Archive for the ‘Agriculture’ Category

Money won’t erase the memory of Mini Mike’s evasive answer when Elizabeth Warren prosecuted Mini Mike about lawsuits. CNN pundit Van Jones said that Bloomberg looked like the Titanic while Sen. Warren looked like the iceberg. That sums it up pretty nicely. Watch this and decide for yourself:

Obviously, this was a great moment for Sen. Elizabeth Warren. This was likely Sen. Warren’s finest debate performance. Bloomberg’s reply was entirely defensive and evasive. While Sen. Warren demanded specifics, Bloomberg spoke about statistics and awards that his organization had won.

The question that remains is whether this temporarily hurts Bloomberg or whether it sinks his ship. Will he organize a press conference and surround himself with women as character witnesses? Or will voters agree with Sen. Warren that voting for Bloomberg is voting for an out-of-touch billionaire? I suspect that we won’t know the answer to that until Super Tuesday.

Considering the fact that the Democrats’ establishment is frightened to death of Bernie, another thing to watch is whether the Democrats’ establishment will try to resuscitate Bloomberg’s campaign. Prior to last night’s debate, Bloomberg had moved up in the polls by running a pretty decent campaign. The campaign got high marks for their commercials.

Then came last night. No amount of slick ads can eliminate last night’s performance. Further, Bloomberg had gotten hit with one opposition research dump after another that made him look elitist and out-of-touch. His demeaning talk about farmers was particularly disgusting, especially after watching Paul Harvey’s ‘So God made a farmer”:

The farmer in Paul Harvey’s story is strong, virtuous, compassionate, hard-working and the type of man that others look up to. Mini Mike is none of those things. He’s an elitist city slicker who’s hiding something.

Politico has noticed how effective the Trump-GOP turnout machine is. Their article started by saying “President Donald Trump doesn’t have much of a primary fight on his hands — but Republican voters are nevertheless turning out in droves for him, a warning sign for Democrats in November.”

It expands on that theme, saying “The efforts are paying off, with Republicans turning out in historic numbers. Trump received more than 31,000 votes in the Iowa caucus, surpassing the 25,000 Democrats who turned out during Barack Obama’s successful 2012 reelection bid. Trump’s share was more than four times the number of Republicans who caucused during George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign. The vote totals in New Hampshire were even starker. The president received 129,696 votes, more than doubling Obama and Bush’s totals.”

John Couvillon, a Louisiana-based pollster, said “There is a personal vote for Donald Trump that is unshakeable.” Couvillon then said “Republican voters are willing to go out” to vote for Trump even though he doesn’t have a formidable primary challenge. That presents multiple challenges to the Democrats’ eventual nominee.

First, Trump has already identified his voters. Next, he’s testing his GOTV operation months before the general election. By the time November hits, President Trump’s campaign will be functioning at peak efficiency. Third, President Trump will have plenty of time to define his general election opponent long before his opponent will define himself.

The question is whether President Trump should define Bloomberg as the minority-hating mayor who thinks that he should throw minority students against the wall or whether he should define Bloomberg as a city slicker who thinks that farmers are idiots. My thought is that they should pick both. They both fit.

Does Bloomberg understand that he’ll need to flip Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to win the White House? At the rate he’s going, he’ll be lucky to win Minnesota.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Democrats’ presidential candidates are competing with each other in their race to Battleground State irrelevancy. Whether it’s Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren wanting to kill fossil fuels, or Mike Bloomberg insisting that farming is simple, city slicker Democrats apparently think that they can win the White House without winning midwestern battleground states.

While this won’t hurt Democrats with primary voters, it’ll sting the Democrats’ nominee in the general election, especially if Mike Bloomberg is the nominee. Picture the reaction Bloomberg would get across the Midwest when this video goes viral:


This is Bloomberg’s ‘Basket of Deplorables’ moment. That video can be deployed in multiple settings. First, it can be used to show he’s simply hostile to farmers. Next, it can be used to show that he really isn’t interested in uniting the country. Third, it can be used to ask how many other things he’ll have to apologize for. He’s already apologized for Stop-Question-and-Frisk.

The truth is that Mr. Bloomberg has said some rather heartless things. When he talked about throwing minorities up against the wall, he was either in his late 60s or early 70s. Shouldn’t he have known the ramifications of his statements? It isn’t like he was a reckless teenager when he said that.

Sen. Warren’s policies aren’t that appealing and she lies about virtually everything. At a time when people crave authenticity, she’s a phony. This weekend, Amy Klobuchar started flip-flopping while pandering for vote. How will that work? Joe Biden has been disparaging people while calling them disgusting names. He’s told them to vote for other candidates, too. Based on Iowa and New Hampshire, they’ve taken his instructions to heart.

Then there’s Bernie. He wants to eliminate private health care at a time when Democrats can’t even do simple math at their caucuses. Democrats still haven’t finished recanvassing the Iowa Caucuses results, which was 2 weeks ago. They want us to think that they’re proficient at figuring out complexities in the health care laws? I don’t think so.

Bernie will have difficulty defending President Trump’s attacks. Bernie wants to keep his money but he wants other millionaires to pay their fair share. Bernie’s policies will cripple this booming economy. How popular will that be with voters? Hint: The answer to that question rhymes with ‘it won’t.’

Every other year, people question whether Collin Peterson will retire. It’s like a fifth season in Minnesota. The order goes spring, summer, fall, is Collin Peterson retiring, then winter. Last fall, Peterson announced that he’d announce whether he’d seek another term “in January or February.” February is half gone and we still haven’t heard anything from Peterson.

What we have heard is that, if he runs, Peterson has a primary challenger:

Thaddeus Laugisch, of Moorhead, on Thursday, Feb. 13, said he planned to challenge U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson for his 7th District seat. Laugisch is seeking the Democratic endorsement for the seat and said he could be a better advocate than Peterson, the nearly three-decade incumbent, for Minnesota’s workers.

“Families of western Minnesota are struggling while CEO profits are at all-time highs,” Laugisch said in a news release. “Minnesotans deserve a fresh perspective in Washington that fits their needs, instead of the needs of the wealthy.”

I’ve never heard of Mr. Laugisch. I’m not surprised by that because Collin Peterson is the DFL bench in CD-7.

Peterson has not yet announced whether he will seek another term and several GOP candidates have signed up to take on Peterson in the district that favored President Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016 by 30 percentage points. Peterson said last year that he expected to make an announcement about his plans in January or early February, but two weeks into February Peterson still hadn’t made public his plan.

It’s impossible to know what Peterson’s plans are at this point but nothing will surprise me. In one way, I think the retirement question is almost irrelevant. Peterson votes against President Trump 85% of the time in a district that Trump won by 31 points in 2016. That’s a strong structural disadvantage to start a campaign.

Peterson has won by smaller and smaller margins the past few cycles. In 2018, which was a strong DFL year, Peterson won by 4.26%. In 2016, Peterson won by 5.06%. In 2014, Peterson won by 8 points. In 2012, Peterson won by 20 points.

Republicans have several top-tier, well-financed, challengers running. In the interest of full disclosure, I contributed to Michelle Fischbach. That being said, I don’t have a vote in the matter. If he runs, the people might involuntarily retire him.

Everyone’s read the articles about the Iowa Democrat Party’s vote-counting fiasco. They’ve read about Joe Biden’s humiliating defeat there. As a conservative, it’s fun writing about the Democrats’ encounter with karma. Democrats are finding out that karma is a bitch.

This is the underreported story from Iowa:

It was too soon to tell what final turnout numbers will be, amid delays in reporting results. But Iowa Democratic Party Communications Director Mandy McClure said early indications were turnout was on pace to match 2016, when about 170,000 people participated. The high-water mark for the contest was the 2008 Iowa Democratic caucuses, when nearly 240,000 participated and Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and other candidates.

The Democrats’ frontrunner is on the ropes. The Democrats’ enthusiasm for Orange Man Bad isn’t as unifying as they’d hoped.

Meanwhile, in an uncontested GOP race, Republicans turned out in record numbers for a re-election campaign. Over 32,000 people showed up to caucus for Republicans. Through impeachment and all of the turmoil that came with that predicament, Mitch McConnell fiercely defended the institution of the Senate. It’s my theory that the Republicans’ fierce fight, in both the House and Senate, has helped inspire Republicans’ enthusiasm. GOP activists aren’t just activated by President Trump. They’re activated because President Trump has turned the GOP into a party of fighters.

Jeff Kaufmann, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party, said this about why Iowans are bullish on Trump:

“In a real, fundamental way, he preserved the family farm … I don’t even know if he ever talked to a farmer before he ran for president but he just tapped right into that rural, populist notch … He knows how to read hearts and he has read the heart of rural populists in this state.”

People have talked about the money that Mike Bloomberg has spent thus far on organization and ads. That’s fine. It’s a newsworthy thing to cover. Nonetheless, the question I’ve got to ask is whether he’ll connect with voters like President Trump obviously has.

The people running thus far on the Democrats’ side aren’t inspiring voters. In Iowa, that’s the underreported story. That’s because things don’t bode well for Democrats.

This article is surprising because it’s something nobody had heard these rumors. The article starts with a sentence that says “Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN) told KFGO that he’s leaning against voting to impeach President Trump — but won’t switch parties.”

Peterson issued this statement:

I’m staying in the party, in spite of some of the stuff that’s going on that I don’t agree with, I am not going switch parties at this stage of my career. There have been overtures by the highest levels of the Republican party in the last couple weeks to ask if I would consider it and I told them no.

That fits with Chairman Peterson’s character. Had Peterson switched parties, it would’ve been one of the biggest switches in recent political history. That being said, Peterson is in the fight of his political life.

According to Lt. Gov. Fischbach, a) President Trump won the district by 31 points in 2016 and b) Chairman Peterson has “voted against President Trump 85% of the time“, including voting against funding the wall. That isn’t exactly the fastest way to endear yourself to MN-7 voters. While President Trump was winning the district by 31 points, Peterson won by a meager 5.03%. In fact, Peterson defeated his GOP opponent by just 4.26% in 2018.

Still, there’s been some visible tension between Peterson and Pelosi. Peterson got Speaker Pelosi’s cold shoulder when she announced that a deal had been reached on the USMCA trade agreement. Rather than having Peterson at the press availability, Pelosi invited Richard Neal, the Democrats’ chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee. As chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Peterson wasn’t invited. Then there’s this:

In the report, Peterson is quoted as saying that a) President Trump didn’t commit a crime and b) the Democrats relied on second- and third-hand information. Those are big sticking points with House Democrats. That pretty much guts the Democrats’ case. If the Democrats are getting along with Peterson, why is he torching their impeachment case?

Stay tuned to LFR for more twists and turns in this race. This one might be a major upset if Republicans flip Peterson’s seat.

It seems like each week brings more bad news in Collin Peterson’s direction. Just minutes ago, I spotted this tweet:


There are endorsements and then there are endorsements. Michele Bachmann’s endorsement in a staunchly pro-life district like MN-7 is definitely a difference-maker. Here is Michele Bachmann’s endorsing statement:

Here’s what Willmar Radio announced:

Former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who has served as a member of President Trump’s evangelical advisory board in the past, says she is endorsing former Lt. Governor and State Senator Michelle Fischbach, who is running for Congress in western Minnesota’s 7th District. If she wins, Fischbach, of Paynesville, will become the second Republican woman from Minnesota elected to the US. House of Representatives; the first was Bachmann.

Thus far, Collin Peterson, the House Agriculture Chairman, has done nothing to get USMCA ratified in the House. Watch this pathetic string of excuses from the Democrats’ ‘leadership’ team:


Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats are a failure. They’ve focused on impeachment while ignoring USMCA. The Democrats’ priorities aren’t America’s priorities. Democrats deserve to return to minority status in the U.S. House of Representatives. Removing Collin Peterson would be a fantastic start to accomplishing that goal.

Most people understood that it wasn’t likely that Nancy Pelosi would put the USMCA trade negotiation up for a vote before the end of the year. This article seems to confirm that suspicion. The article opens by saying “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she doubts Congress has enough time left to pass the USMCA this year, but Democrats and the Trump administration will continue talks next week to work out a compromise on remaining issues.”

The latest DC rumor is that Pelosi is holding that vote up to pressure reluctant Democrats to vote for impeachment. In this scenario, Ms. Pelosi will withhold the USMCA vote until after they vote on impeachment. Ms. Pelosi knows that Schiff’s impeachment case was weak going in. Further, she knows that impeachment got beaten up quite a bit during the public hearings.

When Democrats voted to authorize the impeachment inquiry, 232 Democrats voted for it. When the entire House votes on Articles of Impeachment, there won’t be 232 Democrat votes. If I was scoring the hearings the way I used to score baseball games, I’d score it this way: Democrats pretty much won each day’s opening statements, especially the witnesses’ opening statements. I think that was intentional.

Think of the witnesses’ opening statements as political clickbait. Their job was to feed the MSM. It was then up to the MSM to plaster that day’s “bombshell” into that day’s chyrons to pound the message home. That message was simple — Testifier A, B or C delivered a “bombshell” testimony. The case against Trump is insurmountable. He’ll be impeached and removed. Pay no attention to what Fox says. Don’t pay attention to what Townhall or the Federalist says, either.

What Democrats wanted people to ignore was the cross-examinations, especially this one:

Mike Turner’s cross-examination of Ambassador Sondland all but officially finished the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. That’s the most powerful cross-examination of the 5 days of hearings. All of the other gossip from the other testifiers is worthless. Sondland spoke directly with President Trump and President Zelenskiy. He’s the only one with firsthand knowledge of the central characters in these hearings.

Turner, BTW, is just one of the new GOP heroes coming out of these hearings. For those of us who’ve followed this Russia Ukrainian Hoax, we already knew that Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan and John Ratcliffe were heavyweights. During the 5 public hearings, Elise Stefanik, Mike Turner and Chris Stewart turned in their finest performances.

Holding up the USMCA is further proof that Ms. Pelosi is the nastiest partisan this century. She’d rather hurt President Trump than do what’s right for the nation. The US needs selfless leaders who put the nation’s needs ahead of partisanship. That isn’t what we’re getting right now. Right now, we’re getting overdoses of partisanship from Pelosi and Schiff.

I didn’t know that Collin Peterson was truly independent. I’m skeptical of that characterization ever since I wrote this post. I’d received an email from Lt. Gov. Fischbach announcing her candidacy to challenge Peterson. This jumped off the page at me:

“Collin Peterson no longer represents Western Minnesota values,” added Fischbach. “One of his first votes this Congress was to ban the wall, and he votes against President Trump 85 percent of the time. Unlike Peterson, I will work with President Trump to secure our borders, build the wall, fight against the Democrats’ socialist agenda, and keep America great.”

It’s important to remember that President Trump won the Seventh District by 31 points. Voting against President Trump 85% of the time isn’t proof of Peterson’s independence. It’s proof that Peterson wants it both ways. Peterson apparently is afflicted by Tom Daschle Disease. That’s where a politician votes liberal in DC, then professes his moderation the minute he enters his rural district.

This is who Peterson really is:

In 2010, I’d say that Peterson is a Blue Dog Democrat until Pelosi needed his vote.

After I got this news, the first thing I wondered was whether Collin Peterson is in trouble.

In 2018, which was a pretty strong DFL year, Peterson won by 4.26%. In 2016, Peterson won by 5.03%. In 2014, Peterson won by 8.45%. In 2012, Peterson won by 25+ percent.

There’s no question whether the district is trending in the GOP’s direction. The only question left is whether this is the year that Peterson finally meets his match. One thing that’s for certain is that this race will get tons more money pumped into it over the next year. Another thing that’s certain is that this race suddenly became one of the highest profile races to watch this cycle.

Here is Lt. Gov. Fischbach’s official statement:

PAYNESVILLE, MN – Former Lieutenant Governor Michelle Fischbach today announced she is running for Congress in Minnesota’s 7th Congressional District. Fischbach will challenge Democrat Congressman Collin Peterson, who has been in Washington for nearly 30 years. Fischbach was the most recent Republican to hold statewide office in Minnesota when she ascended from her role as President of the Senate to Lieutenant Governor in 2018.

“After much consultation and prayer with my family, I have decided to run for Congress,” said Fischbach. “Western Minnesota families deserve a representative who will fight for their values in Washington and support President Trump’s agenda – not the socialist agenda of Nancy Pelosi, Ilhan Omar, and the rest of the squad. People here believe in our constitutional rights. They believe in the right to life. They believe in making sure the next generation has the opportunity to pursue the American dream right here in Western Minnesota.”

Before serving as Lieutenant Governor, Fischbach served in the Minnesota Senate. After the 2010 election, the Minnesota Senate selected Fischbach to serve as President of the Senate, making her the first woman in Minnesota history to serve in that role. After the 2016 election, Fischbach was again selected by the Minnesota Senate to serve as President of the Senate, a position she would hold until she ascended to Lieutenant Governor in 2018.

“Collin Peterson no longer represents Western Minnesota values,” added Fischbach. “One of his first votes this Congress was to ban the wall, and he votes against President Trump 85 percent of the time. Unlike Peterson, I will work with President Trump to secure our borders, build the wall, fight against the Democrats’ socialist agenda, and keep America great.”

About Michelle Fischbach:

Michelle Fischbach is a trailblazer and a proven conservative leader. She recently served as the 49th Lieutenant Governor of Minnesota, ascending to that position following the resignation of her predecessor. She was the first woman in Minnesota history to serve as President of the Minnesota Senate – initially from 2011-12 and then again from 2017-18. She also served as Chairman of the Senate Higher Education Committee. She was first elected to the Minnesota Senate in 1996 and served until 2018. She holds a B.A. from St. Cloud State University and a J.D. from William Mitchell College of Law. She and her husband, Scott, live in the Paynesville area and have two grown children and five grandchildren.

About Minnesota’s 7th Congressional District:

Minnesota’s 7th Congressional District is the most pro-Trump district in the country held by a Democrat. In 2016, President Trump carried the district by nearly 31 percentage points. According to The Cook Political Report, the district has a Partisan Voting Index (PVI) of R+12. According to FiveThirtyEight, in the 116th Congress, Congressman Peterson has voted against President Trump’s agenda 85% of the time.

Highlighting the fact that Peterson has voted against President Trump 85% of the time has to hurt Peterson. If he had voted with Trump 40%-50% of the time, he might be able to deflect the ads that are certainly heading in Peterson’s direction. That’s especially true in a district that Trump took by 31 points in 2016.

Further, the DFL can’t paint Fischbach as a TEA Party radical, though I’m certain that they’ll attempt that. The other thing we can count on is Nancy Pelosi’s PAC dumping $2,000,000-$4,000,000 into this race. Losing this race is something she can’t afford if she wants to keep her Speaker’s Gavel.

I won’t predict the outcome of this race at this point but I won’t hesitate in stating that Peterson’s seat is legitimately in trouble this time.