ChrisWeigant.com

Four Progressive Candidates For Governor

[ Posted Wednesday, August 29th, 2018 – 17:46 PDT ]

Primary season is winding down, which means the slates have mostly been set for the midterm general election races across the country. Last night, two Progressives won Democratic nominations for governor, in Florida and Arizona. This means at least four such Progressives will be running in November, when you add in the races in Maryland and Georgia. Progressives haven't exactly swept the board in the primaries this year (many other Progressive candidates in various races have lost to Establishment Democrats), but this is still significant progress. But their chances of winning in November vary, so anyone looking for sweeping conclusions about the superiority (or inferiority) of a Progressive platform is almost sure to be disappointed. All of the candidates are people of color as well, which could also lead to erroneous conclusions by pundits looking to nationalize the story in some way. Different states and different candidates mean there likely won't be one single and obvious conclusion to draw, once the dust settles. You really have to take the races individually in order to accurately assess them on their own. So that's what we're going to do, in alphabetical order.

 

Arizona

David Garcia won the Democratic gubernatorial nomination last night, and if elected in November he would become the state's first Latino governor in decades. In a state with a huge number of Latino voters, that is an appealing concept.

However, Garcia will be running against the incumbent Republican governor, Doug Ducey, and beating an incumbent is always an uphill climb. Garcia, a professor, has made education the centerpiece of his campaign, which is a smart move if you remember the teachers' revolt that happened in Arizona not too long ago. Ducey, incredibly, is trying to take credit for raising teachers' pay, after he and the state government had to be forced to do so by the teachers themselves.

Garcia is also a military veteran, which means a lot in Arizona. But the Republican Governors' Association is already flooding the airwaves with attack ads against him, meaning the Republicans see this as a key race this year. Ducey is about to make an appointment to the Senate to replace John McCain, and he's juggling different Republican factions in who he is considering. Whoever he chooses may disappoint one faction or another.

Arizona is still a pretty red state, although Democrats hope to turn it blue (as they've largely accomplished in next-door New Mexico). Most of the attention from the national media is going to be on the Senate race for Jeff Flake's seat, but the governor's race is going to be equally important.

Can a Latino Progressive candidate manage to win in Arizona? The odds are against it, considering Garcia is taking on an incumbent governor, but if a blue wave develops nationwide, Garcia just might ride it to victory. The race may hinge on the question of education, though, which is very specific to the state's circumstances. While being pro-education is usually a rather nebulous concept even for Democratic politicians, Garcia is specifically pushing an income tax for the wealthy to provide more money for Arizona's school system. After the popularity of the teachers' revolt earlier, this might prove to be the case of a politician picking precisely the right issue to run on. But if this proves to be the case, it should not be seen as a national indicator of any trend, because not every state has seen their teachers rise up. It would be a satisfying victory for Progressives, but it might not indicate any larger conclusion other than Garcia chose his key issue wisely when planning his campaign.

 

Florida

The Florida race is already in the national spotlight, after Republican candidate Ron DeSantis used the word "monkey" in reference to Andrew Gillum, his African-American opponent (for good measure, he also called him "articulate"). DeSantis was in the midst of denouncing Gillum as a socialist (even though Gillum doesn't use the term) and said the state didn't want to "monkey this up" (referring to the state's current economic success). So all the dog whistles have already been loudly blown, to kick off this race.

Florida might prove to be the one state where a Progressive candidacy could be said to be a real test case of the strength of the political message. It is a purple state, swinging back and forth in its presidential vote, but it has been electing Republicans to lead the state government for a while now. A Democratic win here would be a big deal, in other words, and it also falls squarely within the realm of possibility. Gillum actively touts the idea that boring centrist Democratic candidates are not the way for the party to go, and he can point to the failure of many such candidacies in Florida in the recent past as proof. But that doesn't necessarily mean his style of politics will win the day. Gillum is about as progressive as can be imagined, and has already picked up the endorsement of Bernie Sanders. He is for the entire Progressive agenda, but will that be a good match for the Florida electorate? That's what remains to be seen.

Gillum carries some political baggage, because the F.B.I. is now investigating possible corruption in the Tallahassee city government during Gillum's time as mayor. This doesn't mean Gillum is corrupt or even knew about any possible corruption, but the optics certainly aren't great. If the F.B.I. follows its own procedures then no announcements about the investigation will be forthcoming during the rest of the campaign (that's a big "if," though -- just ask Hillary Clinton). While this might delay any bad news, it also will delay any good news as well. If Gillum is eventually exonerated, the voters likely won't find that out until after the election.

Florida will be an interesting governor's race to watch. It is an incredibly expensive state to run for office in, due to the multiple large media markets within the state. Democrats were hopeful, after Hurricane Maria, that a large influx of Puerto Ricans into the state (who had fled the island's destruction) would equate to a big boost in registered Democrats. Since Puerto Ricans are already American citizens, there would be no delay in this boost appearing. But so far, the data does not show all that big a boost in the voter registration rolls, so this may turn out to be illusory. It won't matter how many Puerto Ricans have moved into Florida if they don't bother to register and vote, in other words.

Republicans can be said to have the edge in this race, based on past performance. Nevertheless, an underdog victory is indeed possible. This may be the best test case of the Progressive agenda this year, in fact. The theory that nominating milquetoast Democrats always fails so full-throated Progressives should be given a chance to change that (by inspiring lots of non-voters to turn out at the polls in excitement) is going to be on full display here. Establishment Democrats counter that extreme candidates are not the solution in a very close purple state, and that appealing to moderate Republican voters is the way to go instead. One Democratic faction or the other will be saying: "I told you so!" in November, that much seems certain.

 

Georgia

Georgia is the state where the political strategy of exciting a whole bunch of new voters might actually work. Stacey Abrams has made it the centerpiece of her campaign, and it might lead her to victory in November. It already led her to victory in the primary, when she defeated a much more centrist candidate.

Stacey Abrams would make history if she wins the governor's race in Georgia because she would become the first African-American woman to be governor of any U.S. state, ever. That is an exciting prospect for many Georgia voters. Georgia, much like Texas, is a state Democrats long to turn from red to blue, but it is also a state where this dream usually falls short. If you'll recall, Jon Ossoff lost a special House election here last year, despite spending more money than any House candidate in history. However, Ossoff was decidedly not a Progressive. So he's not the best example to use when trying to figure out the chances of a Progressive victory. He's a good example of how centrists can lose, though.

Abrams has devoted much of her campaign to a massive get-out-the-vote drive. Her stated goal was to register over one million new African-American voters in Georgia, which is possible to even attempt because of the continuing influx of new Georgians to Atlanta and its suburbs. In the past, new Georgians have failed to register to vote in any appreciable numbers, meaning there were a whole lot of possible voters out there who just needed a real reason to get politically involved. Abrams saw this and decided to act upon it, and has so far succeeded. If she can successfully turn them out to the polls in November, her election will be studied by many other Democrats as proof that inspiring new voters can indeed win close elections. This success -- if it happens -- may not be applicable in many other states, though, since the Georgia demographic shift isn't happening in too many other places right now.

Even if Abrams wins, Georgia might be seen as a standalone race. But even if it can't be replicated elsewhere, it will still become the prime example of how motivating people that don't usually vote can reap big rewards. Progressives may overstate the national impact of such a victory, but it will still be an impressive win even if it can't be copied elsewhere. To start a campaign with the goal of signing up a million new voters and then managing to turn them out on Election Day with a solid Progressive message and a history-making candidate would send a very loud signal to the Democratic Party indeed.

 

Maryland

Maryland is going to be a longshot. Ben Jealous, the former head of the N.A.A.C.P., won the nomination for governor earlier this year. You would think that a Progressive running in a very blue state would have an easy path to victory, but that's not really the case here, for a couple of reasons.

First and foremost is the fact that the moderate Republican governor of Maryland is running for re-election. Rather than trying to flip an open seat, Jealous will have to unseat incumbent Larry Hogan, who is actually wildly popular in Maryland, posting job approval ratings of 70 percent or better. That's a tough pickup for any Democrat to attempt.

The second big reason it will be hard for Jealous to win is the underlying reason why Democrats are so fervently challenging governorships across the country. This election cycle is critical, because everyone elected governor in November will still be in office in 2021, when the House of Representatives goes through their once-in-a-decade redistricting. In most states, the legislature and the governor are in charge of drawing the new lines. This represents a golden opportunity to undo the blatant gerrymandering Republicans managed back in 2011, which has given them a clear edge in the House ever since. Governors' races are important this time around, in other words, if you want to fight gerrymandering.

The problem for Jealous is that this argument simply does not work in Maryland, because Maryland is actually the poster child of Democratic gerrymandering. So "fighting gerrymandering" isn't a slogan Jealous can really use. Fighting gerrymandering in Maryland would be to undo the Democratic-friendly map, and who better to do that than a Republican governor? The argument gets turned on its head here, obviously.

Jealous should be a clear frontrunner, since Maryland Democrats outnumber Maryland Republicans by a factor of 2-to-1. However, with a well-liked Republican moderate as governor, this probably isn't going to matter. Beating any incumbent with a 70-plus-percent approval rating is almost impossible, no matter what the demographics of the electorate happen to be. So while Maryland might on first glance seem like it should be the easiest state for a Progressive to win, overcoming the impressive popularity of the sitting governor is likely to be a hill too steep for any Democrat to climb.

 

Conclusion

In all four cases, there are local issues and local political situations that will affect the outcome of the governors' races. Of course, if one party sweeps the board of all four, the temptation will be to claim a big ideological victory (no matter which party wins). But four races isn't all that many, in the grand scheme of things. A statistician would say that the universe of data from four races is just too small to draw any overarching conclusions, especially on what "caused" the results. Progressives didn't sweep the Democratic primaries, so what we are left with is a handful of individual races across the country, for Congress and for state government offices. Even if Progressives won all the races they've been nominated in, if there is a larger blue wave happening everywhere, it would be hard to conclusively state that Progressives have the better platform to run on.

Still, a small amount of data is better than no data at all. Progressive primary victories have guaranteed that we will have at least some campaigns to analyze after the voting is done. Lessons will be drawn from these races, whether negative or positive in nature. Progressives will be able to look back and see what worked, what didn't, and (most importantly) where things worked and didn't. Choosing a candidate that accurately reads the pulse of his or her own electorate has always been the most important factor in winning elections, but what that pulse says in Tallahassee might be different than what it says in Annapolis. But in at least four states, we'll have the opportunity to see authentic Progressive campaigns for the governor's office. Win or lose, these races will be fascinating to watch.

 

[Technical Note: As always, we struggle with the question of capitalizing political ideologies and factions. For the most part, our rule is that capitalization is merited for a clearly-defined faction who uses the term to describe themselves ("Tea Partier"), but that general ideologies should not be capitalized ("communism" and "capitalism"). When it comes to Progressive versus progressive, we usually tend towards not capitalizing the term, since it still remains somewhat nebulous rather than a solid faction or voting bloc in Congress. But in today's article, it must clearly be capitalized as a faction taking on the Democratic establishment. We feel that Progressive candidates are challenging Establishment Democrats, in other words, much as Tea Party candidates challenged Establishment Republicans a while back. The factional lines have become clear in many of the midterm races, and we wanted to reflect this reality editorially.]

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

55 Comments on “Four Progressive Candidates For Governor”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Paula (or Kick?),

    Sorry to break in here with a totally unrelated question but, someone here in Weigantia told me about a book on living or caring for someone with dementia when I mentioned my mom is dealing with it - I think it was Paula or it may have been Kick - and I wrote the title down somewhere but can't find it …

    … hoping someone will know what I'm talking about!

  2. [2] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM

    It was Paula... that time we were all reminiscing about Terry Pratchett.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2018/02/07/leader-time/#comment-115440

    My sincerest best wishes to you and your mother. :)

  3. [3] 
    Kick wrote:

    Wow... four progressive candidates for governorships!? What are the odds?

    I wouldn't count out either Georgia or Florida, although obviously they're longshots. Go bold or go home. :)

  4. [4] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [1&2] My mother was diagnosed with dementia 15 years ago, it started with memory loss and general confabulation...as time went by, it became obvious that she needed long term care at the institutional level. The sad reality is, it only worsens to the point where no amount of home care is enough.

    My sympathy.

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Florida race is already in the national spotlight, after Republican candidate Ron DeSantis used the word "monkey" in reference to Andrew Gillum, his African-American opponent

    No he didn't, but why let FACTS enter into the equation... :^/

    Gillum carries some political baggage, because the F.B.I. is now investigating possible corruption in the Tallahassee city government during Gillum's time as mayor. This doesn't mean Gillum is corrupt or even knew about any possible corruption, but the optics certainly aren't great.

    So, you would agree with the statement that President Trump is NOT corrupt or even knew about any possible corruption, right??

    You would agree with that statement??

    epublicans can be said to have the edge in this race, based on past performance. Nevertheless, an underdog victory is indeed possible.

    Doubtful.

    A 40% tax increase to corporations will sink the FL Socialist...

    I know my state and I know that's going to kill Gollum's campaign.. He'll have to back-pedal on that claim if he wants to make his win even "possible"..

    Stacey Abrams would make history if she wins the governor's race in Georgia because she would become the first African-American woman to be governor of any U.S. state, ever.

    ....In recorded history.... :D

    Apologies... Couldn't resist..

    On a more serious note.. I am always amazed at people who claim that race doesn't matter to anything, yet are always touting accomplishments based on race...

    Morgan Freeman is right. The best way to move past racism is to quit throwing race in everyone's face at every opportunity...

    Reminds me of a passage in the novelization of STAR TREK IV THE VOYAGE HOME.. Kirk, McCoy and Gillian Taylor (a native of 20th century Earth) were trying to rescue Chekov from a 20th century hospital. They came up with a plan to have one act as a patient to get past the police guard. Kirk told Taylor to get up on a gurney. She replied, "Why do I have to be the patient?? Because I am a woman!??!"

    Kirk replied incredulously, "What does being a woman have to do with anything!"

    Taylor thought to herself that THAT told her how much she liked Kirk's future...

    I always think about that whenever someone touts a black person's achievement or a woman's achievement or a gay person's achievement, etc etc etc..

    "What does being black/woman/etc etc have to do with anything??

    Wouldn't ya'all want to live in a society where someone says, "Wow!! That's the first time a black woman has been elected governor!!" and everyone else says, "Yea??? So????"

    I sure would... But every time someone observes an achievement based on race or gender or whatever, they push us BACK from that goal of saying, "Yea?? So??"...

    Just my 2 cents..

    That is an exciting prospect for many Georgia voters.

    A woman President was an "exciting prospect" for many American voters..

    It didn't carry the day...

    When you really get down to it, voters won't vote for a candidate because of their plumbing...

    And do you REALLY want them too???

    Abrams has devoted much of her campaign to a massive get-out-the-vote drive. Her stated goal was to register over one million new African-American voters in Georgia,

    So, right off the bat, her campaign is racist..

    Reminds me of The Black Panther.. :^/

    "Let's all go help the black people of the world!! Frak the white people, they are scumbags!!"

    Once again, I point out the total inconsistency of wanting a color-blind world, yet ALWAYS making race the center of everything done... :^/

    The problem for Jealous is that this argument simply does not work in Maryland, because Maryland is actually the poster child of Democratic gerrymandering.

    HA!!! The shoe is on the other hand now, eh!! :D

    That's what I like about you, CW... More often than not, you don't hesitate to call a spade a spade irregardless of Party...

    :D

    My conclusion is that progressives/socialists are simply too far Left to go mainstream.. This is still a capitalist center-right country and socialist candidates simply will not get elected in large enough numbers to be anything but a novelty..

    They are like a touchscreen on a laptop or a curved TV.. Yea, they are kewl at first, but they get tedious fast and serve no real useful purpose..

    In short, once the shine wears off, they are dunsels...

    "Good talk"
    -Dr Rodney McKay, STARGATE ATLANTIS, McKay & Mrs Miller

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    As to progressives/socialists in general??

    According to the DNC, socialists are the "Future Of The Democrat Party"....

    As a result, LOSING is also the "Future Of The Democrat Party"... :D

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump,

    How Donald Trump dismantled the New Class
    The President has created a Republican Workers Party

    Americans are the most generous and admirable of people, and among the worst governed in the First World. Can this be fixed? I don’t know. How did this come about? That is a question I think I can answer.

    I arrived in America in 1989, an immigrant from Canada.
    https://spectator.us/2018/08/how-donald-trump-dismantled-the-new-class/

    Making America GREAT Again

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    With regards to the upcoming midterms..

    The hidden Trump voters that may save him and the GOP in November

    Could blue-collar workers blunt a blue wave? A new poll suggests they just might.

    Bill Clinton was able to bring those voters back into the Democratic fold by embracing centrist policies. Sixteen years later, Barack Obama embodied a historic candidacy, but he further alienated traditional blue-collar voters who were turned off by his radicalism.

    As the Democratic party increasingly catered to the coastal elites and moved further to the left, those blue-collar voters became ever more alienated. They waited for someone — anyone — to address their economic, national security and values-based anxieties. To respect them. To “get” them.

    In 2016, that person arrived in the unlikely form of a New York real estate mogul who was far more comfortable with the hardhats on his construction sites than he was with the bankers and foremen. The “blue-collar billionaire” spoke like a guy from Queens because he was, in fact, a guy from Queens. That raw authenticity was valued by blue-collar folks, who considered him to be “one of them.”

    They, in turn, rewarded him on election day. White working-class voters comprised one-third of the 2016 electorate; Trump won them by about 39 percentage points, far outpacing Mitt Romney's 2012 margin. They made up the basis for his wins in the critical swing states, particularly in the industrial rust belt, from Pennsylvania to Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.
    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/404122-the-hidden-trump-voters-that-may-save-him-and-the-gop-in-november

    "We're not going to be making the same mistakes!!"
    "No, no.. You are making all new mistakes"

    -Jurassic Park II

    Sadly, for the Democrat Party, they ARE making all the same mistakes..

    As in 2016, Democrats are attacking, demonizing and ignoring blue-collar voters in favor of identity politics... Democrats don't realize that they MUST have those voters to win.. Sure, maybe in 40-60 years, minorities will be all that the Democrat Party needs to win elections..

    But then is not now... Democrats MUST have blue-collar Trump voters to win..

    Add to that, the FACT that Democrats are losing black American support by the MILLIONS and even their identity politics might not save them..

    "Having forsworn the game, President Ryan was now doomed to play it"
    -Tom Clancy, EXECUTIVE ORDERS

    Black American support for President Trump and the GOP has almost TRIPLED...

    It's reported that if Democrats lose just 5% more of black American support, they simply CANNOT win any elections..

    Democrats are making ALL the same mistakes they made in 2016..

    1. Ignoring, attacking and demonizing voting blocks that they MUST have to win..

    2. Ignoring policy and issues in favor of demonizing President Trump and his supporters..

    Come Nov, when the "Blue Wave" is actually a Red Stream...???

    Once again, just as in 2016, ya'all will look back and say, "Yep.. Michale was factually accurate. AGAIN!!!?? How could we have been so stoopid!!?? AGAIN!!???"

    Don't worry, though.. I'll be here to answer that question for ya'all.. :D

    "But what if yer wrong??"
    "If I'm wrong, nothing happens! We go to jail! Peacefully... Quietly... We'll enjoy it.."

    -Ghostbusters

    :D

    As an aside to CW... That was only 3 paragraphs out of 16... I hope that's acceptable..

  9. [9] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    "This represents a golden opportunity to undo the blatant gerrymandering the Republicans managed back in 2011."

    That's Dem/Lib talk for 'This represents a golden opportunity to replace blatant Republican gerrymandering with blatant Democrat gerrymandering', right???

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    As to Cohen and his lawyers lies??

    Davis’ denial came as a surprise, since various reports pegged him as the source. Finally, last night, Davis admitted being the source of the false story on the Trump Tower briefing and lying about it when subsequently challenged; he told BuzzFeed that “I made a mistake. I did not mean to be cute.” Well, it’s a tad beyond cute.

    As counsel for Cohen, Davis could be accused of spreading not just a false story but a false account of both his and his client’s conduct — and that could put him and his law license in jeopardy. D.C. and New York ethical rules state that “In the course of representing a client, a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a third person.” Under Rule 8.4, both jurisdictions state that a lawyer shall not “engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”

    Making things worse is that Davis’ claim about the Trump Tower meeting suggested possible criminal conduct by President Trump, his son Don Jr., and others. Worse yet, the story planted by Davis, if true, would have implicated his client, Cohen, in false statements made to Congress, since Cohen previously denied such knowledge. In other words, the story was not just false but potentially put his client in jeopardy.

    For donors on Cohen’s GoFundMe site, the admissions constitute a type of bait-and-switch. After fueling excitement about Cohen’s impact as a witness against Trump (and driving hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations), Davis has destroyed the credibility of the man he claimed would “reset his life” and try to “tell the truth.” 4/15
    http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/404073-lanny-davis-is-more-proof-2018-is-year-of-lawyers-living-dangerously

    Once again, I am shocked that no one wants to address this..

    Just kidding.. I am not shocked.. It's par for the course..

    Everyone around here loves their new Anti-Trump shiny... Until it's discovered it's nothing but painted bullshit... Then they can't ignore it fast enough..

    Just like Argento and her new child rape charges... It's all part and parcel to the same cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias....

    But hay.. We have the Weigantia we have, not the Wegantia we want to have.. :D

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's Dem/Lib talk for 'This represents a golden opportunity to replace blatant Republican gerrymandering with blatant Democrat gerrymandering', right???

    "That about sums it up for me!!??"
    -Elizabeth Shue, HEART AND SOULS

    :D

    But you raise a good point.. As I have often said, despite vocal opposition from the WPG...

    Democrats and Republicans are simply two sides to the same corrupt, greedy and egotistical coin..

    There really isn't much difference between them...

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, a lesson in Trump..

    Why Trump’s Approval Numbers Won’t Budge
    Despite a horrible week he's still polling relatively high. That's because this fight is bigger than just him.

    Before Trump’s 2016 emergence onto the political scene, many liberals believed the American future belonged to what political analyst Ron Brownstein called the “coalition of the ascendant”—including racial minorities, immigrants, Millennials, and highly educated whites residing primarily along the nation’s two coasts. They were convinced this ascendant force would eventually overwhelm the declining white majority and usher in a new era of globalism, open borders, identity politics, free trade, cultural individualism, foreign policy interventionism, and gun control.

    Trump interrupted the coalition of the ascendant on its way to U.S. political hegemony. In the process, he touched off an epic struggle over the definition of America.

    For those committed to the new world envisioned by the coalition of the ascendant, it is easy to see Trump, with all of his crudeness and vulgarity, as evil. After all, he’s personally distasteful and he wants to destroy the America of their dreams. But for Trump supporters, he represents their last hope for preserving the old America. These people view the stakes as so high that the president’s personal indecency and civic brutishness simply don’t register as problems. They may wish for a more wholesome leader, but no such person has emerged to take up their cause. 3/16
    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-trumps-approval-numbers-wont-budge/

    This is what ya'all don't get about President Trump.

    For all his faults, he *IS* an effective leader. He gives patriotic Americans the America they want... They need...

    His boorish and crass behavior?? That's a small price to pay for millions and millions of jobs, black American unemployment the LOWEST it's ever been in (add biased qualifier/spin here) history, consumer confidence highest it's been in 18 years and economic growth surpassing 4%...

    Just imagine what he could accomplish if he didn't have the Leftist MSM and the entirety of the Democrat Party trying to nullify a free, fair and legal election.. SOLELY on the basis of sore luserism...

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick,

    Contented Dementia. That's it - thanks very much!

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    The impeachment delusion: Democrats dreaming about impeachment would have no clue what hit them
    http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-impeachment-delusion-20180828-story.html

    In addition to the shooting civil war scenario, here's another scenario that the Democrat Party won't like...

    Once again, Democrats need to be careful what they wish for...

  15. [15] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    But for Trump supporters, he represents their last hope for preserving the old America.

    What "Old America", precisely, is Trump bringing back? No one can quite describe that to me. I suspect that they think that there was a time before Democrats.

    Trump does have a lot of ties to the Nixon era - his relationships with Roger Stone and Roy Cohn being just the two most obvious. He also has the authoritarian instincts of Nixon, and the greasy palms of Agnew.

    I think the whole "restoring America" thing is just a lot of bunkum. It's the happy bullshit the party leaders tell the faithful while they write up donor-friendly tax bills. Has legislation to 'restore America' been written and passed without my noticing? All I see coming out of Congress are the same old policies we've seen from every Republican majority of the last 50 years.

    The writer seems to know what the Trump voter opposes, however:

    a new era of globalism, open borders, identity politics, free trade, cultural individualism, foreign policy interventionism, and gun control.

    "cultural individualism"? Could one out of ten Trump voters come close to defining that? I can't, and it's supposed to be my agenda.

    And I notice that 'free trade', the centerpiece of Republican economic policy since Milton Freedman stalked the corridors of the Fed, has now been moved squarely into the 'liberal policy' folder. Just as it was in 'old America'.

    These people view the stakes as so high that the president’s personal indecency and civic brutishness simply don’t register as problems. They may wish for a more wholesome leader, but no such person has emerged to take up their cause.

    Oh sure. There were 17 contenders for the job at one point. What set Trump apart? Could it be that the 'personal indecency and civic brutishness' were the feature, not the bug? Compare Trump to Ted Cruz, and it's virtually the only difference politically between them.

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    The only way I see the end of Trump is if there’s overwhelming evidence he rigged the 2016 election. In which case impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy. His presidency should be annulled. 1/28
    https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-if-trump-guilty-his-presidency-must-be-annulled-opinion-1092345

    I completely agree with this author... If there are facts that PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that President Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election, his entire presidency should be wiped from the annals of history...

    CONVERSELY.....

    Conversely, if there is NO FACTS that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that President Trump rigged the election, then he should be left alone, free to govern as the legally, freely and fairly elected President Of The United States... Free from any bullshit witch hunt
    claims that he forgot to dot an 'i' or cross a 't' a decade ago...

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, we have ya'all's hysteria...

    Privately, Intel Officials Back Shutting Out Brennan, Clapper

    President Trump has been criticized for politicizing the intelligence community by threatening to strip the security clearances of former top officials including John Brennan and James Clapper. But numerous past and present senior intelligence officials say that the Obama administration started the politicization -- and that revoking the clearances of those who abuse the privilege for partisan purposes may help right the ship.

    “As is often the case with the Trump administration, the rollout of the policy is bad, but the idea driving the policy is sound,” said one senior intelligence official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke to RealClearInvestigations only on condition of anonymity. “Under some Obama-era intelligence chiefs, intelligence was used as a political weapon. We need to root that out, not reward it.” 2/31
    https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/08/01/intel_officials_back_revoking_clearances_for_brennan_clapper.html

    And then we have the FACTS and REALITY.....

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    What "Old America", precisely, is Trump bringing back? No one can quite describe that to me. I suspect that they think that there was a time before Democrats.

    Oh people can describe it to you... But you just don't like what you hear, so you put yer fingers in your ears and scream "Nyaaaa Nyaaaaa Nyaaaaa I can't hear you"

    I think the whole "restoring America" thing is just a lot of bunkum.

    Of course you do.. You represent the AMERICA WAS NEVER THAT GREAT Party...

    "cultural individualism"? Could one out of ten Trump voters come close to defining that? I can't, and it's supposed to be my agenda.

    Once again, you KNOW the definition.. You just don't like what it says about your Party and you...

    Oh sure. There were 17 contenders for the job at one point. What set Trump apart? Could it be that the 'personal indecency and civic brutishness' were the feature, not the bug?

    We went with civility with Odumbo... Look what it got us..

    NOWHERE....

    The Leader of the Free World is not a job for pussies who bow at every enemy and stab our friends in the back..

    It's really that simple...

  19. [19] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The Leader of the Free World is not a job for pussies who bow at every enemy and stab our friends in the back..

    You realize that you just described Trump to a tee, don't you?

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    You realize that you just described Trump to a tee, don't you?

    I realize that's how YOU see President Trump...

    But I described yer messiah, Odumbo...

  21. [21] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I realize that's how YOU see President Trump...
    But I described yer messiah, Odumbo...

    I'm beginning to see the problem. You don't know a pussy when you see one.

    Hint: bone spurs.

    I'm sure it won't be a great tanning day for Trump, what with all the shade that will be thrown his way from the McCain funeral...

    .

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm beginning to see the problem. You don't know a pussy when you see one.

    That's funny.. I was thinking the EXACT same thing about you.. :D

    A pussy says that 2% Economic Growth is the "new norm"..

    A LEADER says "Frak that!!!" and pushes the EG to over 4%... :D

    Hint: bone spurs.

    Oh please.. If yer gonna harp on getting out of Vietnam, then yer gonna have to condemn yer racist.... I mean RAPIST.... no actually, both.. buddy Bill Clinton..

    How many years did Odumbo serve in the military??? How many years did YOU serve in the military??

    I mean, if you want to define "pussy" as someone who didn't serve??? How many "Pussies" are here in Weigantia???

    I'm sure it won't be a great tanning day for Trump, what with all the shade that will be thrown his way from the McCain funeral...

    Nice of you to use a war hero's death as a political bludgeon..

    But he is only a scumbag Republican, so it doesn't matter.. :^/

  23. [23] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "...there were a whole lot of possible voters out there that just needed a real reason to get politically involved."

    You mean like the 20-30% that vote in presidential elections but don't vote in off year elections that are part of 125 million that will not vote in 2018 Ralph Nader mentioned in his recent article?

    These people will not be inspired by the Establishment or the Progressive Democrats.

    Getting these people inspired will take more than just promises.

    And the 20-30% that are off year non-voters are already registered and vote in presidential elections.

    If they are not going to be inspired to vote for Democrats in 2018 wouldn't it still be better for them to use their vote in 2018 participating in One Demand rather than stay home and waste their vote?

    This could inspire more of the 125 million 2018 non-voters to participate in One Demand and our political process in 2020 which could force the current major parties to meet the demand for small contribution candidates and create a base for alternatives to replace the current major parties if (when) they do not meet the demand. You know, democracy with a small d.

    This would also make it nearly impossible for whichever current major party is in control of state government to gerrymander the districts in favor of their party in 2021 as it could make many districts completely unpredictable by the standards of current political wisdom and predictable is a key ingredient in gerrymandering.

  24. [24] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    How many years did YOU serve in the military?

    I enlisted in the military back in 1975. But my own military service isn't at issue, nor is Clinton's (who, like Cheney, got student deferments), nor Obama's (who was never called up, but can point to his time working on Chicago's south side as Proof of Balls).

    No, at issue is Precious Donald, who talks tough to dictators, then wilts in their presence. Precious Donald, who holds his hands in the air like a decorator when he speaks.

    You know, the same Precious Donald who stated flatly that he didn't believe that McCain was a war hero - he likes guys, he said, who weren't caught, shoved in a cage and tortured for five years.

    That obese, thin-skinned Precious Donald, hothouse flower (and current presidential record holder for most days spent on a golf course during his first 2 years in office).

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, at issue is Precious Donald, who talks tough to dictators, then wilts in their presence. Precious Donald, who holds his hands in the air like a decorator when he speaks.

    Of course.. It's ALWAYS about President Trump..

    Even though rapist/racist Clinton didn't serve and your messiah Odumbo didn't serve, ONLY President Trump's lack of service is at issue..

    HHPTDS... In spades..

    I enlisted in the military back in 1975.

    Really?? What branch?? What was your job?? Maybe if we can establish some common ground, we won't always be insulting each other.. :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    You know, the same Precious Donald who stated flatly that he didn't believe that McCain was a war hero - he likes guys, he said, who weren't caught, shoved in a cage and tortured for five years.

    And President Trump, like you, is entitled to his opinion..

    You have a high opinion of Bill Clinton even though he is a racist and a rapist..

    Should that ONE shitty opinion define your entire being??

    Once again, double standards.. One standard for President Trump.. A completely different standard for anyone with a -D after their name..

  27. [27] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Really? What branch? What was your job?

    I was an Army grunt. Went to the Defense Information School (an all-service journalism and TV school) in Ft. Benjamin Harrison in Indiana for AIT, then took advantage of a program that sent me to the University of Wisconsin in Green Bay, where I was when I got out. Not much of a military record, but it was during the Vietnam era, so I was available cannon fodder for the time they had me.

    My father, who served four years in Vietnam himself approved, so that's what matters to me.

    You have a high opinion of Bill Clinton

    Peace, prosperity and progressive policy, baby.

    President Trump, like you, is entitled to his opinion..

    He is indeed. He also has to accept the consequences of his mean-spirited observations on days like today.

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    I was an Army grunt. Went to the Defense Information School (an all-service journalism and TV school) in Ft. Benjamin Harrison in Indiana for AIT, then took advantage of a program that sent me to the University of Wisconsin in Green Bay, where I was when I got out. Not much of a military record, but it was during the Vietnam era, so I was available cannon fodder for the time they had me.

    I am duly impressed and will do my utmost to factor in this new information in our future discussions..

    My father, who served four years in Vietnam himself approved, so that's what matters to me.

    All service is honorable...

    Peace, prosperity and progressive policy, baby.

    Rape, sexual harassment and sexual assault, baby... :^/

    But I have to admit.. This is the FIRST time I have heard of Clinton's "triangulation" policy referred as "progressive".. :D

    He is indeed. He also has to accept the consequences of his mean-spirited observations on days like today.

    Yes he does.. But, as I said, that one opinion does not define him, anymore than your opinion of Clinton defines you...

  29. [29] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Maybe if we can establish some common ground, we won't always be insulting each other.. :D

    In case you didn't notice, I don't hurl personal insults. I don't have the same reserve when it comes to Trump's Insane Clown Posse, the Clown King himself, or the Alt-Wrong. That's all fair game.

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    In case you didn't notice, I don't hurl personal insults. I don't have the same reserve when it comes to Trump's Insane Clown Posse, the Clown King himself, or the Alt-Wrong. That's all fair game.

    Fair enough...

    But even in that, there are rules.. There are lines that should not be crossed..

    I sense that you understand that...

    That's a start.. :D

  31. [31] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    But I have to admit.. This is the FIRST time I have heard of Clinton's "triangulation" policy referred as "progressive".. :D

    I have a few friends on the left that make the same point. I remind them that Clinton came at the end of twelve years of Republican rule, during which time two candidates hand-picked by the left went down in flames.

    "Triangulation" simply meant finding the 'sweet spot' of public opinion, something that elected politicians ought to be doing anyway, since they're supposed to represent everyone in their state or district.

    Trump is the first in awhile to try to get by appealing purely to his base. It's why he's so divisive, can't move his numbers up, and probably doomed to a single term.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Triangulation" simply meant finding the 'sweet spot' of public opinion, something that elected politicians ought to be doing anyway, since they're supposed to represent everyone in their state or district.

    I am REALLY beginning to like you.. :D

    Trump is the first in awhile to try to get by appealing purely to his base. It's why he's so divisive, can't move his numbers up, and probably doomed to a single term.

    I'll hold you to that prediction.. :D

    I am also constrained to point out that Obama couldn't move his numbers up either..

    I have a feeling it was for the same reason.. Only appealing to his base..

    The difference between then and now is the, back then, the country barely held together...

    NOW, the country is sitting pretty and well on it's way to it's former glory... :D

    That's why President Trump will win re-election by a landslide...

    Once the "Blue Wave" of the midterms is exposed as a Red Stream, the Left will be so demoralized, they will nominate a McGovern and President Trump will wipe the cosmos with him (or her).. :D

  33. [33] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    There are lines that should not be crossed..
    I sense that you understand that...

    Of course I understand that. I'm here to discuss politics, not you.

  34. [34] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Once the "Blue Wave" of the midterms is exposed as a Red Stream, the Left will be so demoralized, they will nominate a McGovern and President Trump will wipe the cosmos with him (or her).. :D

    Oop. You get a bookmark for that one, too.

    Unfortunately, the harder the GOP turns to the Right, the harder the opposition will turn to the Left. That WILL make it harder to hit that sweet spot, which could become a Purple Microdot.

    I believe, though, in that Purple Microdot.

    .

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Of course I understand that. I'm here to discuss politics, not you.

    This is not a sentiment I express often or lightly...

    Bless you... :D

    Unfortunately, the harder the GOP turns to the Right, the harder the opposition will turn to the Left.

    But that's just it.. President Trump ISN'T turning Right, hard or otherwise..

    As CW noted before the onset of HHPTDS, several of Trump's policies were downright LEFT WING...

    Hell, President Trump offered Dreamer Amnesty to 3 times the number of Dreamers that Democrats EVER wanted...

    The Left's response of moving further left is a response to President Trump's policies ACTUALLY WORKING...

    The Left reasons that middle of the road doesn't work so HARD Left is the only possible solution...

    THe problem is, the Left's "middle of the road" consists of Trump bashing...

    Hard Left will not win elections.. 2016 has proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt..

  36. [36] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    My concern in the Georgia race is their use of the electronic voting booths that mysteriously had all of their data wiped clean following questions raised concerning the election results! Here’s a brief article that explains it better than I can:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/18/mueller-indictments-georgia-voting-infrastructure-219018

  37. [37] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that Obama couldn't move his numbers up either..

    I have a feeling it was for the same reason.. Only appealing to his base..

    Interesting concept...

    I am sure that it had nothing to do with the Republicans crying that Obama refused to work with them, even after Obama caved in to their demands and they still refused to pass the legislation.

    Or maybe Obama’s numbers didn’t grow because the Republicans attacked the health care reform that they had planned on rolling out once McCain took office in 2008 as being the worst health care plan ever invented?

    Sure, they still can’t come up with anything close to as good as the ACA is, AND they did admit that they voted against it because they didn’t want Obama getting credit for passing legislation that would be viewed favorably by most Americans... but the fact that Obama is black doesn’t have anything to do with their animosity towards the ACA!

    Republicans just hate their own ideas that grant affordable medical coverage to anyone, regardless of their medical history!

    Republicans went as far as voting against legislation that they, themselves, had authored — but ONLY after Obama signaled that he fully supported the legislation and that he would sign it into law if it made it to his desk!

    FoxNews loved to pound Obama for not getting anything accomplished, but they always omitted the fact that the GOP controlled congress refused to pass anything for him to sign!

    For all his faults, he *IS* an effective leader. He gives patriotic Americans the America they want... They need...

    A false boogeyman they can fear and his programs that solve the problems that aren’t really a threat to them?

    Or that he tells them what they want to hear, even if it means he has to lie to them to accomplish that?

    His boorish and crass behavior?? That's a small price to pay for millions and millions of jobs, black American unemployment the LOWEST it's ever been in (add biased qualifier/spin here) history, consumer confidence highest it's been in 18 years and economic growth surpassing 4%...

    “Millions of jobs” that he saved for Chinese workers by not sanctioning the phone maker for the spyware found in all of their products? And just because the Chinese granted one of his family’s projects a $500,000,000 loan, it’s wrong to even suggest that it played any part in his decision (which was made without anyone’s from our government who had overseen the sanctioning process’ input)!

    Or were you talking about the two new steel mills being built that he claimed he was responsible for that U.S. Steel didn’t realize they were building?

  38. [38] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    [1,2, and 13] EM

    I lost my beloved wife to Alzheimer's. Any kind of dementia is difficult and distressing. Learn to cherish the moments when your mother's personality comes shining through; they are precious. I wish you and yours strength for the journey.

  39. [39] 
    karen rusk wrote:

    [9] CRS - No, just no. This is the kind of thing that keeps us stuck in the school yard fight. It gets us nowhere.

    [12] M - Low standards don't bring about the changes we want in order to make America great again. Also, if you're ok with Trump being crass, why would you try to prevent others on this forum from being the same? Perhaps decency does matter to you after all?

    In reality, bringing us "back" anywhere is impossible.
    Nothing stays the same, ever. The best ideas are always ideas that will move us forward, as a country, and as humans. Pining for some "golden" past is just a distraction from what we really need to do, here and now.

    All we have is today and the future. We can only ever go forward. Are Conservatives willing to move forward? Perhaps we need a new identifier, the Regressives? What about Democrats? Will they support forward movement?
    How about Republicans? These are the questions I want candidates to answer.

  40. [40] 
    karen rusk wrote:

    I was thinking about Trump's promise to drain the swamp. If there is a plug at the bottom of the pond, then perhaps it is he who will swim down to pull it out. Which means he will, of course, be the first sucked down the drain. But he would have fulfilled the absolute best promise of his campaign.

  41. [41] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    13

    YW :)

  42. [42] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    21

    I'm beginning to see the problem. You don't know a pussy when you see one.

    Hint: bone spurs.

    Anybody else got multiple decades of service and still counting? If not, then you're all pussies! *wink*

    Just kidding, of course, only one of you is. :)

  43. [43] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    36

    My concern in the Georgia race is their use of the electronic voting booths that mysteriously had all of their data wiped clean following questions raised concerning the election results!

    Yes, sir... exactly. Thanks for posting that.

    There was chicanery in multiple states. This could present a future problem because the Trump administration is doing pretty much the equivalent of zero regarding the issue.

  44. [44] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    37

    A false boogeyman they can fear and his programs that solve the problems that aren’t really a threat to them?

    Or that he tells them what they want to hear, even if it means he has to lie to them to accomplish that?

    I know, right!? What will it take for the minions to clue in that Trump thinks they're all gullible? How about his latest bullshit that NBC "fudged" his admission regarding firing Comey over the Russia investigation? Trump is a roadmap: Pay no attention to that time he admitted to obstruction of justice because that never happened, and... yes... he obviously thinks you're all ignorant enough to believe that bullshit.

    Or were you talking about the two new steel mills being built that he claimed he was responsible for that U.S. Steel didn’t realize they were building?

    Remember that time in the same speech where he told the gullible minions that U.S. Steel was building 6 new steel mills, and then later in the same speech he claimed they were building 7 new steel mills. Yes, he quite obviously thinks they are stupid and doesn't mind making shit up. It's pathological con artistry. Just tell the minions what they want to hear and watch them eat it up.

    The facts: U.S. Steel currently operates 4 steel plants in America. They have plans to open zero new ones. It's all over the Internet; pick your own link.

    The constant lying is

  45. [45] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    37

    A false boogeyman they can fear and his programs that solve the problems that aren’t really a threat to them?

    Or that he tells them what they want to hear, even if it means he has to lie to them to accomplish that?

    I know, right!? What will it take for the minions to clue in that Trump thinks they're all gullible? How about his latest bullshit that NBC "fudged" his admission regarding firing Comey over the Russia investigation? Trump is a roadmap: Pay no attention to that time he admitted to obstruction of justice because that never happened, and... yes... he obviously thinks you're all ignorant enough to believe that bullshit.

    Or were you talking about the two new steel mills being built that he claimed he was responsible for that U.S. Steel didn’t realize they were building?

    Remember that time in the same speech where he told the gullible minions that U.S. Steel was building 6 new steel mills, and then later in the same speech he claimed they were building 7 new steel mills. Yes, he quite obviously thinks they are stupid and doesn't mind making shit up. It's pathological con artistry. Just tell the minions what they want to hear and watch them eat it up.

    The facts: U.S. Steel currently operates 4 steel plants in America. They have plans to open zero new ones. It's all over the Internet; pick your own link.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Karen,

    [12] M - Low standards don't bring about the changes we want in order to make America great again.

    True...

    We saw that with Obama who said that 2% Economic Growth was the new norm..

    He set a low standard and that's where we were stuck..

    But your theory would ONLY apply to President Trump if he applied those low standards across the board, as Obama did..

    President Trump has low standards of political behavior..

    But, in his GOVERNANCE, President Trump sets very high standards. MILLIONS of jobs saved.. MILLIONS more jobs created... A US Space Force... Missions to the moon and to mars... FAIRNESS in the media... Eliminating illegal immigration...

    All of these are HIGH standards that President Trump has set for this country..

    And the President is well on his way to accomplishing these goals..

    Obama and the Democrats set low standards and held Americans to those low standards..

    "I'm not playing by their rules anymore.."
    -Bill Murray, GROUNDHOG DAY

    Also, if you're ok with Trump being crass, why would you try to prevent others on this forum from being the same? Perhaps decency does matter to you after all?

    There is a difference between being crass and being terroristic, wouldn't you agree???

    There is a difference between being boorish and hurling gay slurs, wouldn't you agree??

    If Victoria was simply crass and boorish and limited her attacks to me, then I would do nothing but respond in kind..

    But she has moved FAR beyond that insofar as hurling gay slurs and attacking commenters family..

    You seem to be a reasonable commenter and, as such, should find such actions far far beyond anything that a normal rational person would find acceptable..

    Or, are you saying that the woman who wears a short skirt and low cut top deserves to be raped??

    All we have is today and the future. We can only ever go forward. Are Conservatives willing to move forward?

    I can't really speak for conservatives.. I can only speak for myself..

    And I believe we ARE moving forward at great lengths, compared with the dismal inching ploddingly forward of the Obama years..

    What about Democrats? Will they support forward movement?

    Again, I can't speak for Democrats... But from past experience it's clear that THEIR idea of "moving forward" is not compatible with American values..

    "Good talk..."
    -Rodney McKay

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sources: NBC Threatened Ronan Farrow if He Kept Reporting on Harvey Weinstein
    Ronan Farrow had already left NBC News. But a top lawyer at the network threatened to smear him if he continued to pursue the Hollywood mogul, multiple knowledgeable sources say.

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/sources-nbc-threatened-ronan-farrow-if-he-kept-reporting-on-harvey-weinstein

    Remind me again how the press is NOT the enemy of the people??

    I seem to have forgotten, what with all the FACTS to the contrary.... :^/

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    A call to boycott In-N-Out meets its own resistance

    LOS ANGELES — Anthony Grigore is a Democrat. But as he waited Thursday at an In-N-Out Burger in El Segundo for his meal, Grigore made it clear party loyalty would only go so far.

    Just hours earlier, the head of the California Democratic Party called for a boycott of the famed burger chain after a public filing revealed that the company had recently donated $25,000 to the state’s Republican Party.

    “Eating at In-N-Out is such a standard thing to do across California,” Grigore said, dismissing the boycott idea as a bit silly.

    California has emerged as the center of the Democratic resistance since President Donald Trump took office. But this activism might have met its match when it comes to In-N-Out, a California institution that some hold with the same level of esteem as the Golden Gate Bridge and Joshua Tree.

    By the end of the day, Democrats were distancing themselves from the idea and Republicans were enjoying a political feast, with some making big lunch orders to show their support for the chain and posting photos on social media.

    “We have all of our children eating In-N-Out burgers. Even my son’s German shepherd eats In-N-Out,” said state Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber, whose staff ordered 25 burgers and 50 bags of fries for lunch. 6/19
    https://pilotonline.com/business/consumer/article_39be46dc-6ae4-543e-be69-fde631ba765b.html

    Democrats can be so silly...

    But this has serious and threatening overtones..

    In California, if you don't toe the Democrat Party line, you are demonized and attacked and they will try and destroy your business..

    Karen...??? This is EXACTLY what I was talking about above..

    THIS is the Democrat Party's idea of "moving forward"..

    It is NOT compatible with American values of diversity, tolerance and respect...

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    ICE arrests in courtrooms escalate feud between California and Trump administration over immigration policy

    While Ontiveros-Cebreros faced serious criminal charges, his arrest last week reignited protests from immigrant advocates as well as some judges.

    California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye, who has emerged as a leading critic of ICE’s courtroom presence, said in a statement Monday that the arrests were "disruptive, shortsighted, and counterproductive.… It is damaging to community safety and disrespects the state court system.” 2/34
    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-ice-courtroom-arrest-20180829-story.html

    Cry me a river, California.. This "disruption" is one of your own making..

    If CA officials cooperated with ICE, then they could have a say in how ICE operates..

    But if CA wants to side with scumbag murderers and rapists and drug dealers?? Then ICE will do it's when and where it can and CA can't say dick about it...

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again...

    Man accused of stealing teen's MAGA hat indicted by grand jury
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/31/man-accused-stealing-teens-maga-hat-indicted-by-grand-jury.html

    THIS is the Democrat Party's idea of "moving forward"..

    Ironically, here is the victims statement..

    "I support my president and, if you don’t, let’s have a conversation about it instead of ripping my hat off. I just think a conversation about politics is more productive for the entire whole rather than taking my hat and yelling subjective words to me.”

    This is a "deplorable", "irredeemable", "violent", "racist" Trump supporter talking..

    It's ironic because it applies here in Weigantia as well..

    I support my President and if you don't, let's have a conversation about it. Let's not hurl gay slurs around or attack a commenters family in the most vile and disgusting ways...

    Once again, Democrats acting EXACTLY like they accuse Republicans of acting..

    How is that "moving forward"??

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Interesting to note...

    As per Real Clear Politics Poll Of Polls....

    Barack Obama's Approval Rating 31 Aug 11 43.0%

    President Trump's Approval Rating 31 Aug 2018 43.3%

    Once again, this begs the question...

    If President Trump is so obviously horrid and so blatantly incompetent..???

    Why are his approval numbers BETTER than Barack Obama's at the same point in their respective presidencies??

    There are only TWO possibilities..

    1. Obama was as obviously horrid and blatantly incompetent as ya'all accuse President Trump of being..

    2. Ya'all are in the throes of HHPTDS when you make such hysterical claims against President Trump...

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    Martin Luther King Jr. Would Be Pleased With Black Americans’ Gains Under Trump
    Black people have jobs, and more jobs than the left-wing Black Lives Matter-type politicians have been able to provide — ever!

    Martin Luther King Jr. would be pleased that we are celebrating the 54th anniversary of his “I Have a Dream” speech on Aug. 28. We can expect not only the usual adulation for the speech from the keepers of America’s conscience, but also the knee-jerk condemnation of President Trump, the cause of everything evil in this land — from fires in California and constipation in Florida to acid reflux at The New York Times.

    If you think current accounts of what Donald Trump has done for black people — unemployment at the lowest level ever, except for small (disproportionately black) babies disfavored by the Democratic Party — are vicious, think what the history books, at least those written by left-wing zealots (which is most of them) will say. If the past is any guide, it will not be pretty. 2/13
    http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/28/martin-luther-king-jr-pleased-black-americans-gains-trump/

    President Trump has done MORE for black Americans than Obama/Democrats ever did...

    This is factually accurate..

    And yet, people STILL call him racist..

    It's mind boggling..

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Karen,

    But your theory would ONLY apply to President Trump if he applied those low standards across the board, as Obama did..

    To rephrase...

    But your theory would ONLY apply to President Trump if he applied those low standards across the board policy-wise as Obama did..

    To clarify, Obama was very big on elitism, on "don't do stupid shit" type stuff.. So his standards, PR wise, were high...

    But with his governance... With his policies, he set very low standards...

    Given the two, one way have high policy standards and low PR (for lack of a better term) standards and having a great country (President Trump) or have high PR standards and low policy standards and have a country that is barely surviving (Obama).....

    Well, I'll take President Trump's way every day of the week and twice on Sunday...

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Two Years Later, the Elites Are Still Disconnected From Voters
    For many Americans, it feels like the 2016 election never ended

    http://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/elite-disconnect-voters-trump-2016

    This is why Democrats will lose and lose big in 2018..

    Because they learned absolutely NOTHING from 2016, 2014, 2012 and 2010....

    Democrats think they can continue to ridicule and attack and demonize 10s of millions of voters and STILL win elections..

    This thinking is what is fueling the #WalkAway movement.. This thinking is what is fueling the almost TRIPLING of support for President Trump from the black community...

    All Democrats are doing is parading around buck assed nekkid and proclaiming what fine livery they are sporting...

    And 2018 is going to be just as much of a shock to them as 2016 was...

    But don't worry.. I'll be around to point out all ya'all's errors.. :D

    What are friends for, eh? :D

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    How Trump Survives
    Column: The president benefits from the economy—and from his enemies

    The litany has been repeated so often that it's easy to recite: The walls are closing in on Donald Trump, person x or y or z is going to bring him down, it's only a matter of time before he is caught or exposed or loses his base of support and driven from public life. The phrases sound out from our cable channels. We see them in newspaper headlines and in our Twitter timelines. This time Trump has gone too far. The end is near. Take that, Drumpf!

    What is forgotten is that the president has operated in this atmosphere of emergency and crisis and imminent doom since he announced his campaign. No matter how dire the outcry, he moves on. His political standing remains stable. At the end of last week, after Manafort and Cohen, after Trump found himself on the receiving end of the reality politics playbook, NBC News and the Wall Street Journal polled his job approval. There was no appreciable change. 2/12
    https://freebeacon.com/columns/how-trump-survives/

    You see, my fellow Weigantians..

    This is the fact that ya'all refuse to get...

    President Trump is *ALWAYS* ten steps ahead of the hysterical NeverTrumpers..

Comments for this article are closed.