Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Former President Barack Obama rallied 273 cars in Orlando this morning. Appearing on FNC’s Outnumbered, former Reagan Education Secretary Bill Bennett said that President Obama’s crowd went back “as far as the arm could stretch.” By comparison, there are twice as many people in a single section of stands at a Trump rally than there are in an entire Obama rally.

President Obama scolded the nation for electing President Trump, saying he didn’t expect President Trump to follow his policies, then saying that he’d hoped he’d take the job seriously. That’s a breathtakingly dishonest statement, especially coming from a former president. The Trump administration has negotiated more peace deals involving Israel in the past 3 months than all previous US presidents did combined. President Trump and the GOP Senate have appointed and confirmed 250 judges and 3 Supreme Court justices.

Does President Obama think that sounds like an unserious man? I don’t think that. President Obama is fighting for what little is left of his limited legacy. A Trump re-election would wipe out President Obama’s legacy and put smiles on people’s faces. I had the opportunity to watch this speech live:

I’m thankful I opted not to watch. President Trump’s list of accomplishments is lengthy, covers multiple subjects and won’t be undone anytime soon.

Emma Trittin, a University of Central Florida senior, said her age group of 18-29-year-olds was coming out in force this year, with more than 400,000 voting early. “I think Floridians are really fed up with how the past four years have gone with the Trump administration,” she said. “Youth are really stepping up and voting because they know that they have power in their voice.”

Ms. Trittin is ill-informed. According to pollsters Matt Towery of Insider Advantage and John Cahaly of the Trafalgar Group, people in the 30-44 age group have moved towards President Trump since last Thursday’s presidential debate. They attribute the exodus to Biden’s lockdown language.

Joe Biden’s campaign stops tell us who he’s targeting and who isn’t important to him. Monday, Biden made a hastily-arranged trip into Pennsylvania. It was a short car trip from his home. Tuesday, he’s heading to Atlanta. He’s making a single trip to Iowa, too. In other words, he isn’t visiting Blue Collar America, the sections that President Trump flipped in winning Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Biden is still fighting to limit the damage of his fracking flip-flop:

“I’m not shutting down oil fields, I’m not eliminating fracking. I’m investing in clean energy and I’m going to make sure that we don’t continue to subsidize the oil companies,” Biden told reporters on Monday as he made a campaign stop in Chester, Pennsylvania, just a short drive from his home in Wilmington, Delaware.

Years ago, Michael Kinsley said that “A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth – some obvious truth he isn’t supposed to say.” This is Joe Biden’s biggest gaffe. Biden is doing his best to limit the damage of his gaffe in the hopes he hasn’t killed his presidential hopes.

Steve Kornacki thinks that President Trump is playing defense this cycle:

In the sense that he’s hoping to hold all of the states he won in 2016, that’s technically true. Then again, all presidents running for re-election are playing a bit of defense. Kornacki thinks that all polls should be averaged together. With that, I vehemently disagree. Many of the media polls have been utterly worthless. I don’t want those junk polls in the mix. I only want polls that’ve figured out how to identify hidden Trump voters. If they haven’t figured that out, then they’re worthless.

Polls that have figured this out are Insider Advantage, Susquehanna and Trafalgar Group. Those polls show President Trump leading. I don’t pay attention to those polls because Trump’s leading. I pay attention because they’ve figured things out.

Joe Biden’s visits indicate that he isn’t trying to win back blue collar workers in battleground states. That’s a major mistake.

It’s looking more and more like the unthinkable will finally happen this year. To Minnesotans, the unthinkable is defined as a Republican presidential candidate winning Minnesota’s 10 electoral votes. The unthinkable might just have company in the form of the impossible. In Minnesota, the impossible is defined as a Minnesotan winning a statewide race.

Apparently, both things are possible this year. President Trump is well-positioned to flip Minnesota from blue to red. Further, Jason Lewis is finishing fast, making it very possible for Lewis to Trump Tina Smith on the strength of standing with the police. In Lewis’ case, it isn’t a matter of following President Trump’s lead. Jason Lewis’ wife is a retired police officer.

What’s making this possible are 2 forgettable Democrat candidates (Joe Biden, Tina Smith), 2 solid GOP candidates (President Trump, Jason Lewis) and a great GOP GOTV. President Trump and Jason Lewis are enthusiastically pro-mining and stoutheartedly pro-law enforcement. With a week left in the campaign, GOP momentum is surging while Democrats stay in hiding.

Tina Smith has shied away from debates, only competing in 1 virtual debate. Joe Biden visited Minnesota once (Hermantown, just south of Duluth). When Biden visited, he did the impossible when he shut out the local media, which generated lots of negative local press. He visited a union training center, where Biden had a captive audience of about a dozen trainees.

That same night, President Trump rallied in front of “a crowd of thousands at the Bemidji Regional Airport for a campaign rally.” A crowd of thousands to a Biden rally is beyond unthinkable. I don’t think it’s happened this campaign season.

Tina Smith and Joe Biden should worry about this:

But Republicans have to worry about Biden’s enormous lead in urban areas, 64% to 28%, and his 48% to 42% lead in suburbs. Trump’s 53% to 36% lead in rural areas of northern, western and southern Minnesota might not be enough to offset the Biden advantage in the metro area.

A Democrat that isn’t leading by 40+ points in the Twin Cities is hurting. Further, a Democrat running about even in the suburbs is in trouble. Law and order is the predominant issue in the suburbs. It’s also where many shy Trump voters live.

The momentum is clearly on Republicans’ sides going into the final week campaign. The biggest question is who closes stronger.

Robert Reich, former Clinton administration Labor Secretary and current progressive whiner, is fighting a losing fight. In his op-ed, Reich writes “This is a travesty of democracy. The vote on Barrett’s confirmation will occur just eight days before election day. By contrast, the Senate didn’t even hold a hearing on Merrick Garland, who Barack Obama nominated almost a year before the end of his term. Majority leader Mitch McConnell argued at the time that any vote should wait ‘until we have a new president.'”

This is sour grapes. Republicans held the majority in the Senate. They performed their constitutional responsibility of advise and consent by not holding a hearing for Judge Merrick Garland. The Constitution is clear on the issue of appointing judges and justices:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The Senate had the constitutional authority to reject Merrick Garland by not giving him a hearing or vote.

Barrett was nominated by a president who lost the popular vote by nearly 3m ballots, and who was impeached by the House of Representatives. When Barrett joins the court, five of the nine justices will have been appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote.

Again, this is sour grapes. First, the impeachment was a sham. Had it been tried in a trial court, it would’ve been dismissed by the judge for lack of evidence. The ‘prosecutors’ didn’t present evidence during the trial. They provided uncorroborated hearsay testimony. Next, it’s utterly irrelevant how the president got elected as long as the Constitution was followed. This is pure BS:

Barrett’s confirmation is the culmination of years in which a shrinking and increasingly conservative, rural and white segment of the US population has been imposing its will on the rest of America. They’ve been bankrolled by big business, seeking lower taxes and fewer regulations.

Big business wants regulations to stifle competition and higher taxes to prevent competitors from capital formation. Small want lower taxes and fewer regulations because they want to form capital, which is then used to invest in their business. Big business has aligned with the elitist wing of the Democrats. When was the last time Facebook, Google and Twitter bankroll the campaign to confirm a conservative judge?

In the event Joe Biden becomes president on 20 January and both houses of Congress come under control of the Democrats, they can reverse this trend. It may be the last chance – both for the Democrats and, more importantly, for American democracy. How?

For starters, increase the size of the supreme court. The constitution says nothing about the number of justices. The court changed size seven times in its first 80 years, from as few as five justices under John Adams to 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The Supreme Court has had 9 members since 1869. That means they finally figured out what works best. Then they stuck with it.

Biden says if elected he’ll create a bipartisan commission to study a possible court overhaul “because it’s getting out of whack”. That’s fine, but he’ll need to move quickly. The window of opportunity could close by the 2022 midterm elections.

The judiciary isn’t out of whack. It’s just that Democrats don’t like the composition of the Court. If you want to change the composition, they need to win more races. Elections have consequences. BTW, thinking that Joe moving fast isn’t high after watching this:

I’m not sure he’s capable of moving purposefully at this point.

Donald Trump’s momentum, which either started or accelerated Thursday night, isn’t fading. He’s working hard in his sprint to a second term. It’s apparent that President Trump’s momentum isn’t subsiding.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s senility difficulties continue. While campaigning in Pennsylvania, Biden said that “he’s built ‘the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics:‘”

Where that came from is anyone’s guess. The sentence doesn’t make sense. That’s just part of the Democrats’ problems. The Democrats’ biggest problem is that Joe Biden told the world that he wants to end fracking:

The Democrats’ problem is that part of their party wants to get rid of fossil fuels. The other wing of the Democratic Party wants to work in those blue collar jobs. The Democrats are split on this issue.

Meanwhile, Republicans are uniting behind President Trump. Even some Never Trumpers are voting for President Trump. When Biden made the fracking statement, President Trump jumped all over that. Since then, Democrats have been on the defensive. There’s still more than a week left in the campaign so there’s still work to complete. At this point, though, I’d rather be in President Trump’s situation.

Marc Thiessen’s article is exactly right in saying that President “Trump cleaned Biden’s clock on race.” If this election was based solely on who’s done more to improve the lives of minority communities, President Trump would win with a lopsided margin. Unfortunately, the older black community will vote Democrat out of loyalty for the 1960s Civil Rights Movement. The good news for Republicans is that younger black men don’t feel that unity with the Democratic Party.

Thiessen’s article continues, saying “Moderator Kristen Welker asked both candidates whether they understood the fears of Black and brown families who worry their children “could be targeted, including by the police, for no reason other than the color of their skin.” When it was Trump’s turn to answer, he said “Yes, I do” and laid out his record, including opportunity zones to bring investment into struggling Black communities, substantial funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, prison reform and criminal justice reform. By contrast, he said, Biden has “been in government for 47 years. He never did a thing except in 1994 when he did such harm to the Black community” with his crime bill.”

Biden’s feeble response was rejected in this exchange:

Biden responded by trying to take credit for Trump’s success on criminal justice reform, saying “The very law he’s talking about is the law that, in fact, initiated by Barack Obama.” But Trump kept pressing him on why he and Obama didn’t pass it? “You were vice president,” Trump said. “You keep talking about all these things you’re going to do … but you were there just a short time ago and you guys did nothing.”

Why should people think that Biden will get things done when he hasn’t done anything in 8 years as the vice president and 36 years as a senator? President Trump had it exactly right when he said of Biden that Joe is “all talk and no action”:

Let me be exceptionally clear about this election. It won’t be as close as the ‘experts’ are predicting. President Trump will win re-election with at least 306 electoral votes. It’s possible that President Trump finishes with ~350 electoral votes. If I was making my final prediction today, which I’m not, I’d predict President Trump winning the states he won the first time, then adding New Hampshire, New Mexico and Minnesota. Colorado, Nevada and Virginia would be darkhorse possibilities.

In addition to President Trump winning this fight, President Trump also won on the issue of fracking. Rather, Joe Biden lost on fracking by trying to be all things to all people. Instead of threading the proverbial needle, Biden chose to play Russian Roulette.

I didn’t need the transcript of last night’s presidential debate to know that Joe Biden flip-flopped on the issue of fracking. That was totally obvious immediately. When President Trump and Joe Biden first spoke about fracking, Biden said emphatically “I do rule out banning fracking because the answer we need, we need other industries to transition, to get to ultimately a complete zero emissions by 2025. What I will do with fracking over time is make sure that we can capture the emissions from the fracking, capture the emissions from gas. We can do that and we can do that by investing money in doing it, but it’s a transition to that.”

Shortly thereafter, Biden revisited the issue thanks to a little pushing from President Trump:

Donald Trump: Would you close dow the oil industry?
Joe Biden: By the way, I have a transition from the old industry, yes.

That situation started when President Trump accused Joe Biden of wanting to ban fracking. Biden was upset, saying “I never said that”, finally saying “put it on your website.” Unfortunately for former Vice President Biden, President Trump tweeted out his proof:

Biden deserved this. He’s shot his mouth off about this for months. If he was in a battleground state, he’d shift into his Blue Collar Joe from Scranton, PA persona. If he spoke to activists, he’d be fracking’s worst nightmare. Thursday night, President Trump exposed Career Politician Joe, famous for talking out of both sides of his mouth simultaneously.

Thanks to that brief flurry, Joe Biden can start writing his concession speech. That’s the night that the lights went out on the Biden campaign. He can kiss Battleground Pennsylvania good bye.

One sign after another points to the belief that today is the last day of the Joe Biden/MSM wall of silence regarding Hunter Biden’s apparently nefarious international dealings. This article demolishes part of Joe Biden’s story that he never talked with Hunter about Hunter’s business deals. This article highlights Joe Biden’s business dealings.

Let’s start with the first article first. It says “A man who describes himself as a former business partner of Hunter Biden says he heard him and his father, Joe Biden, discuss his dealings with a mysterious Chinese energy firm in 2017 and that the former vice president was due to receive a share of the profits. Tony Bobulinski issued a statement on Wednesday saying that he personally witnessed Biden discuss business deals with his son, Hunter, contradicting claims by the former vice president. ‘I’ve seen Vice President Biden saying he never talked to Hunter about his business.'” Then Bobulinski said this:

I’ve seen firsthand that that’s not true, because it wasn’t just Hunter’s business, they said they were putting the Biden family name and its legacy on the line.

Next, let’s look at Michael Goodwin’s article:

One of Joe Biden’s ways of contrasting himself with President Trump has been to declare the election a battle of Park Avenue values vs. Scranton, Pa., values. Now we learn that Biden has secretly been playing footsie with China.

The statement Wednesday night asserting that the former vice president was a willing and eager participant in a family scheme to make millions of dollars by partnering with a shady Chinese Communist firm is a singular event in a presidential race already overflowing with drama and intrigue.

The dynamite assertion, believable because it aligns with earlier information we know to be true, came in a statement by Tony Bobulinski, who describes himself as a former partner of Hunter Biden, Joe Biden and Joe’s brother Jim in the China scheme.

Each day, more information gets verified:

This isn’t what Joe Biden wanted included the final 2 weeks of the presidential campaign. It’s his worst nightmare.

The Hunter Biden plot thickened. It thickened when it was reported that the “laptop and hard drive” was connected “with a money laundering investigation in late 2019,” thus raising a new set of questions for the Bidens.

Fox News reported that “multiple federal law enforcement officials, as well as two separate government officials, confirmed the authenticity of these documents, which were signed by FBI Special Agent Joshua Wilson. Wilson did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment. One of the documents, obtained by Fox News, was designated as an FBI ‘Receipt for Property’ form, which details the bureau’s interactions with John Paul Mac Isaac, the owner of ‘The Mac Shop’ who reported the laptop’s contents to authorities.” Then there’s this:

The document has a “Case ID” section, which is filled in with a hand-written number: 272D-BA-3065729.

According to Dan Bongino, “272 is the 3-digit FBI code for money laundering, D means transnational.”

The sound quality isn’t the greatest but it’s ok. Bongino’s debate idea is a little unusual but it’s on the right track. Joe Biden wouldn’t know how to handlle it. If Biden insists that it’s a smear designed to ruin his family, President Trump can then ask if Biden thinks that the FBI field office is into smearing presidential candidates. At that point, what does Biden say? That’s the typical heads-I-win-tails-you-lose situation. This complicates things even more for Biden:

That’s a grand jury subpoena. How does Biden explain that away? Answer: he can’t. The other question left is whether the MSM will continue protecting him with their silence. I don’t think they can at that point.

This article highlights the matchup of the final 2 weeks of the presidential campaign. The article starts by saying “Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden had nearly three times as much cash in his campaign coffers than President Trump at the start of this month, according to the latest fundraising filings from both major party nominees.” Next, it says “The former vice president’s campaign had more than $177 million cash on hand as of Sept. 30, according to a filing with the Federal Election Commission on Tuesday evening. Trump’s reelection campaign reported $63.1 million in the bank.”

The Trump volunteer army numbers 2,500,000. That’s the biggest volunteer army in the history of US politics. They’ve made over 130,000,000 voter contacts thus far. The article doesn’t talk about the power of President Trump’s rallies or the importance of a compelling message. It also didn’t talk about the lazy campaign that former Vice President Biden has run.

This segment of The Story highlights the Trafalgar Group’s polling. What’s important is that Trafalgar doesn’t use the same methods as the network polling. It’s worth noting that the network polling in 2016 was virtually worthless. Trafalgar’s was very accurate. Trafalgar correctly identified the hidden Trump voters in 2016 that the networks didn’t. But I digress.

President Trump was outspent by Hillary 4 years ago. Thankfully, there never was a Hillary administration. What Trump had going for him were his rallies and the RNC GOTV effort. After his election, President Trump installed Ronna McDaniel as RNC Chairperson. That was a brilliant decision. He also started recruiting volunteers for his 2020 campaign. Thanks to these decisions, President Trump started putting together a GOTV operation that’s unprecedented.

All the pundits complaining about the mistakes that President Trump is supposedly making will find out Election Night that they’re wrong again. President Trump’s understanding of the American people is unsurpassed. When President Trump goes after Hunter Biden’s corruption, what he’s actually doing is draining the Swamp. That’s one of his core promises. Promises made, promises kept. They’ll never learn.

In his final address from the Oval Office, Ronald Reagan said that he never won a victory that the American people didn’t win for him first. President Trump is the leader of this populist movement but he didn’t start the movement. Trusting him is the equivalent of trusting the movement he’s leading to victory.

I trust President Trump’s instincts. You should, too.