Wilder, Plant, Haney – WIN … Results

By Tom Donelson / Member Boxing Writers Association of America (BWAA) … Contributor to http://www.dmboxing.com with integrity and expertise since 2008

Deontay Wilder lost his second fight in the hard-fought Fury trilogy one year ago and his opponent Robert Helenius who is coming off two straight knockout wins over Adam Kowacki. For Wilder this was a must win if he wanted to be considered a heavyweight contender and the Fury trilogy was a brutal trilogy in which both men pounded each other . Wilder came in the fight as the favorite and he was in top ten shape weighing 215 and his opponent weighed 253.

On the same card, Caleb Plant faced Anthony Dirrell in a battle of two former super Middleweight champions and Plant was coming off a loss to Saul Canelo Alvarez.

Caleb Plant began the first round aggressively and looked the quicker of the two in the first round and the second round, Plant jab connected early and Dirrell looked measured and cautious . Plant jab snap Dirrell head and when Dirrell landed a nasty shot right back. Plant mixed body shots and shots to the head as he won round two.

Dirrell open the third with a good right hand while Plant rips a pair of right to the body. Dirrell hits a good shot to the body and a counter. Dirrell also clinched and provided some rough maneuver. Close round as Dirrell won the round but Plant could have won the round on the judges’ scorecard .

Referee warns Dirrell of his rough tactics and Plant put good combinations but when he overextended, he got nailed. As the fourth round progressed Plant is lunging more and Dirrell is using his experience to make it harder for Plant to land. Starting the fifth round, Plant’s jab stunned Dirrell and forced him to retreat . Plant’s speed allowed him to start the action, but Dirrell slowly adjusted. After the fifth round, I had the fight 49-46.

In round six, Dirrell allowed Plant to come into counter, but Plant landed hooks to the head and body. He connected on the most punches and Plant had a 59-55 lead at the halfway part of the fight. Plants begin the seventh round with a snappy left jab and Dirrell is landing punches fewer than even in the early rounds . Dirrell engages in rough tactics and is warned by the referee the second time. Plant gets Dirrell to the rope. Another round for Plant, 69-64.

Plant showed excellent defense and while he lowered his work rate, Dirrell is hardly throwing punches. The round ended as Plant landed a combination while Dirrell tried to return fire but missed. A combination by Plant ended the round.

Dirrell came out in the ninth round and Dirrell landed a big shot and forced to Plant to retreat. Dirrell has Plant backing up and shooting shots on the inside before out of now where, Plant lands a left hook that sent Dirrell down. This sent Dirrell down and out. Plant has put himself back in the Super Middleweight discussion.

Deontay Wilder showed he still has the power. Helenius comes to the center of the ring as Wilder moved. Helenius cut off the ring and Wilder sent a wild right following Wilder jab, both that missed. Helenius did not land or throw anything of significant. He landed a body shot but no real effect. Helenius followed Wilder into the corner and as he stepped forward, he got nailed by a right that sends him down. He was out cold and Wilder won with a first-round knockout.

Wilder is back as a heavyweight contender and he reminded people why he is a threat, for he can end a fight with just one punch.

In the land down under, Devin Haney defended his undisputed WBO lightweight champion against George Kambosa, Jr. Haney put on a clinic as he landed 202 punches to seventy-six for Kambosa and was even more dominating in this fight than his first fight with Kambosa.  In his first fight, he landed 147 to Kambosa 100 to win a decision. This fight was no doubt from the second round as Haney simply dominated the fight with his boxing skills. In the tenth round he landed thirty-four punches to Kambosa one punch.  A right hand opens a cut over Kambosa’s left eye. If there is a weakness in Haney skills, he does not have a knockout punch as he landed rights consistently 

What was impressive that Haney was willing to travel to Australia for the rematch after winning the title in Australia. He was confident that he beat Kambosa a second time on Kambosa home turf. He was right, and it was easier this time.

Dayton Moore is over

Since 2006, Dayton Moore ran baseball operation for the Royals but now the era is over as Moore was fired.  There were two Moore eras, the first one that began when he was hired and culminated in the 2015 World Series and the second era in which Royals went from World Series champ to the cellar of the American League Central division.

Moore struck all the right moves in winning the 2015 World Series.    Key members of the pennant winning team came from the minors including Eric Hosmer, Mike Moustakas, Salvador Perez, Alex Gordon along with pitchers Yolando Ventura, Danny Duffy, and Greg Holland.  Others that came up through the minors to fill out key roles including Christian Colon, Jared Dyson, Kelvin Herrera, Luke Hochevar, and Brandon Finnegan. He made several great acquisitions including James Shields, Wade Davis, Kendry Morales, Alex Rio, Edinson Volquez, Johnny Cueto, and Ben Zobrist.  They all played key roles in getting Royal to the 2014 World Series and then winning the whole ball of wax.

From 2016, the decline began as Royals finished just .500 and then 80-82 in 2017.  Moore tried to give his core one more chance to win a title but instead, he set the stage for another dark age.  Unlike his previous tour, his moves proved disastrous including Luka Duda, Brandon Moss, Ryan Goins, Ian Kennedy, Chris Owings, and Brandon Maurer.  Maybe one trade that reflects this period was Wade Davis for Jorge Soler. Soler was considered a potential star in the future.  In 2019, he had his best season, batting .265 with 48 homers, a Royals record but for the most part, Soler never reached his potential.  

The minor league fails to produce prospects over the next few years. The strategy in 2008 started with drafting college players, hoping they could make the jump to majors sooner. So far this hasn’t really worked out on the pitching side as only Brady Singer has made the jump to the majors.  Other like Kris Bubic and Daniel Lynch have yet to show any improvement since they have come up. 

Coming into 2022, there was hope that the Royals would continue the improvement from the year before.  Royals won the season series against Twins, White Sox, and Tigers. Only the Guardians won 4 their season series and the Royals won 74 games and finished with less than 90 losses the first time since 2017 not counting the 2020 shortened season.

Perez had a career year with 48 homers, a team record and Lopez hit .300.   Benintendi hit .276, provided good defense in left field and added 17 homers plus Merrifield hit .277.   The bull pen looked like they were developing a young bullpen including Coleman, Brentz, Staumont, and Barlow. The only question was whether the young starting pitcher can make the next move.

Instead, the whole thing came crashing down as Royals began 16-32 as the starting pitching collapsed and the relief pitching was complete failure.  While Benintendi started out fast and was batting .300 plus going into All-Star break, Perez, Merrifield, rookie Witt, and Santana were hitting .100 and the offense was totally ineffectual.  Perez had injured thumb and eventually had surgery.  

By the All-Star break, the Royals were back to ground floor of the rebuild. Moore view that the Royals were close to contention was over.  Royals brought up much of the minor leagues and begin the rebuild.  Moore firing is a reflection that the failures of the past seven years from 2016 to the present.   Moore is a good guy who gave Royals fan a brief three-year window of winning and championship between 2013 and 2015 but since then, the franchise floundered.  From 2016, he had one year .500 and six losing season with three at 100 losses, one at 88 losses and this year Royals will have 90 plus losses.  Failure has consequences.

Who Did Better on Unemployment?

Comparison of Republican States and Democratic States from August 2020 to August 2022.

By Tom Donelson

Since August 2020 and during the pandemics, there has been one constant: unemployment in Republican states have been significantly lower than in Democratic states. The chart below shows this

In August of 2020 unemployment for states with Democratic governors was 8.4 compared to 6.4 unemployment for Republican governors and in August 2022, unemployment under Democratic governors was 3.7 percent and under Republican governors was only 3 percent.

We also compared states with exclusively one-party control of the both the legislature and the executive states with mixed control with one party who split control of the lever of power and found differences. Republicans who control both the legislature and governor seats, had an unemployment rate of 2.8 percent compared to Democrat states who control both the governor seat. and the legislature had an unemployment rate of 4 percent. Those who had mixed government had an unemployment rate of 3.4.   

Completely run blue states had 30 percent more unemployment than completely run red states and these Democrats run states were even behind those states with split control. We did not find a difference between states with Republican governors and split government and Democratic governors with split government as GOP governors was 3.4 percent and Democratic governors was 3.3 percent. When we combined GOP governors and split governance, we see the unemployment is 3 percent.

We also compared the top four most populous states with Republican governors: Florida, Ohio, Texas, and Georgia to top four populous states with Democratic governors: New York, California, Pennsylvania, and Illinois. States with Republican governors had unemployment of 3.4 percent and two, Florida and Georgia, were below the national average and below 3 percent. The Democratic states averaged 4.4 percent and not one of these states were below the national average. Not one Democratic state had unemployment less than 4.1 percent.

The main reason for this difference is that Republican states open their economy earlier during the Pandemics compared to Democratic states. While some GOP states were aggressive with lockdowns initally, GOP states reduce restrictions, and this showed up in the lower unemployment.

Dr. Wilfred Reilly conducted three studies on the impact on the lockdown and found that there were no real differences in deaths per capita and both non-lockdown states and Republican states had lower unemployment compared to lockdown states and Democratic states. 1 Unemployment for non-lockdown states was 5.5 percent and for Republican states 6.4 percent whereas lockdown states and Democrat states unemployment was 8.2 percent in August of 2020.

In winter of 2020, many states reinstate lockdowns and in reviewing those states in August 2022, the unemployment was 3.5 percent for lockdown states compared to 2.8 percent for non-lockdown states. In both studies, all the non-lockdown states had Republican governors and in those states in which Democrats ran all phrase of government, the unemployment rate was 4 percent.

What we find for the past two years is that Republican states have lower unemployment compared to their Democratic counterpart and we found this difference most significant. Other studies support this including a report card by Casey Mulligan, Phil Kerpen and Steve Moore. They observed, “Economy and schooling are positively correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.43), which suggests a relationship between the willingness of the population (or its politicians) to resume normal activity in business and school. MT, SD, NE, and UT are the states’ highest on the economy score and among only seven states to exceed 85 percent open schools. The correlation between health and economy scores is essentially zero, which suggests that states that withdrew the most from economic activity did not significantly improve health by doing so.”

  1. Ignored cost: Effect Yes-No lockdown states along with Red-Blue states political partisanship and other variables on April-August unemployment across the United States. Sept 2020
  2. A FINAL REPORT CARD ON THE STATES’ RESPONSE TO COVID-19 by Casey Mulligan, Phil Kerpen and Steve Moore April 2022

Leadership class

America’s leadership class is in crisis beginning with our political class which includes the party leadership of both Parties, bureaucrats running the administrative state, the foreign policy experts that populate both think tanks and administrations, depending on which party is in power. 

Trump had to depend on many within the establishment as he started his administration.  This proved to be one of his Achilles heels, as many of these individuals did not buy into his agenda, including foreign policy where the amateurs proved to be more effective in implementing Trump’s goals than the foreign policy experts. This was shown in the Middle East as the Trump foreign policy team produced an anti-Iranian Sunni alliance with Israel in the Middle East.  This overcame one of Obama’s great foreign policy mistakes, the Iranian nuclear deal.  He and his amateurs saw changes in the Middle East that his experts didn’t see, such as how states such as the United Arab Emirates could be potential allies of Israel. The amateurs took advantages of those changes and made steps towards peace.  Trump saw the threat of China that his experts did not see or refused to see. 

The scientific class was a major failure in 2020 as this was the year when the pursuit of scientific truth died and may be incapable of being resurrected.  The Wuhan virus demonstrated that our scientific class was perfectly willing to fit their science into political conventional wisdom, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and the destruction of the world economy and local communities.  Our scientists may have killed more people prematurely than they saved from the virus.  The academic class has replaced teaching with indoctrination and the media class is merely an appendage of the political class, and the Democratic Party.  As one wise pundit noted, “Media members are Democratic operatives with bylines.”

Glenn Harlan Reynolds described the suicide of expertise: “It was the experts — characterized in terms of their self-image by David Halberstam in The Best and the Brightest — who brought us the twin debacles of the Vietnam War, which we lost, and the War On Poverty, where we spent trillions and certainly didn’t win. In both cases, confident assertions by highly credentialed authorities foundered upon reality, at a dramatic cost in blood and treasure. Mostly other people’s blood and treasured, and these are not isolated failures.”

 Over the past decade, we have seen the Great Recession, due to a housing bubble engineered by existing laws and promoted by the best and brightest on Wall Street. Trump inherited a foreign policy debacle in the Middle East engineered by Obama’s experts, who produced a policy that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, a million refugees headed for Europe, the rise of ISIS, and the upending of previous relations between the U.S. and the State of Israel. Nor can we forget the toppling of Moammar Gadhafi, which led to Libya becoming yet another sanctuary for Islamic terrorists and another places where refugees fled the Middle East for Europe. A year after the toppling of Gadhafi, attack on two United States facilities resulted in the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others.

While many in the Middle Class saw their income and wealth decline, they were often mocked when they rebelled by voting for Trump and that includes a few within the conservative ranks, some of whom didn’t even vote for him either in 2016 or 2020 and supported the two impeachment attempts.


The election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in 2020 shows the complete failure of the Leadership class.  Biden was a mediocrity at his best but the one thing he was good at, he knew how to play the system and enrich his family and himself. Nor was this the usual graft as his family profited as his son made billions in deals with China while Biden as vice president was negotiating deals that cost many Middle Americans their jobs and allowed China to become even more powerful. Biden also got a prosecutor in Ukraine fired for investigating a corrupt company that Hunter Biden was making hundreds of thousands a year from. (Let us not forget that Trump was impeached over raising the issue of Hunter Biden with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky.  Trump got impeached over asking about what a corrupt Presidential candidate did when he was the Vice President in a previous administration.)

Richard Fernandez noted in 2017, “Suicidal factionalism has torn apart famous nations before, Rome’s Crisis of the Third Century being the most famous example. . ..  If Trump is overthrown by the Deep State in a year, he’s unlikely to be the last. If neither faction will suffer itself to be governed by the other, whoever succeeds Trump can expect his term to be short. America could have its own period of the 26 presidents. That will be good news for the Barbarians, waiting at the edge of the Baltics, in the South China Sea, and on Europe’s borders, ready to move in. Rome’s Third Century crisis did not end well. The new normal was not a return to the Golden Age, but the end of it.” In 2020, the Leadership class won this battle and essentially turned the country over to the socialists and oligarchies that fund their political activity.  

Glenn Harlan Reynolds noted, “Strong nations can fail when their leadership class, or a part of it, succumbs to pettiness, and places its narrow factional interests above those of the nation. Americans have often assumed that we are immune to such things. Perhaps earlier Americas, with a more disciplined, more patriotic ruling class, were. But today’s America is not. Beware.”

Right now, the conservative movement is in turmoil, not exactly sure what to do in the wake of the 2020 elections.  The Trump presidency is controversial among conservatives. since he was not a typical conservative of the past five decades.   For those of us who came of age in the Reagan years, Trump challenged our ideas.  However, times and circumstances change, and we need to recognize that while conservative principles are still essential, the solutions we have come up with to public policy problems need to be reviewed. 

Over the past four years, our coalition is shifting, beginning with adding blue-collar workers living in medium size cities. rural areas and small towns, and we are adding minorities who are finding that states run by Democrats don’t work and give them with fewer job opportunities and higher crime than they would in red states.    We have developed losses with suburbanites, but we don’t know whether these losses were due to the temperament of Trump that they didn’t like or something deeper.

The other shift is that the business class has changed, with many of the larger business leaders siding with the left in the culture war and becoming more caretakers than innovators. Even the tech companies that drove much of the economic growth in the 1980’s and 1990’s have ceased to be innovators. but instead have become monopolies but monopolies that are willing to perform censorship demanded by the political class, who want to crush any opponents who dare to resist the coming socialism of America.   These monopolies want to use government to set up regulations to destroy their competitors.

When Apple, Facebook and Twitter went after Parler, they had two objectives:  to crush a conservative competitor and to censor conservative thoughts.    The past two election cycles 2018 and 2020, Republicans have been outspent by Democrats and much of this due to big business and big tech money going to the Democrats. 

In my first book and reports for Americas Majority Foundation, I have made the case for the synergy between Trump populism and conservatism, and I’ve warned if we failed to form an alliance, then many of our coalition will either stay home or move to the left. Conservatism is at stake but there are solutions to preserving conservative principles beginning with studying the past. 

Reagan lived in an era in which inflation pushed many in the middle class were pushed into high marginal tax rates once reserved for the upper class.  A stagnating economy combined with double-digit inflation to produce “stagflation.”  In addition, Reagan had to confront an expanding Soviet Empire.at the end of the 1970’s. Many observers in this period saw America in permanent decline.  Reagan’s tax rate reductions and victory in the Cold War and winning the cold war produced world peace and nearly a quarter century of prosperity.  Most Americans saw their income rise and by 2007, 63% of Americans became investors and the investor class was born.

Trump inherited a foreign policy mess.  Yemen, stable before Obama took office, was in a civil war with proxy forces of Iran and Saudi Arabia, Ukraine was under siege and partially occupied by Putin’s forces. ISIS occupied much of Syria and Iraq and Chinese influence steadily grew. The economy was growing slowly, with many Americans were not sharing into the growth.  Many in the middle class found their overall wealth declining as their wages stagnated. 

Trump had foreign-policy successes, including formation of an anti-Iranian coalition including Arab states and Israel.  Many Americans did see their income go up until the pandemic, which helped sink his chances for a second term.  Many of his policies were center-right and his foreign policy represented a chance to restructure our overseas priorities. We will see if this can be resurrected in 2024 if Biden returns to the foreign policy failures of the Obama/Biden Administration. 

The greater threat to our freedom comes from the democratic socialist movement. While a reform conservative movement can embrace rising national populism, there are no counterpoints on the right to the democratic socialist movement, since many moderates have either been defeated in elections or have simply left the Democratic Party.  The Democratic donor class funds the socialist movement with glee, and the Democratic Party has become the party of the very rich and the poor. As the Democratic Party has shown since Obama’s presidency, they have no problem in using government to attack their opponents including the use of the IRS to target conservative political organizations. The left likes to portray Trump as the second coming of Hitler or Mussolini, but it has been the Democratic Party which is a real threat to many of our freedoms, beginning with free speech and free political association.

I observed that during the 2016 election, the future of conservative ideas was being fought between Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. Rubio and Cruz’s families both came to America from Cuba, but even though they were both Cuban-Americans, but this hid the differences between the two and the emerging Hispanic community.   Rubio, like most Hispanics, is Roman Catholic, but Cruz is Southern Baptist; and a rising number of Hispanics are evangelicals. Before Rubio was elected to the Senate, he was a Florida legislator including being the speaker of the Florida House.  Cruz worked in George W. Bush’s Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission before becoming the solicitor general of Texas, where he argued cases in front of the Supreme Court.  Cruz drafted the amicus brief for Heller, a significant victory for gun rights in 2008 supported by 31 state attorney generals.

The differences between the two reflected the differences within the Republican Party.  Rubio’s tax plan depended on tax credits for the middle class.  His goal was to promote family values and help the middle class through tax reform.  Rubio’s plan left the top rate at 35%, which is only a slight drop from the present system and.  Of all the tax reform proposals between 2010 and 2016, Rubio’s plan had the highest marginal tax rates.  Ted Cruz proposed a flat 10 percent tax plus a 16 percent rate on business transactions that was like a value added tax.  In foreign affairs, Rubio campaigned as more of an interventionist whereas Cruz’s foreign policy was a return to the pre-9/11 more modest view of America’s role in the world.

Trump’s individual tax plans were similar to Rubio’s and his business plan was similar to what Cruz proposed. Trump’s foreign policy was a return to a more modest view of foreign affairs based on defending American interests and not being involved in parts of the world that may be part of America’s interests.

Both Cruz and Rubio are social conservatives and supporters of gun rights but that is the norm for Republicans even in the era of Trump.  Cruz argued Second Amendment cases in front of the Supreme Court and Cruz opposed crony capitalism including ethanol and sugar subsidies. (Rubio supported sugar subsidies because Florida politicians support sugar subsidies just as Iowa politicians support ethanol.) As the Carrier case in Indiana demonstrated after the 2016 election, in which Trump used government power to aid the company, Trump supported his version of crony capitalism if it benefited his voters.

Both Cruz and Rubio are considered potential rivals for 2024, but the field has expanded to include South Dakota governor Kristi Noem, former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley and Florida governor Ron DeSantis.  During the pandemic, Governor Noem and Governor DeSantis showed leadership at keeping economic growth in their respective states while dealing with a pandemic and showed that much of the scientific class advice coming from Washington was not just wrong, but disastrous to many Middle-Class Americans, small businesses, and city residents, while failing to save lives. Noem and DeSantis ignored much of the Scientific class’s advice emanating from Washington.  They instead listened to the “skeptics” whose ideas and solutions proven more correct. (I only use the word ‘skeptics’ because many of those who opposed lockdown strategies proved to be more accurate with their science, but the Media class and much of the political class viewed them as outliers as opposed to scientists who “got the virus right.”.)

The real need is for the conservative leadership to accept the fact that Trump’s supporters are here to stay and are a necessary part of the coalition without which Republican and conservatives can’t win.  As for Trump, he will remain a Republican to ensure that his ideas are still part of the debate and his supporters respected.  The one obstacle to Trump’s future is that Biden Department of Justice will continue to persecute Trump and his family and there will be attacks from Democratic state attorney generals as well.  Trump may suffer the fate of Andrew Mellon, the secretary of Treasury in the Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover administration. Mellon spent his last years fighting off Democrats’ efforts to put him in jail for various tax crimes.  Shortly after his death, Mellon would be exonerated. Democrats want not just to defeat Trump but also to humiliate him and his family, hoping to permanently blacken Trump’s legacy.

The good news is that Republicans have a deep bench for 2024 among both governors and legislators in Washington, but too many within the Republican establishment are just as happy not just to see Trump leave but his supporters as well.  Without these Trump voters, there is no chance of a Republican victory.  As I noticed in my previous book, many of Trump’s domestic policy ideas are in line with much of modern-day Republican and conservative principles and his foreign policy are becoming more in line with Americans wary of war and endless American military deployments.   The potential to synergize conservative ideas with Trump populism is there, but it means that the conservative leadership class must change course and stop resisting Trump’s supporter and instead take advantage where his ideas mesh with conservative ideas.

My book The Rise of National Populism and Democratic Socialism: What Our response Should Be, explored how, if 2020 showed anything, we are a 50/50 nation, but the left holds the advantage as they control the leadership class, including the media class, much of the political class, the scientific class, and the academic class.  We are witnessing the implosion of these classes, but their decline is also leading to the decline of America.  The political class is the leading governing class that encompasses much of Washington including the administrative state, congressional legislators, the Democratic Party and even quite a few leaders of the Republican Party.  The governing class extends to many governors like Andrew Cuomo who proved disastrous in running his state, implementing policies that resulted in the death of many senior citizens and trashing his state economy. (He was forced from office due to sexual assault and harassment of women but not for a policy resulting in the deaths of thousands of senior citizens.)

 As Joel Kotkin noted, “One has to go back to Reagan to find a Republican Party that could consistently position itself as populist. Reagan’s appeal was based on security and taxes; for today’s GOP, the issue should be – besides terrorism and rising crime – how to address the decline of the middle- and working-class economy”. In the past, Democrats appealed to the middle class with programs designed for them, such as the G.I. Bill and had no problem with fighting class warfare. Hillary Clinton’s campaign attempted to appeal to the middle class through welfare expansion geared strictly to middle class voters but Hillary Clinton, like Obama, built a Democratic base based less than on class and more on race and identity politics and Biden is continuing this trend. Many of this new left-wing coalition is built around Millennials, minorities, single people, academics, and wealthy tech executives.  Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline and his war on fossil fuels was a dagger aimed at many blue-collar Democrats, including union members. With coal mines closing due to EPA regulations, many blue-collar voters who voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 were abandoned by his wife and her party in 2016. Biden is abandoning these voters as he seeks to increase Democratic suburban voters while maintaining minority voters.  His opening executive orders blocking the Keystone XL Pipeline and energy development on federal land has affected blue states like New Mexico and Colorado, who are now seeing their energy sector trashed.  Many blue voters are now seeing the price of voting Democratic.  As H.L. Mencken noted, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.”  These voters got it hard, and this is only the beginning.

For four decades, the Republicans have depended upon a coalition of social conservatives, national security hawks and supply siders. But this coalition that elected Reagan is now fraying and is no longer the majority. The good news is that the left has abandoned blue-collar white voters as well as many within their minority base who have more in common with these white, blue-collar voters than with other parts of the Democratic base. These minorities own their businesses and are moving into the middle class, but they are seeing doors to opportunity being shut by the oligarchies that fund the Democratic left. At least more 1.5 million Blacks and Hispanics voted for Trump in 2020 than in 2016.  The door is open for Republicans and reformist conservatives who understand that the Republican Party is now the party of Main Street.  It is time for Wall Street to understand their long-term health is dependent upon a healthy Main Street.  Wall Street can’t survive in the long run if nothing is produced on Main Street.

The Republicans will have the opportunity to rebuild a new conservative majority, based on conservative ideals beginning with this: the average American wants and needs a Fair Opportunity to Succeed. The challenge to the conservative leadership is to complement conservative ideals with the populist aspect of the movement to form a more permanent coalition.  The present leadership class is no longer adequate to govern America and changes are coming, and we conservatives need to be the vanguard of those changes.

I wrote in 2017, “Trump has many failings including making a fortune as a crony capitalist making his own deals with government regulators and Democratic politicians, but part of his appeal lies with his own view of the political class which he is forever calling ‘stupid.’ He understands that much of America no longer trusts government, but this distrust goes to other institutions of the ruling class, including corporations and Wall Street. Trump appeals to independents and working-class Democrats who know the old rules of the game no longer work for them, ensuring and they are alienated from politics.”

Ruiz wins

The real surprise of the Ruiz-Ortiz fight was that it went the distance. At the age of the 43 years, Luis Ortiz still can box and had power to win a bout with one punch. Ruiz for a heavyweight has quick hands and power.

This bout was interesting since many rounds were close and Without the three knockdowns, this fight could have been a majority draw according to official scorecard. (I had the fight 115-110 as Ruiz had a 10-7 second round as he sent Ortiz down twice and a 10-8 round in the seventh round.) 

The first round was more of a feeling process and what punches of note landed; Ortiz landed it. Second round was different as Ruiz sent Ortiz down twice with quick right hands. Ruiz on my card won the next two rounds but they were close.

The fifth round and sixth round were devoid of heavy action, and you could have given them to Ortiz. At the halfway mark I had the fight 57-55 for Ruiz7 as the second round 10-7 was the reason for the difference.

The seventh-round saw Ruiz send Ortiz down for the third time and he also took the eighth round for a 77-72 lead. The ninth round was another one I gave to Ruiz as he landed the best punch, but it was close and other observers gave it to Ortiz.

Ortiz easily won the ten as Ruiz landed only one punch. I had it 96 – 91 so I had Ortiz needing a knockout to win.

Ruiz quick right hand buzzed Ortiz and closed his right eye. With one round left Ortiz to win the bout and I had him down 106-100.

Ortiz came out desperate and landed some big shots in the final round and showed no quit but not enough to win. I had it 115 -110 with Ruiz winning seven rounds, but I understood the judges’ score as they had it 114-111, 114-111, 113-112 s there was two or three rounds that were close, and Ortiz did land two more punches, but he also threw 140 more punches and only connected 18 percent of his punches. Plus, he hit the canvas three time. Those knockdowns ensured his defeat.

What happens to Ruiz? Deontay Wilder was present at the event and Ruiz knows a Wilder bout would be big bucks. And two knockout artists against each other would be entertaining. Meanwhile, Tyson Fury has offered Anthony Joshua a shot at his title, which is a gift since Joshua lost his lost shot at a title to Oleksandr Usyk.

Most fans want a Usyk-Fury to unite al the title, but Fury knows that a Fury-Joshua is big money and Usyk has injuries issue and a war to fight.

Meanwhile Wilder has an October date with Robert Helenius and he gets by Helenius, look for a Ruiz-Wilder fight to happen.