posted
Can't wait to get into this one that I just bought. The Journal reviewed it yesterday.
I guess "The Big Blue Plane", "Hail To The Chief", and all the other trappings were simply too much to give up.
When I'm done reading it (presently halfway through Bob Woodward's "War"), I'm sure I will hold even stronger views that the Democrats can lay their election loss last year on Joe. After being such a loyal and faithful servant to his Party for over fifty years, how could have he "torpedoed" their chance of a '24 victory escapes me.
Posts: 10868 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Allow me to expand this topic beyond that of a book review that prompted me to lay down my $15 and buy it.
Let's address how Kamala ended up the Democratic nominee and her decisive, but not a landslide, loss to Donald Trump.
Obviously that Joe, clearly unfit to seek a second term, did so anyway relying on the long standing maxim that if a sitting President wants a second term, only the voters can stand in his way, as his Party will not.
But when it became so painfully clear at the outset of the Debate that Joe was unfit (and raising the corollary question "Who has been President over the term?"), what was the party to do? They had no choice other than (what I call) the Rehoboth Beach Conclave, where Joe was forced by his own Party, to step down.
But after telling a sitting President with Election Day only one hundred some days away, "You're out, Mr. President", where do you go from there?
Well, you can't have Primaries, and candidates were, since '52 when Ike was chosen over Taft, no longer chosen in the "smoke filled room" (at a hotel that had no air conditioning).
So Rehoboth Beach was a break with a 70 year tradition (remember; the Constitution didn't know what is a political party), and I think the Democrat's "bench" was not too happy about how the "Candidate by Default" came about.
By "The Bench", I mean anyone - Gavin, Amy, JB, Gretchen, Josh, or Kathy - that had visions of being a '28 contender. But now, had Kamala (note her exclusion from "The Bench") won, that "Bench" would not have had a crack until '32 - and several, JB and Amy, would have "aged out". So how anxious were any of them to get out and hit the trail for "Candidate-Select" Kamala.
So for the Campaign, all the Dems had was a good looking biracial gal, who had no particular record during her political career. True, the Convention was purported to be a love fest, and her appearances on TV shows like "The View", with the Libby women panelists throwing her "whiffileballs" were more of same.
Meantime, Trump, with less $$$ in hand, went and ran a "smart campaign". He identified potential voters, largely young men for whom Election Day was simply "time off", identified who could influence them to come out to vote (thinking Podcasters like Joe Rogan and various Professional Wrestling "Heroes") and got them to come to the Polls. That's how I surmise Trump won his decisive (as distinct from the Landslide my Evangelical Sister holds to) election victory.
Posts: 10868 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I look at your "The Bench" list my immediate thoughts are, none of the above. Admittedly, I live in the midst of "Trump Country", but we still had near 1/3 of the voters fill in the circle for Harris/Walz. These we figure to have been the vote Democrat even if they ran the Donkey crowd. As to the Trump voters being "largely young men for whom Election Day was simply "time off"", no. Most people I knew voting for Trump did so with a combination of enthusiasm and fear. Enthusiasm because we saw a man who would do his best to do what he promised regardless of objections, and fear about the airhead and dingbat (yes, that is what we saw in Harris and Walz) combination continuing the push the into nonsense and insanity that seems to have become the Democrat party's objective. Harris as "airhead" just from listening to her speak. Walz from his completely phony "good ole boy" play acting. At the least he should have done some off-camera practice before his under the hood and shotgun acts.
Posts: 2968 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is uncharted is the behavior of Democrats all lining up to “save” a certain Kilmar Abrego Garcia, their media falsely portraying him as a “Maryland family man” who was “wrongly deported” when in reality he is a wife-beating violent illegal alien MS-13 member who is exactly where he belongs right now, namely in prison back in his home country El Salvador. The Democrats can no longer pretend to be for the welfare of the USA.
Posts: 879 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, Mr. Garcia is hardly any kind of poster boy, and his "legality" to be in the United States is questionable.
But the fact remains that even an illegal, if such is established to be the case by sources other than my Sister's Newsmax, is entitled to "due process"; therefore "Puppy Killer Kristi" (whose TV ads I quickly mute), when she rounded him up even after it was evident that he had not been convicted of anything, (could well have should be) violated his right to due process.
We are a nation of laws, and there are a lot of folk in Wash nowadays who seem oblivious to that 235 year long tradition.
Posts: 10868 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
