In some ways, it’s excellent.

The presentation that Jennifer Lawrence delivers is devoid of outrageous outbursts or nonsensical chants that demonstrate the lack of substance that typically characterizes the progressive platform. In that regard, it’s a breath of fresh air and some of her content is genuinely inviting.

But after a while, one can’t help but wonder if this isn’t just a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

The message is, “The system is broke and the voter has no real say when it comes to the candidates the represent them and the policies that are put in place.”

First off, Jennifer has made her feelings where President Trump is concerned very clear. She’s no fan.

Secondly, the fact that the entire presentation is based on the idea that we are currently experiencing a “total political system failure” begs the question…

According to who?

It’s difficult not to assume that in light of “represent.us” being backed by a collection of individuals that are decidedly anti-Trump, the real message behind all of the rhetoric is that Trump is President because of a major breakdown in our democratic process and we need to fix it.

It’s bothersome to me that the Left cannot accept the fact that the Democrat party lost the election in 2016. It wasn’t stolen, it wasn’t bought, it was lost. And when the Dems were defeated, they lost their ability to choose what might amount to three Supreme Court justices, not to mention several Circuit Court judges. In addition, all of the socialist agenda put forth by President Obama under the guise of social justice is being undone and wound back in a way that works to our nation’s long term and short term benefit.

For example…

By signing an Executive Order that eliminated the tax penalty incurred by anyone refusing to engage in Obamacare, Trump removed the teeth from a financial beast that helped incur more debt that all of the presidents combined leading up to Barack Obama. In addition, he removed our country’s interest from the Paris Agreement, a treaty that appeared to be a wise co-op with other nations resolved to minimize carbon emissions into the atmosphere, yet accomplished very little while simultaneously costing American trillions of dollars. And then of course, there’s the fact that Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, initiated tax reform that put more money back into the wallets of American consumers and is currently presiding over an economy that is booming…

And yet, Jennifer Lawrence says we are in the midst of a “total political system failure…”

While some may scratch their heads and wonder why Jennifer would think the way she does, I believe that it comes down to one thing:

Power.

As an aside, do this: Google this phrase, and use quotation marks (this makes Google look for that phrase specifically): “trump is attacked daily by the press.” You can see the results you get by looking at the screen shot above. Notice that every “hit” is a article about how Trump attacks the media and not how the media attacks Trump.

Progressives are supportive of due process and the Electoral College  provided those two dynamics deliver the result they’re looking for. In fact, you could say that about any one of a number of traditional institutions that are no longer evaluated according to their substance as much as they’re gauged according to their strategic utility in that moment. Provided they can be deployed in a way that reinforces the notion that the system is both flawed and limiting, they are held up as noble and enduring icons. But when things like moral absolutes and the rule of law produce a disposition that hesitates when it comes to abdicating the throne of your own potential to the forces and authority of the state, they are now labeled as unjust and antiquated.

It’s frustrating how things that should be common sense are now converted into these knots of subjective feelings, carefully crafted verbiage bogus conclusions that have no basis in truth.

We’re arguing whether or not there should be any border security. Not just if there should he some border security, but if there should be any at all.

And that’s just one example.

The fact that unemployment is lower than it’s been in five decades and the economy is booming doesn’t matter. According to a poll conducted by the Washington Post, most people feel that more jobs and a strong economy benefits only those who are “rich.”

How does that work?

• More than 5 million jobs have been created since President Trump’s election and the unemployment rate remains below 4 percent.
• The unemployment rate for African Americans in May fell to 5.9 percent, which is the lowest rate on record.
• Under President Trump, job openings outnumber the unemployed for the first time on record.¹

I don’t care how you try to spin it. Trying to twist the reality of people being employed into something that only benefits those who are in positions of authority is ridiculous.

And then there’s tax reform.

Thanks to President Trump, most people saw an overall reduction in taxes in 2018 and this is confirmed by the Joint Tax Committee and the Tax Policy Center. But Kamela Harris was able to figure out a way to twist and stretch the truth to the point where she could justify a tweet that said, “The average tax refund is down about $170 compared to last year. Let’s call the president’s tax cut what it is: a middle-class tax hike to line the pockets of already wealthy corporations and the 1 percent.”

The Washington Post gave her four Pinocchios for her statement. She’s wrong. But why would you even want to be critical of something that is so obviously advantageous to the average American? And don’t try to spin things with how tax cuts benefit the rich. Of course they benefit the rich! In 2018, the top 20 percent of income earners paid 95.2 percent of individual income taxes in 2017. The top 10 percent paid 81 percent. The top 0.1 percent paid an astonishing 24.1 percent of taxes.² If the country is given a 10% tax cut, if you make $10.00, that’s $1.00 savings. If you make $1.00, you get $.10. That’s not favoritism or inequity, that’s math.

Furthermore, as Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman said, “…stop obsessing about the size of your refund and pay attention to your total income tax bill.”

President Trump has knocked it out of the park on so many levels, it’s truly gratifying for anyone who cast their vote for him back in 2016.

But…

We’re apparently dealing with a “total political system failure.”

What “represent.us” is championing is not all bad. There is corruption and there is a revolving door dynamic that exists in politics. Curbing those with intelligent legislation is more than appropriate. But part of their proposal includes “Ranked Choice Voting” which allows voters to rank their preferences rather than it be a scenario where you have one person – one vote. So instead of a candidate winning by the most votes, they win according to how they’re ranked. On the surface it may look intriguing, but there’s a mathematical anomaly at play that can be problematic. The Stanford News explains it this way:

First, the contender with the lowest number of first-choice votes is dropped from the competition. Each voter who had ranked that candidate as his No. 1 choice then has his vote given to whichever candidate he selected as his second choice. The votes are re-tallied and, as before, the contender with the lowest vote total is eliminated.

This process continues for as many rounds as needed until one candidate has over 50 percent of the votes tallied in a round, at which point he or she is declared the winner.

The bottom line is that with ranked-choice voting, you can get a winner who is the first choice of only a small percentage of voters. Given the fact that the chief proponents of this approach are democrats, it’s not difficult to think of it as an unconstitutional sleight of hand that allows for candidates like Hillary Clinton to win where the Electoral College would fail to produce a victory for her.

Another thing this proposal includes is the chance to register to vote automatically when you interact with a government agency. For example, the Department of Motor Vehicles. On the surface, this looks great until you realize that 13 states have legal provisions for illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses.  Should this proposal go through, you now have illegal immigrants in over 10% of our states casting a vote for our elected officials and they’re not even citizens.

Do you see where this is going?

Which party do illegal immigrants typically support? Given the fact that districts characterized by heavy population of foreign born residents are Democrat strongholds, that answer should be obvious.

Another point that Jennifer makes is that people are supposedly their respective parties in droves because of they’re not feeling like they have any real influence in who gets elected and who makes policy.

When you do a search for “How many people have left the Republican party”, you get a number of websites from Google that seem to confirm that idea with numerous headlines insisting that the GOP is shrinking in size and failing to appeal to millennials while simultaneously inspiring more cynicism on the part of those who are currently registered as Republicans.

But then when you look at the Gallup numbers, as of January 21, 2016 you had 29% Republicans, 39% Independents and 31% Democrats. In May of 2019, you have 30% Republicans, 38% Independents and 31% Democrats. There certainly isn’t a major shift, but if there’s any change it would be the fact that you have fewer Independents and more Republicans.

So much for people leaving their respective parties in “droves.”

And let’s not ignore the fact that 76% of all voters approved of Trump’s State of the Union address. Furthermore, his approval rating right now is 43%. Obama’s approval rating in June of his third year as President was 46%. Pretty comparable, but at the same time very significant given the fact that Trump has been assaulted and demonized virtually every day of his presidency since he took office.

Bottom line: Where there is corruption, that needs to be addressed and fixed. But this campaign isn’t so much about eliminating corruption as much as it’s about retooling the electoral process in a way that gives Democrat candidates a better chance of winning where they would otherwise fall short.

Thank you, Jennifer. You can sit down…

1. “The Historic Results of President Donald J. Trump’s First Two Years in Office”, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/the-historic-results-of-president-donald-j-trumps-first-two-years-in-office/, accessed June 21, 2019
2. “Kamala Harris leaps to unwarranted conclusions in tax tweet”, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/02/13/kamala-harris-leaps-unwarranted-conclusions-tax-tweet/?utm_term=.afbbc494f2e4, accessed June 20, 2019