If Klobuchar runs fifth in Iowa and third, fourth or fifth in New Hampshire, in what state does she win her first primary? And as her fundraising has never matched that of the front-runners, where does she get the money to match Sanders or Bloomberg on Super Tuesday, now just three weeks off?...It's bad for the Democrats to lose their female candidates, but that does seem to be where things are going. They've already lost all their black candidates (at least the ones strong enough to have gotten on the debate stage (there's still Deval Patrick)). So it will, in all likelihood, be a white male against Trump. Is that better for him? I could argue both ways, so I give the question to you for now.
As for Warren, in her battle with Sanders to emerge as the champion of the progressive wing of the party, her third-place finish in Iowa, and her expected third-place finish in New Hampshire, at best, would seem to settle that issue for this election.... I[n] what state does Elizabeth Warren beat her progressive rival?...
________________
* WND? Is that a disreputable website? I see it also has: "James Woods sprung from 'Twitter jail,' gets instantly political/Sarcastically asks: 'How's Jeffrey Epstein doing?'"
After being held captive in "Twitter jail" for nearly a year, essentially locked out of his own social-media account and precluded from posting any messages, actor James Woods triumphantly returned to the site Thursday night....His first tweet:
I’ve tried so hard this past year to live without the wealth of knowledge available on Twitter, but this kind of blazing insight can be found nowhere else, so... I’m back! #AOCStillAMoron pic.twitter.com/kB0oDXmArB— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) February 7, 2020
If you were following Woods before his banishment, check to see if you still are. I was and am.
ADDED: From Wikipedia: "WorldNetDaily (WND) is an American news and opinion website and online news aggregator which has been described as 'fringe' and far right as well as politically conservative. The website is known for promoting falsehoods and conspiracy theories."
Posts
111 comments:
I'm just going to put this here.
"This expression originated in the 1800s. It refers to the ability of a person to lift himself or herself up by pulling on the laces of his or her boots. Of course, this is impossible, so in order to do it would take very hard work.
The idiom refers to the fact that sometimes it takes hard work to overcome something or become successful, and sometimes the only person who can do that hard work is yourself. At some point, no amount of help or assistance can help someone. You simply need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps."
https://writingexplained.org/idiom-dictionary/pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps
No. Even if they don't say so there are voters who won't vote for a woman. I was hoping for another sour old white woman. We still might get one...
People have lost to white males in the past.
AOC literally sounds like a junior high student in that clip. Jeezus.
Falsehoods and conspiracy theories? My kinda' site. Thanks Wiki! Clicking over to WND now.
In order to win the nomination, one candidate will name Amy as his VP.
Are all women stupid like AOC? No, but unfortunately, there are way more than you think.
Serious Question
Why/When/HOW did AOC decide that her signature Bright Red Lipstick was yesterday's news?
Now she comes across as that stupid junior high girl that wants to be class president
It's also at taki's mag
Lots of idioms don’t make literal sense. As a Hispanic, AOC should know that as that is true with scores of Spanish idioms.
As opposed to the CNN falsehoods and conspiracy theories.
Wikipedia is not a reliable website for anything political.
Just sayin.
I think the reported overwhelming desire among the electorate to elect a woman POTUS is a fabrication.
AOC is the Emily Litella of the House. It's a metaphor sweetheart, not literal or a joke.
'Twitter jail' is rich in imagery for a comedy skit or a Super Bowl commercial...
WND has some legitimate material. They also traffic in conspiracy theories. Read at your own risk.
Women are hard to run against because women vote and you've got to avoid offending women. Your most insightful lines are off limits.
On the other hand the other half of the voters know already that women are unreliable.
Trump won’t hold back against a male, white or otherwise. Mark me down for ‘better’.
No,no. This is the origin of the phrase, especially as further invented by other authors and published around the world.
The Tall Tales of Baron Munchausen | 4 Corners of the World ...
Aug 22, 2017 - The name Munchausen originally belonged to a real-life German army captain, Karl Friedrich Hieronymus, Baron von Münchhausen (1720-97). In retirement, this gentleman entertained his friends with preposterous stories, completely deadpan, about his time in the Russian army fighting the Turks.
AOC boots her computer every day. It comes from bootloader, which comes form bootstrap loader. It bootstraps itself in.
A very primitive bit of code is loaded by hardware, which code sets up some utilities that do more elaborate loading, and eventually after lots of stuff is set up by increasingly elaborate loaded code, and the system is running.
Originally a card reader was what was loaded, the load button causing it to be set into memory and jumped to. In a second you notice that tapes and disks are loading.
As for lady presidential candidates, wake me up when anyone remotely resembling Mrs. Thatcher or Benazir Bhutto appears on the scene.
Boots were originally introduced as a safety measure. It was found that too many stupid people were strangling themselves whilst trying to tie their shoelaces.....AOC is earnest and appealing but she cannot be trusted to tie her shoes without adult supervision.
Is AOC going to explain the difficulties of the equilateral lift of Rising Tides?
I think i'd enjoy hearing her take on that
There's still Yang! Weird how he does not count.
A rising pie lifts all boats.
Did you know, that the metaphor :
"couldn't hit the side of a barn he was standing in"
Started out, as a JOKE! It's a Physical Impossibility! The Whole Thing, is a Joke!
Tim Maguire said, "WND has some legitimate material. They also traffic in conspiracy theories. Read at your own risk."
And he's completely correct. In this way, it's similar to Vox, The Atlantic, and any number of left publications. The difference is that those ones cited on the left are used as source material and not referred to as far-left conspiracy theory propagators.
As for AOC. As for AOC. To say she's vacant is to demean empty buildings. That she's among the biggest fund raisers in the Dem party, indicates that there are people who listen to her and think to themselves, "Yeah...I like what she's saying. She seems to make sense. I would love her to lead the country in her direction."
What do you think of our school system now?
And the good captain's tale was about the time he got stuck in quicksand in a swamp and saved himself by pulling himself out by his own bootstraps.
"tim maguire said...
WND has some legitimate material. They also traffic in conspiracy theories. Read at your own risk"
Second that. And it is quite a risk because the stories are the kind that catch people's attention and spread, yet a lot are single-sourced, hearsay or even urban legends from the past or else a strange tabloid-type headline on a regular story.
@rhhardin: at my first professional job out of college i was a computer systems operator. We had one system that was usually started by tape which had a bootstrap at the beginning. Occasionally that wouldn't work so i would enter the boot code through paddle switches on the front of the machine. A sort of secret handshake.
It should not have to be explained that boots once had straps on each side, to enable the wearer to pull them on. You put on boots to go to work and go after the American Dream. Rather than sit on your ass and demand support from the government. It had nothing to do with laces.
THEOLDMAN
My father told me this phrase is also where the "boot" in computer language came from, to "boot up".
I have been waiting, Literally FOR YEARS; to find an excuse to post this link!
This Is IT!
Nation's Girlfriends Unveil New Economic Plan: 'Let's Move In Together'
No. It makes it harder for him. There's still a ton of false chivalry in our culture, chivalry that women have decided they still need but won't acknowledge...they like having their cake and esting it to.
From Warren, to Hillary, to Amber Heard, the girls can't compete in a system that doesn't turn a blind eye to their innate solipsism. This era is ending. The sugar and spice era that is, but we still don't live in a world where a man can look a powerul woman directly in the eye, call her a cunt, have it be true, and not be subject to audible gasps.
I hope to live long enough to see that day.
Imagine how stupid voters are in AOC's district. They just eat this shit up. I probably shouldn't have said that, it might be taken the wrong way.
Blogger tim maguire said...
“WND has some legitimate material. They also traffic in conspiracy theories. Read at your own risk.”
The same goes for the NYT.
Very happy JW is back.
The last three years have REALLY demonstrated, very publicly, the quality difference between Democratic reps/senators and Republican reps/senators
James Taranto called it World Nut Daily. I trust Taranto.
Use a pulley. Duh.
The doofy chick dug a deeper hole for herself when she explained "I see that the right is worked up that we pointed out the myth of bootstrapping when 60% of the wealth in this country is *inherited.*"
It's actually about 10 to 12%.
Oh yeah, I loves your fake glasses, Doofy Chick!
I think it would be easier in the sense that a woman candidate would automatically draw attention and desire to vote for the first woman. I think it buoyed Hillary despite her being a very poor campaigner. The thing is the woman needs to be offering good ideas and show strength but not complaining about the man being mean to her. Warren and Klobuchar both seem weak on these things and thus losing in their own primary.
Sanders could be tough because the Socialist in America will have what they always wanted, but I think they are too few to carry the day. Buttigieg will be the first openly homosexual to run, which probably won't hurt him with independents, but I think will hurt with his base.
I hadn't watched the AOC clip until now because I figured the people dunking on her had to be taking her out of context or that it was obviously a joke. Something like what the media does to Trump. After watching the clip, I'm not sure there's any otherexplanation than she's an idiot.
Actually, a plausible lady presidential candidate has appeared.
Unfortunately, it was Hillary! Rodham Clinton.
Who cares whether WND is "reputable"? It's just a piece of political punditry, take it for what it's worth.
I guess the question for me is who does the DNC throw their weight behind in their quest to stop The Bern? It could still be Warren. Bloomberg has a lot of money, but everything about him is repellant to the Dem primary electorate. Can they push him across the finish line? I have my doubts.
Trump is running against all the candidates, Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, CNN, CBS, Joe Scarborough, Rachel Maddow, Gavin Newsome, the Teacher’s Union, China, Hunter Biden, the EU, AOC, The Squad, Socialism, the National Review, and, as of yesterday, Mitt Romney.
It’s almost a fair fight.
AOC should know that
She has the blessing of endless ignorance coupled with the curse of boundless certainty.
--Kai Akker
The progressives now have the population thinking and talking about candidates in terms of their sex, skin color, and sexual persuasion first--policies second.
Change the language, change the thought--slowly, over time.
Stop buying in.
The question for the Democrats is this: if Americans like their President will they be allowed to keep their President?
And, why should we believe them this time?
"WND has some legitimate material. They also traffic in conspiracy theories. Read at your own risk."
Just like everything else.
Have you watched CNN lately? MSNBC? Fox News? NPR? Read WaPoop? NYT? The news pages of WSJ?
Trump ran against a woman and won so how could he be better off this time? What if the Dems created a conflicted activist base by cheating a commie out of the nomination on behalf of a gay guy? It's a plan worthy of the creators of Iowa Caucus - A Study in Centralized Grass Roots Democracy.
rehajm said...No. Even if they don't say so there are voters who won't vote for a woman.
It seems inarguable to me that Hillary got far more votes because she was a woman than she lost because she was a woman. Her campaign obviously expected it to play out that way--there's a reason her slogan was "I'm with her."
Leave Sandy alone!
She is doing great work for our country. She is motivating a group of voters who really don't care in general to get to the polls this November. Even my brain-dead Demmie friends are starting to see that change is needed.
Trump and the GOP are looking extremely good, thanks to AOC and her pals.
Free the Glutens!*
*classic reference.
OT: January jobs up 225,000. Unexpectedly. Unemployment measures ticked up a bit but there's ample evidence the economy is pulling in discouraged workers instead of people losing jobs. Participation rate is up. Wage growth is up.
So much for the softening economy Democrats were praying for...
"* WND? Is that a disreputable website?"
Buchanan is an opinion columnist, not a news reporter. Who publishes his column means little. He was also a CNN regular (Crossfire) and PBS regular (McLaughlin Group)and MSNBC regular contributor, and those gigs would make me more suspect of him than a column in WND would. Of course, he was also a Republican presidential candidate and worked in three Republican administrations;so he may have some insight into presidential politics.
But, to answer the question posed by Althouse, no, WND is mostly a fringe publication that is definitely right wing, but I would say WND is no further to the right than the NYT opinion pages are to the left, and certainly no more disreputable or more filled with conspiracy theories. I think reading Buchanan in WND is similar to reading, say, Jennifer Rubin in the NYT, except Buchanan is much more politically experienced, hence more insightful, but why would anyone read either of them? They're both partisan hacks.
I think it buoyed Hillary despite her being a very poor campaigner.
being identified as a woman was The Only Thing hillary had going for her
Hillary without being a woman, would be like Mayor Pete without being a gay
It seems inarguable to me that Hillary got far more votes because she was a woman than she lost because she was a woman.
Is there evidence or is that just a feeling?
If women are lukewarm about the Democratic Candidate, will they go out and vote on a rainy day? Is their hatred for Trump really that deep and visceral? That they'll do anything to vote him out?
I don't know.
Obviously the multi-trillion dollar Democrat pipe dreams are a policy joke. Green New Deal.... Medicare for all.... So of course all there is to discuss is the skin color and gender of potential Dem nominee.
The Democrat Convention in Milwaukee this summer is going to be a shit show.
AOC Skipped class the day they taught metaphors.
I know Klobuchar is famous for eating a salad with a comb, but isn't she a senator as well? If so, why is she only famous for eating a salad with a comb?
Trump won't have to run against a woman. Warren and boring Amy have zero chance this year. Hillary was unique in that her lack of feminine attributes and past corruption made it possible for Trump to hammer her hard with no blow-back. However, if the D's had nominated a "nice" women like Amy Klochblob - he'd have to hold his fire. Mostly, cluck about how she was a nice little person who just isn't up to being POTUS.
Wikipedia is a left-wing site known for its factual errors, conspiracy theories, and left-wing obsessions.
You never hear it described like that because....once again....its left-wing.
"It's bad for the Democrats to lose their female candidates"
Why?
rehajm said...
It seems inarguable to me that Hillary got far more votes because she was a woman than she lost because she was a woman.
Is there evidence or is that just a feeling?
A feeling? No. Conjecture, maybe. But not a feeling. I cited one piece of evidence in my comment--the part you did not include in your paste.
The DNC-media has tried to regain their reputation for objectivity by "fact checking" which is just a bogus way to attack Conservatives and push liberalism. Other leftists have started to use the word, to shut down Right-wing sites, censor, and gate-keep. Y'see they ain't against that Conservative website because its Right-wing, no, no. They want it shutdown because its spreads "factual untruths" and "Conspiracy theories". The Left NEVER gives up and never stops censoring.
In my experience, "he pulled himself up by his own bootstraps" was praise for how hard it was for someone who started with nothing to get somewhere in life. It was never dismissive or a recommended strategy.
It was never a joke. It was praise.
In Sandy's case, she was fortunate to start with a lot.
I believe that the phrase, "Stick your head where the sun doesn't shine" started as a joke, but then was embraced as a life practice by the Squad.
Since Buttigig is the wife in his marriage, and will be our combo First Lady-President in history. Somehow that ties into the topic, but I'm not sure how.
Let’s run Inga for president!
So, in other words, WND is just like CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC??? The Russian Collusion Hoax was one of the biggest conspiracy theories of our time, yet they are still spewing the lies.
rcocean said...
Trump won't have to run against a woman. Warren and boring Amy have zero chance this year.
With Biden collapsing and the Democrats determined to stop Bernie, that leaves Buttigeig, Warren, and Bloomberg.
Buttigeig--the very young gay mayor of a medium sized city
Warren--the Senator and law professor with a long public record
Bloomberg--the really really rich uninspiring guy who has an issue (guns)
If the Democrats stop Sanders, then I think Warren is well placed to step in and lose to Trump.
I cited one piece of evidence in my comment--the part you did not include in your paste.
Ah. I'll repost: Her campaign obviously expected it to play out that way--there's a reason her slogan was "I'm with her."
The quality of the D Senators has taken a massive drop in the last 10 years, which accounts for the low quality of their POTUS candidates.
Harris - Not ready for prime time
Booker - Total Weirdo
Warren - A liar
Bernie - A socialist
And these are the Giants of the Senate. Your typical D Senator is now someone like Hirano - a complete boob, or a hack like Durbin the Turban.
I've changed my mind on Bernie. I now think he can do it. If 40% would vote for him in 2016, why couldn't 51% vote for him in 2020? The real question is who is the 2nd choice of the Warren/Buttigig voters. Once their candidate drops out will they go Biden or Bernie?
@jaydub:
I think reading Buchanan in WND is similar to reading, say, Jennifer Rubin in the NYT, except Buchanan is much more politically experienced, hence more insightful, but why would anyone read either of them? They're both partisan hacks.
I think it is wildly off the mark to refer to Buchanan as a "partisan hack." He has spent the last several decades criticizing Republican Party policies. He ran as a third-party candidate in 2000 to oppose such policies, and he co-founded The American Conservative in 2002 to oppose George W. Bush from a conservative perspective.
like when aaron klein, revealed that Obama's campaign had disabled 'the donation verification software' and had call centers in the west bank and gaza, who published the narrative about fast and furious, and the irs to this day, same for Benghazi,
"Biden collapsing"
He sucks, but this is a tad premature. There's very little minority vote in either Iowa or NH. Didn't Clinton lose both? South Carolina will buoy him most likely, but maybe not enough to put him back on top.
This is in no way an endorsement. He's a horrible candidate.
"It's bad for the Democrats to lose their female candidates, but that does seem to be where things are going. They've already lost all their black candidates..."
This statement is precisely what's wrong with the Democrat party and liberals in general. Whether the Dem candidate is a commie, a grifter or a comb eater is not important for the country, the economy, or the welfare of the people. Only whether the party's candidate sits to pee. Trump is truly blessed with his enemies.
These 3 guys? I expect Trump's play for a bigger share of the Black vote will work well against any one of them. I don't see him losing to any of them. The real question is, which opponent will minimize the damage for Democrats, allowing them to hold on to the House? My gut tells me Buttigieg is that guy, but might be Lil Mike.
I want Bernie.
Not because I think Trump will beat him easily, but because It's time for America to make a choice.
I can think of no better warrior than Trump to represent my camp. The camp of individualists, and freedom vs the camp of communists that call themselves socialists and progressives.
Rcocean at 8:05--It's diversity casting. The Demmies have what they want, a diverse cast that takes orders. Have you considered that giant of the Senate, Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)?
I appealed my suspension from Twitter. Over a month latter, no action. So I withdrew it.
Twitter is run by leftwing tools.
The frustration I have is I know some really smart people on the conservative side here in my little hole of the forest. They all should run for office. They would be incredible. They won't. Why? because our government is run my morons.
Because our government rail-roads conservatives while the offical party of Corruption - the democrats - run the show. The Shcitt show. AOC is a byproduct of this. She is a window into the decline.
Agree 100% with Browndog.
America needs a start choice in 2020. The Left must be totally crushed and defeated. Maybe then the Dems will get the message. But I doubt it.
@browndog:
The camp of individualists, and freedom vs the camp of communists that call themselves socialists and progressives.
You honestly believe that’s the choice we’re facing in 2020? Wow.
I feel like someone should mention Heinlein's "By His Bootstraps"..
"Do you think Trump will be better off not having to run against a woman this time?"
Trump didn't just run against "a woman", he ran against Hillary. It doesn't get any better than that.
Hillary? Are you talking about the smartest woman in the world?
Woods is back. I may have to rejoin twitter.
What Good have Democratic Women in Politics done for America lately anyway?
Nothin. Not a Damn Thing.
This current crop has been busy shredding hard-won principles of justice long established by good and reasonable men.
Example: The No-Due-Process #MeToo Hysteria (there's a classically-named female problematic trait) revealed how quickly well-educated American women effortlessly lower themselves to a mob mentality.
Good Men and Good Women must reject this current crop, and it looks like they will,
So sure! Run a woman, hah. They are all losers.
Women vote.
Democrat women vote for democrats.
Therefore, a woman will be the party's nominee.
Never mind that white men win in IA and NH.
And then South Carolina, and ....
I read WND years ago. They do traffic in conspiracy theories and in stories of questionable truthfulness, which is why I stopped reading them. They also have legitimate news and opinion. The site was a reaction to the bias of the mainstream media and it seemed to me that their policy was give a platform to quashed conservative voices, regardless of who they are. Some of them were cranks.
Given that the mainstream media has spent the last four years regularly exalting conspiracy theories while ignoring major stories that do not fit the narrative, I'm not really seeing why we should trust WND and more or less than, say, CNN. Then again I don't trust CNN at all, so take that for what it's worth.
jaydub said...
I know Klobuchar is famous for eating a salad with a comb, but isn't she a senator as well? If so, why is she only famous for eating a salad with a comb?
Because she's not worth two sh*ts as a senator?
This election is gonna be like an intelligence test with a low bar for passing, and I think we are going to be surprised at how many people don't pass. A choice between what is clearly working better than anything else in the world, and always has, or a system that has been failing people for a century in a very public and fatal way around the world. For anybody to still be buying the bullshit that it just wasn't done by the right people all these years, well, you failed the test.
I wouldn’t trust World Net Daily as far as I could throw the editor, but you don’t have to make up stuff about AOC. It’s like she has been a parody performance artist all along, and she’s ratcheting it up until people finally get it.
It will be refreshing to not have identity politics as central to the election, but without it a lot of people won't know who to vote for. Maybe the Dem candidate can cross-dress or wear blackface. It's not like those things are alien to them.
Klobachr didn’t have breasts, she would be in the mail room at United Health Care in Minneapolis.
I grimace and groan everytime I read that about Buttigieg. Some idiot says "Ha! Ha! He says he has a husband! That must make him the wife!" And scads of other idiots go around saying that Buttigieg is the wife or the catcher or the bottom in the relationship, as if that were a fact or something that he admitted. C'mon, if there's a dominant partner in the relationship it's not the junior high teacher. But do we really even have to think about this?
I have a pair of cowboy boots with straps that are used to pull them onto my feet.
When walking in a wet, muddy pasture, if I step into deep sticky mud, I literally face pulling my own foot out of the boot while attempting to disengage from the mud.
Therefore, a useful thing to do when stuck in mud while wearing boots is to reach down, grasp the bootstraps, and pull both your own foot AND THE BOOT out of the mud by the bootstraps.
Then one does the same thing with the other stuck boot, and repeats this until one has removed oneself from being stuck in the mud.
THIS is what pulling oneself up by the bootstraps references, and anyone who has (1) worn boots and (2) gotten stuck in mud, knows this to be both practicable and realistic.
"Biden collapsing"
He's definitely lost his mojo.
Quick, get him some little girls to sniff!
We just ended a multitrimester witch hunt and warlock trial lead by NYT, WaPo, CNN et al, the well-established homes of journolists. Wikipedia is a leader for promotion of the sociopolitical prophecy of [catastrophic] [anthropogenic] global cooling... warming... change and other scientifically debatable beliefs. The traditional standard: multiple, independent sources (i.e. signal diversity) is still the most reliable means to reduce uncertainty and filter bias.
thinking and talking about candidates in terms of their sex, skin color, and sexual persuasion first--policies second
Typically diversity or color judgments, political congruence ("="), judgment, too many labels, and exclusion, under the State-established Pro-Choice religion, not limited to sex, color, and gender (i.e. physical and mental sex-correlated attributes), or rather transgender... is trendy. We have made great [unqualified] progress: one step forward, two steps backward. #HateLovesAbortion
Change the language, change the thought--slowly, over time.
Liberalism is divergent. Libertarianism is emergent. Progressivism is monotonic. Conservativism is moderating. #PrinciplesMatter
"Biden collapsing"
His last refuge as President is unlikely to be realized, a progressive dream, and he will not only be censured, but will be the face of progressive corruption marked by Water Closet.
“In other news, cats don’t actually have people’s tongues, nor do pots have the ability to call kettles black.” --Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro.
For anybody to still be buying the bullshit that it just wasn't done by the right people all these years, well, you failed the test.
Trouble is they still get to vote.
I think, everything else being equal, it is better for Trump to run against another male, especially given the present Democratic field. Had the Democratic primaries had the good sense to nominate Hickenlooper, for example, Trump would have had a more difficult time this November, but the present field of male candidates isn't going to be tougher than Shelob was.
I was happy to see Harris out, and am happy to see Klobuchar out. I think Warren is still a threat, but a declining one at this point- she needs to win on Tuesday to have a shot at the nomination. When I listed the electability of the candidates earlier this week, I had Warren at #2 to Sanders, and mainly because she was female.
To answer the original question, probably yeah, running against another man would be easier for Trump. There would less pressure on Democrats to "elect the first woman president" which automatically focuses the Democrats on charging sexism and producing all the crazy women who claim to have been assaulted sexually by Trump forty years ago, etc., and accusations of feeling intimidation by the way Trump moves around on a debate stage.
Yancey Ward said...
Had the Democratic primaries had the good sense to nominate Hickenlooper, for example, Trump would have had a more difficult time this November
I don't know. Before you can think about swing voters, you need to get your party's base to turn out. Old, white, and bland doesn't do that. Bloomberg isn't so bland, but he could have the same problem. Not much there to move minorities and activists. You can't have ho hum Tim Kaine or Amy Klobuchar and expect voters to be energized.
Trump will be better off after his coronation, as will we all, with his princes and Barrons established in the line of succession.
LONG LIVE THE KING!
—Had the Democratic primaries had the good sense to nominate Hickenlooper, for example, Trump would have had a more difficult time this November—
Insty has a drop on Hickenlooper. He was a naughty fiscal boy as governor.
No matter who the Democrats nominate, I suspect a lot of their voters are going to wait until 2024.
Tank said...
"Wikipedia is not a reliable website for anything political."
Wikipedia politicizes everything. I remember seeing an article on washing machines and how they were elitist or something. And every profile of anyone to the right of Stalin has to say how that person is a troglodyte or something....
...or something. :)
Politically conservative as in Constitutional? Do they reject the left's Twilight Amendment and Pro-Choice religion including diversity, political congruence, sex chauvinism, redistributive change, conflation of logical domains, etc.? Do they defer to mortal gods and other ancient traditions of secular faiths, their philosophies, and ideologies?
Post a Comment