Aug032016
U.S. homeownership rate plummets to five-decade low
Despite legislators and bureaucrats best efforts, the homeownership rate continues to slide.
Since the Great Depression, presidential administrations with a cooperative Congress implemented policies intended to maximize the homeownership rate. At the end of World War II, the returning servicemen armed with FHA loans bought millions of new production homes and raised the homeownership rate significantly from the bottom of the depression. Apparently, the new policies were a success.
However, the early success was not matched by future increases in home ownership. Once the stimulus provided by FHA loans reached a new equilibrium, the home ownership rate stabilized at about 64% and remained there for about 40 years — despite ongoing tinkering with financing and other policies.
During the mid 1990s, subprime lending gained market share, and as subprime lending grew, the homeownership rate rose steadily. The growth of subprime lending was not government policy, nor was it a reaction to government policy as the political right often suggests. The growth of subprime was private-sector lending seeking a return on investment.
During the early 00s, on the surface conditions looked great. House prices were appreciating rapidly, mortgage equity withdrawal was fueling an economic boom, subprime lending was providing home ownership opportunities to everyone, and the American Dream was being recognized by a record number of Americans.
For government officials, this was touted as the success of their policies (even though government policy had nothing to do with it). Critics of these policies were mocked or widely ignored as the ravings of madmen, particularly those who believed subprime and “innovative” lending of the age was unstable and could potentially lead to a painful crash.
Unfortunately, homeownership is not right for everyone. Many Americans are better served by the freedom of movement that accompanies renting; young people in particular may want to move for career advancement.
Many Americans lack the financial management skills necessary to sustain homeownership, and it’s necessary to exclude those who lack these skills because if homeownership is granted to those unable to sustain it, the result is a heart-wrenching price crash and 6.5 million foreclosures.
During the housing boom, everyone was able to ignore the reality that homeownership is a privilege and not a right. Everyone considered themselves a homeowner, even those who didn’t pay for their houses.
Declines in the home ownership rate were inevitable when the housing bubble popped. Foreclosures pushed people out of their homes and into rentals at an unprecedented rate. While policymakers have managed to manipulate supply to cause a rise in home prices, the home ownership rate continues to slide.
U.S. Homeownership Rate Falls to Five-Decade Low
But household formation climbs as more Americans look to rent
By Jeffrey Sparshott, Jul 28, 2016
The U.S. homeownership rate fell to the lowest level in more than 50 years in the second quarter of 2016, a reflection of the lingering effects of the housing bust, financial hurdles to buying and shifting demographics across the country.
But the bigger picture also suggests more Americans are gaining the confidence to strike out on their own, albeit as renters rather than buyers.
The decline in home ownership rates may also reflect a generational shift in attitudes toward home ownership. I believe the current generation won’t have the unbridled enthusiasm of the previous generation — thankfully — and they will be more cautious about buying, which is a natural reaction to the carnage they witnessed, but ownership is primal, and no matter how bad lenders and government officials screw everything up, people will still want to own if it’s advantageous for them to do so, and probably even if it’s not.
The homeownership rate, the proportion of households that are owner-occupied, fell to 62.9%, half a percentage point lower than the second quarter of 2015 and 0.6 percentage point lower than the first quarter 2016, the Census Bureau said on Thursday. That was the lowest figure since 1965.
There are many ways to interpret the numbers. Part of the story is the catastrophic housing market collapse, which was especially severe for Generation X—those born from 1965 to 1984.
(See: Which generation was hurt the most by the housing bust?)
Younger households may struggle to save amid student debt, growing rents, rising home prices and limited inventories of starter homes. Indeed, the homeownership rate for 18- to 35-year-olds slipped to 34.1%, the lowest level in records dating to 1994.
At 77.9%, the homeownership rate was highest for those 65 years and over.
But the broader picture suggests a degree of economic strength: Renters are spurring a steady increase in overall household formation. Renter-occupied housing units jumped by 967,000 from the same period a year earlier. Overall, household formation has been fairly steady since the early days of the expansion.
A rising number of households suggests more people are optimistic enough to strike out on their own and helps further spur growth as they buy furniture, start families and move up the economic ladder.
Indeed, moving into a rental unit has been entirely responsible for rising household formation since the recession began.
“Household formation numbers suggest that if the decline [in ownership] is real, it is more likely due to a large increase in the number of renter households than any real decline in the number of homeowner households,” said Ralph McLaughlin, chief economist at real estate website Trulia.
The failure of housing policy
Legislators and bureaucrats who craft US government housing policy want to increase in resale value of houses and maximize the home ownership rate. Middle-class family can make, and home ownership is synonymous with the American Dream.
Housing subsidies are detrimental to America. Evidence of this epic failure is the collapse in home prices and the resulting 8-year economic malaise caused by the withdrawal of the HELOC abuse stimulus from the American economy. Now we can show their failure was complete as the home ownership rate hits a 50-year low.
[listing mls=”OC16165980″]
Trulia outlines the plight of the modern-day renter
Housing is not just becoming less affordable, it is also becoming more cramped for many across the U.S., according to a recent report released by Trulia.
About 14.7% of households had less bedrooms than family members, an increase of 0.5 percentage points from 2009, according to the report.
Unsurprisingly, larger, more expensive metros feel the cramp more than smaller metros. In addition, families with children feel the impact more than those without.
In its study, Trulia analysed the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2014 five-year American Community Survey data. It separated single-family households, and calculated how many rooms that family would need in their home. Married couples were counted as needing one room, whereas non-married adults and children were counted to need one room each.
The company found that, using these parameters, only 8.1% of households who own their home experience a space crunch versus 26.4% of households who rent.
Homeowners experiencing a space crunch decreased 0.3 percentage points from 2009’s 8.4%. On the other hand, the percentage of renter-households with a space crunch increased 0.6 percentage points since 2009.
Despite being more crunched for space, the family size for rental households is actually smaller at 2.3 than homeowner households at 2.6.
When dividing by area, Los Angeles, California, has the highest proportion of households experiencing a space crunch at 29.2%. New York City came in second at 25.2%, followed by Fresno, California.
According to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, the supply gap in 2015 was 400,000 units. Of course, that leads to price inflation on rental rates for existing units as well as driving developers to build.
MBA: Mortgage applications drop again
While the drop isn’t as severe as the prior week, mortgage applications still posted a 3.5% drop from one week earlier, the latest data from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ending July 29 found.
Split up, the Refinance Index decreased 4% from the previous week, as the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index decreased 2% from one week earlier to the lowest level since February 2016.
This is compared to the previous report, which posted that the Refinance Index and Purchase Index decreased 15% and 3%, respectively, from the previous week.
Bank of England should worry about a Brexit boom, not a Brexit bust
Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, is hardly the most reliable guide to anything.
He has warned constantly that interest rates will have to rise soon, but has managed to get through three years in office without changing them even once. He has been through several versions of “forward guidance,” and come up with a range of newfangled ways of managing monetary policy, only to abandon them after a few months. An East German Trabant was more likely to get you to your destination on time.
Even so, if the bank does not cut interest rates tomorrow, and possibly launch another round of quantitative easing, it will come as a major shock to the markets.
And yet, that may well come to be viewed a huge mistake.
In fact, the British economy was already in a perfectly healthy state when the electorate decided to leave the European Union. Since then, there has been a massive devaluation of the pound GBPUSD, +0.0750% , and the government has effectively abandoned fiscal restraint.
What happens when you take an economy running at capacity and stimulate it? It starts to overheat.
The real risk for the U.K. is not of a Brexit bust, despite all the warnings in the immediate aftermath of the vote. It is of a Brexit boom — an overheating economy that may ultimately crash. The best way to avoid that would be to keep rates on hold.
Carney may have let down the City last month by keeping interest rates steady, but he has all but promised to move this week instead. Overall, 45 out of 47 City economists expect rates to be cut this week, with the majority looking for a quarter-point reduction to 0.25%.
But it could be more. The bank may well decided to slash rates all the way down to zero, and perhaps even into negative territory, while launching another round of quantitative easing, and possibly even coming up with some emergency measures to help the housing market.
America’s Oligarchs Support Clinton Almost Unanimously
The results are already in, even before the official campaign-finance final figures will become available after the election.
Though a large percentage of the people funding the campaign advertising will never be made public – due to recent Supreme Court decisions allowing “dark money” – data already exist on the final product of the campaigns (including both the above-board and the dark money), which is the booked advertising time for each of the two candidates at the start of their campaigns. (Similar proportions of donations go also to get-out-the-vote and other campaign-activities; so, these booked-advertising figures correlate rather well with across-the-board funding of the two campaigns.)
Advertising rates – the charges per second of air-time – get higher and higher the later and closer to Election Day the time is booked; so, any candidate who books late is really starved for funds and has little chance of winning; any candidate who does the booking early is getting a big break from the networks and from certain other media. This discount, for early booking, magnifies even further the cash-advantage of the candidate whom the oligarchs prefer.
However, normally, both Parties’ nominees have their own billionaires backing them (Republican billionaires backing the Republican nominee, and Democratic billionaires backing the Democratic nominee), and so there’s a real contest, they both have a chance; but not this time: Look at the figures, and you can see that, this time around, virtually all of the oligarchs are backing only one candidate: they have united around Clinton.
On August 2nd, Carrie Dann at NBC headlined, “Clinton, Allies Have Reserved $98 Million in Ads”, and she opened: “Hillary Clinton and her allies are poised for a TV ad blitz of nearly $100 million dollars, compared to less than $1 million currently reserved on the airwaves by backers of Donald Trump.” That’s a wipe-out of Trump, by the oligarchs.
The detailed total on ads that have already been aired was: “Through last week, Team Clinton had aired a total of $68 million in ads, while Team Trump had spent roughly $6 million.”
The totals booked going forward are even more skewed in Clinton’s favor: $98 million for Clinton, $817,000 for Trump. (In other words: Trump’s ratio is even worse now, than it was leading up to the two Conventions.)
Going forward, it’s like a hundred-to-one advantage, Clinton over Trump.
Will Trump tone down The Trump Speech and try to resurrect this campaign?
Ten Reasons Why Trump Could Win
I have no doubt he can win. I’m only suggesting it’s getting more difficult by the day, because Trump can’t stop being Trump.
Apparently Trump vomited a specious speculative inflammatory comment on Scalia’s death:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/owner-ranch-scalia-died-clarifies-pillow-location-article-1.2535124
Thankfully, this daily repeated shameful behavior is affecting his standing in the polls.
You’ve stooped to posting tabloids now?
I apologize. Deadspin is that, agreed. I’m just interested in what makes Trump Trump.
It used to be that the tabloids was the only place you found Trump. Perhaps in the next cycle we can see if Kim Kardashian has enough star power.
Although it precedes the recent week of Trump gaffes, that was a well written article with decent analysis.
I like reading the National Review to get a feel for the extreme Conservative Right, not the Religious Right. You do have to read past layers of spin, but the basic points made in the article were good ones.
Donald Trump Is A Frightened Coward And I Bet $100,000 He Won’t Fight Me
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/donald-trump-is-a-frightened-coward-and-i-bet-100-000-1784774156
NAr: Pending home sales down 1.8% in West
NAR released a summary of pending home sales data showing that June’s pending home sales are up modestly 0.2 percent from last month and also slightly improved 1.0 percent from a year ago.
Pending sales are homes that have a signed contract to purchase on them but have yet to close. They tend to lead Existing Home Sales data by 1 to 2 months.
All regions showed increases from a year ago except the West, which had a decline of 1.8 percent. The South saw the biggest gain from a year ago at 1.8 percent while the Midwest had the smallest gain at 1.6 percent.
From last month, the West had the largest decline at 1.3 percent
The Canadian Housing Boom Fueled by China’s Billionaires
http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-vancouver-real-estate-market/
The stories at the bottom about how this foreign money is pricing out locals is very similar to what we go through in Coastal California.
Landlord Nation: Boomers’ New Retirement Plan Is Millennials Paying Rent
The foreclosure crisis turned America into a market of renters—and rent collectors.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/landlord-nation-boomers-new-retirement-plan-is-millennials-paying-rent
First-time homebuyers must buck odds to push door open
Alyse Houghton has learned an important lesson during her search for a new home in Valparaiso: “When you see something you like, you need to move quickly.”
Houghton made that observation during a visit to a home for sale with Realtors Matt Welter and Matt Evans, of RE/MAX Pace Realty. It was the 11th home they’d visited during Houghton’s search for her first house.
Houghton, 28, said she contacts Welter as soon as she sees something that might be a good fit. “If you like something, you have to get out there immediately,” she said.
That’s generally true in the local and national housing markets, according to Realtors, but particularly so for houses at or below the median price.
The percent of all homebuyers purchasing their first home has remained low nationally in the years since the housing crash and recession. First-time buyers made up 32 percent of all purchasers in 2015, according to the National Association of Realtors’ 2015 “Profile of Homebuyers and Sellers.” The average since the study began in 1980 has been close to 40 percent.
Construction lagging
In June, National Association of Realtors Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said that despite the fact new home construction has “crept higher” in 2016, “there’s still a glaring need for even more, to help alleviate the supply pressures that are severely limiting choices and pushing prices out of reach for plenty of prospective first-time buyers.”
O.C. needs desalination like it needs another housing development
No matter how needed or environmentally sound a project is, someone, somewhere will oppose it
California has never been a stranger to environmental justice problems – at one point or another our communities, including farmworkers, families and students have had to fight against the health impacts caused by poisons in pesticides, persistent industrial contaminants produced by refineries, decades of urban oil drilling and toxic battery recycling operating next to their homes and schools, as well as fracking and poor air quality, to name a few.
In this context, it is perplexing to see some in the community refer to the $1 billion Poseidon desalination boondoggle as an environmental justice priority while irresponsibly mentioning drought stricken Porterville as if the plant would benefit them. The proposed desalination plant in Huntington Beach has some hurdles to cross before the project can proceed. But one thing we do know is that the Orange County Water District plans to continue taking its full allocation from the State Water Project every year, so building this plant will not benefit dry inland communities like Porterville. The water is going to stay in the county, and, while Poseidon is trying to play off drought fears, the latest Urban Water Management Plan shows that Orange County has all the water it needs for now and the next 25 years.
Orange County residents need to re-evaluate the cost and energy that will go into this project. On its surface, desalination sounds like a good idea, but there are hidden costs once you scratch that surface. According to a 2013 study from the Department of Water Resources, the cost of water obtained from desalination is roughly double that from water that comes from building a new reservoir or wastewater recycling. The energy that a desalination plant requires is outrageous because of the reverse osmosis process. And then, with rising sea levels, planners would have to factor in how to protect the desalination plant from the water that it is supposed to treat.
What is the local consensus in Carlsbad now that their desalination plant has been in operation for awhile?
I haven’t read anything about it in the newspapers. It’s isolated enough from the rest of town (it’s next to an old power plant), unless its operation were really obnoxious, nobody would notice.
I think the Carlsbad desalinization plant project will be viewed a success by anyone without a prior agenda or conception. It cleans a lot of water for a relatively low cost. I don’t know enough about the OC proposal to have an opinion, but the plants aren’t a problem to operate with little environmental impact.
Freddie CEO: 97% LTV product not driving first-time homebuyer market…yet
Freddie Mac introduced its 3% down mortgage product back in December 2014 to help more first-homebuyers and other qualified borrowers jump into the market.
After two years and a significant push from Freddie Mac to make lenders comfortable, it still barely makes a dent in Freddie Mac’s first-time homebuyer portfolio.
But it’s only the beginning.
In an interview with HousingWire after the government-sponsored enterprise posted its second-quarter earnings, Donald Layton, Freddie Mac CEO, pointed out two key facts. First, he said that 42% of non-refinance purchase buys were to fund loans to first-time homebuyers, which is the highest level in 10 years.
He also noted that the 97% LTV product has significantly attractive characteristic for first-time homebuyers.
However, despite both factors, he said that the numbers are not large enough to be driving an increase yet.
Right now, the product’s level of success is hard to judge since the GSE chooses not to disclose the information.
Layton did give some insight into how the program is doing, noting that its partnerships with Quicken Loans and Bank of America are meeting, if not exceeding, expectations.
Quicken and Freddie Mac first announced a partnership in October 2015. At the time, the details on the partnership were sparse, with the two organizations stating that the program will feature “unique, co-developed products to meet the needs of emerging markets, including Millennials, first-time homebuyers and middle-class borrowers.”
Scott Adams: Clinton Takes the Persuasion Lead
As amazing as this sounds, I watched a video clip of Dr. Drew explaining to CNN’s Don Lemon that Trump does NOT show signs of insanity or dangerous narcissism. Indeed, as Dr. Drew explained, some healthy narcissism is probably helpful for leaders because they want to be seen as successful.
Is the amazing part of this story that Dr. Drew thinks Trump is probably sane?
No.
The amazing part is that Team Clinton’s persuasion is now so powerful that the question of Trump’s sanity seemed like a legitimate question for the press.
Okay, okay, I know you don’t think the press is legitimate, and CNN is clearly favoring Clinton. But even under those conditions you still need events in the real world to support your pro-Clinton narrative. And apparently CNN thought it had that justification. They had cover from all the pro-Clinton pundits who are saying Trump is mentally unbalanced (with different language).
Keep in mind that Trump has run an empire for decades, raised several great kids, doesn’t drink or do drugs, and has no known history of mental issues. And as I have explained, the craziest stuff Trump does is mostly (but not always) compatible with good persuasion technique as we know it.
The stuff Trump does that isn’t part of persuasion technique, and still looks crazy to you, is something unfamiliar in the political realm: honesty and politically-incorrect humor. For example, when Trump said about McCain’s war record that he preferred someone who didn’t get captured, it was an adaptation of a well-known joke form, and it made me laugh when I heard it, in large part because it was so politically incorrect. The wrongness, along with the clever twist, is what made it a joke.
I support the troops, by the way. But I think most of them know the difference between a bullet and an offensive joke. Only one of them is harmful.
Anyway, my point is that Clinton’s campaign has such strong persuasion going right now that she is successfully equating her actual misdeeds of the past with Trump’s imaginary mental issues and imaginary future misdeeds.
Clinton’s side (which is my side too, for my personal safety) has made you fear the imaginary monster under the bed so you’ll ignore the thief going through your drawers. That’s weapons-grade persuasion.
I still predict a landslide win for Trump because of the Shy Trump Supporter Effect. But he’s losing on persuasion in the past week or so. That could change on any given day.
—
In related news, Trump’s comment on Mrs. Khan’s silence at the Democratic convention made the country go nuts for a week. On the surface, it looked like a terrible week for Trump, as team Clinton successfully framed his comment about Islam and gender into something about their son, which it wasn’t. In the long run, you’ll forget Trump’s insult. But you will never forget the optics of Mrs. Khan deferring to her husband on stage. Short term, Trump got slaughtered on that issue. Long term, Trump has enough credibility with veterans that it won’t matter any more than the McCain joke did.
But you won’t forget the visual of the Khans on stage, and the husband looking in charge. That will stick with you. It was a gutsy persuasion play from Trump, but we will never know if it worked. My best guess is that the whole situation is just a bump in a long road.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/148413098031/clinton-takes-the-persuasion-lead
Were I in the Clinton camp, I’d send out multiple surrogates and daily pound Trump in the media with speculation that not only is his net worth not in the billions, but it might actually be negative due to debt. We just don’t know. He won’t release his personal tax returns nor his business tax returns.
This would eat at him immensely. He would continue to brag about everything, without proving anything. He would get defensive and start attacking with slanderous comments.
What he won’t do, and we know it, is release tax returns. Those will reveal the Emperor, pun fully intended, is wearing no clothes.
Do tax returns measure net worth? That’s news to me.
My thoughts exactly, tax returns can provide a lot of info but they don’t measure net worth.
Perspective makes a good point about that strategy, as a Trump supporter I am getting annoyed that he just won’t stop his stupid fights with everyone and just focus on Hillary. Hillary has so much dirt on her that if Trump focused on her corruption, bad polices, lies, bad leadership, Clinton foundation lies, he would increase his odds.
Trump is Trump though and he keeps beating himself on the daily basis. His team is too smart not to recognize this, the issue is that he can’t stop himself.
They do not establish net worth, but they do establish reported cashflows, expenses, and taxes paid. To Trump’s credit, he’s conceded he pays as little tax as possible.
If he weren’t so declasse’ constantly bragging about his wealth (while living in a gold palace), this would be much less of an issue for me. If you keep telling me you’re worth billions, prove it.
What you want is his balance sheet, which private companies and individuals typically do not release, even when running for President. Releasing the tax returns has no benefit to him whatsoever, even if everything is above board. So many Americans are ignorant of how taxes work, the media can get to work criticizing him for “tax evasion” as they did with Romney, even if he followed the law precisely.
Romney’s biggest problem was that he donated so much to charity that it drove down his effective tax rate compared to Obama’s. If he had given nothing to charity, he would have paid a much higher percentage in taxes, but then criticized as a tightwad that doesn’t care about charitable giving. It was a no-win situation. Trump paid close attention to how Romney was treated and isn’t going to make the same mistake this time. No tax returns for the media to shred him on.
I agree, but that should stop the shredding. He should be shredded for not disclosing them.
“shouldn’t”
I don’t think they are successfully shredding him over the non-release. They want it to be a big story, but the average American just doesn’t care.
I agree they’re not successfully shredding him. I don’t purport to know what the average American cares about. I’m just a big city “liberal.”
We need a lot more of this to change the market.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-downtown-apartments-20160719-snap-story.html
I understand your sentiment, but I don’t know if $2,300 studio apartments are the kind of change people are looking for.
If apartments absorption is waning, we are probably at the peak of this multi-family construction cycle. There’s still a large number of apartments in the pipeline, so rents should finally stabilize for a while. This supply will work to bring down rents in the oldest and least desirable units, which is where affordability starts and ends.
The anti-illegal immigrant candidate, might be married to an illegal immigrant? Wouldn’t that be fun?
Many questions and few answers about how Melania Trump immigrated to the U.S.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/many-questions-and-few-answers-about-how-melania-trump-immigrated-to-the-us/ar-BBvgiEQ?li=BBnbcA1
The problem with running for President, is that your entire life is subject to intense scrutiny. These questions are going to dog him, ’til they’re answered, and even beyond that. It’s only relevant insofar as a centerpiece of his campaign is ending illegal immigration (Oh, and ending all violence too. Can’t forget that RNC promise).
It was an act of love that caused her to pose naked. 🙂
Trump is only against illegal immigrants who aren’t really, really hot and willing to sleep with him.
More “elitists” abandoning Trump – the Harvard Republicans Club:
https://twitter.com/thecrimson/status/761269926061572096
The real public epidemic affecting the vast majority of Americans, is obesity. Both of our Presidential candidates are likely clinically obese (~30% above ideal weight). Should politicians discuss this? Should government do something? All real questions to real problems affecting real people.
Average Weight of an American Man is 15 Pounds More Than 20 Years Ago
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/average-weight-american-men-15-pounds-more-20-211506010–abc-news-wellness.html
A good summary of the war against Christians as it currently stands, and what could happen under each scenario with a Clinton or Trump presidency.
Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice
http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/07/28/why-voting-for-donald-trump-is-a-morally-good-choice-n2199564
“A President Clinton could possibly nominate three or four justices to the Supreme Court, locking in a far-left activist judiciary for perhaps 30 or more years.”
From your mouth to God’s ears!
Anyone who uses “activist” to describe judges is either an idiot or a thoughtless ideologue. It’s no different than using “socialist” when describing political ideas.
What term should be used to describe judges that legislate from the bench?
Every judicial decision results in precedent – a series of complicated facts applied to the law resulting in a ruling by which subsequent unrelated parties are bound. So EVERY judge then is an activist by virtue of “inserting” themselves in an unresolved dispute, applying the particular facts to the law, and making a ruling.
Here are two examples:
If the SCOTUS balance changes:
1) and Roe v. Wade is reversed in a SCOTUS ruling, would those Justices be “activists”? This has been precedent for over four decades.
2) and SCOTUS begins striking down state laws allowing same-sex marriage, would those Justices be “activists”?
So, it’s basically the decisions you disagree with, not the “activism.” So stop sounding ignorant using the term “activist” judges.
When I say “you” I’m referring to the author of this article. There were an inordinate number of logical fallacies in the piece too, but I accept the basic premise – “We as Christians will vote for anything that best achieves our goals.” That’s fair.
I disagree with legislating from the bench, which is what liberal courts have done throughout the 20th century. Of course conservative justices sometimes do the same, but they are more likely to honor the intent of lawmakers. That recent interview with RBG shows that her opinions are in fact formed before cases even reach the court, completely destroying your theory about applying facts to a dispute. Facts don’t matter when you have a predetermined agenda to accomplish.
Hey, if you vote based on your religious beliefs, that’s perfectly fine. Swallow your vomit in the poll station as you punch that Trump hole.
I think the article failed to mention Trump’s wife was a porn star. So, your religious doctrine is advising you vote for a First Lady porn star. I’m not judging. Work what ya got!
And if Trump’s wife possibly being an illegal immigrant weren’t sufficiently ironic, I heard he also publicly stated he wants to “crack down on porn.” If that’s true, he needs to keep this quiet. I’m certain the vast majority of the rabid Trump enthusiasts treat porn similarly.