Advertisements
Open post

Here’s Why Trump Granted That Interview to the Little Wise Guy

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Great drinking game for this week’s Democrat debates. – Every time one of the candidates promises a new giveaway program that would cost taxpayers more than $1 trillion, take a shot of tequila. You’ll be dead within an hour.

A friend tells me that death would not be the worst consequence of playing this game. The worst consequence is that you have to watch the Democrat debates in order to play it. Solid point.

Now, onto today’s topic, which is why in the hell did President Trump do an interview with that little Clinton toady George Stephanopoulos? That is the question many Trump supporters have been asking since last Thursday, when ABC released the bit of the interview in which the President basically said that he would listen to some guy from Norway who claimed to have information about his political opponent before deciding whether or not it was something that should be reported to the FBI.

That of course is what every other politician in America would do, and it is also the common sense thing to do. Which is why the fake news media has spent the last four days trying to convince everyone that it is tantamount to, like, treason or something. In the media’s eyes we simply cannot allow common sense to prevail in America – if that happens, no Democrat could ever be elected to public office again.

And we also must never allow an evil Republican to get away with doing exactly what a Democrat would do because, well, if that happens, no Democrat could ever be elected to public office again. See how that works?

But back to why in the hell the President agreed to do this wide-ranging interview. After all, he had to know that Stephanopoulos is just a Democrat activist wearing a fake reporter’s suit, would conduct the interview in classic gotcha fashion because Trump is a Republican – this never happens to Democrats – and would ultimately air a version of their discussions that was carefully edited to try to inflict maximum damage on him and his administration. This stuff is as predictable as Nancy Pelosi forgetting her way to the bathroom. It’s like clockwork.

Well, here’s a thought: Maybe he did this interview to get a couple of messages out to an audience other than the subset of Americans who make up the viewers of Fox News. Think about it.

As part of his exchange with the “little wise guy”, as the President at one point referred to the diminutive Clinton hack, he reminded everyone that the Pantsuit Princess and the DNC combined to pay millions of dollars to have the Steele Dossier compiled during the course of the 2016 campaign. Viewers of Fox News all know this to be the case, but it likely is the first time people who get their “news” from ABC ever heard of it.

So, think about what has taken place since last Thursday, as the entirety of our fake national media establishment have hysterically claimed that simply listening to information provided free of charge by some foreigner is some sort of treasonous act, a false claim that millions of thoughtless citizens have now been parroting to their friends for four solid days. How are these people going to react when Michael Horowitz and William Barr, as a result of their respective investigations, formally report that the Coughing Crook and her minions at the DNC in fact paid $11 million for a bunch of salacious claims made by foreign agents, mainly from Russia?

That’s why Andrew McCabe, of all people, was on CNN Thursday night defending the money-laundering effort that Clinton and the DNC used to hide what they were doing. The skunks and snakes know what’s coming and are trying to spin a positive narrative.

So, there’s that. But that bit of key information is not even the biggest revelation the President rolled out during his interactions with the Little Wise Guy. How about this exchange:

Little Wise Guy: “You clearly believe there was a group of people working against you. Do you think President Obama was behind it?”

Trump: “I would say that he certainly must have known about it because it went very high up in the chain. But you’re going to find that out. I’m not going to make that statement quite yet. But I would say that President Obama had to know about it.” [Emphasis added]

“But you’re going to find that out.” What do you suppose the President meant by that? Do you believe, as the fake media wants you to believe, that Mr. Trump is a dope who just randomly says stuff that has no meaning?

Or do you think the President of the United States has a pretty good idea about what is coming, and is setting the stage for the American public to be able to internalize the coming results of the Horowitz and Barr investigations? Understand that, as far back as November, 2016, Mr. Trump was fully briefed on the plot against him by then-NSA Director Mike Rogers. The day after that briefing, in which he was informed that his offices in Trump Tower were under surveillance, the then-President-elect moved his entire transition team operation to a golfing property he owns in New Jersey.

We should all understand that the media has done everything it possibly can to prevent the public from learning the actual facts of the Obama-era spying and entrapment operation conducted against the Trump team. It is likely that less than 20% of the American people have ever heard about the Clinton/DNC funding of the Steele Dossier, likely that far fewer than that understand how high up in the Obama Administration this operation went.

Assuming the Barr investigation being led by John Durham is real, then a lot of stage-setting must be done before any indictments and prosecutions of high Obama officials begin, since our fake news media has worked so hard to ensure the public is largely uninformed.

So, we should look at the President’s interview with the little Clinton toady as a first step down that difficult road. Expect more inexplicable interviews to be granted to folks like Lester Holt at NBC and Norah O’Donnell at CBS in the weeks to come.

Interesting times.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Advertisements
Open post

Why Joe Biden Won’t be the Nominee

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

People keep telling me that I’m really going out on a limb with my all-but-guarantee that Joe Biden will not be the Democrat nominee in 2020. The truth is that that is the safest prediction I’ve made about this race.

The history of presidential politics is littered with the rotting carcasses of early favorites in contested presidential nominating battles who ended up being left behind when the actual convention rolled around.

Remember 1972 Democrat nominee Edmund Muskie? Yeah, neither do I. Well, I sort of remember Edmund Muskie, who was the party establishment’s favorite as the campaign season began, but Democrat voter base, radicalized by the hippie movement moving into adulthood and the early reports of the Watergate scandal, were looking for a much more radical alternative that year. Ultimately, the party presented closet Marxist George McGovern to the country, and an electoral slaughter of epic proportions ensued, despite the media’s best efforts to destroy Richard Nixon.

Sound familiar?

What about 1976 Democrat nominee Morris Udall, the early polling leader and establishment favorite? Or nominee Birch Bayh, who won the Iowa Caucuses? Remember them? No? Well, it turned out that Democrat voters that year weren’t in the mood to nominate some old DC swamp creature, which you are going to soon discover is a very common theme in this essay. Instead, they wanted a fresh face, and ended up saddling the country with Jimmy Carter, who at the time was the freshest face we’d ever seen.

Yeah, that didn’t work out well, did it?

Remember when early polls told us that Ted Kennedy was going to beat Carter for the nomination in 1980 after Carter’s disastrous term in office? Remember when that didn’t happen, either?

Guess who the early polling leader for the nomination in the 1984 race was? Remember how Gary Hart won that year’s nomination? No? Neither does anyone else. That year, the now-ageing hippies passed the party’s baton to old swamp  creature Walter Mondale, and the result was the largest electoral landslide loss in American history.

Ok, what about 1988 Democrat nominee Mario Cuomo? Remember him? After a raft of polls in mid-1987 showed Cuomo would be a big leader in the nominating battle, party leaders tried to recruit him to get into the race. But Cuomo, knowing the scrutiny that would bring into his shady background, refused to take up the baton.

Well, what about 1988 nominee Gary Hart, who again led all the polls once Cuomo refused to run? No? Hart might actually have prevailed in the race that year had he not dared the media to “follow me around” after allegations arose that he was having an affair. For once, the media actually did its job where a Democrat was concerned, and photos of Hart cavorting on a boat with Donna Rice were soon made public. So, we ended up with Michael Dukakis and another electoral landslide instead.

Then there’s 1992 Democrat nominee Paul Tsongas, or 1992 Democrat nominee Jerry Brown, or 1992 Democrat nominee Bob Kerrey, all of whom were leaders in early polling in the race. But then this guy Bill Clinton played the saxophone on the Johnny Carson Show, and shallow Democrat voters had their man!

In 2000, it was Al Gore all the way as the Democrat voter longed to give the country a third Clinton term. That didn’t happen, either.

Then there’s 2004 Democrat nominee John Edwards. Yet another early polling leader flame-out due to Gary Hart-like circumstances. He was succeeded by 2004 Democrat nominee Howard Dean, who surged into a polling lead late in 2003. But he came up a crapper with a third-place finish in Iowa, and the nomination ended up going to the disastrous John Kerry.

Finally, I give you 2008 Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, the overwhelming leader in every early poll in the race, and the woman who eventually…flamed completely out after Barack Hussein Obama his own self caught fire.

Democrat voters are fickle, folks. In every cycle, the party’s leaders always try to push a favorite candidate, and that favored candidate is usually rejected. The lone exceptions to this dynamic in modern times have been Walter Mondale, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton, all loooooooooosers. In 2016, the party’s leaders went so far as to actually rig the primaries in Clinton’s favor, and Obama and his evil minions did everything they could to rig the general election in her favor, and she still lost.

The Fainting Felon’s attempt to saddle the nation with a third Obama term was a miserable failure, and now here is Joe Biden, trying to execute the exact same failed strategy four years later. But Biden’s trying to do it before a party voter base that has been radicalized to the point of insanity, and the primary voting is going to be dominated by the most radicalized among them.

Every nominating battle has its own unique set of dynamics, of course, and the party bosses have set the process up this time to encourage a hung convention at which they will ultimately get to choose the nominee. Maybe that will work out for them, but if it does, history tells us that they will choose a loser.

But back to the point about Joe Biden: History also tells us that the early leader in the polls almost never ends up winning the nomination. I’m not out on a limb at all on that one, and I think I’ll stick to it.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Andrew McCabe Just Endorsed Money Laundering

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

You read that right: The former Deputy Director of the FBI says blatant money laundering by a political campaign is just fine. –  You don’t have to believe me – here he is in his own words, as he attempts to rationalize to Fredo Cuomo why he’s slamming President Trump’s statement that he would listen to a foreign source who came to him with information about his opponent, while at the same time defending the fact that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid $11 million for the Steele Dossier during 2016:

“Not at all, Chris. There’s no equivalence between those two examples,” McCabe responded. “To openly invite foreign intelligence officers, representatives from a hostile foreign government to steal information, to acquire opposition research in anyway, in any illegal way that they might do that and to present it to you is one thing. For a campaign to hire a law firm, an American law firm who then turns around and hires an American research company that then contracts out with a foreign individual, that is not illegal,” McCabe emphasized.

Folks, let’s be real about what Clinton and the DNC did: They laundered money. Knowing that directly hiring a foreign agent – Steele – to coordinate with other foreign agents from England, Italy, Australia and yes, even Russia to compile dirt on their opposition would be a heinous violation of myriad U.S. laws, they attempted to hide that activity by funneling the money through not one, but two different cut-outs.  This is what the FBI in the days before McCabe/Comey/Obama would have called a classic case of money laundering, plain and simple.

But last night, the disgraced ex-FBI Deputy Director said that hey, it’s just peachy.

I have waited all day long for someone, anyone, in the American news media to wake up to what McCabe really said to Cuomo last night, without result.

So there, I’ve said it.

What a dumpster fire the FBI has become, thanks to skunks and snakes like McCabe and Comey. God help us.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Stacey Abrams is Not a Thing; Stop Trying to Make Her a Thing

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Seriously, Democrats, just stop it. Nobody outside of your little thought-free bubble wants any more of Georgia gubernatorial looooooser Stacey Abrams than we’ve already seen. Asking for more Stacey Abrams is like that great old SNL skit where Christopher Walken keeps asking for “more cowbell!” Note to Democrats: Ain’t nobody got a fever whose cure is more Stacey Abrams.

And please, somebody tell Samuel L. Jackson that for me, ok? Here was Mr. Jackson on Stephen Colbert’s show Monday night, expressing his disappointment with the current Democrat field of candidates, and longing for the Georgia loooooser to get into the race (at the 4:41 mark of this clip):

Just to remind everyone: Stacey Abrams is a rank mediocrity. She has never won an election above the level of state representative. She got her butt kicked in last year’s gubernatorial election despite massive amounts of out-of-state money coming into her campaign, despite Oprah Winfrey and Hillary Clinton and gobs of other party luminaries campaigning on her behalf, and despite a massive voter fraud effort in support of her cause.

Despite all of that, she managed to lose the race by 56,000 votes. Undeterred by reality, she has spent the 7 months since her defeat traveling around the country pretending she was somehow robbed, and getting fellow delusional liars like the Pantsuit Princess and Creepy Uncle Joe to support that false premise. The Democrat National Committee weighed in on her behalf by having her give the response to President Trump’s State of the Union Address, and she responded with a very pedestrian reciting of all the standard Democrat talking points like any good little goose-stepping soldier would.

Ok, she didn’t goose-step, but wouldn’t that be fun to watch? Is that mean? I don’t care.

The simple fact of the matter here is that Stacey Abrams is not a thing for 99% of ordinary Americans. No one out here in Flyover Country spends a moment of their day longing for the day when the Georgia looooser gets into the presidential race.

The ongoing effort by prominent Democrats to turn Abrams into a hot commodity reminds me of the similar effort during 2017-18 to do the same with Chelsea Clinton.

How did that effort work? Here we sit in the middle of 2019, and Chelsea Clinton is still not a thing, and never will be, and everyone appears to have given up on trying to make her a thing.

Just as we don’t need more cowbell, and we don’t need more Chelsea Clinton, we most certainly do not need more Stacey Abrams.

Stop trying to make her a thing.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

The Key to Predicting the Democrat Race: Learning the Real Lessons of History

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

It’s very predictable that Jeff Greenfield can’t predict anything accurately. – Dinosaur DC Swamp creature Jeff Greenfield had a typically vapid piece in Politico on Sunday that sums up the sorry  state of media punditry in the nation’s capital quite nicely. It’s a piece filled to the gills with the tiresome nostrums and shibboleths adhered to by the DC pundit class, and thus exactly what we would expect to see published in Politico.

Greenfield, who bills himself as “a five-time Emmy-winning network television analyst and author,” has been completely wrong about everything since the day in June, 2015 when Donald Trump and Melania rode down the escalator at Trump Tower to announce his candidacy. Frustrated by his own foolish consistency, Greenfield assumes that, because he is an awarded “expert,” everyone else must be wrong as well. Thus the title of his piece, “Why You’re Wrong About the Democratic Primary.”

The thesis of Greenfield’s piece is itself highly predictable, and not just because of its headline. It’s also utterly predictable that a guy who is always wrong – like Greenfield – would pen a piece claiming everyone else is just like he is. After all, didn’t every “expert” predict about 500 times between May, 2015 and May 2016 that Trump’s campaign was dead, and that some random event represented the “beginning of the end for Donald Trump” like Greenfield did?

Didn’t every “expert”, inside-the-beltway pundit predict that Hillary Clinton would best Trump by a landslide? Didn’t every “expert” in our fake national news media predict about 300 times between Robert Mueller’s appointment as Special Counsel in May, 2017 and the issuance of his report in March, 2019 that “Robert Mueller has got the goods on Trump?”

Well…yeah. Yeah, they all did predict all of those things. Greenfield even admits as much waaaaaayyyy down at the bottom of his piece where, after writing 800 words of drivel about how the “lessons of history” tell us that nothing about this current nomination battle is in any way predictable, he says:

In 2016, Donald Trump, a candidate with no political experience and no measurable support from his party’s establishment, never trailed in the polls and was never seriously threatened during his campaign for the nomination. Based on the lessons of history, Trump’s inevitable fall was confidently predicted by journalists and insiders, even as he racked up primary victories and delegates.

So, if Greenfield is talking exclusively about inside-the-beltway DC media “expert” pundits, then his piece would be accurate. But if – as the headline appears to imply – he’s also talking about seasoned observers who have never lived inside-the-beltway bubble and who understand how the 99% of the country outside of the nation’s capital works, then Greenfield is massively wrong.

The problem with DC pundits is not that they rely on the lessons of history, but that they don’t understand what those lessons of history happen to be. I was telling my clients in December of 2015 that Donald Trump was almost 100% certain to be the eventual GOP nominee due to one simple lesson of history about the GOP, which is that, since the advent of polling just after World War II, that party has always, without fail, ended up nominating the candidate who led in the polls in the December prior to the election. DC pundits were uniformly shocked as a class that that immutable lesson of history continued to hold true in 2016.

In May, 2016, I told a gathering of about 30 corporate CEOs and other senior executives that Donald Trump would probably win the general election due to another simple lesson of history, which is that every presidential election is determined by the overriding national public mood, i.e., is the public interested in change or is it wanting to preserve the status quo? The public in 2016, after 8 long years of oppressive, economy-dampening regulation by the Obama thugs, was definitely in a mood for change, even the radical change being offered by Donald Trump.

This was at a time when Greenfield and his fellow media “experts” were myopically predicting a Clinton landslide based on an array of polls they all knew were flawed at best and intentionally faked at worst.

But back to the Democrat nomination race. We can’t sit here today and confidently predict who the nominee will be – Greenfield is right about that. In fact, because of the proportional system of awarding delegates the Dems have adopted for the election cycle, we may not be able to do that until next year’s convention rolls around.

But there are all sorts of things that are very easy to accurately predict about this race at this point in time, most of them based on “lessons of history” that Greenfield and other media “experts” seem incapable of grasping.

Here’s a lesson of history: No candidate who lacks a compelling basis for entering the race in the first place is going to become the eventual nominee. See Gillibrand, Kirsten as a prime example. That desperate, humiliating video we saw of her pandering in an Iowa gay bar on Saturday was pretty much an inevitable outcome for a candidate who has literally no reason to be in this race to begin with. This same lesson applies to other mystery candidates like Bill DeBlasio, John Delaney and Steve Bullock (who is the Governor of Montana, for those 99% of you who have never heard of him). All these people and several others who have no compelling reason to run might as well go home now.

Here’s another lesson of history: Failure to strike while the political iron is hot can be fatal. See O’Rourke, Irish Bob as this year’s best example. The fake news media was in love with “Beto” and desperately wanted him to get into the race last December, January at the latest. I wrote way back in January that Irish Bob was missing his moment, but did he listen? Nooooooo. Irish Bob piddled around for another two months before finally coming out as a candidate, and by then his date to the media prom had been taken by Mayor Pete. Now, Texas Dems, seeing O’Rourke’s candidacy dead in the water, are desperate for him to come back to Texas and challenge John Cornyn for the U.S. senate seat.

How about this lesson of history: Age matters, and it matters a ton for some of these people. Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are simply too old to be president of the United States. Neither will be the party’s nominee. Mayor Pete is simply too young. He won’t be the nominee, either, although he will be able to compete in the primaries and carry enough delegates into next year’s convention to be a bit of a power broker if no clear nominee emerges from the primary elections.

One final lesson of history: The nominee will always be someone who is in step with the party’s voter base. We have to caveat this one this time due to the proportional awarding of delegates, which creates an unusually-high potential for a brokered convention where you might see a compromise candidate like the Pantsuit Princess or Michelle Obama or even Oprah Winfrey emerge. But the candidate who will emerge from the primary elections with the most accumulated delegates will be the person who can most authentically play the party’s identity politics game, enthusiastically support the party’s lurch to outright infanticide, and keep the party’s irrational social media mob ginned up. This very dynamic is why you are seeing Elizabeth Warren’s polling numbers firming up slowly as the race goes on.

In addition to being too old, Biden simply has no ability to satisfy this final lesson. He won’t be the nominee. If he is, then we would be looking at a Trump landslide of 1984 proportions, as a discouraged and dissatisfied Democrat voter base stays home in droves on Election Day.

Jeff Greenfield and the other DC media “experts” think I’m wrong about all of this. What do you think?

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Tin Ear Democrats Just Keep Embarrassing Themselves

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Oh, my, what an embarrassment Saturday was for our Democrat friends. – Ok, they’re not really our “friends” – they’re actually enemies of the people who want to put anyone who disagrees with them on any issue from killing babies to throwing away the nation’s treasure on eliminating cow farts and building rail lines that can never be built in prison. Thus, watching them humiliate themselves in public has become a major new national pastime, a source of great joy to millions of normal Americans.

Saturday was just filled with banner episodes of this ongoing inadvertent comedy series, like this one from inexplicable presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand:

Seriously, any advisor who told her that was a good look that needed to be spread on social media should be summarily fired for cause. It doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, since Gillibrand continues to poll at or near 0 in every poll and has no shot at winning anything, but dang, girl, go buy some dignity. I hear WalMart has it on sale this weekend.

But poor Kirsten certainly had plenty of company on Saturday. Here’s the Pantsuit Princess once again blaming Russia for her humiliating 2016 loss in the presidential race. If you can stand it, watch as she engages in classic Clintonian projection by saying that “obstruction of justice did occur.”:

Why yes, “obstruction of justice did indeed occur:

  • 33,000 deleted emails that were under federal subpoena
  • subpoenaed hard drives bleach-bitted
  • subpoenaed cell phones smashed with hammers
  • outright perjury committed in FBI interviews
  • subpoenaed documents falsified and withhel…

Wait, she was talking about someone else? My goodness. Of course she was.

Or how about that always-reliable-for-a-good-laugh San Fran Nan? In the wake of President Trump’s smashing victory in obtaining major concessions from Mexico in his ongoing one-man battle to stem the flow of illegal immigrants, terrorists and drugs across our Southern border, the doddering, stammering Speaker of the House had this to say:

“President Trump undermined America’s preeminent leadership role in the world by recklessly threatening to impose tariffs on our close friend and neighbor to the south. Threats and temper tantrums are no way to negotiate foreign policy.”

Um, well, sorry Nervous Nancy, the evidence currently at hand says that threats and temper tantrums work just fine with our “neighbor to the south.” Do try to keep up, would you?

Then there was Pete Buttigieg saying this to an audience in Iowa:

 “At a time like today when you can still be legally fired in so many parts of this country because of who you are or who you love, we have work to do.”

For the record, there is no place in America where anyone – gay, straight, black, brown, yellow, white, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Native American or anyone else – can LEGALLY be fired because of who you are or who you love. Hard stop, as AOC loves to say.

That is a damnable lie, and if we had anything resembling an honest news media in our country, he would be forced to provide specific examples of where he believes numerous federal laws banning any such practice do not apply in the United States of America.

But we don’t have an honest news media in our country today, so nonsense like this just gets tossed out into the public consciousness with no effort to correct the record.

Buttigieg uses that line as a prop for his next line, which is “America was never that great.” Note to Mayor Pete: If you have to make stuff up in order to claim America was never great, America must be pretty damn great.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

The State of the Democrat Race: Biden Seals His Fate

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Hey, remember when Joe Biden’s rationale for running was that he would be the moderate who would appeal to independent voters? – Yeah, that’s all gone now.  I’ve told you all along that Joe Biden will not – cannot – be the 2020 nominee for the Democrat Party, and this was the week in which he sealed his own fate.

Honestly, it was inevitable. This man is a dinosaur trying to compete in a modern age with which he is totally unfamiliar. He’s like Phil Hartman’s genius “Un-Frozen Caveman Lawyer” SNL character, an ancient throwback to a time long past who is always confused and frightened by our modern ways and customs. More specifically, Biden is confused and frightened by the ways and customs of his Party’s modern-day voter base, pretty much all of which lies to the left of Fidel Castro and, where abortion is concerned, Margaret Sanger.

Not surprisingly at all, Biden got all caught up in abortion politics this week, and the outcome destroyed the entire rationale for his candidacy to begin with. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, wanted all abortions to be legal as a means of controlling America’s black population. Today’s Democrat Party voter base fully endorses Sanger’s beliefs – abortions kill a far higher percentage of African American babies than those of any other segment of U.S. society – but takes it a step farther, to allowing babies born alive after attempted abortions to be left on a table to die.

This is what Democrat politicians refer to as a woman’s right to “healthcare.”  You betcha.

Biden, a life-long practicing Catholic, has always supported the Hyde Amendment, a policy which prevents Americans of actual religious faith from having to pay for abortions through their tax dollars. That is, until this week, when the subject was raised. When Biden reasserted his Hyde support, the SJWs in the social media universe went berserk, and almost frightened the eldery man out of what little hair he has remaining.

Less than 24 hours later, Biden gave up, fully endorsing his party’s baby-killing at all costs ways.

Poof! No more reason for Creepy Uncle Joe to be in the race. If Biden’s going to be just another Commie, baby-killing hack, why, the rest of the field is filled to the gills with younger, more attractive, more female and more minority versions of that.

So, again, as I’ve said all along, Biden will not be the nominee. His polling lead will have evaporated by October – really, by September at this rate – and he will leave the race shortly after he fails to win Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina. Which means March. He is this cycle’s Jeb!, but he just hasn’t realized it yet.

Elsewhere in the race, things remained pretty static. Bernie the Commie remains ensconced in second place in every poll, though his numbers keep slowly declining as the numbers for Fauxcahontas keep creeping up. Every Democrat nominating race is always won by the best liar, and little Lieawatha was just born to lie. So she is now firmly in third place with a slow-moving bullet.

Kamala Harris is going nowhere fast, and seems to have no idea of how to change that dynamic. She is just a very poor candidate, which is not surprising given the unseemly manner in which she advanced herself to the Senate in the first place. Mayor Pete has also stagnated after having received tens of millions in free media from our fake news outlets, and may have reached the peak of his popularity already. Irish Bob O’Rourke, fresh off of his utterly-failed effort to reboot his campaign, is simply dead in the water.

In fact, the entire field has stagnated at this point, as the fake news media flails about trying to decide which of them will be promoted next, and I suspect that will remain the state of play until the debates begin in a few weeks.

Here is a prediction I will make when that season comes around: The only actually interesting candidate in the race, Tulsi Gabbard, will really stand out on the debate stage. She will then likely become the media’s next “rising star” obsession.

What do I mean by “interesting candidate”? I mean that Gabbard, like Donald Trump in 2016, will stand out on a debate stage because she will be the only person on the stage saying what she truly believes, rather than just reciting a bunch of talking points scripted for her by other people. That was the real reason why Trump ended up becoming the GOP nominee, because most ordinary Americans are sick to death of watching politicians recite talking points. Like Trump, Gabbard tends to directly answer the questions posed to her, and does it in plain language most people can understand.

So, expect her to really stand out among the clutter of political hackery that will surround her on that debate stage. As a woman and minority, Gabbard also has some of the identity politics attributes valued by shallow Democrat voters. She is not, however, a particularly good liar, so while she will likely get a boost out of the debates, she cannot become the eventual nominee.

I had previously thought that Andrew Yang might do similarly well in the debates, but he has completely succumbed to the bad advice from professional communications “experts.” So he sounds no different than Kirsten Gillibrand or Kamala Harris these days. Not a recipe for winning if you are, like Yang, an insurgent candidate looking to stand out in a crowd.

The only other candidate I’d expect to perhaps get a boost out of the early debates would be Texas’s Julian Castro, the only actual Hispanic candidate in the race. Castro is a very smart guy and a very polished speaker. But again, not an especially convincing liar, which will really harm him with Democrat voters.

So right now we are just kind of stuck in a holding pattern until the debates get started. That’s when things will really start to get interesting.

Here are my initial odds on the race, which I plan to update weekly:

Anyone Else – Even

Hillary Clinton – 5 to 1

Joe Biden – 100 to 1

Bernie the Commie – 20 to 1

Elizabeth Warren – 6 to 1

Kamala Harris – 12 to 1

Mayor Pete – 50 to 1

Irish Bob – 1,000 to 1

Spartacus – 20 to 1

Tulsi Gabbard – 50 to 1

Julian Castro – 50 to 1

Kirsten Gillibrand – 6 million to 1

Amy Klobuchar – 1,000 to 1

Bill DeBlasio – Infinity to 1

The rest of the declared field – 100 to 1

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

New Democrat Strategy: Hidin’ Biden

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Hey, why does that strategy sound so familiar?– The Washington Post carried a piece on Sunday titled “Biden’s Campaign is one of Limited Exposure.” Gosh, that sure sounds like something we’ve heard from a leading Democrat candidate before, doesn’t it?

Yeah, sure does. To see why, all we must do is hark back to 2015, when the Pantsuit Princess’s advisors decided that the best thing for her to do was to lay low and stay out of the public eye as much as possible. Why would that be the case, you might wonder? Well, it was because the Fainting Felon’s team recognized that they had on their hands an extraordinarily unlikable candidate, a candidate whose polling numbers fell in direct correlation with the amount of public exposure she received. Plus, they had a candidate with a variety of physical infirmities – like her chronic hacking cough and the fact that she was incapable of climbing a few steps up to a stage without assistance – that had to be carefully hidden from the public eye.

Thus, the Coughing Crook’s campaign was one of strategic hiding, a campaign designed to attract as little direct attention onto the candidate herself as possible. While Donald Trump and 15 other GOP contenders were duking it out on national TV every day, the Grasping Grifter was issuing carefully-scripted tweets, speaking maybe twice a week at the standard half-filled high school gymnasium, and otherwise avoiding any live contact with anyone who might ask an inconvenient question of her. That strategy continued right on through Election Day 2016, and we all saw how that turned out for the Democrats.

Fast forward four years, and we now see Creepy Uncle Joe employing the exact same strategy. While 24 other Democrat candidates are jockeying for position in the daily pecking order, desperately seeking all the free media attention they can get, the guy who has had more facial work than Cher and whose really bad hair plug job all fell out late in the 20th century has suddenly gone quiet following his much-heralded two week campaign kickoff a month ago.

It isn’t hard to see why. As we discussed last week, Biden very predictably jumped out to a big lead in the various polls during the 10 days following his formal campaign announcement, and then saw that lead quickly start to disintegrate in direct correlation with the amount of actual media attention he received.

See, Democrat voters love the idea of Joe Biden, but it was starting to become too obvious that they aren’t all that fond of waking up to the reality of Joe Biden. The idea of Biden is the thought that here’s the Washington, DC veteran of more than 40 years, an energetic guy who has seen and done it all, a guy who spent 8 years as VP to Barack Hussein Obama his own self, a guy who would ride in on his unicorn and vanquish the Evil Orange Man, thus taking our nation back to the glory days of 1% economic growth and the EPA regulating our swimming pools.

But the reality of Joe Biden is something else entirely. The reality of Biden is a guy who can’t keep his hands off of women and children at public events, a guy who will be approaching octogenarian status by the time January 20, 2021 rolls around, a worn out old DC hack who can’t attract a crowd of more than a few hundred people to an event in Downtown Philly, a guy with a real record as long as his creepy fingers that is chock-full of statements and positions that offend pretty much every one of the aggrieved special interests that constitute the Democrat Party’s fragile voter coalition, and a guy who can’t even speak in complete, coherent sentences when not reading from a script.

This is a man who has to be carefully controlled and handled, obviously.

Biden’s massive team of handlers understand that the key to Joe Biden becoming president is to ensure that voters go to the polls to elect the idea of Joe Biden, because there is no way on God’s green earth – or I guess they would say Gaia’s green earth – that the American people are ever going to elect the reality of Joe Biden.

These advisors must look at the long series of debates and a long and arduous nominating run laid out before them as a field of land mines, a withering and daunting process that could see their candidate’s clownish mouth produce utter disaster with every successive step. So, yes, they are keeping their accident-waiting-to-happen candidate out of the public eye as much as possible right now. Best to go into that debate season next month with a lead in the polls and see how long they can hang onto it.

Thus, the Democrats go from Hiding Hillary to Hidin’ Biden.

Maybe someday the Party that saddled us with Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama his own self will nominate a candidate it can actually be proud of. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful thing?

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

About That Biden “Surge” in the Polls…It Isn’t Happening

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

When a “surge” is actually a durge. – As is always the case with the DC punditry these days, they’re wrong.

Over the past week, poll-watching pundits like Karl Rove and pretty much all the others have been marveling about Joe Biden’s “pop” or “surge” or whatever word you want to put to it – in the polls. Talking about him in a way that is clearly designed to make you think he is a virtual shoe-in to be the Democrat nominee in 2020, and a real, strong challenger to the re-election of President Donald Trump. The only problem with all of this is that it just isn’t happening. Take a look at this:

 

See that green line? That’s Joe Biden. It’s his average in the RealClearPolitics average of polls. See which way it has been heading over the past 10 days? Clue: it isn’t up. It isn’t a “pop.” It’s not a “surge.”

What that line actually represents is the inevitable: Biden’s precipitous plunge back earthwards as all the people in the Democrat voter base get a good gander at him and listen to the idiocy that pops out of his mouth and remember exactly who Joe Biden really is.

Who Joe Biden is, is a clown. A human gaffe machine. A guy who has no respect for the personal space of women and children. A guy who can’t keep his creepy hands to himself at public events. A guy who has been mucking around in the DC Swamp for 46 years; a guy who has a record as long as your arm and none of it is good.

That’s who Joe Biden is.

And so, the numbers plunge, and they will keep plunging until that gap between his green line and one of the other candidates’ line is gone. I figure that will happen along about October 1 or so, maybe sooner depending on how Biden performs in the early debates.

How fast is Biden falling? Good question. See that poll by The Hill, where Biden’s sitting at 33? Two weeks ago, right after his formal campaign kickoff, he was sitting at 46. That’s the most severe drop in any of them thus far, mainly because that 46 number is the highest Biden has achieved in any of the myriad polls.

In any event, you are best advised not to believe the media buzz that Biden’s the most likely Democrat nominee, for a variety of reasons.

His inherent goofiness as a human being is just one of them. His advanced age, which shows more and more every day, is another. But the main reason is the fact that the Democrats are awarding delegates in their primaries on a modified-proportional basis in all states this time, rather than a winner-take-all basis.

Any candidate winning at least 15% of the vote in a state primary will receive a share of the delegates. If only one candidate reaches that level, then it becomes winner-take-all. If no candidates receive 15% – which is entirely possible in some states with such a large field – then “the minimum to receive delegates will be 50% of the vote received by the front-runner.  For example, if candidate A wins with 10% of the vote, delegates will be allocated proportionately to anyone that receives 5% or more.”

With 25 candidates in the race and counting, this system is setting up a free-for-all in which it is very likely that the Democrats will show up to their national convention next summer without a clear nominee, and maybe without any candidate even coming close to that threshold.

What does that mean? A brokered convention, at which you could even end up with a nominee who did not run in the primaries.

Hey, which prominent, extremely ambitious Democrats are not announced candidates, but are rumored to be working towards that exact possibility as we speak?

What do you think Hillary Clinton is doing with her spare time?

I’m just sayin’.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4 5 6 18 19 20
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: