Posts

The Rushmore Report – According to Democrats, Christians Cannot Serve in Government

On Thursday, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) offered a bizarre critique of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo: Pompeo wasn’t sufficiently enthusiastic about homosexual sex.

Yes, this is a real thing.

Booker asked Pompeo, “Do you believe gay sex is a perversion?”

Pompeo is a religious Christian, so presumably he does. He answered, quite properly, “When I was a politician, I had a very clear view on whether it was appropriate for two same-sex persons to marry. I stand by that.” He also informed Booker, “My respect for every individual regardless of sexual orientation is the same.”

Booker was outraged by Pompeo’s reply. His time ran, however, before he could grill Pompeo on whether he enjoyed Brokeback Mountain sufficiently or cried at the end of Moonlight.

This is anti-Christian bigotry from Booker. It’s that simple. Religious people of all major faiths — Christian, Jewish, Muslim — believe homosexual activity is a sin. Full stop. The Bible is quite clear about this in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the New Testament is clear about it in Romans and Corinthians and Timothy. The Koran isn’t shy on the issue, either. None of that means that religious people thereby want the rights of gays and lesbians violated. I, for example, am fully libertarian on same-sex marriage, and have been for years. Religious people think lots of things are sins, and also think that people have a right to do the wrong thing. The same logic undergirds support for the First Amendment: I hate racism, but people have a right to say racist things. I may dislike sin, but a government dedicated to stamping out sin rather than preventing violation of rights is called tyranny.

But according to Booker, you must celebrate sin in order to believe there is a right for people to commit sin that has no externalities in a free society. This makes sense from a Leftist point of view, where government is the great instrument of the good, not a mere protector of rights — the same people who try to stamp out dissenting thought through “hate speech” legislation are likely to believe that religious Americans feel the same way about using government to stamp out sin. But they’re wrong. And they’re religious bigots.

Worse, Booker’s shtick is unconstitutional if it were to be applied legally. The Constitution forbids religious tests for office. What Pompeo thinks about sin has nothing to do with what he thinks about public policy, unless Booker has evidence otherwise. If not, this is simple intolerance. Ironically, Booker would go on to essentially admit that point a few minutes later when he ripped into Brigitte Gabriel for supposedly expressing bigotry for questioning the compatability between Islam and democracy.

But that’s no shock. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked judicial nominee Amy Barrett just a few months back about her religion: “When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.”

Here’s the real issue: when your religion is government, and government is god, you cannot tolerate any other God before it — and you assume that all those who believe in God wish to mobilize government in order to impose God’s will. The only people on the political spectrum interested in using government as a proxy for imposing heaven from above live on the Left.

About the Author

Ben Shapiro is the editor for The Daily Wire.

The Rushmore Report – Who Had the Higher Approval Rating at This Point in His Presidency, Obama or Trump?

For two years leading up to every presidential election, the biggest story in cable news is pre-election polls which indicate who is leading in the race. For the next two years, the biggest story is the sitting president’s approval rating. So at this point in their presidencies, whose approval rating was higher – Obama’s or Trump’s? The answer may surprise you.

The Rasmussen Report’s daily tracking poll – the most accurate in the business the last eight years – shows President Trump sitting at a 50 percent approval rating. At the same point in his first term, President Obama’s approval rating was 46 percent.

Yes, you read that correctly. Trump’s approval rating is ahead of Obama’s at this point in each presidency – by four points.

Meanwhile, Democrats continue to have an edge in the generic ballot for the November congressional elections, but the gap is narrowing. The latest Fox News Poll has revealed a shrinking difference – from 15 points in October (50-35 percent) to just five points now (46-41 percent).

Giving further hope to Republicans, these generic ballots have traditionally undervalued conservative support. For example, at this same time in the run up to the 2014 midterm elections, such polls gave Democrats a two-point advantage, but they went on to lose 13 net Congressional seats. And in 2010, though Republicans held only a slim four-point lead in the polls, they gained a record 63 seats in the November elections.

In all but two midterm elections of the last 50 years, the party that held the White House lost congressional seats. This cycle will likely follow suite. But don’t believe the narrative being pedaled by most media outlets. They are trumping up Democratic optimism in order to suppress Republican turnout. Plus, it’s a lot easier to cover polls than real news stories.

Anyone can report on the lowest number of jobless claims since the Nixon Administration (yes, the Nixon Administration). Anyone can cover the decimation of ISIS, success in Iran, and record tax cuts. But it takes a real journalist to tell you who is ahead in a historically unreliable poll seven months before an election. Real news? That would be the daily report of how “Generic Democratic Candidate” is doing verses “Generic Republican Candidate.”

I’m not even sure of which state in which “Generic” is on the actual ballot. I guess that’s what makes it news.

Does Trump’s rise to 50 percent approval in the Rasmussen poll mean much? Probably not. Nor did Obama’s 46 percent rating matter much in 2010. And Generic Democrat’s five-point lead over Generic Republican doesn’t matter much, either.

Leading up to the 2018 midterm elections, the Democrats have an edge. But it’s not nearly as big as you’ve been told.

The Rushmore Report – Dems Get Good News, But There’s a Long Way to Go

Just over a week ago, turnout in the Texas primary raised serious questions about how big the Democratic wave could grow by November. This week, however, Conor Lamb won a narrow special victory in a Pennsylvania district that President Trump had carried by 20 points. Democratic spirits soared and some began dreaming that 100 or more Republican House seats could be at risk.

It’s natural for political types to overstate the importance of the most recent election or the one that’s coming up next. After all, convincing voters that the fate of the world hinges on the results is a key part of getting them out to vote. In reality, however, the events of the last two weeks are just early signs of what might happen rather than what will happen. It’s important to keep things in perspective.

The good news for Democrats from both Texas and Pennsylvania is that President Trump has energized the opposition. The early results confirm polling and anecdotal evidence that Democratic voters are more excited about voting this cycle than Republicans. It’s almost a mirror image of what happened in 2010 when President Obama energized his opposition party.

If the enthusiasm advantage persists into November, the Democrats are likely to win a majority in the House of Representatives. A race-by-race analysis at ScottRasmussen.com currently projects that Nancy Pelosi’s party would end up with 222 seats while the Republicans would have only 213 (assuming a good turnout for the Democrats). And, there’s plenty of upside for the Democrats if the political winds keep blowing in their direction.

Another good sign for the Democrats is that some of these early expectations can take on the character of a self-fulfilling prophecy. A sense of momentum may help in recruiting top-tier candidates in competitive races and will certainly help the party’s fundraising. On the flip side of the coin, evidence of a coming Democratic wave could open up more opportunities by convincing even more Republican incumbents to retire.

But the recent results include warning signs for Democrats as well. The biggest is Conor Lamb himself. Lamb won in a heavily Trump district by running as a conservative. He proudly embraces the Second Amendment, is personally opposed to abortion, and pledged not to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker. It’s not clear how many progressive Democratic voters are willing to accept such candidates as the price for winning.

In fact, most of the recent evidence suggests that the energy came from voters seeking more progressive candidates rather than centrists. Looking ahead, a primary next Tuesday in Illinois highlights the growing demands for ideological purity from the Democratic base. Seven term Congressman Dan Lipinsky is facing a serious challenge precisely because he has staked out policy positions similar to those of Conor Lamb.

If Democratic voters are unwilling to tolerate even moderately conservative candidates, their party’s path to victory will be severely limited. If the party’s messaging veers hard left and highlights themes such as single-payer health care and impeaching the president, then the Republicans will probably remain in control of Congress.

This was a good week for Democrats, but there are a lot of weeks left in Election 2018.

About the Author

Scott Rassmussen is one of America’s most reliable pollsters. He is a regular contributor to TownHall.

 

 

The Rushmore Report – Romney Already Being Considered for GOP Leadership?

The Atlantic reports that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is already being considered for a spot in Republican leadership, despite not even announcing yet if he will run for Utah’s open Senate seat, according to a GOP source. This source says that Republican leaders are pushing this idea, despite possible White House opposition.

“According to a Republican donor with direct knowledge, Senate GOP leaders have expressed an early interest in having Romney succeed Colorado Senator Cory Gardner as chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. The role involves leading the Senate GOP’s fundraising arm and helping recruit and vet prospective GOP candidates for the upper chamber. A Republican source close to Romney confirmed that the idea of the Utah Republican taking over the NRSC has generated chatter in recent weeks,” reports Elaina Plott and McKay Coppins.

The article goes on to say that Gardner called the GOP donor and told him that he “liked Romney” as his replacement. The Atlantic’s source concurred with that assessment, saying, “Romney’s got the stature and a virtually unmatched fundraising base to draw upon. And he’s running because he wants a national platform to help the party anyway.”

The Republican source also noted that it would elevate Romney’s stature as an anti-Trump colleague within the party. “Mitt becoming Senator Mitt Romney and chairman of the NRSC elevates Trump’s biggest intra-party foe,” the Republican donor said. “This is not the outcome Trump wanted when he encouraged Orrin Hatch to run again.”

Earlier this week, Romney announced that he will be making a special announcement regarding Utah’s senate seat on February 15. It is speculated that he will announce he is indeed running. Recent polling suggests that Mitt Romney would absolutely trounce any Democratic opponent in the 2018 election. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Romney would have “64 percent of the vote in Utah, compared to 19 percent for Democrat Jenny Wilson.”

About the Author

Timothy Meads writes for Townhall.

The Rushmore Report – Newt Gingrich on How Republicans Hold Congress in 2018

Last week, Newt Gingrich spoke at the Winter Meeting of the Republican National Committee. He shared his thoughts on what the party needs to do to hold both chambers of Congress in the 2018 mid-term elections. Gingrich knows a little about winning elections, given the miracle of 1994. These are the three keys to victory – in his own words.

First, go home and take on everyone.

Contend for every seat. Every Democrat idiotically voted no on the largest tax cut in your lifetime, and they have to go home and explain that. Rep. Joe Kennedy offered the Democratic response to the State of the Union. But you can go to the Ways and Means Committee website for your district. In Kennedy’s district a median-income family of four got a $5,800 tax cut. Now we should be all over him. How can he vote to take away $5,800 from a family of four in his district and send it back to Washington bureaucrats?

Every single one of the Democratic members of the Black caucus voted against the tax cut for their own people and could not applaud the lowest Black unemployment in history. We have to have the nerve to go nose-to-nose with every Democrat in every district.

Second, don’t complain about the news media.

The news media is a fact. The news media is the offensive wing of the other team. They are not the problem. What we do about them is the problem. So, we have to design a campaign plan, and we have to train our candidates assuming the worst about the news media. Whenever you interact with the news media you should assume you’re going into a war zone. You should plan to take the host on and challenge their assumptions.

You would be amazed how many of our folks are too slow, too untrained, and don’t know what they’re talking about. So, they walk in as though George Stephanopoulos is neutral. I mean not only was he the Clinton press secretary, he gave $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation. And we allowed him to chair a presidential debate in 2012. Now, you at least have a minimum rule. Nobody who’s completely on the Left is going to get to chair anything for this party’s good future.

Third, we have to have the courage to fight.

You have to be prepared. When someone gets up, the junior senator from New York, and says, “You know, if you talk about chain migration, it’s racist,” we need to say, “You must be losing this debate on the facts so badly that you’re now reduced to scream ‘racism,’ which is, by the way, what you scream about virtually everything, unless of course that’s homophobia or something else.” The Left has no arguments left except to yell nasty names.

If you’re a left-wing Democrat and totally for open borders, you can’t actually go up and say, “Well, I think it’s okay for a few hundred MS-13 folks to come in.” You just can’t. So, then you get furious at Trump because he’s found the angle of attack you can’t defend.

The most useful book I have read to better understand this year is Karl Rove’s book, The Triumph of William McKinley. That 1896 campaign may sound obscure, but it relates directly to our challenge.

McKinley was faced with the great charismatic Democratic leader, the youngest major party nominee in history at 36 years old, William Jennings Bryan. Bryan is such a great passionate articulator of demagogic populism and was so influential in the Democratic Party for two generations (nominated three times for president) that Elizabeth Warren is his direct emotional descendant.

He literally – and I mean this as a tribute to Bryan – he imprinted the Democratic Party with a negative, anti-elite, anti-city, anti-modernity kind of populism, a populism of anger. He talks about mankind being crucified on a cross of gold. He says at one point that he wants grass to grow on the streets of the cities. McKinley realizes he’s going to lose the election unless he breaks the heart of Bryan’s argument. McKinley understood in 1896 what Margaret Thatcher said in the 1970s when she warned, “First you win the argument. Then you win the election.” And so, McKinley created the most thorough educational campaign in American history.

They printed 18 brochures for every American. That’s a scale of organization that’s unimaginable. And Karl, who’s a great professional, really walks you through it. And that’s what we need today – a response to the Democratic Party that goes right at the philosophical basis for what they believe.

So, when reporters and analysts say, “Well, it’s the first term off-year election. The average losses are X.” My first thought is, “How do you think President Clinton is doing?”

The truth is we are led by somebody who breaks the records. We ought to join in this fall to break the record, and next year if we have won control of the House altogether – if we’ve picked up six or eight Senate seats – President Trump and the Republicans will be able to say, as Ronald Reagan used to say, “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

The Rushmore Report – Democrats Flip on Value of $1,000

The Trump tax bill – passed without a single Democratic vote – has created a great quagmire for the minority party. Even after the Democrats shut down the government out of deference to illegal immigrants, companies continued to dole out bonuses. Over 250 companies have given out $1,000 to $3,000 per worker. Democrats call these payments “crumbs.”

At least that’s what they call $1,000-3,000 now. Thousands of dollars given to hard-working Americans have not always been “crumbs,” as Rep. Nancy Pelosi now calls them. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) now criticizes the bonus money as “not going that far” in helping workers.

But let’s harken back to the days of 2011, when, under Democratic leadership, payroll tax cuts resulted in taxpayers receiving a whopping $40. Democrats basked in the glory of this massive benefit given American workers.

That was then. This is now.

Give the Democratic leaders credit for getting their talking points together. All three leaders, Pelosi, Wasserman Shultz, and Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, used the same word – “crumbs” to describe the $1,000-plus bonuses.

George Will noted, “We have not had a truly successful socialist and redistributionist party in America. At least not the prominent leftist parties that are prominent throughout Europe, though that could be changing with how far to the left Democrats have moved in recent years.”

The criticism of the left, aimed at the tax benefits they opposed, is a stale narrative. The challenge for Pelosi, Schumer, and Democratic candidates in the 2018 elections will be to convince their constituencies that the $1,000-$3,000 bonuses they have received – not to mention their tax reductions of $2,000 on average – are mere “crumbs.”

This will be their message . . .

“In 2011, when we were in charge, you each received a massive $40 tax break. But now that the evil Republicans are in charge, your tax break is only $2,000. And worse yet, your bonuses are just $1000-$3,000. Mere crumbs. They [Republicans] only gave you a few thousand dollars back. We gave you $40. So vote for us.”

And that is the Democrats’ economic message to hardworking Americans.

Good luck with that.

The Rushmore Report: Republicans Can Keep Control of Congress in 2018 – Here’s How

Heading into 2018, Republicans in Congress are unloved and endangered. Their continued control over the House and Senate after the November midterm elections appears precarious. Democrats hold a commanding 13-point lead over the GOP in the generic congressional ballot, according to Real Clear Politics. But Republicans can retain control of Congress.

Looking at the map and the calendar, a Democratic takeover of the House and Senate is not inevitable.

In the Senate, Democrats are defending 25 seats, including 10 in states that President Trump carried in 2016. Five of those states favored Trump by 10 points or more.

Sounds good for the GOP, right? Well, not exactly.

After the Republicans’ recent loss in an Alabama special election, the Senate will now have 51 Republicans and 49 Democrats. That means Democrats will have to pick up just two more seats in November to win the majority. And Republicans are in danger of losing seats in any of the following states: Arizona, Nevada, and Tennessee.

As for the House, things are more in doubt, as each seat is up for election every two years. A national wave election could easily move the House into Democratic hands.

But it’s not too late for Republicans to turn things around. Here’s how.

First, they need to stop talking about entitlement reform. That translates to cuts in Social Security and Medicare – which harms their aging base. It is political suicide.

Second, Republicans need to quit nominating candidates who are crazy or offend women. Women made the difference in the Alabama election. Republicans lost Deleware in 2010 by running a candidate who repeatedly proclaimed, “I’m not a witch.” It seems Delawarians wanted more from their next senator than not being a witch.

Third, Republicans must embrace the positive news about the economy. Unemployment has hit a 17-year low. Black unemployment has dropped the most. The economy is humming. And President Clinton’s words still ring true – “It’s the economy, stupid!”

Republicans, it’s your job to turn lemons into lemonade and tie the current economic boom to the pending tax cuts. Bottom line, if you can sidestep missteps, smile enough, and stay off Twitter (I’m talking to you, Mr. Trump), you may still be Kings of the Hill in 2019.

Just maybe.

About the Author

Lloyd Green writes for FoxNews.com.

The Rushmore Report: The Real Democratic Platform for 2018 and Beyond

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Shumer (NY) has blasted the Republican-backed tax law. Nancy Pelosi calls it “the worst legislation in American history.” The fact is, the Democratic Party has never been more unified. Their platform is simple – if Trump is for it, they are against it. No leading Democratic voice has said a single positive thing about the plummeting unemployment rate, a record stock market, victories over ISIS, tax cuts for 80 percent of the American people, or the growing American economy. Because the party is rooted in what they are against – Trump – it’s easy to define their platform for 2018 and beyond.

Given their universal, undying opposition to everything Trump and the Republican-led Congress have done this past year, what is clear is that Democrats, once given the opportunity, will reverse every policy and undo every law that has been passed by the Republican majority.

So, based on the Democratic Party’s stated opposition to the actions taken on the other side of the aisle, we can glean their emerging platform. The new Democratic Party – in coming elections – will stand for ten bedrock principles.

1. Higher taxes

Not one Democrat in the Senate or the House voted for this week’s tax bill. They called it “the worst piece of legislation ever.” So we can expect the party, should they win majorities in the Senate and House in 2018, to pass higher taxes, to return the rates to the Obama years. So if your family earns $45,000 per year, Democrats will reverse the $2,000 tax break Republicans just passed. By returning rates to the Obama years, those making $49,000-$86,000 will see their taxes go up by $930. Those earning $86,000-$149,000 will see an $1,800 per year tax increase. The Democratic Party – given the chance – will hike taxes across the board, to the levels they maintained through the Obama years.

2. More illegal immigration

Democrats have criticized every Trump statement and action on illegal immigration, from the day he was inaugurated. Illegal immigration has dropped by 40 percent since Trump took office. Therefore, by definition of their opposition to Trump, Democrats will loosen border security in an effort to open the floodgates for a massive increase in illegal immigration – back to the levels they tolerated the past eight years.

3. Return the Dow to 18,000

We hear it all the time. Trump’s policies favor “Wall Street over Main Street.” This explains the jump in the stock market from 18,000 to nearly 25,000 in just one year. Never mind, this means trillions of more dollars in retirement accounts for over 120,000 million Americans. Trump’s pro-business posture led to this growth in the stock market, so it must be reversed. This means returning the market to its pre-Trump level of 18,000 which Democrats praised at the time. A growth in the stock market is good, but enough is enough. And for Democrats, 18,000 is enough.

4. Resurgence of ISIS

Under Trump’s policies – which again have been opposed universally by Democrats – ISIS has ceded 80,000 square miles to American forces. ISIS has relinquished control of such major cities as Raqqa, Falluja, Ramadi, Baquba, and Abu Ghraib. So, in support of pre-Trump foreign policy and its results, the Democratic platform will call for American troops to give land back to ISIS, along with these major cities. If Trump’s policies were wrong, so were the results of those policies.

5. More regulations

By some counts, President Trump has ended over 800 regulations in an effort to free up businesses to set the pace of a capitalistic society. This has led to economic growth of over three percent and record hirings. This will stop under Democratic leadership. Strangling regulations – most that were enacted under Obama – will come back.

6. Return of the corporate tax rate to the highest level in the world

While Democrats say the former rate of 35 percent – the highest in the industrialized world – was too high, they never introduced a single piece of legislation in the past 30 years to do anything about it. They were completely comfortable with a high corporate tax rate, resulting in record numbers of American businesses relocating overseas. So once they win elections in 2018 and 2020, Democrats will return the rate to the level they found acceptable for the last 30 years. American businesses should pay more in taxes than their competition anywhere else in the world.

7. Reduce growth from four percent back to one percent

The Obama recovery was the worst economic recovery in American history, averaging one percent growth per year. Yet, Democrats have universally condemned Trump’s economic policies, despite leading to a near-four percent annual growth rate in the economy. So, it stands to reason, Democrats will enact whatever policies are necessary to reduce the growth of the economy back to a more meager one percent.

8. Higher unemployment

When President Trump took office in January, the unemployment rate was 4.8 percent. Today, at 4.1 percent, the rate is lower than it was at any point in the Obama Administration. This is unacceptable. The unemployment rate is at its lowest rate in 17 years; Democrats will reverse the trend. The only other option would be to admit what Trump is doing is actually working.

9. North Korean sanctions come down

From 2008 to 2016 the Democrats had the White House. And North Korea continued to grow as a nuclear threat. Still, the Obama Administration did not enact any of the sanctions Trump has put on the rogue regime in just one year. Again, since they oppose his foreign policy, it stands to reason, the Democratic Party will reverse these sanctions.

10. Move Israeli embassy back to Tel Aviv

Sure, President Obama – like Clinton and Bush before him – promised to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. They never followed through on this promise. President Trump made the same promise, but actually followed through on his word. And for that he met universal condemnation from the Democratic Party. While this move was praised by Israel, the only democratic state and our strongest ally in the Middle East, Democrats ridiculed the action. So expect them to reverse this move if given the chance.

Will Democrats really take these ten actions? I’m simply taking them at their collective word. They opposed every action of the Trump Administration that has led to such things as the retreat of ISIS, lower unemployment, a record stock market, middle class tax cuts, and economic growth. So it stands to reason that the Democratic platform will be to reverse these gains to pre-Trump levels.

It only stands to reason that the Democratic Party will seek to undo what they opposed in the first place. So for those of you who want to pay more in taxes, see companies move overseas, irritate Israel, increase the unemployment rate, and relinquish gains made against ISIS, you know what to do – vote Democrat.

The Rushmore Report: The Roy Moore Loss – What Does It Mean?

The longest Senate race ever has mercifully drawn to a close. Roy Moore became the first Republican candidate to lose a Senate race in Alabama since the Reagan Administration. In light of this political earthquake, pundits are already asking the question, What happened? What does it mean that Roy Moore lost by 1.5 percent to Democrat Doug Jones? Now is as good a time as ever to delve into post-election analysis. Here’s what the Roy Moore loss really means.

I agree with Michael Brown, of the National Review. “I’m seeing some crazy suggestions about what Roy Moore’s loss means going forward. If this can happen in Alabama, Democrats can win anywhere. And Republicans can lose everywhere. Doug Jones is a true progressive on abortion, immigration, and a host of other issues. Therefore, Democrats can use their unity and be uncompromising. My own impressions are more modest. In reality, does the Moore loss mean anything for 2018 or 2020? Let’s not get carried away.”

Well said. Let’s not get carried away.

Chris Cillizza was right when he summarized, “Candidates and campaigns matter.” Just as Hillary Clinton made a mistake by not campaigning in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, Moore erred by avoiding public appearances in the 48 hours leading up to Tuesday’s election. The famous Michael Dukakis tank commercial cost him votes. Neither Clinton’s nor Dukakis’ loss necessarily meant doom for their party. Similarly, the bland campaigns of Gerald Ford (1976), George Bush (1996), and John McCain (2008) did not reflect on the Republican Party. Candidates and campaigns matter.

Liberal media is proclaiming the end of Donald Trump – because a Republican who is an accused child predator lost to a Democrat by 1.5 points. Conservative media is right to counter that this line of reasoning must admit that any Republican who is not an accused child predator can still win in places like Alabama – big.

If Moore had won by 1.5 points, the analysis would go like this – Trump won big, Republicans are in control, and Democrats are in huge trouble in 2018. I suggest that this is a massive over read. A slim 1.5-point win for the Democrats in this election means little.

What we know now, we knew before the election. Any match-up between two mainstream candidates from the two parties in Alabama will still result in a blow-out for the Republican. How else can we explain Moore not losing by 20 points? Given the baggage Moore drug into this race, the results were as expected, and predicted here last week.

A warning to Democrats – don’t spike the ball too soon. A Moore win would have been an albatross around the neck of the Republican Party for the next year, leading up to the 2018 election. That likely would have cost them five or six seats in close Senate races around the country.

The Moore loss doesn’t mean much. But it does mean this – a small win for Democrats now and a potentially huge win for Republicans next year.

The Rushmore Report: You Won’t Believe Who’s Running Against Ted Cruz

Everyone expects Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) to win reelection in a cakewalk. He’s the one incumbent that even Steve Bannon likes. No one has stronger support among the conservative base than Ted Cruz. He is the most untouchable incumbent senator running in 2018, with $6 million in the bank. Still, someone is going to run against him – from the Christian conservative wing of the party.

So who is the Christian conservative who is daring to take on one of the most powerful men in Washington? His name is Bruce Jacobson, Jr. And his Christian background is unquestioned. Jacobson serves as Vice President of Life Outreach International and as executive producer of Life Today. He works for evangelist James Robison, and announced last week that he will challenge Ted Cruz for his senate seat.

In a new video, Jacobson slammed current politicians as self-serving men and women who do nothing for the people they are supposed to represent.

Jacobson said, “Most politicians today are far more interested in serving themselves and their own agendas than the people who elected them. Blinded by their own political ambitions, nothing ever gets done and we have political gridlock. With a Republican in the White House and a Republican majority in Congress, it makes no sense that we can’t move forward with a conservative agenda. Most of this gridlock comes from obstructionists in the Senate. We should expect more, and we should demand better. As an advocate for citizens of the great state of Texas, I will do just that, representing and working for ‘The Heart of Texas.'”

Jacobson has some politics in his background. Though he has been working for Life Outreach since 1995, he served as a political appointee for both the administrations of former president Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Age 57, Jacobson lives in North Richland Hills, Texas. He criticizes Cruz for using his senate office as a launching pad for higher office. To date, he has raised just $25,000 to mount his campaign.

Two other Republicans also intend to enter the race: Houston energy lawyer Stefano de Stefano and Dan McQueen, the former Corpus Christi mayor who quit after 37 days on the job.

Will Jacobson – or either of the other two candidates – actually win? It’s highly doubtful. But it’s interesting that someone is trying to take Cruz down, from within his own party.