Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label millennials. Show all posts
Showing posts with label millennials. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Trump Passes Big Hurdle

Trump Approval At 51%, Winning Millennials, Trusted More Than Democrats On Economy

By Paul Bedard May 15th, 2019 | Image Source: Washington Examiner

President Trump has crossed the critical 50% approval line needed to win reelection as millennials and independents are moving to embrace him, according to a new survey.
The latest Zogby Poll put Trump’s approval rating at 51%, his highest ever in the trademarked survey.
Zogby Analytics pollster Jonathan Zogby said that the president is riding a booming economy and could be hard to beat should the nation’s economic health continue to improve.
His survey found that several groups that had been leaning against Trump were starting to favor him in large part because they have growing confidence in the economy and Trump’s handling of it. Notably millennials and independents have turned in his direction.

Overall, likely voters said that they trusted Trump over Democrats, 46%-42%, to “grow” the economy.
“With a solid economy, a potentially long and drawn out primary season for Democratic presidential candidates, plus solid gains with independents, millennials, urban voters, college educated voters, and minorities, Trump could be very hard to defeat in 2020,” said Zogby.
“In addition to his base of supporters, Trump might be able to piece together another coalition and produce another improbable victory, as long as everything goes as planned, but we still have a lot of time left on the game clock,” added Zogby.
The Zogby Poll is the latest of likely voters that showed Trump receiving a bump in approval ratings after the release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s 2016 election report. Even Gallup, which surveys the broad category of “adults,” had him at a record high 46% approval.

And, importantly, Trump’s approval rating topped that of former President Barack Obama this far into his first term.
“President Trump’s job approval rating has seen a post Mueller report boost. We called it a few weeks ago. But that’s not the complete story as to why the president has reached a peak in his job approval rating. Trump is also riding high on positive economic news-a record high stock market, low unemployment, and solid GDP growth at home. At the moment President Trump’s approval rating is higher than Obama’s at the same point in his presidency. Zogby Analytics had President Obama at 48% approve/52% disapprove on 05/09/2011,” said the pollster’s analysis provided to Secrets in advance of its release.
There were two intriguing findings in the survey. On the positive side, the poll found that 22% of Democrats approved of Trump, a surprise. But it also found that 59% of elderly voters disapproved of Trump, 59% to 41%.
Zogby’s analysis provided the following takeaways:
  • “President Trump’s job approval rating is the highest we have on record. A slim majority strongly and somewhat approve of his job performance as president. His numbers are being driven by decent job growth, an inflated stock market, solid GDP figures, and low unemployment, but there are potential foreign policy threats like Iran, North Korea and a trade war with China, which could derail his current popularity with voters.”
  • “Besides a good economy and vindication from the Mueller report, Trump’s good approval rating is being driven by a surge in popularity among college educated voters, voters living in the Western region, Independents, Millennials, suburban men, urban men, and middle aged voters. Trump’s approval rating has improved with minorities — 27% of African Americans and 45% of Hispanics approve of the president-both very good numbers historically for Trump.”
  • “According to recent job statistics, most job growth in the U.S. has occurred in large to medium size cities, which could also explain the good job performance rating Trump received from large and medium city voters. Trump has recently seen a spike in support among large and medium city voters-almost half of each group approves of his job as president and think the U.S. economy will be positive the next four years.”

Thursday, April 12, 2018

The Failure Of Education! Will It Cause Another Holocaust?

NEVER AGAIN? On Yom Hashoah, Poll Shows Two Thirds Of Millennials Don't Know What Auschwitz Was

Photo by Universal History Archive/Getty Images
According to a new survey released on Thursday by the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, fully 41 percent of Americans don’t know what Auschwitz was, including two-thirds of Millennials. Approximately 22 percent of Millennials had not heard of the Holocaust, and 41 percent of Millennials thought 2 million or fewer Jews were murdered during the Holocaust.
This is troubling stuff.
It’s also informative, because it helps explain just why younger Americans seem so comfortable embracing identity politics and large, intrusive government. If you’d never heard of the genocide of the Jews by an all-encompassing state focused laserlike on race-based differences between people, you might be warmer to the notion that racial hierarchies in politics ought to exist. You might also be warmer to the claims of genocidal Islamist terror groups who claim that Israel is a land of victimizers. And if you’d never heard of the Soviet Union, you might be more sanguine about the possibility of socialism in the United States.
This is just one reason why teaching of history in America’s public schools matters so much. But that teaching in recent decades has revolved not around signal events in world history, but around the revisionist histories of Leftist advocates like Howard Zinn, who focus in tremendous detail on the sins of America without spelling out the true history of alternatives to the American way throughout the 20th century.
Thursday marks Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day. Clearly the West is doing a pretty awful job of remembering just what happened just two generations ago, given its decision to look the other way at rising anti-Semitism in Europe and to side with the enemies of Israel in the state’s existential fight against genocidal Jew-hatred.

Monday, February 19, 2018

This Is Another Indicator Of The Decline Of The US

US Army Going Old School With Training After Too Many Recruits Act “Entitled”

Army Going Old School to Train Millennials
 
 Print
It’s little secret that millennials have been stereotyped as “entitled” or “undisciplined.” But is that just an unfair oversimplification by cranky baby boomers and Gen X’ers? After all, every generation seems to grouse about the work ethic of their progeny (or progeny’s progeny, as the case may be).
Well, according to the Army, the lazy, entitled millennial isn’t just a pernicious stereotype. In fact, things are so bad that basic training is actually undergoing a redesign to deal with a new generation of recruits that can most charitably be described as “discipline-challenged.”
“The U.S. Army will soon launch a redesign of Basic Combat Training intended to build more discipline after many commanders complained that new soldiers often show up to their first units with a sloppy appearance and undisciplined attitudes,” Military.com reported Friday.
“By early summer, new recruits will go through Army BCT that’s designed to instill strict discipline and esprit de corps by placing a new emphasis in drill and ceremony, inspections, pride in military history while increasing the focus on critical training such as physical fitness, marksmanship, communications and battlefield first aid skills.”
The new basic training regimen “will also feature three new field training exercises that place a greater emphasis on forcing recruits to demonstrate Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills.”
TRENDING: Reporters Absolutely Freak After Trump Aide Says What He Thinks of Them
For those of you not familiar with military training (which I’m sure is nobody), those are the skill sets every incoming soldier is taught in order to prepare for combat conditions.
Maj. Gen. Malcolm Frost — commanding general of the U.S. Army Center of Initial Military Training — told reporters that the new program came out of surveys given to 27,000 commissioned officers, warrant officers and non-commissioned officers.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, they say they’ve “observed a trend of new soldiers fresh out of training displaying a lack of obedience and poor work ethic as well as being careless with equipment, uniform and appearance.”
“What leaders have observed in general is they believe that there is too much of a sense of entitlement, questioning of lawful orders, not listening to instruction, too much of a buddy mentality with NCOs and officers and a lot of tardiness being late to formation and duties,” Frost said.

Do you think millennials are entitled?

 
Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Tribune news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
“These are trends that they see as increasing that they think are part of the discipline aspect that is missing and that they would like to see in the trainees that become soldiers that come to them as their first unit of assignment.”
And the biggest problem? “The number-one thing that was asked for five-fold or five times as much as any of the other categories was discipline,” Frost said.
You would think that people considering the military as a career might be big on discipline and low on entitlement. Alas, that’s not the case, and thus the Army is going old school.
“First unit assignment leaders want initial entry training to deliver disciplined, physically fit new soldiers who are willing to learn, who are mentally tough, professional and who are proud to serve in the United States Army,” Frost said, according to Stars and Stripes.
RELATED: “Smart” Liberals Think They Can Stop Trump’s Tanks by Lying Down in Front of Them
“The bottom line is that when you graduate Basic Combat Training, you are supposed to be ready for your first unit assignment (and) to be ready to step on a plane and go to combat.”
There are moments when I get the feeling that I’m overusing the word “snowflake.” Moments where I feel I’m giving millennials a bad shake. After all, I technically am one. I know hardworking people my age who don’t feel entitled to free education or a high-paying, high-powered job right out of college.
It’s difficult to hold that kind of open-mindedness about my generation when I see stuff like this, however. The fact that we have to train people in discipline when they’re joining — by their own fully informed consent, mind you — a profession that requires significant discipline, there are serious issues. And this hardly sounds like a case of overstatement, either, particularly when there’s discussion of soldiers actively disobeying lawful orders.
There’s no draft. No one is forcing these individuals to go into the military. And while I’m sure we have one of the finest fighting forces in the world, it’s still beyond demoralizing to see that we actually have to treat the men and women who have signed up to fight and die for this country as if they were children.
Of course, what should we have expected when even the Virginia Military Institute is utilizing coloring books for students as part of its “behavior health program?”
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on these new basic training requirements.
What are your thoughts on millennials' fitness to serve?

Saturday, February 18, 2017

The New Way That Millennials Get Together




Matt Walsh: Millennials, ‘casual’ sex is not casual. It’s immature and selfish.

 




Matt Walsh: Millennials, ‘casual’ sex is not casual. It’s immature and selfish.
(KatarzynaBialasiewicz/GettyImages)






The title of a recent article in USA Today says it all: “Survey: Sleeping together before a first date is a-OK, but cracked phones are a put off.” The story focuses primarily on the attitudes of my fellow millennials towards dating and relationships.
Read and behold the death of western civilization:
Millennials are 48% more likely to have sex before a first date than all other generations of singles… Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist and chief scientific adviser to Match, [says]… “Sex before the first date could be a sex interview, where they want to know if they want to spend time with this person… In many ways sex has become a less intimate part of dating… We used to think of sex as you crossed the line now you are in an intimate zone, but now sex is almost a given and it’s not the intimate part…”
But don’t get the impression that we millennials have no standards. We do demand that our partners treat their phones with respect, if not their bodies and souls:
“Singles don’t like people who have a cracked phone, or an old phone or those who use a clicking sound when typing,” she says, citing the survey. 
Ah yes, I’ll never forget when I first laid eyes on my wife’s immaculate phone and thought to myself, “I want to spend the rest of my life with this woman. At least until her phone breaks.”
Of course, the article doesn’t tell the rest of the story. The part where these same people complain incessantly to their friends about how it’s so difficult to find a man or woman who isn’t a shallow, self-interested jerk. The part where they quickly grow bored with each new partner. The part where they conduct these “sex interviews” but somehow keep hiring the wrong candidates. Everyone is lying on their resumes, they conclude.
They tread water like this for years, deathly afraid of marriage, stuck in an endless string of casual sexual encounters and relationships so superficial and ridiculous that they won’t even call them relationships. We’re just “hanging out,” say the grown adults as they rapidly approach middle age.
They tell themselves that this is just how relationships are, this is how people are, this is how it has to be. They never stop to consider that it isn’t some inherent flaw in human nature preventing them from discovering a deeper and more mature bond with another human being. Rather, it’s their own flaws. Curable flaws, thankfully. But if they are to cure them, if they are to change the parts of them which lead constantly into these cheap and unfulfilling hook ups, they have to drastically adjust their attitude towards sex.
There are a great many problems with viewing sex as “casual” or a “given” — something that isn’t intimate, a mere interview strategy or recreational activity — but we’ll focus on just a few:

1. “Casual” sex is impossible.

A high five is casual. Waving hello is casual. Small talk is casual. Treating sex like a casual greeting doesn’t make it casual. It just makes you immature and selfish.
Life offers some clues as to whether a particular activity is casual or not. Here’s a good rule of thumb, though it may not work in every case: If you dress up to do something, such as attend an Easter service or a fancy dinner, it’s probably not casual. Likewise, if you completely undress to do something, such as have sex, it’s probably not casual. Casual things are things that you can do in any attire, anywhere, with anyone, in front of anyone. You may have a casual conversation with an acquaintance at the park in the middle of the day. But if you have sex with an acquaintance at the park in the middle of the day, you’ll find yourself in jail. Why is that? Because sex is intimate and private. People who actually would have sex in the same places and in the same contexts that they’d have a conversation are called sex offenders.
It’s not just the location that provides clues as to the extremely non-casual nature of sex, however. Our hearts and souls give an even stronger indication. Now, it’s hard to talk about this aspect of the issue because everyone lies about it. They lie to themselves and to each other. Those who frequently have casual sex will claim that they can do it without growing attached to the other person. And this may be true, after a while, if they’ve done it so often, and are so numb inside, that they’ve developed the same attitude towards sex as a prostitute.
Fortunately, most people aren’t quite that dead inside. Most people experience a whirl of strange and intense emotions before, during, and after the act. They may suppress or ignore these natural feelings, but that leads to depression and anxiety. Having a casual discussion with someone doesn’t result in this sort of internal strife. Treating sex as if it were a casual discussion does.
I haven’t even gotten to the most obvious indication that sex is not casual. Here it is: sex creates people. Yes, we may go to great lengths to prevent such “unintended” consequences, but that doesn’t change the fact that sex, by its nature, is a reproductive act. Only disease, old age, or surgery can absolutely remove the life-giving potentiality of sex. Outside of that, anytime you have sex, there is a chance you may make a person.
Can an architect casually design a high rise building? Can an aerospace engineer casually build a rocket ship? I don’t know about you, but I can’t even casually poach an egg. Simply making a meal requires a certain commitment and seriousness of purpose. Are we really prepared to say that the process by which we create a breakfast dish ought to be treated with greater respect and caution than the process by which we create humans?
Casual interactions can only have significant consequences by accident. If a fist bump has some Earth-shattering, life-altering result, it was an aberration. Sex, on the other hand, has a significant consequence by its nature. If you “accidentally” make a person through sex, you have experienced the same result as billions of other people. You might say that sex is not casual, it’s causal (sorry, I couldn’t help myself).

2. You devalue yourself and your partner.

It’s technically possible that a relationship that began with a superficial sexual encounter may lead to something lasting, committed, and fruitful. But if it does go that direction, which it probably won’t, it will be in spite of how it began.
Casual sex is fundamentally selfish and degrading. Both partners agree to use and be used by the other. The message they send to each other, quite explicitly, is this: “I’m using you for your body, which I value only as a masturbatory object. You are a sex toy with a brain, but I don’t care about your brain and would rather you not use it right now.”
Ironically, the very people who defend this approach to sex are the ones who usually shout the loudest about feeling “used” and “objectified” by our culture. It is they who allow themselves to be used. They make objects of themselves and pretend that it’s acceptable, in their case, because they’re getting something in return, as if it’s only a problem to objectify a human being when both parties don’t profit from it.
Our culture can’t even get it right on the very few moral principles it still defends. I want to agree with those who demand that a woman not have her dignity stripped of her, but then I realize that they mean it in a mercenary way. She ought not have her dignity taken for nothing, they mean. But if she gets something out of it — financially or carnally — it’s OK. Don’t use people unless they can use you too. I find this mantra extremely uninspiring and inadequate.
And this is the exact opposite of how healthy, successful relationships work. In marriage, we give ourselves to the other, lifting them and ourselves up in the process. This is why sex ought to wait for marriage, because only after that lifelong oath has been sworn can we hope to use sex in a way that’s truly sacrificial and self-giving. Sex should be enjoyable, but it should also be an expression of love and devotion. If we take the love and devotion out of sex, we’ve turned it into an act of mutual objectification. And eventually, without the love and devotion, we won’t even have the enjoyment anymore.

3. You set yourself up for heartache and betrayal down the line.

Let’s say some of these sexually enlightened millennials actually manage to find spouses through this rigorous sex interview process. They’ve already made it clear that sex is no big deal, it’s casual, it’s recreational, it need not involve emotions or commitment or any of that icky stuff. Well, if they stick to this outlook, they’ve put themselves on the path to the divorce attorney before they even walk down the aisle. I’ll explain why.
First of all, this numb, emotionless, “casual” sex is utterly boring. They’ve deprived themselves of the full experience of sex and replaced it with this stale version. Quickly they’ll find their sex life unsatisfying, not because it necessarily has to be, but because they don’t see any real difference between this sex and the sex they’ve already had with dozens of other people. It’s like watching a movie for the 50th time. Die Hard is still great no matter how many times you see it, but it can never be as fun to watch as it was the first time. When having sex is like the 50th viewing of Die Hard, the next step is predictable: One or both partners will go off and watch another movie.
And what happens then? Let’s say the husband decides to search for sexual fulfillment with some lady he met at the gym. On what grounds can the wife even complain? Sex is casual, is it not? It’s just recreation. It’s like playing checkers or ping pong, except naked. Would she get very upset if she caught her husband playing ping pong with another woman? Why should sex be any different? Isn’t that what she and her husband already established? Their relationship was founded on this idea.
Someone may respond that cheating is wrong simply because it breaks an agreement. That it does, but how serious was the agreement? If you and your spouse are binge watching a show together, and you watch a couple of episodes when the other isn’t around, you’ve broken an agreement. If you have sex with the secretary, you’ve also broken an agreement. The latter infraction can only be considered more severe if sex is considered vastly more intimate and morally consequential than watching TV. But we have an entire generation who’ve been raised on the notion that watching TV and having sex really aren’t different at all. The wife, according to her own philosophy, can only be as upset about an affair as she’d be about her husband watching episode 5 of Luke Cage without her.
Yet, in this moment, her liberal ideas about sex suddenly melt away and she’s left with the horrible fact that her husband did something private and serious with another woman. Her husband gave something away that belongs to her. Her husband, through this act that she so often described as “casual” and “no big deal,” betrayed her. Now, when he offers the very defenses of his “casual encounter” that she had been giving for years — it’s only sex, it’s just physical, it doesn’t mean anything  — she sees them for the pitiful, childish excuses that they are. Progressive ideology gives way to reality, and the reality crushes her.
Better, I say, to confront the reality of sex before it asserts itself so painfully. If we do that, a lot of my generation’s relationship troubles will begin to magically disappear.

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

American Rioters Don't Understand Constitution Or American History. A Failure Of Education



David Barton: Presidential protestors don’t understand America

 



David Barton:  Presidential protestors don’t understand America
US President elect Donald Trump (C) and Vice President elect Mike Pence (L) and their family members pray together during the swearing-in ceremony on in front of the Capitol in Washington on January 20, 2017. / AFP / Timothy A. CLARY (Photo credit should read TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images)




The Inauguration of Donald Trump was remarkable in many ways, not the least of which was that six different individuals offered prayers, with four of those prayers ending in Jesus’ name and the other two openly quoting from the Bible. Clearly absent was the typical government-mandated politically-correct prayer. Ministers were once again allowed to pray according to the dictates of their own conscience, as originally intended by the US Constitution.
Another unique feature of his Inauguration was the large number of protesters present. Most were Millennials, and while some focused on single subjects (e.g., immigration, global warming, Obamacare) others were still protesting the general election results. Among the latter group, a common protest sign was, “Trump is not my president.” But that statement says more about our education system than it does about those who held the signs. It affirms the failure of American education in four areas: American history, government, Constitution, and truth.
First, the sign was intended to express their outrage over the fact that Hillary won the popular vote by 2.9 million votes (out of 128.8 million cast) but lost the presidency—an outcome they believed was unprecedented in the history of American elections. Only it wasn’t. The identical thing has happened in several other presidential elections. Shame on schools for not teaching basic American history and why such outcomes occur.
Second, the message on the sign was rooted in the protestors’ mistaken belief that America is a democracy. But we are not. Those who formed our government hated democracies and wisely protected us from them. For example, James Madison affirmed that “democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention [and] incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.” Founder Fisher Ames warned, “A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction,” and John Adams lamented that democracy “never lasts long….There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” For thousands of years, democracies have consistently proved to be a source of lurking disaster—an unpredictable form of government where passions and selfishness are allowed to prevail over reason and deliberation. America was therefore established as a constitutional republic—what John Adams described as “a government of laws and not of men.” Shame on schools for not teaching basic American government.
Third, the “Trump is not my president” sign affirmed their unawareness of how presidents are to be elected according to the Constitution—an election process that mirrors our federal bicameral system. For example, Wyoming has half-a-million citizens, but California has 39 million. So in the US House, Wyoming gets only one Congressman while California gets fifty-three, and California will beat Wyoming on every vote in the House. The popular vote of the House will always prevail in that chamber. But in the Senate, California gets only two Senators—the same as Wyoming; the representation is solely by state, and every state has equal voting strength with all others. This is a prominent feature in our federal system. A bill is not passed merely by the House, which reflects the popular vote; it also must be passed in the Senate, which reflects the vote by states.
The protesters believe that only the national popular vote matters (which Hillary won—barely). But even though she garnered the votes of most of the largest cities in America, she did not win the majority of the states, cities, or counties. In fact, Trump won 30 of the 50 states, more than 80 percent of America’s 3,141 counties, and an equally lop-sided percentage of its 35,000 cities. The protestors were unaware (as are most Americans) that the Constitution establishes an election system that balances diverse measurements. Shame on schools for not teaching the Constitution.
Finally, the declaration that “Trump is not my president” establishes personal opinion as the ultimate measure of right and wrong—that truth is whatever I believe or declare it to be. (Polling today shows that two of three Americans believe that there are no moral absolutes—that every individual is his own arbiter of what is right and wrong, or moral.) But the problem with this is that there are absolutes. Jump off the Empire State Building and see what happens. On the way down you may personally object to what is happening, or be offended by it, or even vehemently disagree with it, but none of that will change the results. There is no alternate reality. None. Shame on schools for teaching students to elevate personal opinion above absolute facts.
It’s time that Americans demand that their schools once again teach American history (so students know that the popular vote winner does not always win the presidential election), American government (so they know we are a republic and not a democracy), the Constitution (so they understand our bicameral federal and election system), and absolute truth (that personal opinion must submit to truth and reality). If we don’t make these changes, we will not want to imagine, much less experience, the horrifying results from Abraham Lincoln’s warning that “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” God help America if citizens don’t act to change our schools.
David Barton is the Founder and President of WallBuilders, a national pro-family organization that presents America’s forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on our moral, religious and constitutional heritage.