Category Archives: Liberal

In case the images of the treasurer campaigning on the line at an early voting booth werent enough of a giveaway, Josh Frydenberg is in trouble.

A YouGov poll published in The Australian has him on track to lose the Liberal heirloom of Kooyong (represented by Robert Menzies and Andrew Peacock no less) to independent challenger Monique Ryan.

Ryan has momentum, a well-resourced volunteer army, and she put in a strong performance at a candidates debate last week. Our sources tell us there are more Ryan corflutes than Frydenberg ones on the treasurers own street.

At a press conference today, Prime Minister Scott Morrison evaded questions about his future treasurer: Thats not something Im speculating on because I know Josh will be returned.

So were doing the speculating for him.

Frydenberg technically leads Victorias ambition faction thats loosely aligned with Morrisons centre-right grouping. But ideologically hes seen as a more moderate type than many on the Liberal frontbench. His loss would trigger a dramatic shift within the party.

First, lets war-game a few scenarios. If Morrison hangs on and Frydenberg loses, his coveted spot as treasurer becomes vacant. Defence Minister Peter Dutton would firm up as Morrisons heir apparent for the leadership, creating potential for succession-plan tension between the two as the term grows stale.

Dutton as treasurer seems an odd fit considering he enjoys the bluntness of Defence, but given his influence within the party the portfolio would be his for the taking.

Other potential contenders come from Frydenbergs own grouping. Michael Sukkar, a leading Victorian powerbroker and current assistant treasurer and housing minister would be in the mix. So would Trade Minister Dan Tehan.

Alex Hawke, a close ally of the PM and leader of the centre-right faction, would undoubtedly rise under a reelected Morrison government, although his personal brand has taken a hit in NSW after widespread infighting over preselections.

A slightly more likely scenario would be a Frydenberg loss and a Labor win. In that instance, its hard to imagine Kooyong being the only seat swept away in the teal wave. If the teals pick up more than one seat, it would represent a dramatic shift in the partys base, with the most affluent areas of the country no longer assured Liberal territory.

Of course, theres every chance the teal wave could be a one-hit wonder, a protest vote against the Morrison governments foot-dragging on climate change and integrity issues. But with Frydenberg gone, and Morrison an election-loser, it would all but pave the way for Dutton to assume leadership of the Coalition.

Dutton is more conservative and less obviously pragmatic than Morrison. Hes also a highly divisive figure in the cities. Any remaining urban moderates would get nervous about their futures. Dutton would be likely to continue with a turbocharged version of Morrisons suburban strategy, tying the partys electoral future to outer mortgage belts, regional centres and mining communities.

With the partys focus shifting, it would be increasingly difficult for moderates to exert their influence over the party at a federal level. Already underrepresented among its most vocal, senior figures, there is no clear moderate candidate for the leadership, or Treasury.

The most senior figures include two senators Finance Minister Simon Birmingham and Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne whod be unable step into the leadership. That leaves Paul Fletcher, perhaps not an obvious leadership contender, but a potential candidate for Treasury in any scenario.

Naturally this is all deeply speculative. Alliances shift, and election results have a way of bringing about seismic change within political parties. However, its clear Frydenbergs fight isnt just about Kooyong, but the very future of the Liberal Party.

Read the rest here:

Frydenberg: if he loses, the Liberal Party would be changed dramatically - Crikey

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Jesse Watters responded to left-wing protesters showing up outside the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices on "Jesse Watters Primetime" Monday.

JESSE WATTERS: [The protest] was enough to force Justice Alito and his entire family into hiding. They've moved now to an undisclosed location. An angry left-wing mob has forced a Supreme Court justice into hiding. Let that sink in. If men wearing MAGA hats forced Justice Sotomayor into hiding, how do you think that would go down?

And this was just a warning shot: We know where you live. Do what we say or else.

We know what the pro-abortion protesters are capable of. In Wisconsin, some lunatic firebombed a pro-life group's headquarters. They actually threw a Molotov cocktail through the window. And if that message wasn't clear enough, they used spray paint to spell it out. 'If abortions aren't safe, then you aren't either.'

Planned Parenthood calls abortion sacred. Now, when something is sacred, it takes on a religious connotation. This is a religious war for the left. So anything goes. The ends justify the means The White House did nothing to stop this. Last week, they refused to condemn protesting at homes, and they gave this weekend's protest license. Now, after the backlash, they've released a weak statement saying President Biden strongly condemns this attack and political violence of any stripe. Now, to give that a little context, it took less than 24 hours for Joe Biden to condemn Jussie Smollett, a fake lynching.

But at least they're not condoning this action, which is more than we can say about Nancy Pelosi [who] released a statement this morning saying[,] "We have been moved by how so many have channeled their righteous anger into meaningful action." Letting threats of violence slide is nothing new for Nancy. During the summer of 2020, when rioters were hell-bent on tearing down our history and desecrating statues of our founders, Pelosi was covering for them.

WATCH THE FULL MONOLOGUE HERE:

View original post here:

Jesse Watters: Liberal protests at homes of Supreme Court justices are just a warning shot - Fox News

Alex tells Charlotte he is angry that your people are being incarcerated. He seems not to notice her quietly spoken response: Why not just say people? The two have just met in the Manhattan loft apartment of Black Lives Matter activist and student Alexs art-collector parents. Charles and Virginia specialise in African American art, and art with a racial theme. As Virginia puts it, gesturing to examples on display around the sparkling dinner table and white sofas, the couples commitment is on the walls (in Debbie Durus set, the images are not shown but are suggested to the audiences imagination by super-size, gallery-style descriptor panels). Charlotte is being introduced to the couple by their friend and art dealer, Eric, who hopes that they will invest in her work. When Charles, impressed by Charlottes measured demeanour, considers inviting her to join the board of his foundation, Eric responds: That would solve the diversity issue.

Claudia Rankines 2019 play of ideas, set during Trumps presidency, presents a multifaceted exploration of the invisibility of whiteness, the root of racism in the US. (Rankine is an American poet and essayist as well as a playwright.) In Natalie Ibus sharp production, its relevance to the UK is highlighted during the entracte: scene-changers hold up mirrors, reflecting the audience back to itself.

Charles unexpectedly visits Charlotte in her studio a year later. Since the confrontations of the dinner party, the artist has shifted the focus of her work from black suffering, which unintentionally allowed the viewer not to look at whiteness. Now, she concentrates on making visible the construct of whiteness and white peoples ordinary complicity in racial violence. This table-turning horrifies Charles: I am not that history!

The plays challenges to ways of seeing are powerfully presented by a strong ensemble cast, with special mention to Estella Danielss Charlotte and Matthew Pidgeons Charles. I recommend them and it.

Visit link:

The White Card review the liberal art worlds blindness to privilege - The Guardian

With only 10 days until Australiansvote in thefederal election, both the Liberal and Labor partieshavepromised a few extra million dollars in funding for the ACT, if they are successful at the poll.

Federal Labor announced on Wednesdaythatit would put an additional $10 million towards the construction of a Youth Foyer at Woden's Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT) campus.

ACT Labor senator Katy Gallagher said the funding wasimportant to tackle housing affordability and helpresolve Canberra's housing crisis.

Senator Gallagher said the Youth Foyer would offer young at-risk Canberrans a place to live that supportedtheircontinued education.

"[It's] student accommodation essentially, but for young people potentially at risk of becoming homeless or disengaged from education," she said.

"They would be linked to the CIT, but also to a student accommodation as well, so it's sort of a wrap around model."

Senator Gallagher said theYouth Foyer would be able to house 20 students and said the model had been proven to have "significant improvements in the education, employment and housing outcomes of vulnerable young people".

"They also help to stop long-term reliance on income support, social housing, support services and interactions with the corrections system," she said.

"Labor has a plan to create a better future for young people who need a helping hand to get the training they need for a better future.

"This is what good, progressive governments do they make investments that change lives for the better."

The CIT Woden campus is expected to be complete in about 2025.

Also on Wednesday, the Liberal party promised somefinancial support tohelp builda football facility in Canberra's northcalled the Home of Football.

The Home of Football is set to be constructed in the suburb of Throsbyand will provide a dedicated competition and training facility for up to 30,000 Canberrans.

The facility has already receivedfunding from the ACT government and Capital Football, but so far remains an empty field.

ACT Liberal senator Zed Seselja said his party couldfix that by pledging$4.5 million to the project, matching Capital Football's contribution.

Senator Seselja said he expected the promised spend on the Home of Football to be welcomed by Canberrans.

"To have a facility that will cater for the elite, and particularly for the W-League, but also for the grassroots of football I think will be very welcome," he said.

"Next year Australia will host the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup, which will provide a platform that inspires girls to give football a go, and Canberra's new Home of Football will mean the Canberra community has the facilities to help young athletes thrive.

"This critical funding will support the delivery of additional football fields in Gungahlin, and much needed indoor sports courts for Futsal and basketball."

In response tothe Liberal party's pledge for the football facility, Senator Gallagher said Labor was not yet across the proposal but would consider pledging the same $4.5 million "if it's sensible".

But SenatorSeselja said he believed only the Liberal government hadaneconomically viable plan for the ACT's future that allowed for such a spend.

Loading form...

See the article here:

Federal Labor and Liberal parties pledge additional funding for CIT accommodation, Canberra's Home of Football - ABC News

Victorian Liberal MP Bernie Finn has repeated his view that survivors of rape should not be allowed to have abortions, saying everybody should be given a chance to live.

Finn resigned as the oppositions whip in Victorias upper house on Monday, days after posting on Facebook that he was praying for abortion to be banned in Victoria, including in the case of sexual assault. He has been replaced by Gordon Rich-Phillips, the member for South-Eastern Metropolitan.

Finn has denied that his controversial views on abortion could affect the Liberal Party at Novembers state election.Credit:Jason South

I think that everybody should be given a chance, Finn said on Tuesday when asked if he still believed women who had been raped should be forced to give birth. I dont think its a question of deciding who should live or die, and I think everybody should be given that chance.

Finn said he wasnt preparing to quit the Liberal Party, but his decision to resign as opposition whip was a matter between me and various people in the party.

The Western Metropolitan MP has been a long-time critic of abortion laws, leading the annual March for Babies rally, which calls for the repeal of the 2008 decriminalisation of abortion in Victoria, for years.

After Politico published a leaked draft opinion from the US Supreme Court indicating the Roe v Wade decision, which legalised abortion in the US in 1973, could be overturned, Finn took to his official Facebook page and said: Civilised societies dont kill their young.

So excited the US is on the verge of a major breakthrough to civilisation, Finn wrote. Praying it will come here soon. Killing babies is criminal.

In response to a social media user who said that while they did not support abortion, it should be allowed in extreme cases ie sexual assault, Finn said: Babies should not be killed for the crime of his or her parent.

Opposition Leader Matthew Guy told Finn last week to rein in his social media commentary or quit the parliamentary team to sit as an independent.

View post:

Liberal MP doubles down on comments that raped women should be denied abortions - The Age

1. Liberal Studies in India is relatively young but gaining steady acceptance. What is the importance of Liberal Studies and why do you think students should opt for it?

For the skills one requires to solve the problems their society faces, we look at the social and physical sciences that lend themselves to policymaking and the creation of techniques and technologies. Liberal studies will teach students to draw upon history, literature, arts, cinema and other similar branches of human knowledge and creativity to bring clarity to the (perhaps unsolvable) moral issues a society may face in making its policy and technological choices.

For example, digitization is changing almost everything we have been accustomed to, the way we do business, the way governments function as well as the way citizens interact with each other. While this has the potential for improving our lives, it also throws up new challenges. Digitalization and big data are helping us address issues more effectively and efficiently while the digital divide is creating deep fissures and disparities in the opportunities an individual faces. So, in this given context, liberal studies is a field which will encourage a student to use digital technology as a tool for creative thinking and also develop a growing awareness of the challenges that digital media may produce. Liberal studies is gaining importance because today it is imperative for young adults to be well prepared to meet the challenges that will be thrown up by

a fast-transforming society and be in a position to provide solutions to those challenges.

2. School of Liberal Studies at UPES takes the Transdisciplinary Learning approach. What does it mean? And do you feel that there is a need for universities to change the approach in designing the curriculum for students?

Young adults trained at UPES will be able to identify, formulate and solve the problems in the society they live in. In addition, they will be trained to anticipate problems such that they can be prevented wherever possible. The schools objective is not only the pursuit of knowledge. The curriculum fosters an awareness and deep understanding of the issues faced by the society around them and strives towards this objective by concentrating on the importance that individuals have with the State and Society as citizens.

There will be three distinct parts in all the programmes under UPES School of Liberal Studies:

a) Classroom lectures (both theoretical and practical)- which is basically the disciplinary training of the core subjects

b) Application of whatever is taught in the classroom to live issues in the neighbourhood- This will enable students to directly connect the classroom theory to the world around them and put their existing knowledge under question. This will also train students in fieldwork and the use of both qualitative and quantitative data.

c) Each course ending with a list of open and topical questions- This is to encourage students to conduct research towards a deeper understanding of specific aspects of the society they are in so that they are better placed to anticipate and tackle future challenges.

3. Liberal Studies is said to focus more on How to think rather than What to think. How does this encourage students to be critical and think differently with a creative mindset?

One of the main aspects of Liberal Studies is that it encourages students to apply their knowledge, thinking and understanding to a situation rather than giving them a planned answer to problems. It creates a habit among students to exercise their minds and find solutions. One of the requirements for anticipating problems and, hence, preventing them or reducing their impact, is the ability to build alternate realities of how things could turn out in the future. If we cannot do this, we will always be reacting to problems. We will always be firefighting rather than preventing fires. The ability to think in the abstract, to understand the relationship between things and visualize the context within which things will play out are all brought together through critical thinking. And that is not all. Imagining alternate realities requires creativity!

4. The world today needs more of problem solvers for a sustainable society. What are the training and skills that the coming generation need to become global leaders capable of solving real world problems?

The world is connected and so are societies. What happens locally can be scaled up globally and what is happening globally could have serious implications for the local. So, our students must be trained as global citizens; they will have to be connected to their immediate neighbourhood as well as the world at large. Local and global are not mutually exclusive choices. Instead, they feed from and impact each other.

Let us take a problem we face today --- the quality of air in Indian cities. It is an environmental issue and a health issue. How does one solve this? It depends on the way the city has been planned or developed organically. It depends on the economic activities in and around the city --- brick kilns, stubble burning, tree cover, movement of goods and people within the city, growth of slums and various other factors. Is it possible for one type of expertise to solve these many factors that all lead to the problem we are facing? We need economists, city planners, logistics experts, architects, sociologists and behaviour scientists and then, of course, scientists, engineers and technologists. It is impossible for any one person to have expertise in all of these. So, we need different experts to work together in a team. And, for that, each team member must have an appreciation of the perspectives the other team members bring to the problem discussion. And that is what we are trying to do at UPES. We are trying to break down the silos within which we have been training our students.

5. What can a student find himself/herself learning under Liberal Studies and how is it going to help them build successful careers?

The things we observe around us are outcomes of the interplay among various factors in a complex system. These factors include human behaviour, nature, technology, regulation and norms among others. A student of liberal studies is trained to understand this system. A student graduating from this programme can, therefore, work with business, government and non-profit organisations or civil societies. Careers include journalism, law, politics, economics, social work, behaviour management and public policy. Some can also go on to higher studies in any of the specific specializations.

To know more click here!

Read more here:

UPES School of Liberal Studies Wants Students To Be Critical Thinkers - The Quint

HumanitiesEnglish

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, M.A., Graduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A., Graduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A.

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, M.A.

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A., M.S., Graduate Certificate

Public Health Degrees Offered: B.A., B.S., Minor, MPH | Graduate Degrees Offered: MPH, Ph.D.

Degrees Offered: B.A., B.S., Minor, Ph.D.

Construct a degree program with coursework in different disciplines and in several combinations.

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, M.A., M.H., M.S., MSS, Graduate Certificate across various disciplines

Degrees Offered: B.A., B.S. Create a Bachelor of Arts major by combining two course clusters from the same or different school/college.

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Peace Corps Prep certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A., Graduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., B.S., Minor, M.A., MPA, M.S., Ph.D.

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A., MBA, Graduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.A., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.A.

Degrees Offered: B.S., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.S.

Degrees Offered: B.S., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.S., Ph.D.

Degrees Offered: B.A., B.S., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, M.S., Ph.D., Graduate Certificate

Degrees Offered: B.S., Minor, Undergraduate Certificate, Graduate Certificate

CLAS offers over 30 undergraduate and graduate certificates as well that offerstudents a way to enhance their existingskills and provide professional development.

Certificates

Read this article:

CU Denver - College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

There is a moment in a Seinfeld episode about abortion that has always nagged at me. The plot pokes fun at crusaders for and against abortion rights, but it has one moment of painful earnestness, where an anti-abortion restaurant owner asks Elaine what gives her the right to disagree with his stance on abortion, and she replies, The Supreme Court gives me the right to do that!

The exchange doesnt quite track its not clear if the writers meant to have Elaine say the Court gives her the right to disagree on abortion, which is wrong (that would be the First Amendment), or the right to have an abortion. But the sour note, to me, has always been the reverence in her voice as she invokes the Courts authority. The character is not merely making a point about jurisprudence. She is citing the Supreme Court as the ultimate moral arbiter.

The forthcoming demise of Roe v. Wade should dispel an illusion. Americans liberals in particular, and boomers especially have been suffering from a misplaced faith in the Supreme Court as the guarantor of rights and liberties. The right to abortion will not be secured by the occupants of a gleaming marble building. It will be the work of politics activism, persuasion, and voting that will control its fate.

For most of its history, the Supreme Court was a nakedly reactionary institution. The Court destroyed civil-rights laws in the 19th century and progressive economic legislation in the 20th, right up until midway through the New Deal. The Constitution, as interpreted by the Court, created rights for social and economic elites that Congress could not touch.

In the second half of the 20th century, the Court reversed its historic character and began handing down liberal rulings. Roe v. Wade was the apogee of the Warren and Burger Courts, and the era imprinted the image of a liberal Court on the public mind.

Even as control of the Court has passed into the hands of conservatives, who have turned it back into its historic role of creating conservative rights to pollute, to carry weapons almost anywhere, to thwart a Medicaid expansion rather than liberal ones, the old impression has endured. Last fall, a Gallup poll found Democrats and Republicans approved of the Court equally, while a Marquette University poll found it had slightly higher approval among Democrats an extraordinary assessment of a body controlled by six conservatives, half of whom were chosen by Donald Trump.

Roe v. Wade has become affixed in the public conscience as a synonym for the right to abortion. But one can support the right to abortion without believing that right is protected by the Constitution. (I personally believe people have the right to abortion and all essential medical services, but I dont think the Constitution is the source of the right either to abortion or to health care generally.) After Roe, the fight for abortion rights will revert to an openly political struggle. The Court is not ending the abortion debate. It is throwing it open.

In this new phase, abortion-rights supporters have the advantage of broad public support. If (and when) Roe is overturned, as polling analyst Ariel Edwards-Levy notes, only about one-fifth of Americans want their state to ban abortion completely. Another fifth favor restrictions short of a full ban, and just over half want their state to become a safe haven for women in other states who cant access abortion.

It took a half-century of patient organizing for the conservative movement to finally kill Roe. That movement overcame numerous setbacks, some seemingly fatal, including the appointment of several Republican justices who wound up voting to preserve the ruling.

It is entirely possible that, having won the ability to ban abortion, conservatives will proceed to enact such bans on many or most women in this country. It is also possible that opponents will begin expanding the right to abortion into a steadily widening sphere. Social conservatives have won a legal victory, but the end of the story hasnt been written yet.

Irregular musings from the center left.

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice and to receive email correspondence from us.

See the article here:

Roe v. Wade and an End to the Liberal Romance With Courts - New York Magazine

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A liberal dark money group with ties to President Biden'sadministration is using the leakedSupreme Courtdraft opinion to yet again push for the court's expansion.

Demand Justice, the left's most activejudicialgroup, emailed supporters on Tuesday in the wake of the leaked Justice Samuel Alito draft opinion signaling Roe V. Wade would be overturned saying the "clearest solution" to protect "constitutional rights" to abortion is to expand the court.

"The Republican party has seen the writing on the wall and knows that it can't win on the issues," Demand Justice writes in the email.

Brian Fallon, national press secretary for the 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton campaign, speaks during a Bloomberg Politics interview in 2016. Fallon now leads Demand Justice, a left-wing group that wants to pack the Supreme Court. (Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

FORMER CLINTON AIDE WONDERS IF 'BRAVE CLERK' LEAKED SUPREME COURT DRAFT TO PUSH JUSTICES TO RECONSIDER

"From the need for access to abortion and reproductive healthcare, to the need for an adequate and immediate plan to address climate change, to the need for robust gun violence prevention, Republicans have categorically rejected issues that a commanding and consistent majority of Americans support," the email states.

The group called the Supreme Court the Republican's "insurance policy" and pushed its supporters to contact and pressure members of Congress to kill the filibuster and add four seats to the Supreme Court.

Demand Justice is led by formerHillary Clintoncampaign staffer Brian Fallon, and it also has direct ties to the Biden administration.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki speaks during a press briefing at the White House, Friday, March 4, 2022. Psaki served as an outside adviser to Demand Justice, a far-left group that advocates packing the Supreme Court. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

White House press secretary Jen Psaki served as an outside adviser to the Demand Justice. Paige Herwig, Biden's point person on judicial nominations, also worked for the group before joining the administration.

Demand Justice started with efforts to discredit Republican judicial picks while backing Democratic nominees. It has since morphed to more advocacy-based endeavors, such as packing the Supreme and lower courts.

LIBERAL DARK MONEY GROUPS DRIVE EFFORTS TO PACK THE SUPREME COURT

But as Democratic politicians attacked right-wing dark money judicial groups, they benefitted from Demand Justice, which has been shrouded in secrecy.

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton looks at a smart phone with national press secretary Brian Fallon on her plane at Westchester County Airport October 3, 2016. (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images) (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Demand Justice launched in 2018 as a project of the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a fiscal sponsor managed by the Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm Arabella Advisors, which oversees one of the left's largest dark money networks.

The group, however,recently spuninto its own legal entity. Its complete list of donors is unknown due to its relationship with the Sixteen Thirty Fund and its recent break-off into its own nonprofit.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

And while it hides its donors, a nonprofit in liberal billionaireGeorge Soros'snetwork, the Open Society Policy Center,provided $2.6 millionto Demand Justice around the time of its inception, its grants showed.

Demand Justice did not immediately respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment.

Originally posted here:

Liberal dark money group with Biden admin ties capitalizes on SCOTUS leak to push court-packing agenda - Fox News

Do Republican investment advisors outperform Democratic ones?

Given how intensely polarized the U.S. has become, it was perhaps inevitable that partisanship would creep into the investment advisory arena. And it most certainly has. Numerous studies have confirmed that Republican advisers tend to invest more in companies run by Republican-friendly CEOs, for example, just as Democratic advisers invest more in Democratic-leaning firms.

But do these differences lead to any difference in performance?

A good place to start in answering this question is with two exchange-traded funds that were created around the time of the 2020 U.S. presidential election: The American Conservative Values ETF ACVF, +0.28% and the Democratic Large Cap Core ETF DEMZ, +0.84%. Since Nov. 7, 2020, the first date for which FactSet has performance data for both ETFs, ACVF has produced a 14.4% annualized return, while DEMZ has produced a 14.2% annualized return. (See the chart below; data through April 29.)

Given the variability in their returns, these two ETFs are in a statistical dead heat.

I didnt include in the chart another ETF that focuses on Republican themes: Point Bridge GOP Stock Tracker MAGA, +1.35%. It is older than these two newer ETFs, having been launched in September 2017. There is no corresponding Democratic-leaning ETF that was launched around the same time, so theres no head-to-head comparison. Since inception through April 29, MAGA is up 11.9% annualized, lagging the S&P 500s 13.7% comparable return.

We shouldnt be surprised by these results, as they are consistent with what researchers have found over the years. Consider a study that appeared in the August 2020 issue of the Journal of Quantitative and Financial Analysis, entitled Partisan Bias in Fund Portfolios. It was conducted by M. Babajide Wintoki of the University of Kansas and Yaoyi Xi of San Diego State University. They found that, while fund managers are more likely to allocate assets to firms managed by executives and directors with whom they share a similar political partisan affiliation, this bias is not associated with improved fund performance.

Another major study appeared a decade ago in the Journal of Financial Economics, entitled Red and blue investing: Values and finance. It was conducted by Harrison Hong of Princeton University and Leonard Kostovetsky of the University of Rochester. They divided U.S. equity mutual fund managers into two groups based on their contributions to candidates for federal elections. A manager was considered Democratic-leaning if the manager made significantly more contributions to Democratic candidates, and Republican-leaning if the manager tilted towards Republican candidates. (The researchers ignored for purposes of their comparison those mutual-funds managers who made no contributions to either party.)

Though they found significant differences in the stocks owned by Democratic- and Republican-leaning managers, the researchers found that the overall performance of Democratic and Republican managers does not significantly differ.

A similar result was reached in a study that appeared in 2017 in the Journal of Banking and Finance, entitled Hedge fund politics and portfolios. Its authors were Luke Devault of Clemson University and Richard Sias of the University of Arizona. They employed a similar methodology as Hong and Kostovetsky, classifying a hedge-fund manager as Democratic-leaning (or Republican-leaning) if he made significantly more contributions to Democratic (or Republican) candidates.

As was the case with mutual funds, the portfolio of the average hedge fund managed by a Democratic-leaning was significantly different than the average Republican-managed hedge fund. Despite these differences, Sias, in an interview, said that he and his co-author found no significant difference in the performances of Democratic and Republican hedge-fund managers.

These results make sense. If the stock-selection criteria employed by Democratic managers really did lead to beating the market, Republican managers would waste no time employing those criteria themselves, and vice-versa.

Profits have the upper hand over partisanship, in other words. Wall Streets money managers are some of the most hyper-competitive people on the planet, going to great lengths to gain just a few basis-points advantage over their competitors. Theres little doubt that they would happily sacrifice their political biases if it helped them come out on top in the performance sweepstakes.

This is one of the reasons why the betting markets are generally more reliable than opinion polls. Talk is cheap. But when our money is on the line, we tend to become less partisan and more objective.

One investment implication you might draw from these studies that its OK to align your portfolio with your political affiliation, since doing so shouldnt lead your portfolio to underperform. Another way of putting this: You dont have to invest in companies or funds whose politics you find particularly distasteful in order perform just as well as those companies or funds you find repugnant.

This implication might be going too far. The studies cited above are based on averages of many different funds, and theres wide variation among individual funds results. Theres no guarantee that, in your individual circumstance, aligning your portfolio with your political beliefs wont lead to underperformance as has been true for the MAGA ETF, for example.

In any case, the stronger investment implication I draw from these studies is that youre on shaky ground if you think that investing in companies whose politics match yours leads to beating the market.

Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at mark@hulbertratings.com

More: Hes a MAGA-hat wearing Republican, and Im pretty liberal. This concerns me: Shouldnt my financial adviser have similar beliefs to mine?

Plus: These competing Republican and Democratic ETFs are surprisingly bipartisan in their stock market holdings

See the article here:

Red stock, blue stock --- MAGA Republicans and liberal Democrats are taking their politics to Wall Street - MarketWatch