ChrisWeigant.com

Can Bernie Successfully Follow The Trump Playbook?

[ Posted Monday, February 10th, 2020 – 17:57 UTC ]

In 2016, Donald Trump ripped up the playbook on how to get elected president and then he wrote his own unique version. Quite obviously, it worked a lot better than anyone expected. Democrats now face a surprisingly similar situation in 2020 with Bernie Sanders, because he seems poised to use almost exactly the same playbook that allowed Trump to succeed against a field of candidates much more acceptable to his party's establishment.

Now, please don't get me wrong -- when I say Bernie Sanders could use "the Trump playbook" I am decidedly not talking about Trump's personal style of campaigning. Bernie's not going to suddenly start hurling playground insults at his fellow Democrats on a debate stage or anything like that. What I am talking about instead is the mechanics of how Trump won the Republican nomination.

In 2016, the Republican field was huge. There were many candidates in all the supposed "lanes" that the pundits love to talk about. Their overall problem, however, was that there was never any one single strong candidate in the "not Trump lane." Instead, there were many candidate all vying against each other for the "not Trump" crown. Because it took so long for each one of them to realize they weren't going to be "the guy to beat Trump," many of them stayed in the race just long enough to divide the anti-Trump vote to the point where nobody else could achieve domination over Trump. Trump won almost all of his primary victories with what would normally be considered anemic percentages -- most of them in the 30-to-40 percent range. Trump didn't start winning primaries with over 50 percent of the vote until the final month of the primary fight, in fact. But even with 35 percent, when the other 65 percent was split between three or four "not Trump" candidates, Trump still won the state. Over and over again.

That's the playbook Bernie could successfully emulate. Now, there is no guarantee that this is going to happen. History may not repeat itself. But the question of whether Bernie can in fact be beat or not may soon boil down to when the other Democratic candidates decide to exit the race, thus throwing their support behind a stronger "not Bernie" candidate. And so far, it doesn't seem like any of the chief challengers is going to do that any time soon. These are all people, please remember, that look in the bathroom mirror in the morning and see a president looking back at them.

Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, and Michael Bloomberg all seem like they're so convinced that they and they alone are the ones to win that they're not going to be convinced that the only way to beat the progressive wing is to drop out. Biden may be the only one who does realize this, but if it happens it'll likely be because his donations dry up to the point that he can't adequately campaign any more. Buttigieg is so far the strongest "not Bernie" candidate and Bloomberg has a bottomless campaign fund, so neither one of them is likely to get out in the next few months.

Amy Klobuchar's fortunes are going to be decided in New Hampshire and possibly the other two early-voting states. If she surprises everyone with a third-place finish in New Hampshire, then she'll be convinced that she's stronger than all the others and keep going for a while. If Klobuchar does worse than expected tomorrow night, though, and only places fifth (again), then she probably won't make it much beyond Super Tuesday.

Elizabeth Warren is a big question mark in this scenario, because Warren more than any of the other candidates has supporters who are ideologically very similar to Bernie's base. If Warren finishes third in New Hampshire (again), then she'll be arguing for others to drop out of the race rather than others trying to convince her to do so. And she'll have a point, since she will have shown more support at the ballot box than anyone but the two frontrunners. But if she falls back to fourth or even fifth tomorrow night, then progressives are going to begin calling on her to drop out of the race and endorse Bernie as the best progressive choice to win the nomination.

If Warren drops out earlier rather than later and the moderates all stay in the race, it could indeed pave the way for a Bernie victory. Even if Warren does stay in -- but with diminishing returns at the polls -- Bernie still might be able to divide the moderate vote enough between Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Bloomberg to continue racking up victories. And at some point, it's going to be mathematically too late for the "not Bernie" contingent to rally around any one candidate. If Bernie piles up more delegates than anyone else, then he could wind up being unstoppable.

There is one big difference between the parties, though, that Trump was able to exploit that Bernie won't. Republicans, after the first month or so of contests, start making all their states "winner takes all" -- whoever wins even a plurality of the popular vote gets all the delegates from that state, kind of like the way the Electoral College works. Democrats don't do this -- their states stay proportional (delegates are handed out proportionally to every candidate who gets above 15 percent). This means it'll be much harder to reach that mathematical point where a candidacy becomes essentially unstoppable, because winning a state with 35 percent will only mean gaining a fraction of that state's delegates rather than all of them.

But it still could happen. If Bernie wins New Hampshire and Nevada, places in the top three in South Carolina, and then wins California in a big way on Super Tuesday, then he'll be at the top of the delegate heap, most likely. From that point on, he could wind up following Trump's path to the nomination.

Of course, all this is wildly skewed in favor of Bernie continuing to do well over the next few weeks. Which is in no way guaranteed. Pete Buttigieg could win New Hampshire, which would totally change the situation. Joe Biden could actually win Nevada and he could stage the comeback he's been counting on in South Carolina. Or Bernie could have a disappointing finish everywhere else (outside of California) on Super Tuesday. There are a lot of ways this scenario may never come into being, admittedly.

At the same time, the possibility of Bernie winning the nomination is now at its highest probability ever. If the moderates spend all their energies fighting each other rather than Bernie in fear of alienating Bernie's supporters (which seems to be happening right now in New Hampshire), then they may do no more than continue to split the anti-Bernie vote. Unless Elizabeth Warren mounts a big comeback very soon, Bernie could soon be seen as the only viable choice for a progressive voter (this is rather surprising because not so long ago it seemed that the opposite would prove to be true; that Warren would emerge strongest and Bernie voters would start drifting over to her candidacy). If these cards all fall into place, then Bernie will at the very least emerge as the frontrunner after Super Tuesday.

For a painfully long time in 2016, nobody was really convinced Trump could win the GOP nomination. Even after beating everyone in the public opinion polls for months, people still laughed at Trump. Even after he began racking up state after state in the primaries, there was still a firm belief that one of the others would eventually emerge to vanquish the upstart. None of that came to pass, and eventually all the pundits had to face the reality of Trump. That is the scenario that could repeat itself this year, on the Democratic side. The moderates' argument, like the Republicans' argument back then, has become: "Bernie can't win the nomination because he is so unelectable." However, that argument completely falls apart when the voters are voting for him in bigger numbers than any of the other candidates. It's still incredibly early in the process and nothing is set in stone by any means, but the possibility now exist for Bernie Sanders to walk away with the Democratic nomination in almost exactly the same fashion that Trump used four years ago. No wonder the party establishment is so worried.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

61 Comments on “Can Bernie Successfully Follow The Trump Playbook?”

  1. [1] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Unlike Trump in in 2016, no Democratic candidate should be at all surprised by Bernie's strength in 2020. On an uphill playing field he really took it to Hillary. Yet I'll agree that, thus far, the Moderates are being tougher on each other than on the Progressives Bernie & Elizabeth.

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    Quite obviously, it worked a lot better than anyone expected.

    Ahem... :D

    The question ya'all need to ask yerselves is "Do ya'all WANT Bernie to win the Dem Primary??"

    Because there is simply NO WAY on this planet or any other planet will the American people elect a self-labeled rabid socialist...

    It simply will not happen..

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's becoming all but assured that Joe Biden will not be the Democrat nominee..

    Quinnipiac: Nearly Half of Biden’s African-American Supporters Have Abandoned Him

    Biden has been counting on South Carolina as his firewall (where two-thirds of Democratic primary voters are black), but the new national Quinnipiac poll shows support for Biden among African Americans dropping from 52 percent to 27 percent since the Iowa caucuses.
    https://tinyurl.com/wpljd5r

    If Biden doesn't clean house in SC it's GAME OVER

    Even a win by a hair will not be enough to salvage his campaign

    In the contest between "electability" and "Party Purity".....

    Party Purity is taking the day..

    EXACTLY as I predicted it would..

    One of these days, ya'all will see the light... Or, more accurately see and accept the FACTS and REALITY..

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bloomberg heard in 2015 audio clip defending ‘stop and frisk,’ throwing minority kids against wall: report
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bloomberg-stop-and-frisk

    And don't think Bloomberg is going to swoop in and save the day..

    There is NO WAY that black Americans will rally the creator and most ardent defender of STOP N FRISK...

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    "They are male, minorities, 16-25. That's true in New York, that's true in virtually every city (inaudible). And that's where the real crime is. You've got to get the guns out of the hands of people that are getting killed."
    -Michael Bloomberg, 2015

    Yea.. Black Americans are going to rally behind Bloomberg... :smirk: :D

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    "So one of the unintended consequences is people say, 'Oh my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities.'

    Yes, that's true. Why? Because we put all the cops in minority neighborhoods. Yes, that's true. Why do we do it? Because that's where all the crime is. And the way you get the guns out of the kids' hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them... And then they start... 'Oh I don't want to get caught.' So they don't bring the gun. They still have a gun, but they leave it at home."
    -Michael Bloomberg, 2015

    If ya'all are thinking that Bloomberg will be yer Trump slayer... Stop it..

    It just ain't gonna happen...

    The only Dem candidate who has a snowball's chance in hell of beating President Trump is Joe Biden...

    And he won't be the nominee...

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    Socialized Medicine in the Shadow of Wuhan

    Years ago, I hate to say how many but you can look it up and do the math for yourself, at the age of 16 or so I used to argue with my late father about socialized medicine.

    He was a doctor and a pioneer of sorts who helped found the first private radiological office in New York City. The inventor of several operations, including for cancer of the cervix, he also had security clearance and treated the Hiroshima Ladies when they were brought to this country after the bomb.

    I, of course, took the youthful idealistic side advocating free healthcare for all under a single-payer government plan. I even recall, to my everlasting regret (it was ugly and adolescent given the commandment about honoring thy father and mother) implying that my father’s opposition was based heavily on greed and self-interest. He was a successful physician and I, needless to say, benefited from that. He paid for my college education and most of graduate school.

    My father, although a Stevenson Democrat, advocated a free market (private insurance) approach to healthcare for several reasons: Government centralization, he said, would diminish medical innovation and the discovery of new cures. By lowering pay it would reduce the incentive for the “best and brightest” to be doctors or be in the healthcare field altogether, something we should want.

    He also warned that although socialized medicine looked attractive, the quality was inevitably worse and you would have to wait in line for treatment when ill, sometimes for a dangerous period. He further cautioned that society would not be able to pay for such a system.
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/socialized-medicine-in-the-shadow-of-wuhan_3233127.html

    The Democrat plan for healthcare SIMPLY does not work..

    It's been tried and tried and tried and it FAILS every time..

    Wuhan China proves that beyond any doubt..

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is all worth considering as we move forward in our presidential election where at least two of the Democratic candidates—Sanders and Warren—are espousing outright socialized medicine.

    Others—Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Biden and Bloomberg, to cite only those with chances of winning at this point—support a “public option,” usually implying that it is only temporary and a transition to the inevitable single-payer. For now, they don’t want to offend the millions on private plans, frequently won by their unions and almost always preferable to anything that would emerge from a socialized system.

    The candidates often point to the Scandinavian countries as examples of what we should do, neglecting to point out that those countries each have populations roughly half the size of Los Angeles County’s. Very little they do is analogous to the United States with a population of 330 million. Although smaller than those behemoths, we are more comparable to China and India. At the same time, those Scandinavian countries are themselves rejecting socialism.

    In China, sick people are being ARRESTED...

    THAT is the hallmark of socialized healthcare...

    Any candidate who espouses socializing our healthcare will NOT win the election..

    It's really THAT simple...

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    New Hampshire Democrats Are Worried About Beating Trump, And They Should Be

    Granite State Democrats desperately want to pick a candidate who can beat Trump, but they’re not sure anyone on the primary ballot can do it.
    https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/10/new-hampshire-democrats-are-worried-about-beating-trump-and-they-should-be/

    Since Democrats are going down the Party Purity path, there is simply no path to success for Democrats in the General Election..

    As Tony Stark said, there is NO VERSION of this where Democrats come out on top..

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — It would be easy to mistake the feverish activity in New Hampshire over the past week for excitement. The state has been abuzz with Democratic presidential campaign events, armies of canvassers knocking on doors, curious voters from neighboring states coming to get a look at the candidates, and here in Manchester, swarms of reporters and camera crews.

    But when you talk to voters, the overarching feeling isn’t excitement or optimism, but anxiety. Having gotten a close look at the candidates, Granite State Democrats are worried none of them can beat Trump.

    They have good reason to worry. Between his powerful State of the Union address, the impeachment acquittal, rising approval ratings, and the Democratic debacle in Iowa, last week was arguably the best of Trump’s presidency. The economy is strong, approval of the Republican Party is the highest it’s been since 2005, and the two Democratic frontrunners are a 78-year-old avowed socialist and a gay 38-year-old former mayor of a small midwestern city.

    The writing is on the wall, people..

    Democrats BEST course of action would be to save all their money and mojo, concede 2020 to President Trump and concentrate on winning in 2024...

    Because there is simply NO WAY that a Party Purity candidate will prevail against President Trump...

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Russ,

    But that never has happened! NOAA only agreed with Trump after they were ordered to do so because the fat baby

    Unfortunately (for you) you have no facts to support this claim..

    And I have the HEAD of the NOAA stating as fact that the sharpie'ed weather map was factually accurate at the time it was displayed....

    In short..

    You have nothing but hate and bigotry..

    I have the FACTS...

    Just another day in Weigantia... :D

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Victoria,

    A combination of pure unadulterated ignorance and hysterical nonstop sucking. They don't know they're rubes. :)

    And yet.. WHO called the 2016 election perfectly??

    And WHO claimed that Hillary would take FL and PA???

    So, it seems the "unadulterated ignorance" & "rube" label is permanently affixed to yer stooping and moronic face, Victoria.. :D

    BBBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The 2020 Democratic presidential field was supposed to be the most talented, diverse, and accomplished group of candidates we’d ever seen. For more than a year the media assured us that it was, even as the candidates’ manifest weaknesses became more apparent. Many of those who seemed so promising early on—Beto O’Rourke, Julian Castro, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker—dropped out one by one before Iowa, victims of their own awkward leftward lurches and woke pandering.

    And then came Iowa, where the putative frontrunner, Biden, simply collapsed. Biden came in a distant fourth, earning barely 15 percent of the vote in a caucus with lower than expected turnout. It was confirmation of what should have been obvious from the beginning: Biden is a terrible candidate who might not make it through the primaries.

    Despite leading in most polls over the last year—probably as result of name recognition more than anything else—Biden has displayed a remarkable lack of energy on the campaign trail and a growing penchant for gaffes and lashing out at voters. (On Sunday, he called a woman who asked a tough question about Iowa a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier.”)

    Complaints about Biden seem to be ubiquitous among voters in both Iowa and New Hampshire. One self-described working-class man I spoke to said he couldn’t believe it when Biden told a roomful of people the economy is only working for the top 1 percent, not the working class.

    Another man, a Sierra Club volunteer I spoke to in Manchester, said his wife voted for Biden by absentee ballot because she’ll be out of town for Tuesday’s primary, but she immediately regretted her vote when the Iowa results came in. A 23-year-old black woman told me she won’t vote for Biden because of his treatment of Anita Hill in 1991, and that she doesn’t believe his apology.

    There is simply no escaping it...

    Democrats simply CAN'T win against President Trump..

    They'll be EXTREMELY lucky to hold onto the House...

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Russ,

    But that never has happened! NOAA only agreed with Trump after they were ordered to do so because the fat baby

    But thanks for conceding that the NOAA *DID* agree with President Trump...

    That totally decimates the argument in JL's link..

    Yer a peach, Russ.. :smirk: :D

  15. [15] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    it's completely irrelevant to my "argument" whether a person said this or a publication said that. i just listed the location of hurricane dorian on each day, which anybody with a satellite photo could clearly see.

    the irrefutable fact is that donald took an incorrect weather forecast from august 29, tweeted about it on september 1st, (3 days later) and put it on television september 4th (6 days later). both he and the head of the noaa claimed it was accurate after it had already been proven inaccurate for anyone with functioning eyesight.

    those are the facts.

  16. [16] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    No. Bernie can't successfully follow Trump's playbook.

    That doesn't mean that Bernie can't do what Trump did in the primaries, get the nomination and win the election in November.

    But the only way he can be successful is to do it as a small donor candidate.

    If he does it as the big money candidate he is now it could not be considered success because it won't solve the problem of big money in our political process which his small contribution campaign deception only pretends to do.

    But if Bernie were to take the lead instead of following and declare NOW that he will run a small donor only campaign in the general election it would help him extend his lead in the primaries and would completely change the dynamics of the general election.

    The lesson that the Dems seem to be missing from 2016 is that the unpredictable voter was the story in 2016. The primaries and general election had many people voting differently than their predictable past including some that had never voted before or had stopped voting.

    While Michale is right that there are many citizens that would never vote for a rabid socialist, Bernie can't be considered a rabid socialist because a rabid socialist would not take big money to run their campaign.

    While this will not make a difference to the people that won't vote for a socialist, Dems would never get those votes anyway because those are the same people that call the Clintons, Obama, Biden and Pelosi socialists.

    To those people socialism means someone you don't like so you label them as socialists to provide an excuse to not have to think about anything they say or do because socialism is bad and as socialists anything they say or do is bad.

    The reason the Dems keep snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is they keep trying to appeal to people that will never under any circumstances respond to their appeal.

    The Dems depend on their predictable voters and battle the Republicans for the flip-flop voters which are becoming more and more unpredictable.

    If the Dems want to win in November and really cash in on the anti-Trump sentiment shared by people that actually choose to think about politics, then they should instead concentrate on the HUUUUGE (to take a page from Trump's playbook) 40% of citizens that don't vote and the possibility of getting another 5% of the vote in November from that untapped potential.

    Add that to the lead that the candidates currently enjoy head to head against Trump and it becomes a blowout.

    But another big money candidate, even one that runs a small contribution campaign, will not fool those in the 40% that think about politics and have decided that voting for the big money Dems is not going to change anything and they are not fooled by the small contribution deception. Anti-Trump sentiment alone is not going to inspire these people to get back in or join the game.

    It will take a Dem candidate that is really different and clearly taking action toward real change.

    And a small donor only candidate in the general election could provide that spark that ignites their interest in participating.

    So please, CW, offer Bernie and the Dems a playbook that can reach the end zone instead of one that only says "punt on first down."

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    They’re Voting in New Hampshire, but This Democrat Just Wants to Jump Off a Bridge

    OUR PLATFORM AIN’T STRONG

    It’s not just Sanders and the electability question. The whole field, while all of them seem like good, dedicated people, has disappointed.
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/theyre-voting-in-new-hampshire-but-this-democrat-just-wants-to-jump-off-a-bridge

    It's not just me who is pointing out the severe trouble Democrats are in..

    Anyone who doesn't concede they are worried is either a Party slave or is just sticking their heads in the sand to avoid the facts and reality..

    No one here is doing the Democrat Party any favors by claiming everything is peachy keen wonderful..

    If yer not worried, yer either a slave or yer ignorant.. Or a combination of both..

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    New Hampshire is voting. I remember when this used to be an exciting day. Even if my candidate didn’t win, which he (they were all men) usually didn’t, I loved both the reliable rituals and the unexpected little accidents. If memory serves (the video doesn’t seem to be online), I recall Illinois Senator Paul Simon saying during his concession speech in 1988 that “our platform is strong”—right before the riser he was standing on collapsed.

    Well, it’s not exciting now. It’s depressing. I’m depressed. Almost everybody I know, every Democrat anyway, is depressed. It’s a mess. Iowa was a shitshow and shouldn’t be first anyway. New Hampshire shouldn’t be second, it’s totally preposterous, yet the party lacks the stones to tell these self-important, second-tier states to go stuff it. The candidates don’t look like winners. The party looks like it might be headed toward a face-off between a billionaire and a man who wants to ban billionaires, neither of them really Democrats.

    This is the reality on the ground, people.

    Ignore it at yer own peril...

  19. [19] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, and Michael Bloomberg all seem like they're so convinced that they and they alone are the ones to win that they're not going to be convinced that the only way to beat the progressive wing is to drop out.

    Please explain what exactly Pete Buttigieg has done to convince you that he seems "so convinced" that he alone is the one to win and that he's not going to be convinced that the only way to beat the progressive wing is to drop out. Was it Buttigieg winning Iowa that convinced you? And ditto for Biden and Bloomberg; what have either of them done to convince you that they're "so convinced"?

    If the moderates spend all their energies fighting each other rather than Bernie in fear of alienating Bernie's supporters (which seems to be happening right now in New Hampshire), then they may do no more than continue to split the anti-Bernie vote.

    Please explain why you would refer to the vast majority of American voters choosing to cast a vote for another candidate not named "Bernie Sanders" as the "anti-Bernie vote."

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump blasted his fellow New Yorker as the audio emerged, saying in a Tuesday morning tweet as the New Hampshire primary was getting underway: '"WOW, BLOOMBERG IS A TOTAL RACIST!" The tweet was later taken down, without explanation -- but his campaign manager Brad Parscale soon afterward tweeted "#BloombergIsARacist," next to a separate clip of Bloomberg complaining in a 2013 radio interview that police stop white people "too much" and minorities "too little."
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bloomberg-stop-and-frisk

    If President Trump had said something like this, ya'all would go crazy apeshit hysterical..

    But when a DEMOCRAT says it??

    {{{cccchhhhiiirrrrrppppp}}} {{cccccchhhhiiiiiiirrrrrppppp}}

    It's cricket city..

    Pure unadulterated hypocrisy....

  21. [21] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    3

    If Biden doesn't clean house in SC it's GAME OVER

    You mean like Bernie's campaign is "over"?

    Even a win by a hair will not be enough to salvage his campaign

    A bald guy explaining "hair" *laughs*

    In the contest between "electability" and "Party Purity".....

    Party Purity is taking the day..

    EXACTLY as I predicted it would..

    Bernie is done.. His campaign is over..

    ~ Mike

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/10/04/ftp545/#comment-146328

    As I've said, it's always a bonus when idiots seem quite intent on proving their stupidity for you. :)

  22. [22] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ

    And yet.. WHO called the 2016 election perfectly??

    ~ Mike

    This type repetitive con works spectacularly on ignorant people who're quite content to narrowly focus while conveniently filtering out anything else that doesn't fit their worldview, and while no one else on this forum qualifies as breathtakingly clueless to buy into bullshit quite like Mike, he certainly seems to have convinced himself in his never-ending quest to fill his ever-present neediness. *laughs*

    It's always a bonus when a rube steps up to volunteer to prove our point. Who but a rube would continue to claim hysterically that they possess some kind of superior knowledge because they "called" a 50/50 race in 2016, meanwhile ignoring the multitude of other things wherein he's been proven time and time again by every poster on this forum to be an uneducated dipshit who's rusted shut and stuck permanently on stupid?

    So, Russ, pay no attention to that "Red Tsunami" or that citizenship question "guaranteed" to be on the 2020 Census, all those "winning" candidates like "Senator Roy Moore," and those multitude of other things we were promised because it's just so much easier to ignore the inconvenience of reality and be a simple-minded sucker wound tightly around Donald Trump.

    And, Russ, I know this post seems repetitive, but the dipshit who answered my comment to you from yesterday's commentary wherein I was discussing stupid people has now clearly, unequivocally, vigorously, and enthusiastically answered to the name "rube" multiple times now in hysterical fashion. *laughs*

    So I've said it before, and I'll say it again: It is always a win-win when the rubes step up and volunteer to make our point for us. :)

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Great Liberal Freakout Has Begun

    Biden is fading fast, and Democrats are losing their minds.

    Joe Biden could finish as low as fifth place in tonight’s New Hampshire primary results. Certainly, if we can trust the most recent poll, the former vice president will do no better than third, behind Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Even a third-place finish in New Hampshire for Biden would be an improvement over his dismal showing in the Iowa caucus, in which he placed fourth behind Sanders, Buttigieg, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. But as badly as Warren’s campaign has floundered, it’s unlikely Biden could beat her in her own backyard. What most troubles the dreams of establishment Democrats is the worst-case scenario for Biden in New Hampshire, namely that Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who finished fifth in Iowa, can gain enough momentum to claim fourth place tonight.
    https://spectator.org/the-great-liberal-freakout-has-begun/

    Tonight is not going to be pretty for Democrats...

    President Trump will be the big winner.. :D

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    So I've said it before, and I'll say it again: It is always a win-win when the rubes step up and volunteer to make our point for us. :)

    Dodge and deflect all you want, Victoria..

    But you know and I know that you Democrats are going to lose and lose big in Nov..

    Just like you lost with your faux impeachment coup..

    You called that one wrong as well.

    You are ALWAYS wrong.. :D

  25. [25] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    There are elements of the Dems that are anti-Bernie. Not everyone supporting another candidate is anti-Bernie and not every Bernie supporter is anti-other candidates though there is an element of Bernie supporters that are anti-corporate Dem.

    The vast majority of all of those above will vote for whatever candidate the Dems nominate because they are all anti-Trump.

    And whichever candidate wins the general election nothing will change because it will be a big money candidate, this will ensure that the 40% remain on the sidelines because they know nothing will change by voting for a big money candidate and the 2022 and 2024 campaigns will be the same as 2018 and 2020 with the exception being how much worse things have gotten in 4 years.

    The big money Dems do not care as much about winning as they do about preserving big money in our political process and giving the progressive wing of the party just enough of a voice in the party to keep them from going elsewhere.

    That is more important to them than beating Trump no matter what they say.

    It is not always a bonus when idiots seem quite intent on proving their stupidity for you.

    It is a bonus for the big money interests when citizens keep proving their stupidity by voting for big money candidates.

    But it is not a bonus for our country, democracy or any citizens that want the big money out of politics.

    And the most anti-bonus part about it is that many of the 80& of citizens that want the big money out of politics are the same people that keep voting for the big money candidates.

    How can you rationalize voting for something that you don't want, big money candidates, and then complain you don't get what you want?

    How can you rationalize, CW, encouraging stupidity by pretending the show is real when you could easily provide citizens with information on how they can use the basic tools of democracy to achieve the goal of getting big money out of politics?

    How can you rationalize not exploring something that could change the Democratic Party into real opposition to the big money interests and not just a big money alternative to the big money Republicans which could blow the doors off Trump and get some of the 40% to participate in 2020 and even more in 2022 and 2024 with the vast majority of those new voters voting for the small donor Dems?

    Maybe that's why you never address this. You can't rationalize not informing citizens about this so you just pretend that it is something that citizens can't or won't do so there is no point in informing citizens they could do it or even discussing why you think it can't be done, can't work or citizens won't do it.

    Or maybe you just think that big money is not a problem.

    Nah. Even you would have to admit that is not true if you had the balls to discuss this.

    But even if you believe that big money is a problem, your actions do not match your beliefs.

    It's time to put your mouth where the money is and provide citizens with the information they need to use our electoral process the way it is designed to work and match your actions to your beliefs instead of your rationalizations that are obviously so weak that you won't even put them up against me and the opportunity for citizens to act like real Americans by standing up to the big money interests that are destroying our democracy, country and the very planet on which our democracy and country exist.

    Or maybe just change the name of the blog to The Great Pretender so it will be more in line with the reality-based concept.

  26. [26] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    24

    Dodge and deflect all you want, Victoria..

    Said the guy who continues to answer to "rube" and who deflects to November 2016 ad nauseam. Discussing the deflection on your part neither qualifies as a "dodge" nor a "deflection" on anyone else's part.

    If you don't like deflection, you must really despise your reflection... the dipshit attempting desperately to convince everyone he's always correct when he practically never is.

    But you know and I know that you Democrats are going to lose and lose big in Nov..

    * Your insignificant little brain cell isn't equipped to comprehend what I know.
    * I'm still not a Democrat and never will be.
    * Similar to your lousy predictions of last November, you seem to have failed to factor in the irrefutable fact that the Republican Party is shrinking.

    Just like you lost with your faux impeachment coup..

    President Impeached In Perpetuity cries hysterically about the fact he was impeached... one of the few things he doesn't lie about when he opens his Orange Blowhole. So you believe Trump when he lies yet take issue when he cries... proving irrefutably that you do belong indubitably to that veritable cornucopia overflowing with nuts and rubes. :)

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Impeached In Perpetuity cries hysterically about the fact he was impeached...

    Facts to support??

    Of course not.. You NEVER have any facts..

    proving irrefutably that you do belong indubitably to that veritable cornucopia overflowing with nuts and rubes. :)

    Says the moron Democrat who has ***ALWAYS*** been wrong about EVERYTHING to do with President Trump. :smirk: :D

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    As much as I like Joe Biden...

    Electile Dysfunction: Joe Biden Pulls Out Early from New Hampshire
    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/11/joe-biden-leaves-new-hampshire/

    THAT headline is funny.. :D

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Impeached In Perpetuity

    Yer fellow Democrat, Bill Clinton was impeached in perpetuity as well..

    You don't care about that..

    Why should anyone care about President Trump's??

    Answer?? No one does.. Especially President Trump..

    He is royally THRILLED that Dumbocrats did the VERY FIRST TOTALLY PARTISAN House Impeachment...

    By EVERY quote from the Dumbocrat Party, an ILLEGITIMATE impeachment..

    Then he gets to bitch slap Dumbocrats at the SOTU speech.. A speech which even your fellow Democrats declare, was knocked outta the park..

    And to complete the AWESOMEST Trifacta, President Trump and real Patriotic Americans got to laugh their asses off at the pathetic shit show Dumbocrats put on in Iowa....

    No matter how ya want to spin it.. Dumobcrats had a royally frak'ed up week and President Trump and REAL patriotic Americans had the very bestest of weeks.

    You Dumbocrats couldn't find a single brain cell amongst ya'all if ya had a map and a flashlight...

    :smirk: :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    One has the feeling that Victoria is about to go on "haitus" (IE running away and licking her wounds) soon..

    :smirk: :D

    Make sure yer back by Nov, Victoria.. I would hate for you to miss all the gloating that yer fellow Dems couldn't take the White House, couldn't take the Senate and lost the House..

    :smirk: :D

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:
  32. [32] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    29

    Yer fellow Democrat, Bill Clinton was impeached in perpetuity as well..

    You don't care about that..

    You seem demonstrably clueless that typing out a lie over and over doesn't magically turn it into a fact; I'm not a Democrat and never will be. So Bubba Mike Trump resorts yet again to his standard knee-jerk deflection and manufactured bullshit pulled straight out of his flabby ass wherein he regularly and like clockwork enlists his bestie Bubba Clinton and the asinine claim of reading someone's mind while at the exact same time proving definitively and without doubt he hasn't got one. Predictable, thy name is Bubba Trump.

    Why should anyone care about President Trump's??

    You are the one who keeps bringing it up, dipshit; you tell us.

    Answer?? No one does..

    We accept your concession that you are "no one." Now please accept our declaration that your modus operandi and standard drivel comment spew is as rote as it is predictable.

    Especially President Trump..

    Suck that Trump, Mike, it's been a whole half-second since you last stroked, and you wouldn't want to miss a chance to pump that Trump.

    He is royally THRILLED that Dumbocrats did the VERY FIRST TOTALLY PARTISAN House Impeachment...

    I think you have confused being the holster of Donald Trump with being his mouthpiece, and I would further wager that even Dumbshit Donald wouldn't want his nattering little bitches telling the world what they invented on his behalf or pulled straight out their ass.

    By EVERY quote from the Dumbocrat Party, an ILLEGITIMATE impeachment..

    But who cares about impeachment? Oh, right! According to "no one"... no one.

    Then he gets to bitch slap Dumbocrats at the SOTU speech.. A speech which even your fellow Democrats declare, was knocked outta the park..

    Opinions are like Trump's assholes, and I'm still not a Democrat no matter how many times "no one" types it.

    And to complete the AWESOMEST Trifacta, President Trump and real Patriotic Americans got to laugh their asses off at the pathetic shit show Dumbocrats put on in Iowa....

    I guess that makes me a real Patriotic American then because I haven't stopped laughing yet, and that's despite the indubitable fact that I have no demonstrably monstrously fat ass like you and Fat Donald in desperate need of laughing off.

    No matter how ya want to spin it.. Dumobcrats had a royally frak'ed up week and President Trump and REAL patriotic Americans had the very bestest of weeks.

    We weren't discussing Trump's week, but your attempt to spin the subject is as predictable and undeniable as you being a pure unadulterated rube, and thank you again ever so much for coming repeatedly when my comment to Russ about rubes called your name. It's rubes like you that are the living embodiment of exactly what I was explaining to Russ.

    You Dumbocrats couldn't find a single brain cell amongst ya'all if ya had a map and a flashlight...

    I'm still not a Democrat no matter how many times a dipshit types it, but I would wager without hesitation that a Democrat wouldn't be impressed with y'all's ability to find a single brain cell like Trump with your map and your flashlight, but when you've got no education like you, I guess your map and your flashlight will have to suffice. *laughs*

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    You are the one who keeps bringing it up, dipshit; you tell us

    Says the moron, the ONLY moron I might add, who has mentioned Impeachment In Perpetuity several times.

    But who cares about impeachment? Oh, right! According to "no one"... no one.

    People care about the ILLEGITIMATE impeachment, dipshit..

    Is that too complex a point for yer feebled drug addled brain??

    We weren't discussing Trump's week,

    Yes, we were.. It was the subject of an entire FTP Weigantian commentary..

    Have you hit yer head lately??

    I'm still not a Democrat

    Yea.. You keep saying that.. But, as usual, you are full of shit..

    :smirk: :D

  34. [34] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    30

    One has the feeling that Victoria is about to go on "haitus" (IE running away and licking her wounds) soon..

    Tell us more about this "haitus" [sic] while you simultaneously prove our point about your demonstrable ever-present ignorance and utter cluelessness... and with little help necessary from the rest of us possessing functioning brains and not dependent on a "feeling" and/or a "map and a flashlight" in pale substitution.

    Your projection is duly noted, though, since it was indeed you who was on hiatus (i.e., on a recess) and nowhere to be found here in Weigantia when midterms 2018 rolled around.

    Make sure yer back by Nov, Victoria.. I would hate for you to miss all the gloating that yer fellow Dems couldn't take the White House, couldn't take the Senate and lost the House..

    Said Bubba Mike Trump who was nowhere to be found here in Weigantia in November 2018 during the midterm elections when multiple years of his worthless (easily searchable) predictions were blown all to Hell like a hand grenade in a single day... because the rube had a "feeling" and was operating on a "map and a flashlight" in lieu of an intellect.

    Stupid is as stupid does. ~ Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump

  35. [35] 
    dsws wrote:

    [11] Michale wrote:
    And I have the HEAD of the NOAA stating as fact that the sharpie'ed weather map was factually accurate

    What was the exact quote? I remember a statement from NOAA higher-ups saying that the NOAA staffer who criticized Trump had gotten it wrong, but I don't remember them saying what the sharpie mark meant, let alone that whatever-it-is was right.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why New Hampshire may be the last stop for Elizabeth Warren's campaign: Pollsters break it down
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/why-new-hampshire-may-be-last-stop-for-elizabeth-warrens-campaign-pollsters-break-it-down

    Looks like Fauxcohantos is gonna bite the big one.. :D

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    What was the exact quote? I remember a statement from NOAA higher-ups saying that the NOAA staffer who criticized Trump had gotten it wrong, but I don't remember them saying what the sharpie mark meant, let alone that whatever-it-is was right

    From Wednesday, August 28, through Monday, September 2, the information provided by NOAA and the National Hurricane Center to President Trump and the wider public demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama. This is clearly demonstrated in Hurricane Advisories #15 through #41, which can be viewed at the following link.

    The Birmingham National Weather Service’s Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time.

    President Trump showed the sharpie altered map on 1 Sep...

    So, at the time the map was shown, the official map was altered the latest up to date information..

    And the idea to charge President Trump with altering "an official document" is ludicrous and HILARIOUSLY funny..

    The President is the ultimate authority.. If he wants to alter an "official document" then he has all the authority he needs as the highest official in the land...

  38. [38] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    You really can't blame Trump for Sharpiegate.

    He just didn't understand that using a sharpie to alter a weather map was different than when Putin showed him how to use a sharpie to alter the map on Crimea. :D

  39. [39] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    33

    Says the moron, the ONLY moron I might add, who has mentioned Impeachment In Perpetuity several times.

    Said the moron who just mentioned it and who quite obviously isn't me. And surprise/not surprise that if you broach the subject of "faux impeachment coup" like a rube stuck on stupid, someone/anyone will be around to remind you that even Dumpshit Donald knows his impeachment wasn't fake and that he's definitely been impeached for all eternity; otherwise, there'd be no need to whine incessantly and hysterically about having been impeached. That's a fact that's going to linger in history... always.

    People care about the ILLEGITIMATE impeachment, dipshit..

    But who cares about Trump's impeachment Mike questions... meanwhile, Mike prattles on and on proving without doubt that Mike obviously does... despite all his flailing and hysterical protestations otherwise... and the ridiculous and asinine assertion that an adjective thrown in there in ALL CAPS changes the meaning of the subject entirely.

    But please keep flailing and digging, Mike; you're doing a spectacular job of making yourself look like an ignorant rube... who answers repeatedly on cue when the word is used.

    Yes, we were.. It was the subject of an entire FTP Weigantian commentary..

    To be factually accurate versus a total lying liar like Mike, the actual subject of conversation taking place when you answered repeatedly to the term "rube" was your insistence that Trump made a correct forecast when he took a Sharpie and incorrectly and illegally altered an old weather map... yet another dipshit with a "map" in lieu of an intellect... oh where was Trump's "flashlight" and "feeling"? *laughs*

    No one was discussing "Trump's week" when you decided to jump repeatedly on cue when I used the word "rube." However, your flailing ignorance to deflect the subject of Trump's stupidity as well as your own has backfired on you spectacularly, and I would like to thank you for the assist. You've made making you look stupid a piece of cake... and also pie!

    Have you hit yer head lately??

    Nope, but I'm definitely still chuckling, and I do hope sincerely that y'all are still laughing your asses off since it would serve Trump well to lose some of that ample ass fat, and you might accidentally and mercifully be set free of him.

    You keep saying that.. But, as usual, you are full of shit..

    That muffled sound you're mistaking for me is Donald, and thank you ever so much for letting us all know where your head is lodged. Please tell Sean Hannity and Bill Barr that Weigantia says hello. :)

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    You really can't blame Trump for Sharpiegate.

    He just didn't understand that using a sharpie to alter a weather map was different than when Putin showed him how to use a sharpie to alter the map on Crimea. :D

    Actually, it was Obama who worked with Putin to alter the map of Ukraine to add The Crimea to Russia..

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    That muffled sound you're mistaking for me is Donald,

    Ahh.. The old I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I comeback..

    Third grade at best...

    But that's yer level of mentality so I am not surprised..

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lindsey Graham on New Hampshire primary: 'You’re seeing the demise of the Democratic Party'
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/lindsey-graham-democratic-party-demise-new-hampshire

    Yep...

    The Democrats are decimated, disintegrating and demoralized.

    The idea that they can actually take on President Trump in Nov and actually keep the House???

    Laughable...

    Of course there are morons like Russ and Victoria who actually believe that Democrats have a chance in Nov..

    Well, they also said President Trump would be removed from office, so that shows their level of intelligence..

    Somewhere between an amoeba and a cockroach.. :D

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, it was Obama who worked with Putin to alter the map of Ukraine to add The Crimea to Russia..

    Yunno.. When Obama asked for Putin's help in winning his election and promised Putin fealty in return??

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., claimed on “America’s Newsroom” Tuesday that "the demise of the Democratic Party" is underway, as voters headed to the polls in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary.

    “The president’s in a spot where he really can't lose as this plays out,” Graham said on Tuesday. “[Former Vice President Joe] Biden’s going to win South Carolina, you’re going to have three different winners in the first three states.”

    “On Super Tuesday, I think [billionaire and former New York City mayor Mike] Bloomberg is going to make a real dent. He’s going to make a real presence,” he continued. “You’re going to go to this convention with Biden basically collapsed. Somebody’s going to fill that lane, it’s not going to be [Democratic Sen.] Amy Klobuchar, it’s going to be Bloomberg.”

    He went on to say that if the 2020 Democratic National Convention in July comes around and “if you can't find a nomination on the first round of voting, the Democratic Party as we know it is going to completely implode.”

    Graham said if a nomination isn’t determined after the first round of voting, “It’s going to help President Trump get reelected.”

    Cannot wait until the Dim convention..

    It's going to be popcorn worthy to see Democrats flail around trying to act competent.. :D

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biden super PAC warns of 'doomsday scenario'

    An outside group backing Biden tries to soothe nervous donors — by raising the specter of a nightmare if one of his opponents wins.

    A super PAC for Joe Biden — in a call to arms to wavering donors and supporters — is warning of a "doomsday scenario" for the Democratic Party if the wobbly onetime frontrunner is forced out of the presidential race.

    A memo from the Unite the Country super PAC to donors, obtained by POLITICO, asserts that the party could pay a steep price if Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg or Amy Klobuchar is chosen as the nominee. Most ominously, it raises the specter of Sanders and billionaire Mike Bloomberg squaring off at a split convention.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/11/biden-pac-2020-democrats-113684#431

    Blue on Blue. Democrat Civil War..

    What's not to love!?? :D

  46. [46] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    OK, I'll have time later to address some of these comments, but just wanted to point out that today's column is up (early!) with my NH picks. I'll be commenting live (in the comments) tonight as the returns begin to come in, too.

    Anyway, check out my NH picks and feel free to make some of your own:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2020/02/11/my-new-hampshire-picks-2/

    -CW

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now, let's refer to the ONLY accepted news source in Weigantia.. :D

    Going Into N.H., Dems Struggle to Define Their Party's Direction

    The Democratic presidential race has remained stubbornly fluid, with their front-runner, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a seemingly unpalatable pick for the party establishment. Voters in Iowa and New Hampshire seem frustrated with their choices, fearing no one in the field has the strength or stamina to take on President Trump.

    In New Hampshire, a Suffolk University survey shows the possibility of last-minute candidate shifts, even ground-shattering ones. A majority of likely primary voters said they either hadn’t made up their minds (12%) or they could change their minds (45%) at the last minute.

    Democrats are on the verge of their own civil war: nominate a moderate candidate who has the ability to unite blue-collar workers in states like Pennsylvania or Michigan but isn’t polling well or swing wildly to the left and unabashedly back someone who isn’t even in their party – a self-avowed socialist like Sanders. Neither option seems to be sitting well with voters.

    “We cannot nominate Bernie. If he’s the nominee, it’s a disaster,” Rep. Tim Ryan, an Ohio Democrat who endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden after dropping out of the presidential race, told Time magazine last week. “Socialism is not popular and would sink us.”
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/02/11/going_into_nh_dems_struggle_to_define_their_partys_direction__142368.html

    Democrats are toast...

    The nominate Bernie and President Trump's landslide re-election is assured...

    The nominate Buttagig and President Trump's landslide re-election is assured...

    Democrats simply have *NO* path to victory..

    All of their effort should go towards mitigating their embarrassment of a HUGE loss at the White House and a bitter defeat in losing the House to the GOP..

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Former Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel argued supporting Sanders could possibly sink the Democratic Party by isolating swing voters.

    "The fact is, one of the threats to the party right now is a rupture in the core," Emanuel said on ABC's “This Week.” "We as a party, to win Arizona, to win Wisconsin, to win in Michigan and Pennsylvania, and to be viable in North Carolina, need a candidate who moves those swing moderate voters.”

    Yet, no Democratic presidential candidate has finished lower than second in New Hampshire and has gone on to win their party’s nomination. That’s looking good for Sanders, who’s leading the state, followed by Pete Buttigieg, who virtually tied Sanders in the Iowa caucuses.

    The great hope of Biden seems to have faded after his dismal fourth-place finish in the Hawkeye State, and during last week’s Democratic debate he practically conceded New Hampshire in his opening remarks.

    The problem for Biden is clear: He often doesn’t know what state he’s in and his lack of energy on the debate stage has shocked even his more ardent supporters. He’s largely running as the heir apparent to Barack Obama but hasn’t even secured his endorsement. Biden’s fundraising is anemic, and after potentially suffering two early loses, how can he convincingly tell voters he’s the most electable in the field?

    Biden's myth of electability has all but disappeared..

    Democrats have decided that PARTY PURITY is their platform...

    Just as I predicted they would..

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    That leaves an opening, which Buttigieg seems to be capitalizing on. But don’t be fooled by his suave rhetoric. The former mayor of South Bend, Ind., is not the centrist answer. His record is weak – and, aside from casting himself as a moderate, his campaign promises cast him in a totally different light.

    Buttigieg stops short of endorsing “Medicare for All” on the campaign trail, but does support a public option, which would eventually lead the way for a Medicare for All system. He says he doesn’t want to confiscate your guns, but he does want to license every one of them, leading to such a system. And on ABC’s “The View” last week he refused to answer whether he supported infanticide, leaving the door open to murdering babies up until the day they are born. Not to mention he wants to abolish the Electoral College – the same kind of system that arguably won him the Iowa caucuses.

    Such policy mutations have led even the Sanders campaign to question Buttigieg’s authenticity. “He’s good with the turn-of-the-phrase, and he pitches what he thinks sounds good,” campaign manager Faiz Shakir told the Washington Times. “It’s our job to make sure that ... he’s being accurate. And it is accurate to say that he used to be for Medicare for All and no longer is.”

    This has all left Democratic voters with a sense of unease.

    “I’d like to vote strategically, but we Democrats are in disarray and I don’t know what strategic is,” Millie LaFontaine, a 69-year-old New Hampshire voter told Reuters. “I am afraid.”

    “We’re a party in chaos,” Rep. Marcia Fudge, a Democratic congresswoman from Ohio, told Politico.

    No matter WHERE you turn, Democrats from all walks of life are united in their claim that their Party is in disarray...

    You people are not doing the Democrat Party any favors by putting yer heads in the sand over the very real problems that the Dem Party has...

    The first step to FIXING the problems is admitting that there ARE problems.

    None of ya'all (NEN) can admit the problems..

    And THAT is why Democrats will lose big in Nov...

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democratic strategist James Carville was even more pointed, telling Vox, “It’s like we’re losing our damn minds.” On MSNBC he said he was “scared to death” that Democrats would blow the 2020 election, adding in an interview with the New York Times that “if the Democratic Party doesn’t come together, we’re going to lose the country.”

    Resisting President Trump could provide a strong unifier for the Democratic Party – but it sure didn’t turn out votes for them in the Iowa caucuses. The president meanwhile had 32,000 caucus-goers turn out for an uncontested nomination, dwarfing the 8,000 that came out when George W. Bush ran for his second term.

    Meanwhile, the president has soared to the highest approval rating of his term, with Gallup saying 63% of respondents approve of the work he’s doing on the economy.

    Democrats should be scared. As they grapple with the direction of their party, with no clear vision of the future, Republicans have unified around President Trump and are energized to elect him for another four years. Unlike Democrats, with no clear message, ours is clear: Keep America Great.

    Democrats SHOULD be scared..

    But to hear ya'all tell it, everything is coming up roses for the Democrat Party and it's smooth sailing to capture the White House and the Senate and retain the House..

    It would be laughably hysterical if it wasn't so sad and pathetic..

    The plus side for me is I'll be winning all my wagers.. :D

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump steals the Dems’ spotlight at New Hampshire rally

    ‘We have the highest poll numbers we’ve ever had — thank you, Nancy, very much’
    https://spectator.us/trump-steals-dems-spotlight-new-hampshire-rally/

    All of the excitement and enthusiasm is on the GOP's and President Trump's side...

    The losses, over and over and over again, at the hands of President Trump has demoralized and decimated the Democrat Party...

  52. [52] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    41

    That muffled sound you're mistaking for me is Donald, and thank you ever so much for letting us all know where your head is lodged. Please tell Sean Hannity and Bill Barr that Weigantia says hello. ~ Kick

    Ahh.. The old I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I comeback..

    Nope! Spectacularly wrong, epic fail, and totally opposite unless you're under the ridiculous delusion that you are Donald Trump because I'm obviously not him, and no matter how hard and how high you jam that empty head of yours up into Trump's ample fat ass folds while bumping repeatedly up against Sean Hannity and Bill Barr, you shall remain ever the ignorant rube with that "feeling" and that "map and flashlight" in lieu of a functioning brain... that penniless dipshit who landed himself into his very own stench hole because of his own reeking ignorance that is easily searchable public record... in perpetuity.

    He who represents himself has a fool for a client.
    ~ Abraham Lincoln

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Donald Trump successfully trolled Democrats once again Monday — hosting a packed rally the night before their New Hampshire primary election and successfully directing attention and energy away from Democratic campaigners desperate to interest voters.

    The near-overflowing arena at Southern New Hampshire University stood in stark contrast to the sparsely attended campaign trail events put on just around the corner by Joe Biden, Amy Klobuchar, and the rest of the Democratic field.

    Bernie Sanders may have a rabid online fan base, but how many would camp out all night and day in the frigid February snow for a chance to see their political hero? Warren couldn’t even get hungry diners to glance up from their meals long enough to ask for their vote.

    ‘I LOVE Trump,’ a concession stand worker said enthusiastically as she doled out chicken tenders and fries to the hundreds of people lined up for food and drink. Attendees danced and sang along to classic rock anthems by Billy Joel and Elton John for hours before the president’s speech, putting Mayor Pete Buttigieg team’s ‘High Hopes’ dance to shame.

    :D

    I am actually beginning to feel sorry for Democrats...

    Well, no.. Not really.. They were warned time and time again that they were taking steps that would actually HELP President Trump and HURT Democrats..

    So, Democrats made their own beds.... Now they gotta lie in them..

    And lie they will.. Over and over and over and over again...

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    The president concurred, telling the crowd, ‘The Democrats want to run your healthcare but they can’t even run a caucus in Iowa’.

    That's a dead on ballz accurate VERY good point.. :D

    Monday night’s rally showed the campaign’s willingness to capitalize on the errors of its opponents.

    The president hit Speaker Nancy Pelosi for ‘mumbling’ behind him during last week’s State of the Union address and described the impeachment ‘hoax’ as having ‘completely failed and utterly backfired.’ Pelosi indeed miscalculated when she tore up Trump’s SOTU address, as pro-Trumpers quickly edited a video showing Pelosi ripping the speech as the president honored military heroes. And as the president escaped from impeachment without a Senate conviction, his approval rating hit its highest level at any point in his presidency.

    A stroke of genius spinning Pelosi's childish temper tantrum video.. :D

    Ya really have to LAUGH at how Democrats are ALWAYS screwing up!! :D

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Victoria spewed:

    blaaa blaaa blaaa... whine whine whine... cry cry cry

    And yet, with all your bullshit and lies....

    President Trump is going to win the White House..

    And Democrats are going to lose their majority in the House...

    And, on the night of 3 Nov, I'll be hear laughing my ass off and you'll be off somewhere sulking and whining that, ONCE AGAIN, I was dead on ballz accurate and you were full of shit.. :D

    What a fun day it's gonna be.. :D

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Candidates Votes % Delegates
    Amy Klobuchar 8 29.63% 0
    Bernie Sanders 4 14.81% 0
    E. Warren 4 14.81% 0
    Andrew Yang 3 11.11% 0

    And AWWAAAAYYYYY We go!!! :D

    It's gonna be fun!!! Popcorn is all ready!!

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Reposted for Clarity

    Candidates...Votes...%.....Delegates
    Amy Klobuchar....8....29.63%.....0
    Bernie Sanders...4....14.81%.....0
    E. Warren........4....14.81%.....0
    Andrew Yang......3....11.11%.....0

    And AWWAAAAYYYYY We go!!! :D

    It's gonna be fun!!! Popcorn is all ready!!

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    Grrrrrr

  59. [59] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    I didn't say Trump helped Putin on Crimea, I said Putin showed him how he did it on a map with a sharpie.

    Why are you so defensive all of a sudden out of nowhere? :D

  60. [60] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mike
    55

    blaaa blaaa blaaa... whine whine whine... cry cry cry

    Oh, and Mike's reading comprehension issues come to the fore yet again. Talk about third grade, and Mike naturally demonstrates his unmistakable resemblance to his own elementary remark because he is ever the projectionist, and of course he does.

    And yet, with all your bullshit and lies....

    Well then, it takes a special kind of dumbshit like yours wherein you'd allow such things to get your knickers in a twist if they weren't facts... not at all unlike the special kind of ignorance it takes in order to answer repeatedly to a comment to Russ wherein you quite obviously recognized yourself in the word "rube."

    President Trump is going to win the White House..

    Nobody wins the "White House" dumb ass, they win the presidency and are allowed to live in it temporarily. However, a 50/50 prediction from the guy who insisted Bernie's campaign was over is about what we'd expect from the combination asshat and board troll who keeps getting anything with more difficult odds spectacularly wrong on a regular basis. I would definitely stick to those 50/50-type predictions wherein your odds are much easier since your track record at anything else is so woefully inadequate and demonstrably pathetic that you keep getting your Trumpian fat ass handed to you by your very own Mitts.

    And Democrats are going to lose their majority in the House...

    The Democrats can't possibly have a majority in the House because of that "Red Tsunami" we were promised by Mike the ignorant dipshit... who was nowhere to be found in November 2018.

    And, on the night of 3 Nov, I'll be hear laughing my ass off and you'll be off somewhere sulking and whining that, ONCE AGAIN, I was dead on ballz accurate and you were full of shit.. :D

    Will you really be hear [sic], you demonstrable moron... when you were nowhere near this forum in November 2018 after spending months and months sounding exactly like you do now... and then running away like a true moron Trump chump with an impeachment to prove just how wrong you actually were?

    Idiot.

    I was wrong about you not knowing you're a rube; my sincere apologies for doubting your bone-deep ignorance. :)

  61. [61] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    The President is the ultimate authority.. If he wants to alter an "official document" then he has all the authority he needs as the highest official in the land...

    Funny, the Constitution is an “official document”, and Trump has no authority to alter it! Trump cannot alter court rulings, not change the criminal code at his whim.

    Quit proving that your worship of the Diaper-rash Don is just making you dumber by the hour...it’s pathetic.

Comments for this article are closed.