The Republican Party Is Not Prepared for the 2024 Election

posted by Steve McCann at American Thinker 

There is a growing consensus among conservatives and the vast majority of Republican voters that the 2024 election is a watershed moment for the United States. The dire reality of another four years of a Marxist-dominated Democrat Party in total control is beginning to increasingly come into focus.

However, the Republican Party hierarchy appears unconcerned, as exemplified by their near total lack of urgency regarding the need to offset voting manipulation by the Democrats and a lack of understanding of 2024 political demographics. Is the Republican Party hierarchy serious about winning the White House and both Houses of Congress?

In 2024 there will be approximately 237 million eligible voters, or 72% of the overall population, who are U.S. citizens, meet state residency requirements, and turn 18 before election day. Of that number it is estimated that 170 million will be registered to vote.

The average turnout among eligible voters in the 25 presidential elections from 1920 to 2016 is 58.8%. In the 2016 election, 137 million or 59% of eligible voters voted. By comparison, in 2020 156 million or 67% of eligible voters supposedly cast ballots.

This was the highest percentage since the presidential election of 1900, when the overall population was one-fifth of the current level and less than 30% of the population were eligible voters, as women could not vote.

Which turnout will it be in 2024? If the 2016 turnout is repeated, approximately 146 million votes will be cast. If the 2020 results are recorded again, approximately 158 million votes will be cast. A difference of 12 million votes, which will determine the outcome of the election.

The Republican National Committee (RNC), beyond issuing the usual fatuous press releases and reports about what they are going to do, has done nothing of substance on the ground to offset the Democrat’s determination to repeat their success of 2020.

In an effort to do what they can, individuals such as Scott Presler and his PAC have been on the ground in the various battleground states not only registering voters but instructing and recruiting volunteers to promote early voting, mail-in voting and to ballot harvest where legal.

However, instead of supporting and coordinating with Presler and various other get-out-the-vote organizations such as Turning Point USA, the RNC has deliberately ignored them and criticized their emphasis on direct contact with potential voters in their efforts to get-out-the-vote.

R.C. Maxwell writing at Red State:

John Seaton, an RNC-aligned consultant with ties to former Senator John McCain, perplexingly said he “cannot fathom” that much money being spent on get-out-the-vote efforts. “There’s not even enough doors” to knock on, said Seaton in an Associated Press article that labeled him as an “expert”.

Maxwell further points out that Ronna McDaniel and the RNC proudly announced to the world that the RNC has begun a “Bank Your Vote” initiative, which they touted as an all-out effort to offset the party’s mail-in ballot deficit. However, this inane initiative simply calls for voters to visit BankYourVote.com to confirm that they have mailed their ballot. It does nothing to recruit volunteers, work with independent groups, or encourage low frequency voters to vote.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are spending massive amounts of money, time and organization on ballot chasing in order to repeat their success of 2020. In fact, the DNC has a website and PAC with overwhelming monetary resources to finance and train any left-wing organization that wants to participate in the effort.

Because of this lack of commitment, the rank-and-file Republican voter is neither enthusiastic nor financially contributing to the party. Additionally, there has been an absurd and foolish level of spending on non-get-out-the-vote efforts as pointed out by Jennifer Van Laar at Red State. The RNC is broke, and its finances are in shambles. Thus, the party is grossly uncompetitive with the Democrats.

Donald Trump, as its three-time presidential nominee, is the de facto leader of the Republican Party. Despite being forced to wallow in numerous legal quagmires, he must request Ronna McDaniel’s resignation and immediately initiate a housecleaning at the RNC.

Trump understands that rampant Democrat voting manipulation will not be defeated in the gilded offices in Washington, D.C. but in the precincts throughout all the battleground states. He must get involved and act quickly as the hour is growing exceedingly late.

Per a recent Gallup poll, the current breakdown of party identification is: 27% Democrat, 27% Republican, and 43% Independent, as more Americans are increasingly fed up with both parties. When Independents are asked whether they lean Republican or Democrat, the result is 45% of all poll respondents identified as or lean toward being a Republican and 43% identified as or lean toward being Democrats.

Analyzing exit polls, which eliminate the impact of voting manipulation, in 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump each won 88% of the vote of their respective parties, the deciding factor -- Trump won independents by a 46-42% margin. In 2020 Biden and Trump each won 94% of the vote of their respective parties, the deciding factor -- Biden won independents by a 54-41% margin.

Polls nine months out from the election are essentially meaningless, but they do underscore the potential impact of the independent vote. For example, a Quinnipiac poll published on February 1, 2024, revealed that the independents polled were backing Biden by a margin of 52-40%, and Biden beats Trump 50-44% in the overall poll. However, in an NBC News poll published on February 4, 2024, Trump leads Biden 48-29% among the Independents they polled, and Trump beats Biden 47-42% in the overall poll.

The bottom line, independent voters, a majority of whom dislike both Biden and Trump, are a volatile but exceedingly important segment of the electorate.

This volatility is further exemplified by various polls published over the past six months which revealed that a majority of Independents believe Trump should be prosecuted for attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. A January 31, 2024 Bloomberg poll indicated that over half of voters in the key battleground states would not vote for him if he is convicted of a felony.

Trump’s "insurrection" trial in Washinton, D.C. has been postponed indefinitely. If the decision of the appeals courts or the Supreme Court regarding presidential immunity goes against Trump, the odds are that the trial could take place in July or August. Any conviction so close to the election would leave Trump and the Republican Party in an untenable position going into November.

What is the strategy of the Trump campaign to deal with any potential conviction, or the very real possibility of Biden dropping out of the race? What is the blueprint for the RNC to turn out independent voters? At present, there appears to be none by either the Trump campaign or the RNC.

A portrait of the American electorate reveals that 73% are either conservative or moderate while just twenty-five percent claim to be liberal or very liberal. Seventy-one percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. And 92%of Republicans and 75% of independents deem themselves to be conservative or moderate on social issues.

Thus, the vast majority of the current American electorate is not in the thrall of the Marxist-controlled Democrat Party and can be swayed to vote for Republicans in 2024.

Whether that outcome can be achieved lies primarily in the hands of Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee, and secondarily in the hands of the individual candidates for federal and state offices. They must convincingly spell out why voters should 1) financially support the Party, 2) trust them to do everything possible to defeat the Democrats, and 3) turn out in massive numbers in November.

X22, And we Know, and more- February 7

 

Are Republican Senators Stupid or Do They Just Think We Are

posted by Kurt Schlichter at Townhall 

What a deal! We give Ukraine billions of dollars in return for a border deal, which makes the open borders exponentially worse! Our GOP senators are handing us a Schiff sandwich and inviting us to take a bite. Come on, people, tell them how yummy it is!

Now, when something like this abortion of an immigration deal comes down the pike, and the Republican dealmakers are super proud that they negotiated a handful of magic beans, you have to wonder if they are truly as dumb as they seem or if they just believe we are that dumb.

It is a conundrum.

There is plenty of evidence to support the contention that they are, in fact, that dumb. Just look at the history of GOP immigration compromises. Every single time some Republican senatorial stiff presumes to negotiate some sort of comprehensive deal, he comes back without his pants. And then, a few years later, somebody tries it again. They never learn. It’s like Ned Beatty telling his buddies, “Hey, why don’t we take another canoe trip next weekend? Because last weekend went great.”

You remember when this happened a decade ago? It went poorly. Marco Rubio was one of The Gang of However Many and, like the current crop of smug senators pushing this pile, he was greatly offended that us peasants started pointing out the myriad flaws in his terrible, terrible bill. That fiasco changed Marco Rubio from a potential presidential contender into just another second-tier Senator, one who is as likely to be president someday as Kamala Harris is to get a Nobel Prize for particle physics.

Sadly, she is nearly certain to be president someday, but that’s an entirely different disaster.

It’s not hard to find out what the GOP br thinks about illegal immigration. You could, you know, talk to actual Republicans instead of donors, sycophants, and staff flunkies. The br is tired of the country being flooded with Third World peasants. It is tired of the crime and social pathologies and paying people who should not be here to be here. We are spending money we borrow to subsidize other people’s citizens at the expense of our own citizens. You don’t have to spend a lot of time listening to Republican voters to find out that they’re not interested in making the tsunami of fake asylum seekers more efficient. They are interested in stopping it. 

So, when the senators crow that they are limiting the flood to a mere 5000 people a day – 1.8 million per year – that’s not a selling point. That’s the opposite of a selling point. That is an unselling point. Their most prized achievement in this dung heap of a bill is literally the thing the br hates the most. And then you add in the fact that the terms of this garbage deal allows Biden and Mayorkas to waive these bogus limitations and it’s a zillion times worse. 

The problem right now is that Biden and Mayorkas are illegally not following existing law. This deal gives them a law that makes it legal for them not to follow existing law, which is exactly the opposite of actually stopping illegal immigration. Oh, and the cherry on the cake is making any legal challenge to the bill not be heard by the very conservative Fifth Circuit down in Texas but in the hard-left District of Columbia Circuit. Yeah, the only place people can challenge Biden for not abiding by these ridiculous standards would be the most liberal circuit in the country, the circuit that the Ninth Circuit considers a bunch of communists. 

Great work, everybody. Unless you wanted these insane results, you are very stupid people.

But then, there’s the possibility that this is exactly what they wanted. After all, the giant corporate donors love the idea of a bunch of illiterate vagabonds flooding the country so they can toil for sub-minimum wage. These Republican senators know it’s garbage. They know we in the Republican br don’t want it. They know we’re going to be angry. But they think they are smart enough to fool us. They think we are stupid. They think we’re such idiots that we can’t read the bill and find the little landmines about liberal courts construing it and waiver provisions and millions upon millions of dollars for lawyers to defend these intruders. They think we will be distracted by a few shiny pennies for a wall that will never get built because there’s no way to force Biden to actually build it and for – get this – ankle bracelets. Yeah, that’s the ticket. We don’t mind illegal aliens being here if they have ankle bracelets on!

Maybe these people think we can’t read. Now, that is a possibility, considering the fact that these spineless Republicans refuse to take on the garbage teachers’ unions and allow them to keep turning out illiterate pseudo-citizens, which is another disaster. They think we won’t read it and will just listen to them. They think we’ll just go along with whatever they say because senators are smart people who deserve our obedience and respect. They know that because all the little minions around them are telling them how smart they are all the time. They have their own elevators and their own special rooms and their little pins on their lapels, and everybody kisses their Chuck Schumer. They think they are geniuses, and because we aren’t senators, we must be idiots.

It’s always amusing to be looked down upon by people whose peers include Mazie Hirono, who is dumber than most minerals. This unearned self-regard makes them presume that they can fool us again. But they can’t fool us, and they’re not going to fool us, which is why they’re getting mad. Senator James Langford is the guy spearheading this nonsense. He went on Hugh Hewitt’s radio program where Hewitt, a friend of his, addressed him as Jim, and – this really happened – he said, “It’s always James, never Jim.” Yeah, he’s that guy. It went downhill from there.

Aside from the fact that he doesn’t seem to know what’s in his own bill, and the fact that he had to reluctantly admit that he didn’t actually ask for the things we in the Republican br actually want, what really came through was both his arrogance and anger. He was mad. He was mad that he was being challenged. He was mad that he was being criticized. He was mad that we weren’t lining up to thank him for being served this steaming pot of boiling feces.

This bill will almost certainly go down in defeat. The scam won’t work. I don’t know whether James Langford – Never Jim! – is stupid or thinks we are stupid. I think I’m going to put my money on both.

Trainwreck: Kirby Admits Making False Statement About Who Was Informed Before Airstrikes on Militants

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Joe Biden's administration is such a train wreck. 

We've seen so many failures because of their incompetence, be it domestic policy or foreign policy. 

One of the problems that we've reported on before is the way they have handled the response to the attacks from Iranian-backed militants. Part of the problem is the administration has cozied up to Iran and not taken the attacks on U.S. assets and forces seriously despite dozens of troops being injured. Then, three U.S. troops were killed. The Biden team said they would take action in response but came under justifiable criticism for telegraphing their moves to the Iranians beforehand, even listing possible areas they might target. That gave IRGC leaders the ability to flee from some of the areas. 

---

Jennifer Griffin Nails Biden on Telegraphing to the Iranians About Strike Locations

Biden's Stupid Plan: Tell Iran We're Coming, Then Provide the Target List

---

Then, when the Biden team finally conducted airstrikes in response, there was a question of whether they really hit anyone of consequence, given the heads up. The Biden team said Friday's strikes were just the start, and they intended to carry out more strikes against the Iran-backed militant. 

But there's also news now that something White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby told us about Friday's strike wasn't true. 

Kirby initially said that the Biden team told Iraqi leaders about the strike on the IRGC-related locations ahead of time. 

However, he was then contradicted by State Department deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel, who said on Monday that Iraqi leaders weren't told ahead of time, as Kirby had claimed. Patel said they told Iraqi leaders after the strikes. 

So, on Tuesday, Kirby had to apologize to reporters for telling them something false on Friday.

Kirby released a statement about the confusion the same day, saying he was going off "information that I had been provided at the time."

"I'm sure many of you saw the statement that I issued yesterday correcting what I had said Friday night about pre-notification to Iraqi officials on Friday night before the strikes that we took on facilities related to the Iran-backed militia groups," Kirby told the press. "And I deeply apologize for the error, and I regret any confusion that it caused. It was based on information we had or that it was provided to me in those early hours after the strikes. Turns out that information was incorrect. And I certainly regret the error."

"And I hope that you'll understand there was no ill intent behind it, no deliberate intent to deceive, to be wrong. I take those responsibilities very, very seriously. And I deeply regret the mistake that I made."

Incompetence or deception? Either way, it's not good. At this point, because the Biden team is so untruthful about so many things, it's hard ever to trust them on anything.

Either way, with these guys, it's a continual clown show. 

Nothing About The Rigged Senate Border Bill Is In The ‘National Interest’

posted by David Harsanyi at The Federalist 

Can you imagine Senate Democrats ever supporting a bill that gave President Donald Trump the power to temporarily ignore provisions he didn’t believe were in the “national interest”? Of course not. Yet one of the most conspicuous parts of the new bipartisan border bill allows Joe Biden to do just that.

Once there is a rolling average of 5,000 border encounters per day for a week, or 8,500 encounters in a single day, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would be given “emergency authority” and compelled to turn away anyone else who crosses (though there are many exemptions). Most conservatives believe this threshold is already too high. Under 5,000 daily crossings can still amount to nearly 2 million entries per year, which is around double the number of Green Cards we hand out annually.

Yet, on top of that, Biden has the power to unilaterally suspend the closure (for 45 days each year) if he deems it “in the national interest.”

You know, the reason we have political debates in the first place is so we can figure out how to protect the “national interest.” If we had a common understanding of the idea, we’d be a one-party state. But as with other political phrases these days — the “common good” or “democracy,” come to mind — the term “national interest” is meaningless. Democrats, for instance, believe it’s in the national interest to regulate gas stoves and “misinformation.” I believe it’s in the national interest for the executive branch’s power to be limited to its constitutional role and mind its own business.

Indeed, the president can already declare national emergencies. Trump did on the border in 2019 and was called an authoritarian by Democrats. Congress could stop this from happening again by repealing the National Emergencies Act, not by doubling down and handing the executive branch even wider latitude to interpret laws whenever they find it convenient.

Most of the provisions in the bill are so loophole-riddled they are worse than irrelevant. One provision allows administration officers to grant asylum without any oversight from judges, who (at least, theoretically) use a set of criteria to adjudicate these cases. “Asylum” might have been stripped of any real meaning, as well, but it’s a mystery why James Lankford wants to hand Alejandro Mayorkas more autonomy on this front. Or any front. (Again, can you imagine Democrats signing onto a bill that handed Chad Wolf more discretion over asylum cases?)

Then again, if there are any legal fights over the implementation of the law, Democrats have cherry-picked the court that will adjudicate. No, not the Fifth Circuit, which inconveniently sits on the border, but the left-wing D.C. District Court will have exclusive authority over “written policy directive, written policy guideline, written procedure” and their implementation.

Meanwhile, Democrats are acting as if they’ve made some giant, historic concession even deigning to address the crisis. But where is the compromise? They’ve rigged the bill, making it so malleable that Biden can basically interpret and implement its provisions in any fashion he chooses. (Only on the enforcement side, naturally. There is no opting out of Ukraine aid or more taxpayer-funded asylum lawyers.) Then, Democrats ensured that the court hearing any disputes over that implementation would almost surely side with them.

And lest anyone think I’m some kind of hardline closed-border type, I’m fine with more asylum-seekers and more immigration and more work visas. High walls and wide gates, etc. Like many Americans, though, I’m just not a fan of policies that perpetuate anarchy. 

Here Are the Top GOP Senators Who Have Come Out Against the 'Border Security' Bill

Rebecca Downs reporting for Townhall 

The text of the border bill was finally released on Sunday night, and from the start it was vocally panned by Republicans. This doesn't merely include Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), who continues to insist it is "dead on arrival," but even more establishment figures as well. Yesterday we covered how Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) shared he had "serious concerns." On Tuesday, he became a "no," as CNN's Manu Raju shared.

Cornyn would be in favor of the parts of the bill addressing aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. 

Cornyn, a top ally of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), is not the only one who has come out against the disastrous bill. Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) and Senate Republican Conference Chair John Barrasso (R-WY) will also vote against it. 

Senate Republicans held a meeting on Monday night, where it did not bode well for the bill. A Wednesday morning report from The Hill highlighted how they will block the bill. 

The Tuesday morning edition of POLITICO's Playbook highlighted comments from an anonymous Democratic lawmaker who shared "I’m coming to the notion that everything is dead," adding "All of it." While McConnell shared a positive take about the bill once it was released on Sunday night, he's now telling members opposed to go ahead and vote against moving forward with it, as Playbook also highlighted:

Here’s MITCH McCONNELL speaking about the $188 billion national security supplemental on the Senate floor yesterday afternoon: “It’s now time for Congress to take action.”

And here’s the Senate minority leader speaking to fellow Republicans in a closed-door meeting last night, per Burgess Everett and Ursula Perano, amid a fierce revolt over the border security negotiations he had cultivated for months: “McConnell told Republicans that if they didn’t like the direction that the bill is going, they should vote against moving forward this week.”

The abrupt about-face from McConnell tells you everything you need to know about how the bill’s debut went yesterday, when a morning trickle of GOP opponents turned into a flood — 22, by the WSJ’s count — by the time the minority leader faced his conference in their 90-minute meeting and he bowed to political reality.

Another blow this morning: Sen. JOHN BARRASSO (R-Wyo.), the No. 3 GOP leader, is opposing the bill: “I cannot vote for this bill,” Barrasso tells Burgess in a statement. “Americans will turn to the upcoming election to end the border crisis.”

President Joe Biden, who continues to falsely insist that he needs such a bill to be able to enforce the law, is also blaming Republicans for the crisis, including and especially former and potentially future President Donald Trump. Biden and Trump are likely headed for a rematch of 2020 in November, with immigration currently being Biden's worst issue in the polls. 

For all of the focus on Trump here, though, it's nevertheless reminding that there are serious issues with the bill, without the former president even getting involved. 

Mitch McConnell Urges GOP Senators to Vote Against the Border Security Bill

streiff reporting for RedState 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell recommended that Republicans vote against the $118 billion border security bill, at least for now. Even Oklahoma Senator Jim Lankford, one of the bill's authors, indicated that it was too soon to bring the bill to a vote. The sudden about-face on the part of the GOP caucus left Democrat Brian Shatz saying on X,  "Just gobsmacked. I’ve never seen anything like it. They literally demanded specific policy, got it, and then killed it."

The cloture vote scheduled for Wednesday is certain to fail. Without the momentum of its much-anticipated release and the tactical advantage of not giving anyone time to read it, it seems that if the bill does pass, it is unlikely to resemble the atrocity unveiled Sunday night.

The whole bill reeked of bad faith. The drafting was not done using the traditional committee process. Instead, a small group wrote the bill without sharing the contents or general direction with their colleagues. The draft text was released Sunday night, with the first vote scheduled for Wednesday. Two other important but unrelated issues were attached to the border security bill. Though, in fairness, that isn't the Senate's fault; it was in answer to a stupid demand by Speaker Mike Johnson. Unfortunately, this kind of dishonest process seems to have been baked into the Senate. 

The big question is, what now? Can this bill be saved? 

I think the short answer is "no." The border security bill included billions for resettling illegals in American cities and providing them free legal representation, but it did not contain a penny for constructing the border wall. Arguably, the dumbest thing in the bill was the creation of a quota of illegals allowed each day or the free giveaway of work permits. Or... no, there was a lot of stupid sh** in this bill.

Establishing a threshold of illegal immigration, making the declaration of a border emergency dependent on the whims of an imbecilic dementia patient, and gutting the ability of future administrations to deport illegals revealed this bill for what it really was, a pathway to citizenship for about two million illegals per year. 

On the Democrat side, they have no interest in securing the border as a massive influx of illegals dovetails perfectly with their vision of this country.

Under a new president, this needs to be revisited. Instead of being cute and creating daily quotas, the next bill needs to tighten rules, make Trump's "remain in Mexico" policy the law of the land, build a border wall, and set the acceptable number of illegals at zero per day.

Macron leads ceremony for French victims of Hamas attacks

 

President Emmanuel Macron has described the 7 October Hamas attacks on Israel as "the largest antisemitic attack of our century".

He was addressing a ceremony for French victims of the attacks in the courtyard of the Invalides military complex in Paris.

A total of 42 French and dual French-Israeli nationals were killed on 7 October, and six were injured.

Three are still missing, presumed to have been taken hostage by Hamas. 

Four French hostages were freed during a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in November.

The 7 October attack was the largest slaughter of French nationals since the July 2016 Bastille Day attack in the southern city of Nice, in which 86 people were killed when a truck drove into crowds celebrating Bastille Day.

The sombre ceremony - the first of its kind to be held outside of Israel - took place in pouring rain.

A French government representative said earlier this week that it was obvious that "the same emotion and the same dignity are owed to the French victims of the bombing of Gaza, who will be honoured on another occasion".

Dozens of members of the Jewish community stood outside Les Invalides, following events on a giant screen and holding signs that read "The world can never look away again".

Ahead of President Macron's speech, photographs of the 42 victims were brought out as their relatives looked on  

Three chairs were left empty, to mark the three hostages believed still in captivity in Gaza. A violinist and a pianist gave a rendition of Maurice Ravel's interpretation of Kaddish, the Jewish prayer for the dead.

"On 7 October, at dawn, the unspeakable emerged from the depths of history... Hamas launched a massive and hateful attack, the largest antisemitic attack of our century," said the French president.

He drew parallels between 7 October and the "barbarity" of the 2015-2018 jihadist attacks in Paris, Nice and Strasbourg.

"Barbarity feeds off antisemitism and spreads it," President Macron said. "But those who kill out of hatred will always find on their path those who are ready to die for love."

French Jews have been targeted by a steep increase in attacks in the four months since 7 October, and President Macron hit out against "rampant, uninhibited antisemitism".

His speech was followed by a minute of silence and the Marseillaise. 

A number of cabinet ministers and representatives of political parties attended the ceremony.

Among those taking part were members of the far-left France Unbowed (LFI), whose leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon has come under fire for not labelling Hamas a "terrorist" group. The armed group is proscribed as a terrorist organisation by many Western governments, including the UK, EU and US.

LFI described Hamas as "an armed offensive of Palestinian forces", prompting fierce criticism from other parties, including left-wing allies such as the Socialist and Communist parties. A major demonstration against antisemitism in Paris in November was boycotted by LFI.  

Relatives of the victims and the hostages criticised the presence of LFI deputies at the Invalides.

"I don't think they should be there," Ishay Dan, the brother of French hostage Ofer Kalderon, told Agence France-Presse.

Aymeric Caron, an MP who belongs to a party affiliated with LFI, was booed by the crowd outside Les Invalides who called him a "collabo" - a derogatory term for traitorous Nazi collaborators during World War Two.

After the ceremony, Mr Mélenchon wrote on X, formerly Twitter, that his party colleagues who attended had shown great dignity and that, "despite the swearing and the provocations", they had paid their respects to the dead.

France has a Jewish community of almost 500,000, the largest in Europe. Another 100,000, many of them dual nationals, live in Israel.

Around 1,200 people were killed during the Hamas attacks on southern Israel on 7 October last year.

More than 27,500 Palestinians have been killed and at least 65,000 wounded by the war launched by Israel in response, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.  

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68226506    

McConnell Admits Defeat on Disastrous Senate Border Bill

Spencer Brown reporting for Townhall 

Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell admitted on Tuesday afternoon that the bipartisan "deal" reached in the upper chamber on a supplemental security and border security bill "will not become law."

McConnell's admission came during the Senate GOP leadership press conference in which the Republican leader faced questions amid significant blowback from House Republicans and conservative members of Congress. 

"It's been made pretty clear to us, by the Speaker, that it will not become law," McConnell said of the border bill. "It looks to me, and to most of my members, as if we have no real chance here to make a law," he reiterated.

Asked whether the swift and damning rejection of the package signified that the Senate's Republican leader was out of touch with the GOP conference, McConnell reminded that he "followed the instructions of my conference who were insisting that we tackle this in October. I mean, it's actually our side that wanted to tackle the border issue," McConnell emphasized. "We started it. Obviously, with a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate, our negotiators had to deal with them."

McConnell again praised Senator James Lankford (R-OK) for "doing a remarkable job" negotiating with Democrats on the border legislation and noted the National Border Patrol Council's endorsement of the bill as underscoring "that it was a quality product" that "would make progress toward making things better."

"But as I said earlier, things have changed over the last four months and it's been made perfectly clear by the Speaker that he wouldn't take it up even if we sent it to him, and so I think that's probably why most of our members think we ought to have opposition tomorrow," McConnell explained of the current legislative reality. "We'll see," he added of the planned Senate vote on the legislation. 

Even though the border legislation is dead on arrival in the House, McConnell said he still thinks the upper chamber "ought to tackle the rest of" the supplemental security funding "because it's important." Still, with Republicans in the minority in the Senate, McConnell noted that "it's up to Senator Schumer to decide how to repackage this."

Congressional Budget Office Admits Obvious Consequences Of Biden’s Border Bedlam

Christopher Jacobs reporting for The Federalist 

Sometimes, dry government reports can hide revealing facts deep inside them. Such is the case with the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) annual update regarding demographics.

The CBO report, issued late last month in preparation for the organization’s annual review of the budget and economic outlook, includes typical statistics and projections regarding fertility rates, mortality, life expectancy, and age swings among the American population. But it also shows how the chaos at our southern border under the Biden administration far exceeds all prior migrations, raising questions about the consequences should this bedlam persist.

Immigration Explosion

In its report, the budget office created both prospective and retrospective estimates for three different categories of migrants: legal permanent residents, or people who can become legal permanent residents (e.g., fiancées of citizens, refugees, and asylees); people admitted as non-immigrants, such as students and temporary workers; and other foreign nationals. The last category includes individuals who have entered the country (either at a port of entry or otherwise) illegally, individuals paroled into the United States, and individuals who have overstayed their visas.

As this chart on page six of the report demonstrates, it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to recognize that the explosion in the “other foreign national” category under the Biden administration vastly exceeds all other types of immigration combined over the past two decades:

Elsewhere in the report, CBO notes that it now expects 5 million more migrants to arrive in this country over the next three years (2024 to 2026) than it did just last year. And yet the budget office predicts that the immigration explosion in the “other foreign national” category will soon end almost as quickly as it began:

Net immigration of people in the other foreign national category in 2024 will be similar to what CBO estimates it was in 2023 … and then will decline in 2025 and 2026 as the immigration system adjusts (without new legislation) to the increase in immigration. After 2026, net immigration of other foreign nationals returns to a number that is closer to historical levels. The decline in net immigration between 2024 and 2026 may stem from changes in decisions by other foreign nationals to enter or leave the United States, changes in actions by the administration or immigration judges, or a combination of those changes. (Emphasis mine.)

The budget office projects that “other foreign national” migration will decline from 1.7 million per year over the next three years to 200,000 per year thereafter. In other words, CBO assumes — without giving any solid evidence or justification for its assumption — that net migration will just suddenly decline to just over one-tenth of its current levels, without any changes to current law.

On the one hand, one can’t judge CBO too harshly for its guesswork about whether the migration mayhem continues beyond 2026. The agency did recognize the effect of the current surge by increasing its short-term immigration estimates by 5 million — and CBO generally cannot assume changes in current law. A future administration could (and should) tighten up immigration controls to secure the border.

But given the size and strength of the immigration surge, CBO’s assumption that this migration will quickly abate raises an obvious question: What if it doesn’t?

Secure the Border

Some may use other elements of CBO’s demographic report to argue for the benefits of migration. Because Americans are having fewer children and having them later, CBO estimates that the fertility rate among women over age 30 has exceeded that of women aged 14-29, previously the peak child-bearing years, the budget office projects that deaths will exceed births among the native-born population by 2040. After that date, the United States’ population would begin to decline, absent either net migration to the country or an increase in the birth rate among the native-born.

That said, the current chaos is not legal, not secure, and not controlled — nor, as the graphs in the CBO report indicate, is it anything approaching sustainable. The Biden administration created this mess as a result of its policies — only enforcing the law and securing the border will get us out of it.