Category Archives: Uncategorized

Rampant identity politics ensures that we don’t solve our worst problems

Associated Press photo

“President” Pussygrabber — who recently tweeted that the four members of “the squad” “originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe” when only one of them was born abroad (is Pussygrabber calling the United States’ government “a complete and total catastrophe?”) — is succeeding in distracting us plebs with his awful fiddling while he burns the empire down.

“With a tweeted attack on four minority congresswomen this week, President Trump made clear that his reelection campaign will feature the same explosive mix of white grievance and anti-immigrant nativism that helped elect him,” wrote The Washington Post’s Michael Scherer in an analysis/commentary.

He continued: “Trump’s combustible formula of white identity politics already has reshaped the Republican Party, sidelining, silencing or converting nearly anyone who dares to challenge the racial insensitivity of his utterances. It also has pushed Democratic presidential candidates sharply to the left on issues such as immigration and civil rights, as they respond to the liberal backlash against him. …”

I won’t get into a discussion of which came first, the chicken or the egg — or, perhaps more accurately, of who started it — and I won’t assert that Democrats and others who don’t identify as Repugnicans (or even self-identified Repugnicans) simply should ignore the racism, xenophobia, misogyny and patriarchy, homophobia, etc., etc., of the right.

But I will point out that while we commoners are bogged down fighting over “President” Pussygrabber’s latest incendiary, divisive tweet, our largest problems — such as runaway climate change and insane, unsustainable income inequality — are only getting even larger.

I abhor the “both sides are equally guilty” “argument.” Both sides are not equally guilty, but, again, we are mired in playground-level fights while our world (sometimes literally) burns around us.

One thing that both sides (both party establishments, anyway) could be accused of is stoking conflict in areas that allow our corporate overlords to continue to rob us blind while we’re distracted.

Our corporate overlords for the most part don’t mind if we, the people-peons, are bickering over such matters as abortion, guns, gays, religion and race, since those fights at least keep us distracted from what the corporations are doing to us: despoiling our planet; robbing us of the wealth that rightfully is ours, not theirs; and even literally killing us, such as through making medical care and other necessities (food, shelter, etc.) too expensive and thus unobtainable for us and by poisoning our environment in their insatiable quest for ever-increasing profits, causing such maladies as cancer and chronic respiratory diseases.

If you want to know whether or not a Democrat is a true progressive, look to see whether or not he or she directly attacks corporations. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren do — routinely. Kamala Harris and Joe Biden don’t. Like our Repugnican friends, the likes of Biden and Harris (and yes, even button-nosed Boy Scout Pete Buttigieg) would rather have us focus on things that our corporate overlords don’t find threatening to their continued death grip on us.

(Issues that threaten rampant corporate profiteering, of course, include doing something substantive about climate change, ensuring that all who need medical care can get it — and that they won’t go bankrupt if they can’t afford it — ensuring quality, affordable housing, and ensuring that good students can get a low-cost to even free higher education without being wage slaves to student loan sharks their entire adult lives.)

It’s a simple litmus test: Does this “Democrat” fight for the people or for the corporations? Does this “Democrat” encourage us to fight for better lives — or only lecture on us what we “can’t” do, lecturing us to be “realistic,” since that’s what their corporate sugar daddies much prefer?

Look at who gives this candidate money and how much money. How does this candidate campaign? Does he or she wish to attract small, individual donors — or big corporate donors? How much does this candidate talk about corporate abuses? How much does this candidate instead talk about identity politics, which probably is the No. 1 distraction from our largest, most threatening problems?

It’s easy to see whom a candidate serves and if elected would serve. Just open your eyes and look at his or her record and at what he or she is doing and saying right now.

Pete Buttigieg is a great example. Apparently I’m just supposed to cream my jeans because he’s a gay white man like I am. This apparently is supposed to be enough for me as a voter.

But I’m quite put off by Buttigieg’s centrist, pro-corporate stances; he fails my most critical litmus tests. For instance, CNN reported recently:

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg weighed in on his opponents’ plans to implement “Medicare for All” and free college tuition, calling them “questionable on their merits” and “pretty far out from where Americans are.”

“I do think that we should be realistic about what’s going to work. And just flipping a switch and saying we’re instantly going to have everybody on Medicare just like that — isn’t realistic,” the South Bend, Indiana, mayor said in an interview with CNN’s David Axelrod. …

You’ve lost me, Pete — probably for good.

No one ever fucking said anything about “just flipping a switch” and magically making something stupendous happen. (Gee, is that what a Rhodes scholar does? “Beats” you in a debate by asserting that you asserted something that you never fucking asserted?)

But if you, as a leader, don’t even bother to set an ambitious goal, you’ll never fucking get us anywhere near there; you’ll have all of us remain mired in the daily slog that benefits only our corporate overlords whom Buttigieg and his ilk aim to plea$e.

We actual progressives who (pretty much by definition…) aren’t from Hickville, Indiana, don’t need punk-ass brainiac Mayor Pete lecturing us on being “realistic.” Also, despite Petey’s claim that he knows what Americans want and don’t want, a clear majority of polls show that a clear majority of Americans support universal health care, with polls about free college and/or university tuition being more mixed.

(I’d argue that universal health care is much more popular because it’s much more life-and-death than is higher education, and also, those who never intend to attend college because they’ve already done so or because they’re not big on higher education [or for whatever reason or reasons] probably don’t support low-cost or free college or university tuition because they don’t see that they’d ever benefit from it. You never know, however, when you might be in dire need of medical care.)

One of the many problems that I’ve had with the Clintons is that their political incubator was Arkansas, for fuck’s sake, and so they — the Clintons and the Clintonian “Democrats” — have sought to force-feed us only what can succeed for Democratic politicos in such places as Arkansas.

Indiana is no more than a notch better than Arkansas. These red-state “Democrats” sorely need to stop telling us actual Democrats, us true progressives, that we need to be ineffectual cowards and corporate whores like they are.

Just as I won’t vote for Pete Buttigieg because he’s not a progressive and because a Buttigieg presidency very apparently only would continue the status quo — and because smashing the status quo is far more important than is our shared race and our shared sexual orientation — voting for Kamala Harris primarily or even solely because she’s black would be a mistake.

Black Americans would be able to point to the nation’s second black and first black female president, but with President Harris that would be all that they would get, just as their lot barely budged, if it budged at all, under the centrist, pro-status-quo, pro-corporate Obama.

All of that said, “President” Pussygrabber is a racist. There is nothing to argue about. I might say that his recent comments about “the squad”proclaiming via the juvenile’s platform of Twitter that these four women elected to Congress in November 2018, “who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe” (um, three of them were born in the United States) should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came” — technically are more xenophobic and nationalist than they technically are racist, but no one with two brain cells to rub together denies that Pussygrabber is a white supremacist.*

I mean, first and foremost, Pussygrabber, who acts like he’s a bad-ass but who has the fragile ego of a spoiled little girl, expects us to bow down to him like the unelected, illegitimate little orange Caligula that he is, and while he clearly would prefer blindly obedient followers of the Northern European persuasion than of any other kind, he’d give you some degree of acceptance if you just kissed his ring like a “good” American “subject” “should.”

Why are the Repugnicans so silent about Pussygrabber being such a jaw-droppingly appallingly shitty “president”? Aside from fearing that the vengeful little cunt might come after them next, those who are Repugnican because they’re filthy rich love the fact that under Pussygrabber they’re getting even richer while the rest of us are getting only poorer. They have a great gig and they don’t intend to blow it.

And, of course, non-rich Repugnicans respond well to Pussygrabber’s fascist words and deeds — including his racism, white supremacism and nationalism and xenophobia — because they’re fucking fascists, too.

There aren’t enough of the rich and super-rich to keep a political party afloat, so the Repugnican Party has to feed enough red meat to these modern-day Nazi Germans who are so fucktarded that they don’t even know how to fucking vote in their own fucking best interests. History repeats itself.

But, again, if we get caught in the weeds, dissecting and talking incessantly about “President” Pussygrabber’s latest offensive tweet — I find it mind-blowing that after all that he has said and done and neglected to say and do as “president,” the “Democrats” in the U.S. House of Representatives thus far have talked seriously only about passing a resolution denouncing Pussygrabber’s latest “racist” tweet (yet another example of how the Democratic Party establishment wants us commoners to be in the grip of identity politics, just like the Repugnican Party establishment does, so that we don’t rise up and overthrow our corporate overlords) — the outcome will be predictable: a continued worsening of the United States of America, which is fast becoming the shithole to which Pussygrabber says others should return.

P.S. Full disclosure: I support the members of “the squad,” whom I see as an injection of fresh blood into our calcified political system, which sorely needs the youth, vision, fresher perspective and diversity that “the squad” gives it. It’s not a democracy if it’s not representative of all of the people, and the members of “the squad” are more representative of the people than are the plethora of white men whom we see in D.C.

I have given Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib donations, and just gave Ayanna Pressley a donation. (I hadn’t given her one before because news coverage of her had been much less than for the other three; of the four, I’d say that Ocasio-Cortez and Omar have been the most visible [and thus the most excoriated by the neo-Nazis].)

The intent in attacking “the squad,” of course, is to try to push them out of office via harassment and intimidation — and to dissuade like-minded others from even thinking about running for office. How dare someone go to D.C. with the idea of disempowering the powers that be and empowering the powerless?

Clearly “the squad” is doing something right, or the neo-Nazis wouldn’t be reacting to them like vampires after you’ve just opened the drapes during the daytime.

*It is telling, of course, that if you are not white (of Northern European descent) and are not on his team, Pussygrabber would claim that you came here from another country even though you were fucking born on U.S. soil.

This demonstrates not only Pussygrabber’s total disregard for facts and truth, his declination to even bother to research someone’s biography before he, as “president,” viciously attacks him or her on his little instant-social-media national platform like the little mean girl that he is, but it demonstrates Pussygrabber’s mindset, which reminds me of that of a drunken, brain-damaged monkey: clearly, Pussygrabber’s own personal definition of an “American” is, first and foremost, white, and second, someone who is in total agreement with his unacceptable bullshit.

My definition of an “American” is anyone who has U.S. citizenship, regardless of how he or she (OK, or “they”) obtained it, via birth or via naturalization. My definition of “American” does not make race or national origin — or even one’s political orientation — a factor at all.


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The 2020 Democratic race for president is tightening but still open

Image result for kamala harris bernie sanders joe biden elizabeth warren

These are the only 2020 Democratic Party presidential candidates who routinely poll nationwide in the double digits, and methinks that one of them most likely is to be the nominee.

“When people ask me who I think is going to win the [2020] Democratic [presidential] nomination, I shrug my shoulders and say, ‘I have no freaking idea,'” prognosticator-god Nate Silver posted yesterday. He continued:

“It’s worth keeping in mind that in a field of 20-something candidates with no runaway front-runner, all of the candidates are fairly heavy underdogs. Joe Biden is probably going to lose. Kamala Harris is probably going to lose. Elizabeth Warren is probably going to lose. Bernie Sanders is probably going to lose. And so forth.”

Indeed, the race is much more open than many (most of them corporate whores, of course) would have us believe. RealClear Politics’ aggregation of recent nationwide polls puts Biden at No. 1, with 26.8 percent, puts both Bernie and Warren at 15.2 percent, and puts Kamala Harris at 15 percent, so we have a fairly clear front-runner (if not a “runaway” front-runner), and three other candidates pretty much tied for second place.

The aggregation of polls by 270 to Win shows similar results: Biden at 25.8 percent, Bernie at 15.8 percent, Warren at 15.6 percent and Harris at 15.2 percent.

Again, that’s Biden at No. 1 and Bernie, Warren and Harris all within a percentage point of being No. 2.

That’s not very sexy, so what we’re seeing is the results of even just one poll being reported as “evidence” of a new, permanent change in the race (usually a change that threatens to topple Bernie, of course).

It takes several polls over some time to show a real change in a race, not just one poll.

Yes, Kamala Harris got her wholly planned and orchestrated polling bounce by white-shaming Joe Biden in last month’s debate — and when you peel back the thin layers, that’s what it was: simple, craven identity politics — “I’m black and you’re not; I’m good because I’m a victim and being a victim is good, and you’re not a victim, so you’re not good” — but will Harris’ bounce last? We’ll see.

(Seriously, though, Harris is largely substance-free, and apparently expects to fairly coast on being a female Obama. I’m not sure which is more depressing: that this is her campaign tactic in the first place or that it actually might work because voter-shamingbased upon how one was born — apparently is a thing now in a Democratic Party that is enthralled by craven identity politicians.)

There is talk of “lanes” within the 2020 Democratic presidential primary race, and it seems to me that there are two broad lanes: The vote-for-me-because-I’m-not-a-white-man or the vote-for-me-because-I-have-been-associated-closely-with-Obama lane, most notably occupied, of course, by Harris and by Biden.

If Biden and Harris split the black vote between the two of them, that’s fine by me. (I was hoping that Cory Booker would help split it even more, but he can’t average even a full 2 percent in the nationwide polls.)

The other lane is the progressive (or actually Democratic) lane, most notably occupied of course, by Bernie Sanders and by Elizabeth Warren. They rely on progressive ideas rather than on lazy identity politics, whereas Biden and Harris rely on lazy identity politics and on the perpetuation of the milquetoast, status-quo-continuing (and thus, pro-corporate and pro-powers-that-be) Repugnican-Lite bullshit that has been crammed down our throats as “Democratic Party” politics at least since the Bill Clinton era.

I think it’s safe to say that one of the current top four — Biden, Bernie, Warren or Harris — is going to be the nominee, although I think that Harris, being substance-free and being so unknown and inexperienced (she hasn’t been in the U.S. Senate for even three years now), is the least likely of the four to win the nomination (although she might be the one most likely to get the veep spot, if she’ll deign to accept it).

Warren could be the nominee if she satisfies enough camps: mainly, the progressive camp, the camp that really wants our first female president, and the party-hack camp (which sees Warren’s decision not to run against Billary in 2016 as a good thing, not as cowardly and politically craven, as I always have seen it).

If Biden and Harris damage each other enough and the people truly find that they are sick of Bernie (his having been so consistent in word and deed for decades is so boring, you see) and want to give another woman another chance at the White House, then yes, Warren could win the nomination.

I’d say that if Warren weren’t in it, Bernie probably would be at No. 1 right now, but Warren is in it and has the right to be in it.

But if Nate Silver doesn’t know who the nominee will be and I don’t know, how could you?

Yet this doesn’t stop hatefully wishful thinking, such as demonstrably false reports that Bernie is dead in the water, even though he’s still in second place (even if he’s fairly tied for second place). Of course Bernie still has a chance at the nomination, and those gleefully reporting his political death don’t make it true merely by falsely proclaiming it. (Indeed, when these are “news stories” or “analyses,” these are instances of the biased writer trying to make what he or she wants to be true to become true.)

At this point, those Democratic presidential candidates who probably should pack it in are those who can’t sustain even 5 percentage points in the nationwide polls. Right now Pete Buttigieg is coming in at fifth place, around 5 percent or 6 percent, and I’d be shocked if he were to win the nomination, given that he’s about 10 percentage points behind Biden, Bernie, Warren and Harris.

Buttigieg only has been a mayor and isn’t all that well-known, and while his Obama-like attempt to be all things to all people impresses some, I think it spooks others, such as myself, who want a candidate who clearly and strongly states progressive principles — none of this gauzy “hope” and “change” bullshit. We have been there and done that.

Not all of us voters are stupid; Obama used “hope” and “change” to cover up his centrism and noncommitalism, and at the time he was a bright and shiny new toy, but from having been punk’d royally by Obama, we, the people, have some immunity now to The Obama Effect.

(I’d say that at least four presidential candidates have tried to use The Obama Effect to some degree this cycle: Harris, Biden, Cory Booker and Buttigieg. I’d say that it’s not that effective for them.)

Aside from “lanes,” there is talk of “tiers,” and Nate Silver, in the same aforementioned piece, put Bernie Sanders in “tier 2a.” He put Biden and Harris in “tier 1a,” Warren in “tier 1b,” Sanders in “tier 2a” and Buttigieg in “tier 2b.”

Wow. With Bernie still polling as well as Harris and Warren, why demote him to “tier 2a” already? Methinks that even Nate Silver is not immune to groupthink and to the “wisdom” of the dogpile.

I’d say that if you consistently are polling nationwide in the double digits — only four candidate are — then you belong in the first tier.

If you are polling between 5 percentage points and 9 percentage points, I’d say you’re in the second tier. Below 5 percentage points, I’d put you in the third tier. (And frankly, if you are in the third tier as I define it, again, I wish that you’d drop out already, but, again, I recognize that it’s up to the quixotic candidate, not to me, as to when to finally call it quits.)

So we’ll see how things unravel over the coming weeks. Will Harris ultimately be able to pull anything other than the race card from her bag of tricks? Will Harris and Biden continue to take shots at each other, as I hope? Will Warren be able to maintain her double-digit status, which took her a while to achieve? (Note that Buttigieg reached double-digit status but then fell back down again.)

Are the voters really through with Bernie? And even if many of them are, might he at long last be the last one still standing?

Time will tell.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Oh, Pussygrabber WILL leave office

Donald J. Trump
Reuters news photo

It rather blows my mind that some are positing that “President” Pussygrabber might refuse to leave the White House if he loses the 2020 presidential election (most likely falsely-of-course claiming that the election was “rigged”) — or even after his eight years are up, should he “win” “re”-election in 2020.

No, the illegitimate “President” Pussygrabber will leave the White House when the Constitution mandates that he does so.

Pussygrabber has given the won’t-leavers plenty to work with, of course, from “joking” that he should be “president for life” to “joking” that he should get two more years added to his time in the White House because the investigation for the Mueller report took two years (he actually called this “reparations”) to proclaiming that his mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, “MAGA”-cap wearing supporters might demand that he remain as “president” even after his eight years are up.

Do I believe that Pussygrabber is joking? No, to be safe, I presume that he is being dead serious.

What I think he is doing is testing the waters. This is part of his M.O.: He’ll put something insane even for him out there to see how it’s received. If there is enough outcry and backlash, he will back off. (Pussygrabber acts like he’s a bad ass, but he does respond to pushback.)

The thing is, someone with Pussygrabber’s low approval rating — he averages in the low 40s — can’t expect to be able to flout the Constitution by attempting to stay on longer that he constitutionally may. Those of us Americans who despise him significantly outnumber those so-called Americans who adore his pathetic, treasonous, fascistic orange ass.

I myself would join the angry mob to ensure that Pussygrabber leaves the Oval Office when he constitutionally must. We’d employ a lot more than torches and pitchforks, too.

That’s not an empty threat.

That’s the feedback that “President” Pussygrabber needs to have when he floats the idea of staying in power longer than the U.S. Constitution allows. The piece of shit needs to know that we, the people, will ensure however we must — that he leaves when the Constitution says he must.

Pussygrabber lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes and therefore is fucking lucky to have the job that he has now; his talk of extending his time in power only further shows how deranged and power-hungry he is.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Why has Warren surged?

Image result for elizabeth warren hillary clinton
Reuters news photo

I posit that one of the reasons for Elizabeth Warren’s current surge in the nationwide polls of 2020 Democratic Party presidential preference is the leftover pain and anger from women voters who didn’t see the first female president elected in 2016.

There was a time not so long ago that I believed that Elizabeth Warren probably should just drop out of the 2020 presidential race already, as she was languishing in the polls and was unable to put the “Pocahontas” bullshit behind her.

However, that has changed, at least for the time being. She now is poised to overtake Bernie Sanders, who has been at second place (behind Joe Biden) for quite a long time now. Here is the graph that accompanies Wikipedia’s page on nationwide polling for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination:

Nationwide opinion polling for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries (higher candidates).svg

Warren is represented by the red line, which sharply is trending upwards. (Biden is the sharply dropping red line and Bernie is the slightly declining orange line.)

If the trend continues, Warren will overtake Bernie, as so many Bernie-haters hope will happen.

Why is Warren surging now? Matt Taibbi’s theory, as to at least the media coverage of Warren’s surge, seems about right to me. He recently wrote for Rolling Stone that

… Warren’s obvious [current] appeal to the conga line of think-tankers and D.C. political consultants currently swooning over her campaign is her perceived utility in helping remove Sanders from the race. It’s why Bernie’s in almost every headline about her rise.

The Sanders campaign has come to expect the doom-saying headlines, even taking them as validation. Echoing the famous FDR quote, “We welcome their hatred,” Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir suggested it’s all par for the course.

“This isn’t bean-bag politics,” he said. “It’s a war for what vision of the country you believe in.” …

Indeed, as Taibbi also notes, “Horse race coverage exists so commercial news can cover presidential races without talking about issues.”

Indeed, let’s set up a false horse race between Sanders and Warren instead of talking about the status-quo-disrupting structural reforms that they have advocated. You can’t expect the corporately owned and controlled mass “news” media to advocate for the loss of their own power, can you?

To be clear, as would Taibbi, I would be fine with Warren in the White House.

However, after her fellow Massachusettsans Michael Dukakis and John Kerry lost their presidential bids because they were depicted as clueless eggheads, I’m not at all sure if Warren could beat “President” Pussygrabber, but she has been my second choice, behind Bernie, for a long time now.

Warren is my second choice because she was a Repugnican as late as the 1990s and because she calls herself a capitalist while I see present-day capitalism as very probably beyond anything like meaningful reform. Capitalism is evil, and “reforming” it only means making it a little less evil (if that’s even possible).

Also, of course, I still hold it against Warren that she didn’t have the balls to challenge Repugnican Lite Billary Clinton for the nomination in 2016, and I still believe that Bernie deserves the 2020 nomination in no small part because he did have the balls to go up against the Clinton machine.

If Warren actually ends up getting the nomination, which seems to be a real possibility, since she now is in third place (and since at least for right now both Biden and Bernie are dipping in the polls), it probably will be because she successfully has straddled both worlds: that of the (probably dying) Democratic establishment (in which one dare not to have opposed Queen Billary in 2016) and that of those of us who actually are progressive (and thus, in my book, the only true Democrats; corporate whores, in my book, are not Democrats, not at all).

Part of the reason that Warren appears to be surging now also might be from the lingering disappointment that in 2016 we didn’t get our first female president.

I was fine that we didn’t, as DINO Billary would have been a very disappointing first female president, but I know that millions of American women were crushed to see the first female presidential candidate of either major party be defeated by the likes of Pussygrabber. (And the fact that he lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes but still ascended to the Oval Office was only salt and lemon juice ground into the wound.)

I’d be fine if Elizabeth Warren were our first female president, but today I’m still backing Bernie.

My third choice probably would be Pete Buttigieg, but I don’t see him getting the nomination, even though he’s surging lately, too. (He is represented by the blue line in the graph above, which shows him at fourth place.)*

I find Joe Biden to be utterly unacceptable, and even if he won the 2020 nomination, I would not vote for him. You can’t whine that the Democratic Party has become too much like the corporate whores who comprise the treasonous Repugnican Party and at the same time support a corporate whore like Joe Biden.**

P.S. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention as a possible if not probable factor in Warren’s current surge the fact that she doggedly has been putting forth progressive policy proposals.

I acknowledge that hard work of hers.

It’s that I rather doubt, in our corporately owned and controlled mediated environment, which is all about personalities and the horse race, that Warren’s hard work much benefits her.

Indeed, in our anti-intellectual national environment, stoked by the likes of fascist and treasonous “President” Pussygrabber and his band of treasonous and fascist grifters, being an intellectual often counts against you, not for you.

*Buttigieg is in third place for me because although the then-young Barack Obama promised “hope” and “change” but delivered only more of the same, I suppose I’m still at least a little susceptible to the supposed political promise of a young upstart.

But perhaps because I felt perpetually punk’d by Obama after he actually took office, I’m still gun shy enough to keep Buttigieg in third place.

**Before you fucking say (or even think) a word, please remember (or educate yourself for the first time…) that the U.S. president is selected under the Electoral College, not by the popular vote, and that the Democratic presidential candidate, whoever it is, will win my very blue state of California and thus all of its electoral votes, no matter how I fucking vote.

Under the awful Electoral College I could fucking vote for Pussygrabber in November 2020 and that wouldn’t at all change the fact that every single one of my state’s electoral votes will go to the Democratic candidate, regardless of who it is.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Biden drops as Bernie climbs

Nationwide opinion polling for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries (higher candidates).svg

Above is the graph that accompanies Wikipedia’s page on the nationwide polling for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination.

As the graph shows, Joe Biden, the top line in red, peaked after his official presidential campaign announcement in late April but now is dropping, and Bernie Sanders, the second-from-the-top line in orange, dropped as Biden peaked but now is recovering (not as quickly as Biden is dropping, but still…).

If the trend continues, as I expect it to, since Biden is an incredibly weak candidate, Bernie has a very good chance of winning this thing this time.

Things should get interesting after the first set of Democratic presidential debates later this month.

Again, I expect Biden (who, much like Billary Clinton, never has been willing to do the work that a presidential candidate must do) to implode — history probably is a guide on this — and the question then will be which candidate the most Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters support as the Democratic presidential field inevitably dwindles.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

My response to ‘straight pride’

Begins at 1:28. Yup…

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Joe Biden, who is Billary 2.0, already falls back to earth in the polls

Joe Biden, pictured above dozing in public during one of Barack Obama’s speeches in 2011, apparently believes that, like the hare in the tale of the tortoise and the hare — and like Billary Clinton — he safely can nap and win the race anyway.

The Democratic Party hacks won’t talk about this, but Joe Biden’s poll numbers have dropped. He got a post-official-announcement bounce that put him in the 40s in some polls, but already he has come back down to earth.

Three nationwide polls to which gives a grade of “A” were taken from May 11 through May 20.

A Fox News poll* taken from May 11 through May 14 put Biden at 35 percent and Bernie Sanders at No. 2 at 17 percent. Elizabeth Warren came in at No. 3, with 9 percent, and Pete Buttigieg came in at No. 4, with 6 percent.

A Quinnipiac University poll taken from May 16 through May 20 put Biden at 35 percent and Bernie Sanders at 16 percent, with Warren coming in at No. 3 with 13 percent, five percentage points ahead of Kamala Harris at No. 4.

A Monmouth University poll also taken from May 16 through May 20 put Biden at 33 percent, Bernie at 15 percent, Harris at 11 percent and Warren at 10 percent.

This trio of recent grade-“A” polls (according to gives Biden an average of 34 percent and Bernie an average of 16 percent.

The million-dollar question, it seems to me, is which of these top-two candidates, Bernie or Biden, is going to inherit more of the supporters of those many candidates who inevitably will drop out over the coming several months.

Joe Biden has been around for decades — he first ran for the Democratic Party’s 1998 nomination for president, spectacularly unsuccessfully, in the midst of a plagiarism scandal — and it seems to me that if he were so fucking beloved, he’d be doing better than capturing the support of only about a third of Democratic Party voters and Dem-leaning voters.

Has the well-known Biden maxed out his support? If so, even though Bernie right now is trailing him at a rather distant No. 2 in the polls, then Bernie does indeed have a chance — especially if he picks up the lion’s share of the supporters of those candidates who inevitably drop out.

A sign of Biden’s weakness, it seems to me, is the fact that he’s keeping a low profile. The Washington Post reports:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) plans to enjoy ice cream with New Hampshire voters to celebrate Memorial Day. He won’t be far from former Maryland congressman John Delaney, another presidential candidate, who’s in the midst of his 19th trip to the state and plans an itinerary that includes four barbecues, one parade and a wreath-laying.

In Iowa, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) is rolling through the cornfields in an RV, while Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) unveils a “Family Bill of Rights” and tours an ethanol plant.

And here’s former vice president Joe Biden’s agenda for the holiday weekend, according to his campaign: “Joe Biden has no public events scheduled.”

Those seven words are becoming familiar for the Biden team. Aside from a campaign swing right after announcing his candidacy, Biden has kept his head down while his rivals rush from state to state to state. Even when he has held public events, they have included only a handful of questions from voters or reporters.

The light public schedule reflects the unique position of his campaign, advisers say: With near universal name recognition and high favorability ratings among Democrats, the former vice president does not need to introduce himself to voters like nearly every other candidate. And as the leader in early polls, he can attract media attention without splashy events. …

Wow. Recall that in 2016, party hack Billary Clinton believed that she was so beloved that she didn’t need to show up in the Rust Belt states. Recall that the 2016 presidential election results showed that although Billary won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes, Pussygrabber won the Electoral College by having won only three Rust Belt states (Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) by only a combined around 80,000 votes.

So why the fuck isn’t Biden campaigning as though campaigning matters?

I can think of only three possibilities:

One, as I just indicated, Biden believes, like the cocky Billary did in 2008 (when she lost the Dem Party presidential nomination to Barack Obama), and in 2016, when she lost the White House to Pussygrabber, that he’s a shoo-in, and therefore he doesn’t have to exert himself. He’s like the hare in the tale of the tortoise and the hare.

Two, perhaps most probably, Biden’s handlers realize that his propensity to put his foot in his mouth easily could sink his third try for the Dem Party presidential nomination. Therefore, the apparent limit on the number of questions that he’ll take when he can be bothered to appear in public, according to The Washington Post.

Third — and it could be some combination of these three — Biden is low-energy, as Pussygrabber might put it, and he prefers to keep a light schedule because, unlike Bernie Sanders, he is unable to keep up with a rigorous campaign schedule.

None of these possibilities bode well for Team Biden, and, as I’ve indicated before, it’s my belief that if Joe Biden manages to win the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination, November 2020 will be a fucking repeat of November 2016, and Pussygrabber will get another four years.

The Democratic Party hacks never fucking learn. Instead, they blame their wholly predictable failures on others, such as those of us who are true Democrats (that is, true progressives and not centrist corporate whores), and this sick dynamic easily could keep the Repugnicans in power for some time to come.

*I usually refer to Fox News as Faux “News,” and while the media outlet indeed is evil, rates its polling outfit highly.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized