Gallup: Biden's job approval sinks to 50%, the lowest so far during his presidency

President Biden's approval rating has declined to 50 percent, according to a Gallup poll.

This marks a new low as all prior approval numbers in Gallup polling during Biden's presidential tenure have ranged from 54 percent to 57 percent.
While 50 percent of those surveyed indicated that they approve of the way the president is handling his job, 45 percent disapproved and 5 percent lacked an opinion on the matter, according to Gallup.
The highest that Biden's disapproval level has ever previously reached is 42 percent.
Unsurprisingly, Biden's approval rating is quite high among Democrats at a whopping 90 percent, while it is much lower among Republicans at just 12 percent and somewhere in between among independents at 48 percent.
"His ratings among Democrats and independents are the lowest to date among those groups. The new poll marks the first time he has less-than majority approval among independents," according to Gallup.
"Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted July 6-21, 2021, with a random sample of 1,007 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia," the organization noted. "For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting."
Gallup reported that during the second quarter of Biden's presidential tenure, which ran from April 20 through July 19, he averaged 53.3 percent job approval.
"Biden's second-quarter average compares favorably with those of presidents from the past three decades. It is significantly better than the second-quarter averages for Bill Clinton (44.0%) and Donald Trump (38.8%) and slightly lower than George W. Bush's 55.8% average. Barack Obama, at 62.0%, is the only other president during this period to have a significantly higher second-quarter average than Biden," according to Gallup.
PS  He will destroy America.  

Print Email Hits: 20

French police take down suspected cannibal after discovering teenager’s partially eaten head in a bucket

French police fatally shot a male suspect accused of cannibalism Monday morning following the grisly discovery of a decapitated and partially consumed head of a 13-year-old boy.

The suspect remains unidentified at the time of this reporting.
What are the details?
Authorities shot the 32-year-old suspect on Monday after arriving his Tarascon apartment following a call for what neighbors said appeared to be a dead body in a bag.
The child in question, which local authorities identify only as "Romain," reportedly had gone missing from a foster care home in Marseille, about 60 miles from the suspect's apartment. Authorities said the child had been on his way from his foster home to visit his mother, who was said to have lived on the same street as the suspect.
According to reports, authorities discovered a partially consumed head in a bucket near the suspect's apartment. Authorities discovered the body, reports added, in a bag with what appeared to be strips of flesh torn from the shoulder area.
Local authorities said the condition of the body sparked "suspicions of cannibalism."
The suspect reportedly fled as police approached his home, and began jumping from rooftop to rooftop in an effort to evade authorities. Police were ultimately able to catch up with the suspect and fatally shot him.
The mother, who remains unnamed at the time of this reporting, was reportedly heard screaming, "He killed my son! He killed my baby!" upon the horrific finding on her street.
What about the suspect?
Public prosecutor Laurent Gumbau said that the suspect, who reportedly had a psychiatric disorder and a history of mental illness, had past convictions for violent crimes.
Authorities added that the case is in preliminary stages of investigation, and stated that the dead suspect has not been formally identified as the teen's killer. Authorities also added that it is "impossible at the current time to confirm the hypothesis of anthropophagy" based on the current information available on the case.
Authorities continue to investigate the grisly murder.

Print Email Hits: 40

Unvaccinated Americans say COVID vaccines are riskier than the virus, even as Delta surges among them

When asked which poses a greater risk to their health, more unvaccinated Americans say the COVID-19 vaccines than say the virus itself, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll — a view that contradicts all available science and data and underscores the challenges that the United States will continue to face as it struggles to stop a growing “pandemic of the unvaccinated” driven by the hyper-contagious Delta variant.

The survey of 1,715 U.S. adults, which was conducted from July 13 to 15, found that just 29 percent of unvaccinated Americans believe the virus poses a greater risk to their health than the vaccines — significantly less than the number who believe the vaccines represent the greater health risk (37 percent) or say they’re not sure (34 percent).
Over the last 18 months, COVID-19 has killed more than 4.1 million people worldwide, including more than 600,000 in the U.S. At the same time, more than 2 billion people worldwide — and more than 186 million Americans — have been at least partially vaccinated against the virus, and scientists who study data on their reported side effects continue to find that the vaccines are extraordinarily safe.
Yet 93 percent of unvaccinated U.S. adults — the equivalent of 76 million people — say they will either “never” get vaccinated (51 percent); that they will keep waiting “to see what happens to others before deciding” (20 percent); or that they’re not sure (22 percent).
With Delta rapidly becoming dominant nationwide, U.S. COVID-19 cases have surged by 140 percent over the last two weeks. Hospitalizations and deaths — both lagging indicators — are up by one-third over the same period. Missouri, Arkansas, Nevada and Florida are being hit particularly hard, with hospitalization rates soaring to 2-3 times the national average. Nearly all of the Americans who are falling ill, getting hospitalized and dying — 99 percent, according to some estimates — are unvaccinated. And more than half the U.S. population (52 percent) has yet to be fully inoculated.
As the Delta variant surges among the unvaccinated and counties such as Los Angeles reinstitute indoor mask mandates to try to stave it off, Yahoo News and YouGov sought to understand why so many Americans continue to hold off on vaccination — and whether Delta’s rise might change any minds.
The results are complicated. Some unvaccinated Americans recognize the rising threat of Delta. The share who say they are worried about the variant has risen 9 percentage points (from 25 percent to 34 percent) since last month. Yet the share of unvaccinated Americans who say they are not worried about Delta is larger, and it has risen by nearly as much (from 31 percent to 39 percent).
As such, just half of the unvaccinated say Delta poses “a serious risk” to “all Americans” (33 percent) or “unvaccinated Americans” (17 percent); the other half says the variant doesn’t pose a serious risk to anyone (30 percent) or that they’re not sure (20 percent). In contrast, a full 85 percent of vaccinated Americans — and 72 percent of all Americans — say Delta poses a serious risk.
Yet while unvaccinated Americans are relatively dismissive of Delta’s dangers — which have been amply proven by massive outbreaks in India and elsewhere — they tend to apply a much lower bar to the COVID vaccines. Asked to pick the “most important reason” they haven’t been vaccinated, for example, few say they lack “easy access to vaccination” (4 percent), “can’t get time off from work” (3 percent), or “already had COVID” (9 percent). More say they’re not worried about getting COVID (12 percent) or — far more frequently — that they don’t trust the COVID vaccines (45 percent).
But why? The most important reason, according to 37 percent of unvaccinated Americans, is that they’re “concerned about long-term side effects.” That’s followed by “I don’t trust the government” (17 percent), “The vaccines are too new” (16 percent), “The FDA hasn’t fully approved the vaccines yet” (11 percent) and “I don’t trust any vaccines” (6 percent).
The trouble for public health officials is twofold. First, despite the fact that there’s no precedent in the history of vaccines for severe side effects emerging several months after dosage, let alone several years — and no mechanism by which the COVID vaccines would trigger such side effects — it’s difficult to convince skeptics that this time won’t be different. Meanwhile, the pandemic is ongoing and the clock is ticking.
Second, when unvaccinated skeptics are asked to select “all” the reasons they don’t trust the COVID vaccines — as opposed to just the “most important” — many select all of them. Seventy percent say they’re concerned about long-term side effects; 60 percent say the vaccines are too new; 55 percent say they don’t trust the government; 50 percent say they’re concerned about short-term side effects; 45 percent say the FDA hasn’t fully approved the vaccines yet; 45 percent say they don’t trust drug companies; and 26 percent say they don’t trust any vaccines. Hesitancy, in other words, could turn into a game of whack-a-mole: address one concern and another just pops up to replace it.
Whether Delta’s impact softens any of this resistance remains to be seen. Fifteen percent of unvaccinated Americans say the spread of Delta makes them more likely to get vaccinated, particularly Democrats (34 percent) and Latinos (34 percent). Yet another 12 percent of unvaccinated Americans actually say Delta makes them less likely to get a shot, and 73 percent say it makes “no difference.”
Delving deeper, 20 percent of unvaccinated Americans say they would be “much more” (10 percent) or “somewhat more” (10 percent) likely to get vaccinated “if COVID cases start to rise among unvaccinated people in [their] area”; the same goes for rising local hospitalizations and deaths. Likewise, 27 percent of unvaccinated Americans say they’d be either much more (12 percent) or somewhat more (15 percent) likely to get vaccinated when the FDA fully approves the COVID vaccines, which are currently authorized for emergency use to combat the pandemic.
Full FDA approval isn’t expected until next year. COVID cases, hospitalizations and deaths, on the other hand, are already rising. We’ll see if either makes a difference.

Print Email Hits: 48

Biden’s dangerous assault on freedom of speech

Just days after calling voter identification requirements “the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War,” President Joe Biden accused Facebook of “killing people” by failing to censor what the White House characterizes as “misinformation” about COVID-19 vaccines.

Biden’s penchant for hyperbole would not be so worrisome if his press secretary, Jen Psaki, had not called on social media companies to work together in banning sources from all social media platforms

“You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others for providing misinformation out there,” Psaki said.

The White House’s efforts to deputize social media platforms into becoming de facto government censors should be deeply troubling to every citizen who has ever voiced an opinion outside of the politically acceptable mainstream.

It was not that long ago when some social media platforms actively suppressed claims that COVID-19 originated in a Wuhan laboratory and spread after an accidental leak. It was not that long ago when government officials encouraged people not to buy masks to protect themselves from COVID-19. It was not that long ago experts said COVID-19 spread through physical surfaces or that we had to be a full 6 feet away from each other to socially distance.

In each of these cases, the Biden White House would have preferred to quash any debate about the truth of the virus. They want only one voice of expert opinion reaching people, and they want to ban anyone voicing a dissenting opinion from all platforms.

The implications of this White House conspiracy to shut down speech it does not like becomes even scarier when the subject moves beyond COVID-19. Just consider NPR’s recent story about The Daily Wire in which the story admits that “the articles The Daily Wire publishes don’t normally include falsehoods” but by “only covering specific stories that bolster the conservative agenda and only including certain facts readers still come away with the impression that Republican politicians can do little wrong.”

And: “If you’ve stripped enough context away,” NPR chosen expert Jaime Settle said, “any piece of truth can become a piece of misinformation.”

Truth as misinformation. This Orwellian idea is probably why social media platforms colluded with Democrats to suppress true stories of Hunter Biden’s laptop containing evidence he sold access to his father.

Or why they suppressed evidence COVID-19 did originate from a Chinese communist lab.

Or why they banned books documenting the harm of invasive surgery on confused young children.

The power of social media platforms is only growing. More than half of adults prefer to get their news on a digital platform. Even if the people running these platforms didn’t give 90% of their political donations to one party, it should be worrisome these firms are conspiring with the federal government to control what can and cannot be said about any subject.

Policy solutions to this problem are hard. But the Biden administration is showing the need for a solution is great and growing.

Print Email Hits: 38

Democrats ignore science with their new push for marijuana

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has introduced legislation to remove marijuana from regulation under the Controlled Substances Act.
There is plenty of common ground on the issue of cannabis. People generally agree on ending overly harsh punishments for its use and possession and removing obstacles to non-psychotropic cannabis products such as hemp. But it is a delusion that marijuana is a safe substance for recreational use and that the federal government should stop worrying about its trafficking.
For those who claim to care about science and data, these offer few lessons for society about this drug.
The Lancet, a highly respected medical journal, published a study in 2019 proving at least correlation and suggesting possible causation between marijuana use and psychosis. It found that roughly half of all cases of psychoses in Amsterdam could be prevented “if high-potency cannabis were no longer available.”
Another study, published in JAMA Psychiatry in February 2019, found adolescent marijuana use is associated with up to a 40% risk of developing depression and suicidal behavior in adulthood. Roughly one-third of marijuana users develop an unhealthy dependency, and smoking marijuana increases the risk of a heart attack by almost 400%.
In Colorado, the first eight years of marijuana legalization were accompanied by a noticeable increase in violent crime. That does not prove a causal link, but note that legalization did not cause the decrease that advocates repeatedly, constantly, and irresponsibly promised.
Meanwhile, marijuana now consistently causes about 20% of all traffic fatalities in Colorado each year — a number that has roughly doubled since legalization in 2013. Traffic fatalities per capita have also increased by about 10% since legalization.
Between 2012 and 2017 (the last year for which data are available), there was a 50% increase in emergency room visits related to marijuana use. Colorado child poison control cases related to marijuana have risen by more than 300% between legalization and 2019. The number of children under 12 endangered in this manner (usually through ingestion of edibles) has increased six-fold since 2012.
Perhaps, the scariest fact is what researchers at the University of California San Diego reported last decade. Long-term use of marijuana by young adults under age 30 is believed to cause permanent brain damage in the form of “poorer performance on measures of attentional functioning.” Basically, if you smoke marijuana for your eight years of high school and college, or at any point before your brain is fully developed at age 30, science says this is a known medical risk.
If any other drug caused such effects on the brain, Schumer would probably be railing against the company that produced it and calling for his trial-lawyer donors to sue. If mass shootings caused anywhere near as many deaths as marijuana-impaired drivers, he would be calling for gun control twice as loudly as he does.
But when it comes to marijuana, Schumer is too cowardly and too busy pandering to acknowledge the problem.
To put it mildly, there is quite a bit we don’t understand about marijuana’s effects. Although it may be harmless relative to heroin or fentanyl, that doesn’t mean it is objectively harmless or that the federal government should give up efforts at limiting its use.
Moreover, it doesn’t mean that widespread marijuana smoking is healthy for society and won’t create a class of dropouts and government dependents who, by their own choice, become a burden.
Marijuana should also not be treated like a special medicine that doesn’t require any of the regulation or scientific scrutiny applied to nearly every over-the-counter and prescription drug available in the United States. Many advocate for this position under the banner of “medical marijuana” as if that were the middle ground. But this is lunacy, based mostly on hunches and not science.
There is a reason people do not chew tree bark and call it “medicinal.” Modern medicine depends upon drugs in precise doses to produce well-studied and well-understood effects and side effects.
It is one thing to take drugs — even dangerous, potentially addictive, or hallucinogenic drugs — in carefully regulated doses known to be safe, labeled with warnings, and actually proven to treat or cure disease.
It is quite another thing to smoke marijuana, with unpredictable dosages of its components and whose precise effects remain poorly understood. After all, there are drugs available that use marijuana’s components but with precise dosages and medically rigorous testing.
Schumer is in a difficult spot. His one-vote Senate majority is as precarious as it can be, and he faces a midterm election in which his party is likely to lose its legislative power.
This provides him with a distraction and an opportunity to pander. He will try to make it look like a criminal justice issue.
But take that isolated, bipartisan question off the table, and his proposal is at war with science and medicine.

Print Email Hits: 41

More Articles ...