January 31, 2017

"Trump essentially ran against a united Democratic party, the Republican establishment, the mainstream media (both liberal and conservative) — and won."

"He was outspent. He was out-organized. He was outpolled and demonized daily as much by Republicans as Democrats. Yet he not only destroyed three political dynasties (the Clintons, Bushes, and Obamas) but also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself... Instead of seeing Barack Obama (both his successful two elections and his failed two terms) as the wave of the future, Democrats would be wise to reassess his electoral legacy as a unique phenomenon. In truth, Obama’s legacy is twofold: He took the party hard left, and he downsized it to a minority party of the two coasts and big cities. And then he faded off into the sunset to a multimillionaire retirement of golf and homilies... [T]he Democratic-party strategists are doubling down on boutique environmentalism and race/gender victimhood, while hoping that Donald Trump implodes in scandal, war, or depression.  They are clueless that their present rabid frenzy is doing as much political damage to their cause as is the object of their outrage."

Writes Victor David Hanson in "The Democrat Patient/Ignoring the symptoms, misdiagnosing the malady, skipping the treatment."

93 comments:

Unknown said...

Which explains the current freakout by the left: they thought they had all the power in both parties. What's the difference between McCain and Schumer? Anyone know? What policies would, say, Orrin Hatch vote for that Bernie Sanders would not?

And so forth. Now, the GOPe is caught between their rhetoric, which Trump is enthusiastically enacting, and their actual agenda, which is what MSNBC wants.

Hence the total meltdown on the left.

--Vance

Sigivald said...

"Do you want more Trump? Because that's how you get more Trump."

madAsHell said...

Cuz....shutting down SeaTac is a way to garner my sympathy.

Chuck said...

"...but also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself..."

That was always true. The Obama coattails only exist when he is running. (And then they are considerable.)

Witness the non-Obama elections of 2010, 2012 and 2016, all in the Era of Obama. Obama the campaigner, but not on the ballot. And they are always anti-Democrat routs. "Thumpins." Trump was there for 2016, and he won, but about as narrowly as could be imagined.

Obama's magic was and is premised on one and only one thing; black voter turnout that is effectively about 120%, under the usual polling regressions. When, and only when, he is running.

That is how he beat the best president we never had, Mitt Romney.


Jack Wayne said...

Democratic cluelessness after an election is unremarkable. The Republican "autopsy" after 2012 was completely wrong. Some bright person will emerge who turns most of the current Democrat policy on its head. The question is: will it change any minds if Trump is successful at bringing back jobs?

Mike said...

It is ongoing. I called Hillary "a slow motion train wreck" in Spring of 2015 and it proved prescient. But that description continues to be apt in regards to her party. What do they hope to accomplish by horrifying the public with giant roaming vaginas swearing at people, with thugs breaking windows, with Democrats boycotting the hearings they are elected to attend?

And the lefties here think Trump is in trouble? How so? Approvals at all time high for him. 75% of public in California hates sanctuary cities (Pew). Get a grip people.

AJ Lynch said...

Hanson is brilliant and a good writer. He has Althouse's writing skills & brain power but he does not withhold his opinions.

Matthew Sablan said...

"That is how he beat the best president we never had, Mitt Romney."

-- A lot of people, on the left and right, are wishing we were on Romney Term 2, even if it meant Obama only got one term.

The Godfather said...

We hear stuff like this all the time about the losing party. How many times have we heard that the Republican Party is doomed? 1964? 1974 (after Nixon's resignation)? 1992? 2008? In between those dates, we were hearing that the Democrats were doomed.

Do you remember the Ballad of Andrew Barton:

'I am hurt but I am not slain.

I'll lay me down and bleed awhile,

Then I'll rise and fight again.'

The difference being that Sir Andrew really was fatally wounded.

eddie willers said...

First, let me say I agree 100% with VDH.




Now I'll go read the article.

Lewis Wetzel said...

while hoping that Donald Trump implodes in scandal, war, or depression.
This is confirmed by the occasional Lefty comment at Althouse Blog.
The other half of the comeback plan for the Dems seems to be to do even more of what cost them control of state governments, the federal House and Senate, and the presidency.

Mick said...

Donald J Trump is the Gray Champion of the 4th Turning, as this period of cyclical upheaval is called. Whatever comes of it, and it will last until about 2025, will be a new order, whether good or bad (Read Strauss and Howe, The Fourth Turning http://www.fourthturning.com/). Trump will preside over extemely trying times, and perhaps war.
No one here looked with their own eyes at the way people were flocking to Trump's rallies, and where the Crooked Old Lady was holding poorly attended snooze fests. No ONE here but I saw that the polls of the cheer-leading treasonous media were horribly skewed, and did not reflect the reality of Trump's populist support.
Thank god a real American natural born Citizen is at the helm to protect and guide his/ our country from the Globalist hordes.

No ONE here saw the danger of the Usurper Hussein Obama, Globalist, citizen of the world and non natural born Citizen, born of a Kenyan/British father, but I did. Why didn't you see all this "law prof"? Is it because you were too ensconced in the Ivory Tower of Academia to stand up and be counted for your country, and to educate the public? Still afraid of the "birther" label? Education is one of the purposes of this "law prof blog" is it not? FAIL

wendybar said...

HA!! And nobody was listening...just like they aren't now...they are listening to the protesters throw a tantrum...Looks like it will be 8 years of Trump!!

EDH said...

The strategy of the Democrat left seems to be "we're going to continue to be obnoxious and in your face until you elect us to high office."

n.n said...

Americans overcame both domestic and foreign influence to elect a representative of the People and our Posterity.

Americans, 1. Special interests, 0.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Democratic-party strategists are doubling down on boutique environmentalism and race/gender victimhood

Don't forget sanctuary cities.

The Democrats intend to flip the Rust Belt states back to the Democratic Party by doubling-down on their idea that the USA should have sanctuary cities for illegal aliens.

Henry said...

Hard left? Hardly.

Scott McGlasson said...

but also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself

As he was the first black president, I would have thought this would be self-evident.

Scott McGlasson said...

I called Hillary "a slow motion train wreck" in Spring of 2015.

Did anyone ever reach out to Crack and find out how his mantra, "She'll run and she'll win in a landslide" worked out for him?

rehajm said...

but also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself

The kiss of death for a leftie candidate was to have Obama show up on stage at your rally.

Tommy Duncan said...

As we've noted in prior threads, self-awareness and honesty are not Democrat hallmarks. After the Hillary/Bernie saga the Democrats will be looking for the magic of another Barack Obama. But that magic was a one time event. Enough people learned the magic was an illusion. They may find another young charismatic candidate, but America is looking for results, not promises.

It's funny, the Republicans own the Presidency, the House and control the Senate. Yet they still act like the minority party. Except for Trump they are afraid to lead.

fivewheels said...

And the abuse of the word "dynasty" metastasizes from sports to politics. Only the Bushes are a dynasty, and barely so, having seen power descend from one generation to the next. Bill Clinton never got Hillary elected to national office, and Chelsea doesn't seem up to it. Obama is one man, and by Hanson's own reckoning is a unicorn who can't pass any legacy down to anyone. What do people think "dynasty" means?

Fabi said...

It took a special kind of wimp to lose to Obama in 2012. Mitt was up to the task.

Sean Gleeson said...

A nitpick, perhaps. But I don't see how "the Obamas" are a "political dynasty"; there is only one Obama who has ever held office, or even sought office.

AReasonableMan said...

VDH makes two points, one trivial and one wrong. The trivial point refers to Trump's victories, the extent of which have been clear for some time to any informed person. His second point re Obama is wrong because VDH is part of the establishment and doesn't fully understand just how woefully corrupt and inept both of the main parties have become. Even a vaguely competent and clean opposition party would have defeated Trump easily in the last election. In order to lose the Dems had to pick their most disliked and corrupt member and even then she won the popular vote.

Obama is unusually good at politics but the Dems just need a warm body with a minimum of ethical lapses and they will defeat Trump in the next election. If Trump doesn't run then they need someone better than whoever does run, usually not a huge challenge.

Yancey Ward said...

Well, to allow Peanut Butter and Readering some well earned nap time, I shall report that Clinton won the popular vote and Obama has higher approval ratings than Trump who presidency is now a failure.

Danno said...

The Senate Democrats are going full Wisconsin and not showing for the confirmation votes.

William said...

When they mentioned that Obama had no previous executive experience, the rebuttal was that he had successfully managed a Presidential campaign. When it is pointed out that Trump had no previous political experience, a plausible rebuttal is that he successfully managed a presidential campaign........That said, if Trump's policies prove unsuccessful then he's got problems. Reagan was a popular and successful president when Iran Contra broke. The Dems would have dearly loved to impeach him, but he had built up too much goodwill and had a past record of success.......The future is unknowable, but my prediction is that if Trump stumbles, more people will be eager to break him than to break his fall.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Obama is unusually good at politics but the Dems just need a warm body with a minimum of ethical lapses and they will defeat Trump in the next election"

-- I'd argue, he's good at getting himself elected, but given how unpopular his policies are, and his inability to get others elected, he's overall terrible at politics.

Freeman Hunt said...

Part of the problem is that if a person goes too far over the top, no one wants to make him angry by contradicting him. Then the only voices he hears are those agreeing with him, giving him a false impression of how appealing his approach and arguments are to people generally.

This is observable on social media right now.

Mattman26 said...

EDH: The strategy of the Democrat left seems to be "we're going to continue to be obnoxious and in your face until you elect us to high office."

I'm beginning to think that may be true, and not (quite) as crazy as it sounds. I wonder if they're going to wear down "normal" people (those who aren't strong partisans or avid political junkies) into concluding that the only way to get away from the daily turn-it-up-to-11 crises, disruptive protests, boycotts, etc. is to leave Democrats in charge.

That would make me sad. I hope it's a (political) suicide mission instead.

Michael said...

There is no better winning strategy, short of shutting down a freeway during rush hour, no better way to sway the opposition than to give shelter to illegal aliens. Because the people getting speeding tickets out in the deplorable hinterlands, the women bailing out their drunken boyfriends, are all for there being no laws for illegal aliens but happily shelling out the fines to the local authorities who more or less insist they obey the law. What the hell.

The sanctuary city movement will bury the left. The sanctimony itself will choke them. But a lot of fun to watch.

David Begley said...

VDH nails it. Again.

David Baker said...

"What's the difference between McCain and Schumer?

I say the difference between Chuck McCain and John Schumer is night and day. Especially at twilight.


The same goes for Elijah Hatch and Orin Cummings.

eric said...

He underestimates the power of the American people to grow weary of drama.

The left will keep their speakers set at 11 for four years. They will create constant drama. We won't get a moment's rest. It'll be domestic drama, international drama, economic drama, etc. One crises after another. Always set to 11.

When the next election comes around, people will openly say, "Trump's been an OK president, I'll vote for him again."

But in their heart they'll think, "I'm going to vote for the Democrat, if for no other reason than they'll dial it back from 11 and I can get some peace and quiet again!"

Fabi said...

"Obama is unusually good at politics..."

Over a thousand Democrats lost their offices to Republicans in his eight years in the White House. They weren't merely decimated -- they were obliterated. His policies were disastrous for his party. Try again, ARM!

AReasonableMan said...

Mattman26 said...
I'm beginning to think that may be true, and not (quite) as crazy as it sounds.


People don't like chaos. The Dems have a simple goal, to create the appearance of chaos. Trump and Bannon have proven unusually adept in helping them achieve this goal.

Big Mike said...

@eric, it's you who underestimate the American people.

CStanley said...

I think VDH gives a bit too much credit to Trump. Some of the Democrats problems were self inflicted, and their party was hardly "united".

AReasonableMan said...

Fabi said...
Over a thousand Democrats lost their offices to Republicans in his eight years in the White House.


This is a stupid argument. Obama was Michael Jordan playing on the Washington Generals. It's not his fault the other guys couldn't play. Being good at politics means winning your election. He won despite the shit show that is the current Democratic Party. Bill Clinton couldn't get Hillary elected. Bill Clinton is good at politics.

Although you would never admit it, John McCain is good at politics. He keeps getting elected. The only election he lost was following Bush Jr's disastrous presidency, which Jesus newly risen from the dead could not have won running as a Republican.

320Busdriver said...

Because we're tired of a self serving ruling class whose only instinct is to protect their own turf and enrich themselves.

If Trump can get congressional term limits through he will go down as the best potus...EVAH!

Fabi said...

Did you forget when he said his policies were on the ballot in the 2014 midterms and got trounced, ARM? The only reason he got elected was because he's black and ran against the twin idiots of McCain and Romney.

News flash: US Senators get re-elected unless they're caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl.

Unknown said...

"... rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself... ""

I don't think Mr Trump did this, Mr Obama's "election matrix" could only have worked for him, or possibly only for the first black candidate for the office. Although it wouldn't have worked for a black Republican

Unknown said...

"... rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself... ""

I don't think Mr Trump did this, Mr Obama's "election matrix" could only have worked for him, or possibly only for the first black candidate for the office. Although it wouldn't have worked for a black Republican

James Kahn said...

"Obama was Michael Jordan playing on the Washington Generals. It's not his fault the other guys couldn't play."

Yeah, right. The President is the de facto leader of the party. Losing huge majorities in both houses of Congress is at least partly on him. Of course the Dems in Congress, especially Pelosi, have to take some of the blame too for giving the finger to public opinion and ramming Obamacare down our throats. But they were following the President's lead.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...

That was always true. The Obama coattails only exist when he is running. (And then they are considerable.)

Witness the non-Obama elections of 2010, 2012 and 2016, all in the Era of Obama. Obama the campaigner, but not on the ballot. And they are always anti-Democrat routs. "Thumpins." Trump was there for 2016, and he won, but about as narrowly as could be imagined.

Obama's magic was and is premised on one and only one thing; black voter turnout that is effectively about 120%, under the usual polling regressions. When, and only when, he is running.


No, Obama would not have defeated Trump And it is stupid and hurts democrats to think so.

That is how he beat the best president we never had, Mitt Romney.

No Chuck, Mitt Romney was an oligarch pet who passed and implemented Obamacare before even democrats thought it was cool. Romney lost because he was a terrible candidate. Trump would have won in 2012 and there will be no going back to the way things were when we had a feckless bunch of cowards running the GOP.

Sebastian said...

"also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself.' Seemingly, but not quite. Oprah will run and do better than O. She is already returning to network TV, I hear, setting the stage. She is the only one who can 1. rescue the Dems form their lefty madness; 2. project a positive image to the Deplorables; 3. get minorities to turn out in PA, MI, WI. She has enough money. She has enough cred to move to the center. She will get enough white women on board. If so, game over for GOP.

320Busdriver said...

Blogger eric said...

"The left will keep their speakers set at 11 for four years."

Here's a perfect example of the completely inept running with their speakers set to 11

https://youtu.be/IzYoX-lBGpM

"Look at the moon"

AReasonableMan said...

Fabi said...
Did you forget when he said his policies were on the ballot in the 2014 midterms


He was desperately trying to increase turnout for those idiots. But, if your argument is that the Democratic Party is full of hard working, clean and brilliant politicians who's only problem was that they were sorely hobbled by Obama's policies, knock yourself out. Now that Obama has gone it should be fair winds and following seas from here on out for the Dems. They will crush their enemies mercilessly.

eric said...

Blogger Big Mike said...
@eric, it's you who underestimate the American people


I hope so.

Fabi said...

"Trump was there for 2016, and he won, but about as narrowly as could be imagined."

A thirty state victory. Plus ME-2. Not even close.

Fabi said...

Have you considered that they all suck and he had the benefit of weak opponents and historic firsts, ARM? Try harder.

mockturtle said...

Obama's early speeches were very centrist, even family-oriented. Whether he was being deliberately deceptive about his ideology or was swung hard left by the Democratic/Progressives I don't know. I suspect the former. In either case, he left middle-America behind.

Guildofcannonballs said...

How much did you donate to Trump Mick? Not your talk talk talk, dollar bills beach.

$42 here son.

mockturtle said...

No Chuck, Mitt Romney was an oligarch pet who passed and implemented Obamacare before even democrats thought it was cool. Romney lost because he was a terrible candidate. Trump would have won in 2012 and there will be no going back to the way things were when we had a feckless bunch of cowards running the GOP.

Totally agree. He was a terrible candidate. I wrote in Ron Paul both elections. Romney was clearly not interested in the working class voters. The ones Trump stole from the Dems.

Achilles said...

Do not forget Trump didn't win because of "turnout." He won because he TOOK the working class vote from democrats. He is in the process of bringing the private sector unions permanently into the republican party.

If the democrats don't stop that they can keep their illegal immigrants and pussy hats but they wont be winning any elections.

AReasonableMan said...

Fabi, you argument is obvious nonsense but if you genuinely believe it then the unavoidable corollary is that the Dems will now rack up a long string of electoral victories. I am sure you can find someone here to take your money on that bet.

Achilles said...

AReasonableMan said...
Fabi, you argument is obvious nonsense but if you genuinely believe it then the unavoidable corollary is that the Dems will now rack up a long string of electoral victories. I am sure you can find someone here to take your money on that bet.

Who will dissolve first? The NYT or the Democrat party?

Fabi said...

If my argument were obvious then it would be very easy for you to explain why, ARM. Read my earlier post again -- they all suck for the Democrats and they're two cycles away from any electoral progress.

AReasonableMan said...

Achilles said...
Who will dissolve first? The NYT or the Democrat party?


Neither.

vicari valdez said...

a lot of good points in that article, and i'm happy to see the national review engaging in class warfare rhetoric, even if i think it's largely disingenuous.

exhelodrvr1 said...

VDH - on target as usual.

Achilles said...

AReasonableMan said...
Achilles said...
Who will dissolve first? The NYT or the Democrat party?

Neither.

My money would be on the Times. The Peso is looking pretty sad right now and Mexico is going into a tailspin since their economy is based on remittances from illegals working in the US and US companies moving heavy manufacturing to Mexico and shipping products back to the states. The NYT has already started renting out office space and owner Carlos Slim is getting a harsh financial haircut right now due to Mexico's economic problems and corruption.

Lewis Wetzel said...

I'm trying to imagine who the Dems will run in 2020.
Warren is Hillary w/o the charisma.
I've heard Julian Castro's name mentioned, but he has no ability to appeal to non-activists. He is a faux hispanic. Like me, he learned Spanish in high school.
Corey Booker is no Obama. He is too Black for the Democrats to be comfortable with.
So, doubling down on failure, they will run Hillary again.

Gahrie said...

I'm trying to imagine who the Dems will run in 2020.

Gavin Newsome and/or Kamala Harris.

AReasonableMan said...

The Dems have an effective monopoly so it is a safe bet that they aren't going anywhere but neither is the NYT. Someone like Bezos would be happy to own it, even if the current inept ownership fails. The Times is an almost perfect argument against primogeniture. Weeding out all the Ochs/Sulzbergers by itself would probably ensure its survival.

Gahrie said...

Who will dissolve first? The NYT or the Democrat party?

Don't ever underestimate the democratic Party..they have extensive experience in being on the wrong and losing side.......

...slavery
....civil war
.....Jim Crow/segregation
....the civil rights movement
....the cold war

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger Gahrie said...
I'm trying to imagine who the Dems will run in 2020.

Gavin Newsome and/or Kamala Harris.


They've already got Cali. But they don't seem to have a strategy, or even know that they need one.
The other day I read that the DNC is targeting R congressmen in districts Trump won by 15, 20 points. Their idea is that the rollback of Obamacare will be so unpopular that these districts will turn D.
uh . . . okay.

eddie willers said...

I've heard Julian Castro's name mentioned, but he has no ability to appeal to non-activists

And the name sure won't help. Who's his running mate....Andrew Hitler?

Gahrie said...

It's funny, the Republicans own the Presidency, the House and control the Senate. Yet they still act like the minority party. Except for Trump they are afraid to lead.

The MSM has trained them well.....think of the MSM as Ramsey Bolton and the GOP Establishment as Reek........

Gahrie said...

I've heard Julian Castro's name mentioned, but he has no ability to appeal to non-activists

And the name sure won't help. Who's his running mate....Andrew Hitler?


It would be an advantage on the Left.....If they could come up with someone named Vladimir Pol Pot Guevara he'd win the Democratic primaries by a landslide.

Meade said...

I ran into a Madison friend yesterday who is an old old liberal Dem leftie prog socialist marxist genius scholar and he told me that he's "so f*cking tired of those people." I said, what? — and here I thought you one OF those people? He said, "well, still, I'm sick of them all." I said yeah they're sort of like a religious cult aren't they and he said, "they're like Jehovah's Witnesses. Only the Jehovah's Witnesses are nice. Have you ever met a Jehovah's Witness? They're always really really nice. But these people are not nice. They're like mean Jehovah's Witnesses. They're sick people trying to steal each other's medicine."

Achilles said...

AReasonableMan said...

Someone like Bezos would be happy to own it, even if the current inept ownership fails.

Maybe Salesforce would stoop down and scoop the times up. Or Uber. Or...

the Kock Brothers! But they are basically on the same team.

tim maguire said...

Barack Obama is a dynasty? Since when is one guy a dynasty? Otherwise, he's right but obvious.

Matthew Sablan said...

Dynasty seems like the wrong word; factions, maybe? There's are definite Clinton/Obama factions on the left.

exiledonmainstreet said...

A friend who lives in San Antonio told me she ran into Julian Castro once - literally. She said he's a very small guy. She was looking straight ahead and walked right into him.

It's entirely superficial, but being extremely short is a handicap for a male presidential candidate in this day and age. If you've ever seen Ron Johnson in person, you know he would have a similar disadvantage if he ever decided to run.

CWJ said...

ARM working hard to do the work other trolls and opposition commenters won't do. Give that man a Green Card.

grackle said...

The best sentence:

They are clueless that their present rabid frenzy is doing as much political damage to their cause as is the object of their outrage."

Among the comments:

It's funny, the Republicans own the Presidency, the House and control the Senate. Yet they still act like the minority party. Except for Trump they are afraid to lead.

If only we could take a tissue sample from one of Trump’s testicles, grow a pair under strict laboratory conditions and somehow graft them somewhere in the region of Paul Ryan’s crotch … but no, what we have in reality is a eunuch festival that we sometimes refer to as the “House leadership.”

Ryan can’t even get his caucus to agree on a replacement for Obamacare, even though he has known this moment was coming since election night; that’s not leadership, that’s incompetence. Or worse - wanting to fail, planning to fail, where we go from mere incompetence to political treason.

It took a special kind of wimp to lose to Obama in 2012. Mitt was up to the task.

I supported him on this blog and voted for him. The best thing you can say about Mitt is that he would have been a little better for America than Obama turned out to be. But that’s a low bar. Romney’s behavior since his defeat has been atrocious. He has no national political future, as he is bound to know …

Robert Cook said...

"In truth, Obama’s legacy is twofold: He took the party hard left...."

Okay, immediately we can see that Hanson's "analysis" is deeply flawed.

Robert Cook said...

"It's funny, the Republicans own the Presidency, the House and control the Senate. Yet they still act like the minority party."

Most Republican, and most in the right overall, no matter whether they are in majority power, always act like peeved, self-pitying dorks angry that the pretty girls at the dance won't let them cut in.

And who can blame the pretty girls?

mockturtle said...

I know, Cookie. No one to the right of Stalin is 'left' to you.

mockturtle said...

the Kock Brothers! But they are basically on the same team.

Better yet, the Coen brothers! :-) That might be a rag worth reading.

Robert Cook said...

"I know, Cookie. No one to the right of Stalin is 'left' to you."

Heh. Obama was to the right of Nixon.

Birkel said...

What evil do you have planned tonight, Robert Cook?

Bob Loblaw said...

It's funny, the Republicans own the Presidency, the House and control the Senate. Yet they still act like the minority party. Except for Trump they are afraid to lead.

You don't succeed as a Congressman by doing things. You succeed by criticising other people who are doing things. That's true of both parties, too - look at the amount of time Harry Reid spent lambasting the Koch brothers instead of trying to put a budget together.

Most of the Republicans in Congress don't have much in the way of actual ideology (as opposed to stated), they don't owe Trump anything, and they spent the election making him their enemy. They'll wait until he falters, and then the knives will come out.

Rusty said...

How can a return to the rule of law be considered chaos?

damikesc said...

That was always true. The Obama coattails only exist when he is running. (And then they are considerable.)

Based on 2012, I'd dispute that they were considerable.

Obama is unusually good at politics but the Dems just need a warm body with a minimum of ethical lapses and they will defeat Trump in the next election.

Not at this rate. Most people don't want to support a political ideology that defends political violence.

Hint: Conservatives aren't saying it is OK to punch an opponent for their views.

The Senate Democrats are going full Wisconsin and not showing for the confirmation votes.

Might be time for quorum rule changes. Such as if the member is within 10 miles within 1 week of a vote and refuses to appear for votes, then quorum rules are suspended.

This is a stupid argument. Obama was Michael Jordan playing on the Washington Generals. It's not his fault the other guys couldn't play.

A "great" player who basically decimates his own side is not that great.

Corey Booker is no Obama. He is too Black for the Democrats to be comfortable with.

He's also EXCEPTIONALLY weird.

damikesc said...

I supported him on this blog and voted for him. The best thing you can say about Mitt is that he would have been a little better for America than Obama turned out to be.

Disagree. He'd have been infinitely better. He is, still, the best qualified candidate we've ever had. He just didn't have the fire to fight. A great candidate who just won't fight is not going to win. And it's sad. We missed out on somebody who could've improved things a ton.

JAORE said...

" He just didn't have the fire to fight. A great candidate who just won't fight is not going to win."

Bingo. And a large part of the appeal of Trump from the start. More than fighting the opposition, Trump did not cower and issue apologies at any and all examples of "bad" press.

I find Trump to be weird, somewhat unnerving, but a classic example of the "strong horse" in a field of geldings.

Henry said...

@Robert Cook -- You and I saw the exact same sentence. Second sentence in the article. The entire conceit is based on a false premise.

To be fair, VDH's vague definition "hard left" is echoed by the vague definition Democrats use of "hard right".

mockturtle said...

Corey Booker is no Obama. He is too Black for the Democrats to be comfortable with.

He's also EXCEPTIONALLY weird.


But he's better looking than Obama. :-) IMO. Not a reason to vote for him, of course. I hope the Dems do run someone like that. They'll have as much chance as a snowball in hell.

mockturtle said...

Trump vs. Romney: It all depends on whether we want a president who actually acts for us or one who just looks presidential.

Craig Howard said...

Bill Clinton never got Hillary elected to national office,

He got her elected to the Senate, close enough to start a dynasty.