The Irreducible Logic Of An Illogical Choice

I’ve said it before, I’ll no doubt say it again; I don’t like Donald Trump. I discovered my dislike of him in 1986. I kept it going, cordially, even through the 2000s, when many of today’s “resistance” (gag koff choke) were making him reality TV’s most popular personality.

And I like a lot of Trump supporters even less. Not present company of course.

I voted for Scott Walker in 2016 – and still think he was the best person for the job by a Wisconsin mile. I didn’t think Trump had a chance – of staying in the race after caucuses, then of getting anywhere near the nomination, and finally of getting elected. I literally went into shock, on the air, when it became clear he was going to win three years ago.

I figured, best case, we’d get a couple good SCOTUS justices. Two down, maybe another to go, here. If nothing else, I consider him a success for that alone. There’s been more; obliterating ISIS (although this Kurd thing could screw that all up), focusing the nation on illegal immigration, rolling back some of the damage Obama did on foreign policy…

…but of course, he’s spending like a Democrat (and the Democrats, who control the House, which controls appropriations, *could* do something about it, but they won’t, so shush, Dems). Which is going to be a huge problem…someday

Thing is? Given any of the alternatives to Trump? I couldn’t in conscience vote for any of them.

*Every last one* of them at the top of the ticket (except Tulsi Gabbard, and I have as much chance of getting the Democrat nomination as she does) is promising to do to the Bill of Rights what Donald Trump bragged about doing to fictional women; grab it and molest it. A vote for *any* Democrat is a vote for a gutting the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, for abolishing the Electoral College (making the entire country serfs, paying obeisance to New York and California), for imposing “our best interests” on us exactly the way it’s done in Baltimore, Newark, Chicago, Detroit, or all of California. From sea to crumbling ,dysfunctional, crime-ridden sea. But hey, abortion will be legal until the sixth trimester…

Sorry, Libertarian friends – if you normally vote GOP, a third-party vote is a vote for the Dems. More’s the pity. See you down-ticket, maybe. And all you “withhold my consent” folks? All due respect, but that’s just too precious for me.

So – will I vote Trump? We’ll see.

Will I vote for *any* Democrat who’s actually going to get on a ticket outside of a red Congressional district? I couldn’t do that in any form of conscience that could be reached at the speed of light in my lifetime. I prefer Trump. God help me.

Maybe He’ll Come Out, Next

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Beto urges banks to refuse service to people Beto doesn’t like.  This is a good start, but it’s not sufficient. I recommend we take principle farther
Urge Banks to cut off business with anyone who has an abortion.
Urge Banks to cut off credit for all Methodist’s.
Urge Banks to refuse to do business with companies that sell or Support rap music
Urge banks to cut off credit card transactions at liquor stores, pizza parlors, State Fair cheese curd booth, and other unhealthy food vendors. Also, no credit cards for Vaping, tobacco, fireworks, p*** movies, adult novelty store sales, or tap dancing shoes, which are totally legal but they annoy me.
Yes, I think he’s really onto something here.
Joe Doakes

Where “onto something” = “desperately trying to get traction with an ever-loonier Democrat far left”.

This Time Without Daddy Warbucks’ Money

Let’s not be coy about it – Jason Lewis lost the 2nd District congressional election because Angie Craig floated to a close win on a tsunami of out-of-district money during a first-term midterm that was bound to bring out the knee-jerks and the soccer moms. The Bloomberg fortune alone pumped seven figures of filthy anti-gun lucre into the district – testimony to how much Big Left hated the most articulate conservative in the House.

But it’s a whole ‘nother election, and Angie Craig has exactly as much to show for her time in office as you’d expect an “HR Executive” to have accomplished – the same as they accomplish in the real business world. Bupkes.

Or – rematch? Nah. Maybe a swing at the Butcher of Vandalia, Tina Smith.

I’d go for that.

Off The Table?

It’s about a year and a half too early to be making big assumptions about such things, but its entirely possible Trump (and relentless Democrat intersectional class warfare) has driven Ohio out of “Swing State” status:

The first hint that Ohio might have lost its bellwether status came in 2016. If you’ll recall from my Wargaming the Electoral College series for the presidential election, Ohio was never in play for Hillary Clinton. While that should have been a coal mine canary that Trump’s chances of winning were far better than the polls indicated, most every expert (and Yours Truly) glossed over that indicator as we pored over our 270toWin maps.

Previously, Barack Obama won Ohio handily in 2008 and 2012. George Bush’s electoral mastermind, Karl Rove, bet big on Ohio twice — and won twice, too. In fact, as Roll Call’s Ben Peters reminds us, “Going back to 1896, the Buckeye State has backed the winning candidate in all but two elections — the best record for any state in recent history.” Looking ahead, he writes, “Election handicappers largely put Ohio in the GOP column for 2020 — Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales rates the state’s presidential race Likely Republican.”

It’s good news in a sense – it’ll take the Dems a while, and a lot of illegal-alien voting, to get Ohio back in the gray zone – but it further shows that the nation’s cultural divide is becoming gnarlier.

And given how far to the extreme left the Democrat party is pulling, I’m almost afraid to see what “the center” looks like anymore.

Best Interests

Daniel “What-i-gieg?” Buggigieg is the incumbent mayor of South Bend Indiana.  He’s also the media’s flavor the the month among the roughly 225 Democrats running for the 2020 Presidential nod. 

Why? 

Is it the intersectional lottery – he’s a gay midwestern Democrat?  Or is it his accomplishments as mayor of South Bend?

It’s the lottery:

While Chicago is notorious for its murder rate, in 2015, Buttigieg’s South Bend actually topped Chicago’s 16.4 homicides per 100,000 people with a homicide rate of 16.79 per 100,000 people. Those numbers put Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s city on the list of the top 30 murder capitals in the country for the year.

In January, three shootings in one week killed two teens and left a woman paralyzed from the waist down. In one summer week, the casualties included a 12 and a 13-year-old. Last year, a man shot 6 people when he opened fire on 50 partygoers in a house and was sentenced to 100 years in jail.

By 2017, shootings had risen 20% on Mayor Buttigieg’s watch. Rapes increased 27% and aggravated assaults rose from 183 in 2013, the year before Buttigieg took office, to a stunning 563 assaults.

It’s hard to know which are flying faster, bullets in South Bend or dollars into Buttigieg’s campaign.

But then with Democrat politicians, effectiveness isn’t the issue.

The ability to divert the low-information voter base with a raft of hopey-changey unicorn piffle is.

Kamala Harris Is Everything That’s Ugly And Stupid About Government

The thing about “progressivism” is that while it flaps its jaws about “helping” the vulnerable, it inevitably ends up harming them.

Give them a $15 minimum wage and mandatory sick time? Get them laid off!

Attack landlords for the “quality” of housing they provide? Make housing unaffordable!

Kamala Harris, in her celebrated (by the media) record as a prosecutor, did more than her fair share of being unfair.

. Her crusade against the scourge of parents whose kids skip school, for example:

The good news is that post-CNN town hall, although much of the media lauded Harris and posted adoring articles about her acumen and likability, several took it upon themselves to resurface videos of Harris’s recent support for cracking down on truancy violations.
In 2010, for example, video shows Harris saying, “I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime. So I decided I was gonna start prosecuting parents for truancy.”
“Well, this was a little controversial in San Francisco,” Harris noted, with a folksy giggle.
Another video showed Harris bragging about her power: “As a prosecutor in law enforcement, I have huge stick. The school district as a carrot. Let’s work together in tandem…to get those kids in school.”

Have I ever mentioned how much I love prosecutors who are drunk with their own power?

Her policies involved $2,000 fines, and even jail time, for parents whose kids missed “too much” school.

Which, people who actually pay attention to this issue will tell you, is a stupid, stupid plan, unless your goal is to paint yourself as “tough”:

…the people hurt by this carceral approach are the very people who are most likely to be financially crippled by a few fines. We’re not talking about wealthy people here, and generally speaking, criminal justice reform advocates fear using punitive means to “help” poor people because it can be so easy for them to get trapped in a cycle of unpaid fines that leads to jail time, which leads to time forcibly taken off of work, which leads to even less money and even less ability to pay outstanding debts.
None of this, you can imagine, helps children get a more stable home life with more attention from parents. 

With junior high and high school kids, truancy often isn’t something parents can control (while still holding down jobs, anyway).

With younger kids? If they’re missing school regularly, it’s usually not a matter of “truancy”; it’s problems at home, more often than not problems stemming from one personal or social pathology or another.

In what other area of society do we try to address this sort of thing with fines and jail time?

Kamala Harris is a public cancer.

Unconstitutional

Beto O’Rouke – flirting with the idea of running for president with all the grace of an elementary school choir singing a medley from Les Miserables – discusses his take on the Constitution.

Caveat: I did not make this up. Emphasis added by me.

“I’m hesitant to answer it because I really feel like it deserves its due, and I don’t want to give you a — actually, just selfishly, I don’t want a sound bite of it reported, but, yeah, I think that’s the question of the moment: Does this still work?” O’Rourke said. “Can an empire like ours with military presence in over 170 countries around the globe, with trading relationships . . . and security agreements in every continent, can it still be managed by the same principles that were set down 230-plus years ago?

More and more, I’m starting to believe those who do believe we can, and must, govern ourselves by those principles should seek an amicable divorce from those who can’t.

The Next Tilt

Is O’Rourke the candidate to beat for the Dems, next time around?

Former Rep. Robert “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) has been meeting with former President Barack Obama. A meeting of these two minds makes a great deal of sense. In Obama, the Democrats found a blank slate candidate on whom voters could project their wishes and dreams and he won two terms. In O’Rourke, the Democrats may have found the answer to their struggles in Texas. And if they can even become competitive in Texas, national politics will shift in the Democrats’ favor. Democrats see 2020 as an opportunity to topple President Trump.

Two years is a long time in politics, but at the same time it’s no time at all. The 2020 primaries are just over a year away. Any serious candidate for president in 2020 must be laying the groundwork now if they have not already started. They must be looking at building campaign staff, and they must have money in the bank or proven access to money.

Read the whole thing

 

The Bloom Is Off The Rose

Barack Obama was on the campaign trail in the weeks leading up to mid-terms…

…and it’d seem he had the same results at mid-terms that he did as president:

Now – if only we can get the Dems to endorse Elizabeth Warren, and get Obama to stump for her…

Fight The Power

Senator Warren just held a press conference saying that genetics tests prove that she is of between 1/64 and 1/512 Native American ancestry – and therefore “Native American”

Those same tests say that I – one of the most northern European people I know, and proud of it – am between 1/64 and 1/256 African-American.

If I were to use my “African-American heritage” to get preferential treatment, including prestigious academic appointments, based on a genetic sample like that, not only would people mock and taunt me, I would mock and taunt myself. And I would deserve it.

Please, my Democrat friends – nominate this woman for president in 2020.

Marketplace Of Dumb Ideas

A longtime friend of this blog writes:

With all the talk of Trump being too impulsive to have his proverbial finger on nuclear weapons, Trump hasn’t really done anything rash. He says some annoying things, getting the goat of many people in this country. But, despite all the uproar, he has pretty much stuck to not doing anything to us.

However, the constant focus on his brash style of speaking has me most concerned about what the Democrats are going to produce next Presidential election to counter this. It has been speculated that Franken may run. He has already written a book, which usually signals interest. Last night, I had a nightmare that he announced. His pen will likely be a little more impulsive in doing to us.

Yeah, that thought’s crossed my mind.  I can just see the meeting at the DNC:  “So the people want loudmouthed, brash and incorrigible?  Let’s give ’em really loudmouthed, brash and incorrigible!”

If Franken doesn’t run, they might go with Dennis Rodman.

A Hit, A Laugh, And A Warning

Warren Henry, in writing about the “Womens March” for women against Donald Trump, notes sort of clubby fragmentalism that accompanies so much of the far left these days:

Black feminists have turned off white women with calls to check their privilege. The march’s inclusion of a pro-life group as a partner in a march that cites abortion rights as one of its “unity principles” was proven controversial and “horrified” the usual suspects. The march has now disowned the pro-life group. Given the march’s problems with alienating women, it is not surprising that the enterprise has had some difficulty attracting men.

The New York Times helpfully explains that “[t]his brand of feminism — frequently referred to as ‘intersectionality’ — asks white women [and presumably everyone else] to acknowledge that they have had it easier.” Moreover: “[T]hese debates over race also reflect deeper questions about the future of progressivism in the age of Trump. Should the march highlight what divides women, or what unites them? Is there room for women who have never heard of ‘white privilege’?”

Under Urbal Liberal Privilege, there are no contradictions.

I cite this partly to diagnose some of the problems with the American left today – and partly to give me an excuse to run this video which is the ultimate illustration of the phenomenon:

But let’s not get too smug, conservatives.  We’ve got problems of our own too – starting with the fact that while we started this cycle with over a dozen great conservatives, none got to the White House.  Remember how the Cruz faction hated the Rubio faction?

We’ve got our own homework to do.