The Smartest Women In The Room?

The Democrats like to proclaim that they have the market cornered on providing rights and opportunities for women.

If you listen to the narrative you might think that there is no hope for any woman who is not a Democrat to ascend to any position of power.

The White House held this summit meeting last month in Washington, D.C.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/03/28/the-status-of-women-is-the-status-of-democracy-advancing-womens-political-and-civic-participation-and-leadership-at-the-second-summit-for-democracy/

Kamala Harris said this about the summit.

“The status of women is the status of democracy.” 

 

Of course, any discussion of political power should consider whether the person we are entrusting with leading us (man or woman) is qualified for the task.

Why is Kamala Harris a heartbeat away from holding the most powerful office in the world?

Is it because you has superior intellect. Is she one of the great leaders and visionaries of our time?

It is because Joe Biden committed to pick a woman as his running mate and later narrowed that to minority women.

It had nothing to do with the best person for the job.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/21/politics/joe-biden-four-black-women-vice-president/index.html

Democracy?

We have a woman who on her own merit could not break 1% in the polls and could not even sustain her own Presidential bid until the first primary caucus in Iowa.

Harris has become principally known in her VP role for nonsensical dribble in speeches or interviews that cause almost everyone to scratch their heads and ask does she have any idea what she is saying?

Link to video: https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1651048078290329600

Source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/word-salad

Harris seems to like to put together big words in an attempt to sound intelligent but in so doing insures that any thinking person has to arrive at the opposite conclusion.

It reminds me of this quote that I have seen attributed to Abraham Lincoln, Mark Twain and others but research suggests is really unknown.

If we want to consider other inane comments made in the last week it is hard to top this one from Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm.

In testimony before Congress, Granholm states she supports our military adopting an all-electric vehicle fleet by 2030!

Note to any foreign adversaries---please install electric charging stations wherever the U.S. military might need them as our forces advance on our objectives.

Note to Secretary Granhom---what happens if the electric grid is down as it is always a primary target in any war effort? Details, details, details.

It is also worthwhile to consider that the vast majority of energy generation globally is coming from fossil fuels and will be for the foreseeable future even under the most optimistic green energy outlook. What exactly would this policy do other than cripple the United States military and weaken our national security?

We also have the report this week that New York Governor Kathy Hochul's state health department is test-marketing a plan that would ban all tobacco sales in New York State.

Credit: https://nypost.com/2023/04/22/kathy-hochul-test-marketing-ban-on-all-ny-tobacco-sales/

At the same time she wants to ban tobacco sales, Hochul has been pushing for a number of years to totally legalize marijuana in the state.

Source: https://cheddar.com/media/lt-gov-hochul-ny-legalize-cannabis-need-money

Source: https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2023/03/17/lawmakers-eye-big-changes-to-state-s-marijuana-law

You can't sell tobacco but you can sell pot?

Do you see a lot of intellectual consistency in those policy positions?

There is nothing but crass political posturing in everything referenced above from all of these women.

Are we to believe these Democrats are the smartest women in the room... or any room?

Hobson's Choice?

Joe Biden officially announced yesterday that he is running for re-election in 2024.

Source:https://joebiden.com

Donald Trump announced he was officially in the race earlier this year.

This sets up a potential 2024 Presidential election pitting Biden who will be 82 years old that year and Trump who will be 78.

Despite the fact that both Trump and Biden have announced they are running I still stand by the prediction I made in January that I believe there is only a 1% chance that both will be on ballot in November, 2024.

I don't like making political predictions because it is too easy to be wrong. I prefer analysis based on data.

However, if I were to place odds on Biden 2.0 vs. Trump 2.0 right now, I would suggest there is only a 1% chance that both Biden and Trump will be the candidates on the final ballot in 2024.

In fact, I believe there is less than a 50% chance that even one of them will be on the ballot in November, 2024 as I forecast the next Presidential race at the present time.

There are too many cautionary signs out there for both Trump and Biden right now.

It is still a long road ahead for both of these candidates.

A lot can happen in the next 18 months.

I could very well be proven wrong but it is pretty clear in current polling that most voters do not want either Biden or Trump on the ballot in 2024.

70% of voters do not think Biden should run for President in 2024 according to a recent NBC News poll.

Another poll, an AP/NORC survey, found that 52% of Democrats alone do not want Biden to run in 2024.

Those are staggering poll numbers for an incumbent seeking re-election.

Trump's numbers on this question are a little better but should not give Trump supporters a lot of comfort.

60% of all voters do not think Trump should be on the ballot in the 2024 general election.

When I was in law school I took a course in Admiralty Law.

In that course I was introduced to the term "Hobson's Choice".

For example, assume the Captain of a ship only has the choice of running aground or running into another ship.

The Captain is free to choose either course of action but there is no real alternative. Either choice will result in losing the ship and losing his command. 

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/

Right now the 2024 general election looks like a potential Hobson's Choice election for many voters.

Right now I actually believe that it is more likely that Donald Trump will be on the general election ballot than Joe Biden.

Trump clearly carries a lot of baggage but his support among Republicans has solidified over the last few months as it appears that he has been unfairly targeted by the FBI in the documents controversy and in the the New York indictment.

Trump only had a margin of 11 points over Florida Governor Ron DeSantis among potential GOP primary voters in January. He now is up 37 points over DeSantis.

Yes, DeSantis has not formally announced he is running yet but Trump has clearly strengthened his position since the beginning of the year compared to DeSantis.

I also continue to believe that the worse matters get in the United States with Biden at the helm the better Donald Trump looks to voters.

Biden has two announced Democrat challenging him thus far---Marianne Williamson and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

A USA Today/Suffolk poll done shortly after Kennedy entered the race shows that 14% of Biden voters in 2020 would back RFK, Jr. 5% would support Williamson.

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/04/19/rfk-jr-campaign-poll-biden-voters/11690888002/

Those are not comforting numbers for Biden.

If Biden continues to poll poorly could it embolden a Gavin Newsome, Michelle Obama or another Democrat to get in the race and push Biden out?

That scenario would not surprise me.

At this point the DNC and the Democrat establishment is doing everything it can to protect Biden from primary competition.

Fro example, the DNC currently has no plans to schedule any primary debates for the Democrat candidates

A number of Democrats have even criticized this stance.

Does Biden think he can win in 2024 hiding in his basement again?

The polling in the NBC News poll on a general election matchup of Biden-Trump 2.0 is also interesting.

Only 21% of voters state they will definitely vote for Biden in the general election in 2024.

39% of voters polled stated they would definitely vote for the Republican candidate in 2024 (Trump, DeSantis or someone else).

If you add up the probables Biden gets to 41%. However, the GOP candidate is at 47%.

It is another warning sign involving Biden.

Source: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23786178-nbc-april-2023-poll?responsive=1&title=1

Another insight from the NBC News poll is that only 21% of those who voted for Biden in 2020 stated they did so because they liked him or his policies.

25% voted for Biden in 2020 because they did not like Trump or his policies.

That number is one that DeSantis or the other Trump challengers need to promote in their campaigns.

On the other hand, only 10% voted for Trump because they did not like Biden or his policies but 31% voted for him because they liked him or his policies.

It goes without saying Trump is.a polarizing figure. 

Many love him but many cannot stand him.

It is undoubtedly true that Trump has a unique ability to attract many voters who are otherwise disaffected from politics.

The question that remains is whether the numbers of those voters outnumber those who he turns off?

The election results in 2024 may be decided on that answer.

In the meantime, all of this polling data may give you a better idea why I think there is no better than a 1% chance that both Trump and Biden will be on the ballot in November, 2024.

And I have not even touched on potential health issues or further damaging investigations or revelations that might surface with either of these two men in the next 18 months.

There is a long road ahead for both of these candidates and we have barely started.

Perception and Reality

“What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.”

This quote has been attributed to Mark Twain.

The problem today is that in a world in which more information is readily available than at anytime in history there seems to be more people who don't know basic facts.

There is a wide gap between what people believe to be true and what is actually true.

If you doubt this take a look at this survey that was done by YouGovAmerica which asked 1,000 U.S. adult citizens to estimate the percentage of adults in various demographic groups.

The degree to which the perception of those surveyed differed from reality is remarkable.

Credit: https://twitter.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1648515040948146178/photo/1

 

Respondents believed that 20% of households in the United States had incomes of over $1 million.

The actual numbers do not even round up to 1%.

Respondents believed that 21% of American adults are trans and 30% are gay or lesbian. 

The actual percentages are 1% and 3%.

They estimated that 30% of Americans were Jewish when the actual number is 2%.

They believe that 40% of adults are military veterans compared to 6% being the true proportion.

What can we take from this?

First, it shows the extent with which mathematical illiteracy or innumeracy is prevalent in the United States.

It also shows a dearth of critical thinking skills. 

Look at the numbers above on estimates of those who live in New York City, California and Florida.

Respondents estimated that 30% of Americans lived in New York City, 32% in California and 30% in Texas. That equals 92% of the population. 

If anyone stopped and considered their answer for more than a millisecond they would see that is impossible.

Unfortunately, very few apply basic critical thinking skills anymore.

Second, I believe the answers show how pervasive and persuasive the news media, social media and popular media are in shaping the views and perceptions of Americans.

Why do people believe that 20% of Americans are making more than $1 million?

Is it because the news media and various politicians like to blame "the rich" for many of the nation's ills?

Is it because the lifestyles of the rich and famous are so prominent in popular media?

Why do people believe that 92% of Americans live in New York City, California or Texas?

Consider how many movies or tv shows have a connection to these areas.

Why do people believe that 30% are gay or lesbian?

Can you watch a tv show or movie and not see a gay or lesbian character?

I would have liked to see a survey question on the estimate of the percentage of married couples that are mixed race.

It seems today that nearly every commercial on tv involves a mixed race couple and often included biracial children.

Nissan tv commercial
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kS9TEzAciU

Source: https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_race-america_americans-see-more-interracial-relationships-advertising/6202928.html

State Farm Insurance ad
Source: https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_race-america_americans-see-more-interracial-relationships-advertising/6202928.html

This is portrayed as common place.

What are the actual numbers?

Only 7% of the 63 million married couples in the United States are mixed race.

63% of married couples in the United States are both white.

6% of married couples are both Black.

12% of married couples are both Hispanic.

Number of married couples in the United States in 2022, by ethnic group and origin of spouses
(in 1,000s)
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242028/number-of-married-couples-in-the-us-by-ethnic-group-and-combination/

You can be sure that the estimates of the numbers of mixed race couples would be high if it was surveyed.

All of this would be funny if not for the fact that the same people who believe they know what is going on around them are also voting.

In fact, their vote counts as much as my vote or yours.

Perception is reality if someone is never exposed to the real facts.

It is a reason that we have the troubles we do in the United States today.

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so."

                                                                                                               -Mark Twain

It is also the reason I write this blog.

I try to focus on three things.

Facts. Data. Reality.

BeeLine is always trying to be the shortest route to what you need to know that is really so.

Share it liberally from time to time with  friends who need to know what is so.

Awake or Woke?

No matter what we might think of the trans movement in the United States it pales in comparison to what is going on in Canada.

Perhaps the cold winters or high real estate prices are responsible.

For example, check out this headline about a stabbing in Halifax, Nova Scotia recently.

Source: https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2023-03-27/woman-jailed-after-stabbing-and-falsely-imprisoning-partner

Zara Jade was sentenced to nine years in prison for assault, robbery and false imprisonment.

I assume Jade is headed to the nearest women's prison.

I am sure the other inmates will be thrilled to have her? him? in their midst.

If things could not get any weirder in Canada, a male powerlifter identified as a woman for the "Heroes Classic" weightlifting event and proceeded to break the Alberta WOMEN's benchpress record.

The new women's record holder is Avi Silverberg, Team Canada's powerlifting coach, who just entered the competition to demonstrate how ridiculous the new rules are in Canada for trans athletes.

Silverger’s benchpress of 167.5 kilograms, or 369 pounds, was all the more shocking because it did not violate rules of the competition set by the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sports and sanctioned by the Canadian Powerlifting Union. According to the organizations’ Trans Inclusion Policy, any athlete is able to compete in any gendered category based on self-identification alone.

What was even more ridiculous was that Silverberg broke the record previously held by another biological male who now identifies as a female who goes by the name Anne Andres.

Anne Andres

Andres is now unhappy that her previous record was broken by another trans athlete and said it was "unfair" that "she" was allowed to participate because "she" had not gone through any transition procedures.

As a result, Andres believes she has been discriminated against.

Of course, Andres doesn't seem to want to admit that the reason that she was beating her former competitors in the bench press by over 100 pounds might have something to do with the innate biological advantage that biological males have in upper body strength.

The United States is not immune from the madness.

In the state of Washington, some males are identifying as females when convicted of a crime in order to be sent to a women's prison.

Source: https://tennesseestar.com/policy/whistleblowers-female-inmates-in-washington-state-prison-forced-to-bunk-with-male-rapists-and-murderers-punished-if-they-object/admin/2023/04/16/

In March of 2022, Washington’s State legislature passed House Bill 1956, which prevents the state DOC from having to reveal any information about an inmate’s “transgender, intersex, nonbinary, or gender nonconforming status, sexual orientation, genital anatomy, or gender-affirming care or accommodations other than that person’s preferred name and pronouns.”

A female inmate in one detention facility explained what is happening in the state.

“All you have to do is say that you are a woman,” she said, explaining that men in the county jail often tell authorities that they identify as female just to get sent to their facility.

“The guys don’t even have to go to the men’s prison first,” she said. “Some of these men know that they’re men. They’re not trying to be a woman. They just say that to come here to have sex with women during their prison sentences.”

I am old enough to remember when Democrats and liberals were working hard in the 1970's to get the Equal Rights Amendment ratified as an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The stated purpose was to insure that equal rights for women in matters of divorce, property, employment and other issues would be guaranteed by the Constitution.

Opponents of the measure argued that if the amendment was enacted same sex marriages would occur, single sex bathrooms would be eliminated, women could be drafted into military service and women's sports would be threatened.

No one at the time suggested that we could see men posing as women populating prisons. It was too ludicrous to contemplate.

Those supporting the amendment scoffed that any of this would result because of passage of the ERA.

The irony is that all of this has taken place without the ERA ever being ratified.

What I find most interesting is that human civilization has existed for centuries upon centuries without anyone ever suggesting that men could be women and women could be men.

Is all of this just another example of human evolution?

Or is all of this proof that the human species is degenerating into something that is totally unrecognizable to right-thinking people who are truly awake to incontrovertible truths and are not merely woke?

Beliefs Drive Behavior

Almost everyone I speak to in my generation is confused.

The common refrain is "what has happened to the United States of America?

For those who grew up in a different era it almost feels as if we are living on a different planet

I have a friend who often says "Beliefs drive behavior."

What are the beliefs and values that Americans say are very important to them today?

Compare the responses on this recent WSJ/NORC poll between 1998 and today,

A lot has changed on what Americans value in the last 25 years.

What more does one need to consider on why we are where we are today?

Patriotism? Who cares?

Religion? I don't need it.

Children? A complete nuisance that keeps me from doing what I want to do.

Money is more important now than all three.

It was not even half as important as these other values and beliefs a generation ago.

Beliefs drive behavior.

We are living it today.

Home Sweet Home

Conventional wisdom has long held that you should buy a home as soon as you can.

"It is better to own that rent."

"If you rent you are just throwing your money away."

Of course, this financial advice ignores several underlying truths.

If you buy a house and take out a 30 year mortgage a large portion of the money you pay each month is going to pay interest in the beginning. You are building little equity in the first years you are in the house. 

In effect, the interest payments are not much different than rent payments.

For example, this is the amortization schedule on a $200,000 loan at a 6.86 interest rate for the first five years of a 30-year mortgage loan.

Despite $63,000 being paid on the mortgage less than 15% of the total payments goes to pay down the  balance by year 5 (less than $10,000 on the $200,000 loan).

Source: https://www.calculator.net/mortgage-amortization-calculator.html

Second, owning the house also makes you responsible for real estate taxes, insurance and repair costs that you don't have as a renter. These costs quickly add up.

Finally, if you buy a house and find that you will have to move within the first three years, the odds are high that you will not make any money on the house.

Housing prices have historically averaged about a 4% annual increase over the last 100 years. The last 50 years have been better (a little over 5%) thanks to low interest rates but real estate returns have still lagged stock and bond returns by significant margins over the last 50 years.

Source: NYU Stern School

When you take account of transaction costs in getting into and out of a house, you need close to a 10% increase in value just to cover transaction costs if you are in a house only a few years.

Of course, the increase in the value of houses over the last three years has been much higher than 4%-5% per year.

Does that suggest that we can expect housing values in the next few years to moderate or even fall?

That has to be a concern to anyone looking at the housing market right now.

For example, it is a rule of thumb that you should not spend more than 28% of your income on a mortgage payment. Spending more than this does not leave much flexibility to pay for the other necessities of life (food, utilities, transportation) not to mention taxes, insurance and saving for retirement.

There are now 30 states in the United States where the average mortgage payment on a median priced home is at least 30%.

Considering this data it should probably not come as a surprise that the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) has just approved 40-year mortgages beginning in May.

Source: https://www.abc15.com/news/state/fha-approved-40-year-mortgage-for-homebuyers-in-may

On the mortgage example above, a 40-year mortgage would decrease the monthly mortgage payment by $89/month but would result in an additional $115,000 in interest over the life of the loan.

How is this "innovation"going to really help anyone?

Housing affordability is even worse in Canada.

General inflation and real incomes are  both up +149% since 1976 in Toronto.

Housing prices are +1,840%!

The monthly mortgage payment on the median priced single family home in Toronto is now more than the median income in Toronto!

Source: https://twitter.com/daniel_foch/status/1608449814186045440/photo/1

Notice in that graphic that it is projected that it would take 30 years for those with an average income to accumulate the funds necessary for a down payment if they save 10% of their income for that purpose.

A representative home in Toronto now costs more than $1.3 million.

Look at the bottom graphic to see how mortgage payments have increased from about 50% of income to 100% of income in Toronto in the last two years.

Source: https://twitter.com/daniel_foch/status/1608449814186045440/photo/1

Indeed, how is that mathematically possible or sustainable?

You have to believe that something has to give in Canada (and in the United States).

We are likely to see more people renting because right now it has never been more financially advantageous to rent in the United States.

In the United States we are also seeing a surge in the construction of multi-family units unlike anything we have seen in the last 50 years.

Credit: https://twitter.com/nickgerli1/status/1641203294755516416

When you see the current disconnect between mortgage payments and rents the natural order suggests that mortgage payments have to come down (as they did after 2007) or rents have to increase to be in some type of equilibrium.

However, there is currently a low supply of houses for sale in most parts of the country that is keeping home prices from falling and the increasing supply of new apartments may restrain rents from increasing.

Housing Inventory for Sale 1982-2023

This may mean that the disconnect between mortgage payments and rents could endure longer than we might normally expect.

Nevertheless, when anything is out of balance there are many forces at play to bring things back in balance.

You can expect the same in the relationship between mortgage payments and rents.

The end result may be deferred but you can only deny the reality of the numbers so long.

The mathematics and the economics of supply and demand will always win in the end. 

Life or Death for LIV at The Masters?

Yes, that headline is a little over the top.

It is not really life or death for LIV based on how its 18 players performing The Masters this week.

However, I would submit that it is pretty important for the future of that Saudi-backed pro golf tour right now. 

I wrote in a blog post last year when it was just getting started that I thought the biggest challenge that LIV would face would be gaining relevancy due to weak distribution and lack of exposure to its audience.

The reality of all of this is that any professional league needs talented athletes. However, the athletes also need a venue to showcase their talents.

The greatest song in the world means nothing if it is not heard a lot...and by a lot of people.

We have always heard that "content is king". Yes, you need content.

However, content means nothing without distribution.

Tom Cruise might be the same actor performing in a community theatre in New Jersey as he is in Top Gun.

He might be the same guy performing at the community theater but how many would see him and how many would care?

His fame and his fortune is due to the distribution of his films.

The best examples of the importance of distribution over content in recent years is looking at what  happened to Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kelly at Fox News. They both are talented and had broad audiences at FNC. Today you hear little about either as they try to maintain relevance on their own without the benefit of the FNC distribution and exposure.

I made this prediction in that blog post last year.

LIV may have guys who can play the game but it is going to be difficult to get and sustain an audience.

That has proven to be exactly the case.

Attendance at LIV events has been scant.

It has only recently inked its first corporate sponsor---EasyPost.

Source: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/liv-golf-first-sponsor-easypost-2023

LIV had no television deal last year and had to rely on streaming its events on the internet. 

It now has a tv deal but it is on the CW network and the ratings thus far have been less than impressive.

LIV's first event in Mexico in February was viewed by fewer than 300,000 on tv.

For perspective, the CW Network got higher ratings for an episode of the "World's Funniest Animals".

The PGA Tour's competing event that week drew seven times the number of viewers despite the fact that many of the biggest stars skipped the event.

The second LIV event in Tucson got lower ratings still.

Source:https://nypost.com/2023/03/19/liv-golfs-tv-ratings-somehow-get-worse-with-tucson-event/

Golf has never been considered a big tv ratings winner because it is considered to only have a niche audience. However, it is an affluent audience that is attractive to advertisers.

Despite that perception, the PGA Tour's Players Championship tv coverage on Sunday, the week before LIV's Tucson event, had the largest viewing audience of any sporting event the week ending March 12, 2023.

Higher tv ratings than any of the NCAA conference championship basketball tournament games.

Higher than the NBA, NASCAR, the World Baseball Classic, Soccer, the NHL or XFL that week.

LIV has a long way to go to build an audience.

LIV Golf has placed a big bet on generating interest (and selling sponsorships) for a team event that is simultaneously played with the individual competition at its tournaments.

This seems to be an attempt to capture the enthusiasm for team golf at the Ryder or President's Cup.

LIV's business model seems to be based on being able to sell these teams to sponsors for mega million deals.

However, why is anyone supposed to care about a 4Aces, HyFlyer or a RangeGoats team?

Source: https://www.livgolf.com/standings-2023

LIV Golf needs a few of their players to perform well and be at or near the top of the leaderboard at The Masters.

One of the biggest challenges LIV is facing is that its tour has quickly been perceived as nothing but an exhibition tour.

LIV has not helped the situation by letting players wear shorts, piping music over the course during play and using a shotgun start.

It has all the look and feel of a golf outing where the boys are out to have some fun on the course.

The only thing that seems to be missing is a cart girl delivering Bud Lights to the players as they make their way around the course.

It does not have the look and feel of a competitive golf tournament.

Of course, how could it be when most of the players got big guaranteed sums to join LIV and even the last place finisher collects $120,000 no matter what they shoot.

That is what Sihwan Kim received for finishing in last place (48th) at last week's LIV event in Orlando by shooting +13.

These are the nine players who finished at the bottom at that event.

Source: https://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnewsnetteam/2023/04/02/2023-liv-golf-orlando-final-results-prize-money-payout-leaderboard-and-how-much-each-golfer-won-128797/

Watson, Mickelson, Oosthuizen and Garcia were at the bottom of the field in LIV Orlando and are all in the Masters field.

None of these guys appear to be at the top of their game right now.

LIV is probably going to need to rely on guys like Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka. Dustin Johnson or Bryson De Chambeau to put on a good showing to burnish its image that it is more than an exhibition tour.

There is no better platform to do that than The Masters.

However, are LIV players ready for top flight competition when the stakes are high?

That is a big question.

LIV has only had three events in the last five months.

It is difficult to say that these guys are battle tested right now.

Are the LIV players ready to play at a high level in a high stakes environment?

That will make The Masters this year even more interesting than usual.

The PGA Tour vs. LIV Golf is an interesting subplot that might add a significant boost to the tv ratings this year if a couple of LIV golfers are in contention on Sunday.

It may not be life or death but it is very, very important for LIV.

It is a chance for LIV to change the narrative and put more focus on their fledging tour. 

It is a chance to demonstrate legitimacy to the golf fan who seems skeptical of the product right now.

However, a poor showing by its players will further feed the narrative and push LIV deeper down a path of irrelevancy.

In that case, the Saudis better be prepared to keep pouring more and more money into LIV.

And LIV players better make sure that the money they have received is locked away in a very safe place. 

What Next For Trump?

One of the big stories last week was the indictment of Donald Trump by a New York grand jury based on allegations of fraud related to so-called hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign.

The exact charges are not known at this time as the indictment is sealed.

Credit: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indicted-in-manhattan-first-ex-president-to-be-charged-with-a-crime/

The indictment has resulted in big headlines but what does it mean?

First, most independent legal analysts suggest that New York District Attorney has embarked on a political prosecution rather than a legal one.

What is known about the facts in the case make the charges incredibly flimsy.

Payments made to Stormy Daniels were made almost seven years by former Trump associate Michael Cohen.

The payments in questions were already investigated by the Federal Election Commission and the U.S. Justice Department who declined to pursue any charges.

The Manhattan DA, Alvin Bragg, has political ambitions to run for Governor or Senator in New York.

Trump only received 14.5% of the vote in Manhattan in 2020. He got 23% overall in New York City.

It simply is not bad politics to indict Trump in Manhattan.

However, is this the way justice is supposed to work in the United States of America?

And with the vote totals against him in 2020 how is it possible for Trump to get a fair trial of his peers in New York City?

By comparison, Hillary Clinton's campaign paid millions of dollars to craft a fake Russian dossier against Trump in the 2016 election and hid the payments as "legal fees" in federal election campaign finance reports. 

The Clinton campaign was actually fined by the Federal Election Commission for the fraud.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/index.html

The FEC voted 4-1 that there was no evidence that either Trump or his campaign "knowingly and willfully" violated campaign finance laws. That was not the case with Clinton and the DNC.

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/552271-fec-drops-investigation-into-trump-hush-money-payments/

The last I checked Hillary Clinton has not been indicted for anything either.

An interesting legal argument is if this case goes forward on the basis that state charges can be brought over what is essentially a federal issue, does that  then open the door for a state like Wyoming, South Dakota or another red state to do the same thing to Hillary Clinton or another Democrat?

Yes, we are atop a very slippery slope.

Second, what does this mean for Trump's 2024 election prospects?

I predicted almost two years ago that the Democrats could be expected to do something like this in light of the hatred (and fear) they have of the man.

Yes, there really is a Trump Derangement Syndrome infecting many people.They are not all just Democrats either.

This is what I wrote in July, 2021 assessing Trump's potential prospects in 2024.

There is little question that the Democrats are going to turn over every rock and throw everything they can at Trump and his family the next few years.  They clearly live in fear of the man. They may get something that sticks and get people to believe that it is more than political retribution. If they do, Trump will not be viable in 2024 as his political brand will be permanently damaged. Once you lose trust you don't get it back.

The question is whether this will be viewed as a legitimate prosecution by the voters?

It does not look that way from what I know right now.

It may curry favor with the hard core base of the Democrat party.

However, how does it play with other voters?

If the Republican primary was held right now I would most likely vote for someone other than Trump.

As I have written before, there has been no President in my lifetime who was better aligned between what he promised he would do when he campaigned and what he actually did as President.

Despite the bluster and over the top rhetoric, it is hard to find fault with how he governed. There was nothing unhinged about any decisions he made while in office.

However, there is a good argument that it is time for someone younger to be on the ticket in 2024. Trump will be 79 years old in 2025. That is even truer if Biden is the Democrat nominee.

Trump's antics also get in the way of the message. Is there someone who will govern like Trump without the drama?

That being said, this prosecution, as well as the FBI raid over the "classified documents" at Mar-a-Lago, the disclosures about the collusion between the FBI and Twitter and other social media companies to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2016 election clearly shows that there is a double standard in place in the United States.

If Donald Trump is a crook show me he is a crook with something that does not look like a political prosecution.

Has there been anyone in the world that has been under more scrutiny over the last seven years? 

Is there anything in Trump's life or business dealings that hasn't been examined in microscopic detail in  hopes to get rid of him over that time?

This is the best they can do in indicting Trump for a crime?

All of this reminds me of of this quote by the head of Joseph Stalin's Secret Police in the Soviet Union.

Beria would target Stalin's enemies first and then fabricate the crime. You were presumed guilty and the blanks were filled in later.

It is far different than the presumption of innocence that is supposed to be an underlying principle of the American justice system.

Of course, it does not seem that Nancy Pelosi believes that applies to Donald Trump.

Does anyone believe that Twitter would have added this context before Elon Musk bought it?

Right now the political prosecutions of Trump appears to be making him stronger.

How else can you explain this reversal in polling between Trump and DeSantis since the beginning of this year?

Of course, this poll is only of Republican voters in the primary.

Can Trump prevail in the general election with Independents and suburban women voters?

The conventional argument is that he cannot. However, there is a lot of polling to suggest that Trump has the unique ability to attract disaffected voters to the polls that might otherwise not vote at all. There is evidence that this ability outweighs his other disadvantages.

I still stand by the prediction I made in January that I believe the odds that both Trump and Biden will be on the ballot in the general election in 2024 to be less than 1%.

Perhaps one of the two will gain the nomination for their party but I still give that no better than 50/50 odds.

Of course, making Presidential predictions this far out have proven to be a fool's errand more than once.

Trump had not even announced he was running for President at this point before the 2016 election.

Barack Obama had announced he was running by this time in 2007 against Hillary Clinton but he was polling below 20%.

Two years out did anyone believe that a peanut farmer from Georgia would be on the ballot in 1976 let alone become President?

We have also seen several establishment favorites at this time barely capture a handful of delegates (John Connally, Jeb Bush come to mind) when primary voting started.

We know what happened in all of those races which few expected.

A lot can happen over the next year when the primary season really heats up.

That is even more true this year than it has ever been before with the unprecedented indictment of not only a former President but a candidate for President as well.

How will it all play out?

I have no idea.

However, it promises to be an interesting and entertaining year if you are interested in politics.

Fasten your seat belts.