There will not be a debate between Trump and Biden. It will not happen. I’ve suspected this since June, once it became clear that the lockdowns would not be just a quick, temporary thing.
After the lockdown entered its third month, it was pretty obvious that the whole thing was an election year ploy that included a way for Biden to not have to debate.
However, the virus alone will not be enough of an excuse to get Biden out of the debates. Trump’s team will easily be able to accommodate a “socially distanced” debate. You don’t need a crowd. You just need the candidates, some staff, a moderator and a TV crew.
And then if even that get shot down by the Biden camp as “too risky,” then you can do virtual debates. This would obviously suck, but clearly no one could object to this on virus-related grounds. And the Biden camp could even feed him answers the whole time off-camera.
But the Biden campaign is determined to avoid any sort of debate–it’s not about the virus at all. The virus is the excuse.
So the NYTimes has another excuse:
Now it is true that Presidential debates did not became an election staple until 1976. The first real televised debate was, as we know, in 1960 between Nixon and Kennedy. But that would be the last debate until 1976, and every election since then has featured a debate or, as has become the trend in recent years, multiple debates.
The Lincoln-Douglas debates took place back in 1858, though most people probably think it was a presidential debate since Lincoln and Douglas would end up squaring off for the White House in 1860. But whether or not it was for President or Senate, the point is, debates have a long history in this country.
I’m under no illusions that the debates are anything other than a made for TV spectacle. The first debate itself proved this: TV viewers thought Kennedy won, while radio listeners thought Nixon won. It’s a matter of optics, charisma and screen presence–it’s almost as if the debates measure who’s a better television performer instead of who’s a better candidate for president.
Elections in general are made-for-TV spectacles, honestly. Have you noticed that just about every election in the cable news era (early 1990s-present) has been relatively close? Cable news is designed to keep the elections close in order to keep people hooked all the way until the Thrilling Conclusion of this season of The Presidential Campaign. Every election has to have drama, suspense and uncertainty.
This was not the case in the past. Prior to the rise of cable news–again, early 1990s–blowout elections were quite common.
But the reason we need a debate now in 2020 is because of how uniquely unfit for office the Democratic candidate is. In 2016 the first debate got over 84 million viewers and that was just online–it didn’t even count how many people were streaming online. The debates are often thought of as the moment when most “low information voters” get their first good looks at the candidates, and while that might not be as true today with social media and the generally increased focus on politics as a whole, the debates are the first time we get to see the candidates in as close to an unscripted, candid environment as possible. The debates allow us to really size up the candidates, and while most of us are already long since locked in to our choices, there are still those people who really can be swayed every four years.
Everyone needs to be able to see Joe Biden in a debate setting. They have to have full knowledge of who they’re voting for. They need to see this guy in all his glory. They need to see him struggle through the most basic sentences and forget rudimentary facts. They need to see him off-script and without handlers in his ear. They need to see him attempt to think on his feet.
In short, Joe Biden’s clearly deteriorated mental faculties need to be exposed for all the world to see.
And the debate is the only way that can happen, even though the leftwing network it airs on will probably be doing everything it can to prop him up, including giving his team the questions beforehand and having the moderators blatantly favor him.
In any other year, I would agree that the debates are over-hyped, made-for-TV spectacles that don’t really tell us who will be a better president.
But this year, we need a debate so the whole world can see how unfit for office Joe Biden is.
The latest Anti-Trump Hoax is that FASCIST TRUMP IS TRYING TO DELAY THE ELECTION BECAUSE HE’S A FASCISTY FASCIST!
Now obviously anyone with a brain who thinks for themselves and has a healthy distrust of the media would hear this and think, “B.S.”
But the media relies on people who are already programmed to believe their lies. That’s why the media is able to get people to believe this outlandish nonsense about Trump.
It feels like every day the media is lying to stoke some artificial anti-Trump rage. And it works, too. Just look in Trump’s replies on Twitter. Just look on social media at all the shrieking brainwashed hordes who will believe anything they hear about Trump. It’s like these people are addicted to rage, and they enjoy having a cow over every little thing the media tells them Trump does.
For the past four years, they’ve existed in a perpetual state of ANGER and DISBELIEF over this ORANGE FASCIST RACIST FASCIST in the White House–at least what the media tells them about the ORANGE FASCIST RACIST FASCIST in the White House. For many of them, screaming about Trump online has become the purpose of their whole lives.
But on this one, Trump did give the media somewhat of a reason to publish sensational and hyperbolic, even if Trump was clearly and obviously trolling. Here’s his tweet:
Now, his critics interpreted his tweet in the worst possible light. Their response was completely over-the-top and unwarranted. But Trump didn’t do himself any favors.
He’s making the point that if, as the Democrats are claiming, due to the virus, we are apparently not able to have a normal election with in-person voting, and we have to rely on this horribly shoddy mail-in voting system, which makes it incredibly easy to cheat, then maybe we should just delay the election until we can have a safe and secure election free of fraud.
In fact, he was tweeting all day about how disgraceful the mail-in voting process is. He pointed out the New York primary from last month which has been a complete mess and the results are still not even fully clear:
He tweeted this video from a news station in Philadelphia that found some serious problems with mail-in voting:
He had a few more tweets yesterday about the perils of mail-in voting:
He even clarified his remarks during his press conference today (53:33 mark):
As usual, everything the Dems accuse Trump of, they themselves are invariably guilty of. They’re the ones who are trying to steal the election by way of the easily-defrauded mail-in voting process, and Trump is calling them on it.
All they’re doing right now is flipping the script and trying to put Trump on defense. They’re trying to distract from how many legitimate problems mail-in voting creates.
He is 100% right about mail-in voting. He’s also right that we should not have an election until we can be assured that it isn’t vulnerable to massive fraud.
But of course, this is the whole point of the Coronavirus Plannedemic: to make it easier for the Democrats to steal the election by giving them an excuse to massively expand the easily-defrauded system of mail-in voting.
The problem is that Republicans just complain, while Democrats cheat. Republicans lost six Congressional seats in California because the Democrats used the ballot harvesting technique. Republicans just complained and expected someone else to do something about that.
News flash, Republicans: nobody is going to come to the rescue. It’s just you vs. the Democrats. If they’re going to cheat, you’re going to have to either stop them or even the playing field by cheating as well.
Maybe we should throw our morals out the window like Democrats have done.
Excluding the polls, is there any evidence Joe Biden is winning this election?
Just entertain the possibility, for one second, that the Almighty Polls are either wrong or rigged, and that we cannot trust what they say. Who do you think is winning this election based on the general feel of the country right now?
People aren’t stupid. They see the collective insanity of the left. They see the images of what’s happening in Portland, even if the media tries to hide them:
No matter what the media tries to say, no matter how much they try to shift the narrative to “TRUMP’S SECRET FASCIST POLICE!” most Americans understand what’s going on.
At the most basic level, most Americans understand that Joe Biden = Antifa, Joe Biden = BLM, Joe Biden = endless lockdowns.
Is there any indication that “the middle”–those few remaining Americans who are persuadable every four years, who vote mostly based on intuition and gut, who are not wedded to any one political party, and who tend to instinctively reject extreme behavior and disruption–are flocking to the left?
I just don’t see it–outside of the polls.
The country has changed. People don’t mindlessly believe the media anymore. Maybe 25-30 years ago, people would have believed the media’s lies about coronavirus, police brutality, white privilege, systemic racism, Antifa and the “mostly peaceful protests”, and Trump would be toast.
But if people still believed the media, then Trump would not have even been elected back in 2016.
I highly doubt the media’s reputation has improved over the past five years. If anything, it has gotten significantly worse.
People just don’t believe the media anymore. They don’t believe it’s Trump’s fault that the economy is in the toilet. They don’t believe the virus is his fault. And they don’t think he’s the reason unarmed black people are killed by police.
On top of that, most normal Americans are 100% in favor of hardass federal agents crackin’ Antifa skulls on the streets of Portland. Most Americans do not like seeing a major American city fall into chaos and anarchy. They want to see order restored.
I also don’t see 2016 Trump voters abandoning him. They already knew about his Twitter account back then. “His tweets” are not going to push people towards Biden.
In 2016, people voted for Donald Trump because they felt like America was at the point of no return. They could sense the hard left turn the Democratic Party had taken, and knew that if the Democrats held the White House for another four years, this country would be finished. This view was best summarized in “The Flight 93 Election“:
“The election of 2016 is a test—in my view, the final test—of whether there is any virtù left in what used to be the core of the American nation. If they cannot rouse themselves simply to vote for the first candidate in a generation who pledges to advance their interests, and to vote against the one who openly boasts that she will do the opposite (a million more Syrians, anyone?), then they are doomed. They may not deserve the fate that will befall them, but they will suffer it regardless.”
Nothing has materially changed since 2016. Trump has made some progress, to be sure, but the Cabal is not anywhere close to being defeated. We are not out of the woods by any stretch. And nobody who voted for Trump in 2016 has gotten cold feet between then and now. They haven’t changed their minds and now think Trump is the biggest threat to America. They are still with Trump.
I have not yet seen one good case made that Trump has lost a lot of his 2016 supporters. I am not buying that he’s lost many of his 2016 supporters because of “his tweets.” He was tweeting in 2016 and it didn’t deter people from supporting him.
If anything, Trump has only gained support since 2016. This is what Elon Musk is talking about: the insanity of the left is turning lots of people into Trump voters by default.
Trump was portrayed as dangerous and crazy during the 2016 election. As President he’s benefited because the media set the bar so low for him with its hyperbolic and outlandish coverage of him. Most of the people who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Trump in 2016 are now saying, “This guy wasn’t nearly as bad as they said he’d be.”
The left is losing the middle. Trump is the one that wants kids back to school next month. He’s the one that wants the rioting to end.
He’s the “normal” candidate.
The Democrats are asking you to vote for an obviously senile old man who has been locked in his basement for the past four months because his handlers know the less the public sees of him the better. The Democrats are asking for you to vote for a figurehead candidate who will, from day one, be controlled by the most radical leftists imaginable, who are seeking nothing less than the complete dismantling of America as we know it.
The Democrats are asking you to sympathize with the rioters. They’re asking you to defund the police. They’re asking you to endorse open and explicit anti-white racism. They’re asking you to accept the economic suicide of your country over a virus that has killed 0.0004% of Americans.
They’re asking you to support a party that is now run by and for crazy people.
It’s just not gonna happen, no matter how much the polls are trying to say it is. Elon Musk just said what most of us know intuitively.
With both Buttplug and Klobuchar surprising the country by abruptly dropping out and endorsing Biden just in time for Super Tuesday, and with Warren staying in the race presumably to siphon off votes from Bernie, the Democrats have made it clear that Bernie Sanders will not be their nominee. Not now, not ever.
Instead of Super Tuesday, people are calling it Super Coupsday.
What a fortuitous (and surely coincidental) turn of events for Joe Biden and the Democratic Party Establishment!
You know, Republicans made a lot of noise about stopping Trump back in 2016, but ultimately they didn’t really do much to deprive him of the nomination.
In 2020, Democrats haven’t really said much about making sure Bernie does not win their party’s nomination, but they certainly are taking action, closing ranks quickly around Joe Biden.
The polls for Super Tuesday don’t close until tonight, but it seems like Biden is poised to roar back into contention with Sanders. Here are the latest opinion polls for the race:
It’s suddenly a two-man race, and the Democratic Establishment has clearly thrown its weight behind Biden. Bernie clearly has the popular support, but will it be enough to overcome the party bosses?
Democracy is dying in darkness, but since there’s no way to blame Donald Trump for it, the media is uninterested.
As you probably know, Monday night’s Iowa Caucus (which kicked off the presidential primary season) was anything but ordinary. Usually on election night, early returns start coming in as early as 7-8pm CST. But not Monday night. On Iowa Caucus night, the nation waited and waited for the results to begin trickling out, but there was nothing. By 9pm and 0% of the vote reported, it was clear something was amiss in Iowa.
Then came the announcement at around 9:05pm:
“Out of an abundance of caution,” the Iowa State Democratic Party was undertaking “quality control” measures and would not be releasing the caucus results anytime soon. No time frame was given for when the results would be released to the public.
Immediately people began pointing out the obvious: they’re rigging it against Bernie, again.
The comments began pouring in in response to the MSNBC tweet:
By Tuesday morning, the #2 trending hashtag on Twitter was “#PeteTheCheat,” in reference to Pete Buttigieg, who bizarrely delivered a victory speech late Monday night despite 0% of the results having been reported:
Things had taken a turn: it wasn’t Biden for whom the Iowa Caucus was being rigged–it was Pete Buttigieg. How would he know to deliver a victory speech on Monday night despite 0% of the vote having been reported?
Well, that’s because there’s a strong possibility “Mayor Pete” was part of the reason the voting results weren’t available on Monday night. What made the 2020 Iowa Caucus different from all previous Iowa Caucuses was that this year, the Iowa State Democratic Party decided to use an app called “Shadow” to coordinate and calculate all the vote totals. It was this app “Shadow” that “failed” (many would say it succeeded, depending on your perspective) and threw everything into chaos.
It turns out that Buttigieg’s campaign gave thousands of dollars to Shadow:
I just want to add: why did they give the app such an obviously sinister name like “Shadow”? A movie villain wouldn’t even be this blatant about it.
At around 4pm on Tuesday afternoon, the Democratic Party announced that it had 62% of the votes counted and finally released the partial results. They showed Bernie and Buttigieg neck and neck for the lead, with Joe Biden a distant fourth behind those two and Elizabeth Warren.
Finally, on Thursday night, the full results of the 2020 Iowa Democratic Caucus were released:
The final results showed Buttigieg with a 0.1% margin of victory over Bernie Sanders. Keep in mind this result shows the percentage of delegates won. As far as the final popular vote went, Bernie was ahead of Buttigieg by several thousand. But it’s the delegates that actually matter.
This was quite a remarkable turn of events for Mayor Pete given that the final polls from Iowa in the run up to Caucus Day showed him far behind Bernie. The RCP average had him at around 16, with Bernie in the lead at 23%:
Only one polling outlet had Buttigieg in the lead prior to the vote, while the rest showed either big Bernie leads or decent Biden leads:
The fact that Buttigieg managed to make up so much ground over the course of a couple days is a testament to the scrappiness of his campaign and its exceptional get-out-the-vote efforts. And absolutely nothing else, okay?
Not only did Mayor Pete overcome what was by most accounts a sizable polling deficit just days before the Caucus vote took place, but last night he just so happened to be on-air at CNN when the news broke that he won on Thursday evening:
That Pete Buttigieg is one lucky fella, huh? It’s almost as if. . .
Buttigieg’s surprising victory in Iowa has unsurprisingly boosted his polling numbers in New Hampshire, where he’s now in a virtual tie with Bernie for the lead according to freshly-released polling data:
The damage has been done. Bernie supporters are furious, and now Buttigieg is surging in the polls due to the momentum from winning Iowa. People like a winner, and so it should be no surprise that more and more people are climbing aboard the bandwagon.
Monday’s Iowa Caucus is now ancient history, despite some serious red flags being raised about its results–beyond just the Buttigieg-Shadow connection:
Even the New York Times admits that there are enough “errors” in the numbers that, given the slim margin of victory for Buttigieg, the results of the Iowa Caucus probably aren’t even accurate. There were dirty tricks aplenty:
But these cries will fall on deaf ears, because though the voting tallies may have been wrong (meaning fraudulent), the Right Candidate won. So it’s on to New Hampshire.
Keep in mind, however, that winning the Iowa Caucus does not automatically make you the favorite to win the party nomination:
In 2016, Ted Cruz won Iowa on the Republican side. Hillary won Iowa on the Democratic side, but we all know the 2016 Dem primary was rigged (more on this in a bit).
In 2012, Rick Santorum beat out Mitt Romney by a mere 34 votes to win Iowa.
In 2008, Barack Obama famously won Iowa and gained a ton of momentum in the primary fight against Hillary. But on the Republican side, Mike Huckabee won Iowa with 34% of the vote while John McCain finished a distant fourth with just 13% of the vote.
In 2004, John Kerry won Iowa.
In 2000, George W. Bush won Iowa, as did Al Gore.
So in the five elections since and including 2000, between both parties, five times has the candidate that won Iowa gone on to win their party’s nomination: Hillary 2016, Obama 2008, Kerry 2004, and both Bush and Gore in 2000. Three times we’ve seen a party nominee fail to win Iowa: Trump 2016, Romney 2012 and McCain in 2008.
Actually, now that I look at it, it’s clear that winning Iowa is far more important on the Democratic side than it is on the Republican side. Every Democratic nominee since 2000 first won in Iowa, while only one Republican nominee since 2000 won Iowa (George W. Bush in 2000).
Why is this? I have no idea. Maybe it’s because the Democrats rig their primaries. Maybe it’s simply because the best candidate tends to win the most states, Iowa included. It could be any number of reasons.
But clearly the Democratic Party feels Iowa is important, as evidenced by the fact that they blatantly rigged the election against Bernie and in favor of Buttigieg.
My question is this: why has the Democratic Party Establishment kicked Joe Biden to the curb in favor of the 38-year-old homosexual mayor of the fourth-largest city in Indiana? Is he really their best hope of defeating Trump?
The obvious answer would be that Biden is unfit to run for President given his obviously deteriorated mental facilities. The guy is falling apart; half the time he doesn’t even know what day of the week it is. It’s not a stretch to say this is the reason the Democratic Party Establishment–which he himself is a part of, or perhaps was a part of–is bailing on him.
Speaking of Biden, his media hype has officially collided reality. For a while I’ve suspected his candidacy was not nearly as popular with the voters as the polling suggested. I think his polling success was based mainly on a combination of his name recognition relative to the other candidates, as well as outright rigging of the polls by the media outlets conducting them because Biden is the Establishment’s Choice.
I’ve never felt like Biden was the true front-runner in the Democratic race, either he was a placeholder or the pre-determined nominee. But he’s no longer the front-runner. Polling in New Hampshire–the next primary on the calendar–shows Biden projected for another fourth-place finish. He’ll probably win in South Carolina, but even that could be in doubt now. It would appear Biden is cooked.
The only reason I want to talk about Biden is in relation to Buttigieg, specifically how Buttigieg replaced Biden as the apparent Chosen One in the eyes of the Party Establishment.
There are rumors that Buttigieg is CIA: somehow, this small-town mayor from Indiana received the endorsement of over 200 “foreign policy and national security professionals,” including former CIA Deputy Director David Cohen among many other CIA, State Department, Pentagon and NSC officials from the Obama-era That’s odd.
And how did Buttigieg become so popular in the first place? Why is no one talking about how unprecedented it is that the mayor of a town in Indiana has suddenly built a national profile for himself and has become one of the front-runners to win the Democratic nomination for President? You don’t just do that all on your own; it can only be done by having friends in high places.
There’s something up with Buttigieg. I don’t know exactly what it is, but for some reason his candidacy has the blessing of people high up the chain. He would not be where he is today without the permission of high-ranking officials and their mouthpieces in the media. Buttigieg is backed by powerful forces. He’s like an iceberg in that 90% of him is shrouded in mystery.
Keep in mind that it is an indisputable fact that the DNC rigged the 2016 primary for Hillary Clinton and cheated Bernie Sanders out of the nomination. Yes, it is a fact. A federal judge reviewing the case even admitted so in 2017:
“In June 2016, a class action lawsuit was filed against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz for violating the DNC Charter by rigging the Democratic presidential primaries for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders. Even former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid admitted in July 2016, “I knew—everybody knew—that this was not a fair deal.” He added that Debbie Wasserman Schultz should have resigned much sooner than she did. The lawsuit was filed to push the DNC to admit their wrongdoing and provide Bernie Sanders supporters, who supported him financially with millions of dollars in campaign contributions, with restitution for being cheated.
On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated. This assumption of a plaintiff’s allegation is the general legal standard in the motion to dismiss stage of any lawsuit. The allegations contained in the complaint must be taken as true unless they are merely conclusory allegations or are invalid on their face.
The order then explained why the lawsuit would be dismissed. “The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The Court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.’”
The Court continued, “For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise of ‘impartiality and evenhandedness’ as a mere political promise—political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNC’s governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that the DNC has the right to have its delegates ‘go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,’ the DNC, through its charter, has committed itself to a higher principle.”
But ultimately, it is only the DNC itself that can choose (or choose not) to hold itself to those “higher principles.” The Court cannot make the DNC be “impartial and evenhanded.” Thus you have the Court conceding that the DNC is entirely within its rights to rig its party primary for its favored candidate.
Basically you had the DNC’s lawyers arguing that the voting and the primary process itself is just for show. They’ll only let the voters’ votes count if they vote for the candidate the DNC wants to get the nomination. If the voters go off-script, well, tough: the DNC is under no obligation to honor their wishes. The DNC can simply pick its own nominee.
It’s an extraordinary admission for the DNC to make, but their backs were against the wall: the primary was rigged against Sanders and everybody knew it, and so the DNC was facing the prospect of having to repay millions and millions of dollars of objectively wasted campaign donations that went to Bernie. Their only option was to admit that yes, they had rigged the campaign, but hey: it’s our Party, we can rig our primary if we want.
Of course, this incredible admission by the DNC was hardly reported in the mainstream media–the media was far too obsessed with propagating the Trump Russia Collusion Hoax. But the Federal Court ruling gave the DNC the green-light to rig every future election henceforth.
On Monday night, when the “quality control” news broke, it became clear that the Democratic Party was never again going to allow its elections to be decided by the voters. Every Democratic Party election from 2016 on will be rigged, and this is why Monday night unfolded as it did.
Joe Biden, the 76-year-old six-term Senator and two-term Vice President, is officially running for President in 2020. Polls have him at the top of the heap in the Democratic field, although it remains to be seen whether he’ll maintain his lead once he jumps into the fray.
The Democratic Party has changed quite a bit since Biden’s last election in 2012–it’s more Woke, more Diverse, and more intolerant of old white men than ever. In honor of his announcement, I thought I’d go over some of his best moments–beyond the “Creepy Uncle Joe” stuff–in case they had been forgotten, given that it’s now been seven years since he was last directly involved in an election.
Will the party of Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar accept Biden in light of this stuff? You be the judge.
First, there’s Biden describing Barack Obama in 2008, just as Obama burst on to the scene of American politics and took the nation by storm. Biden used some interesting words to describe Obama:
“I mean you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean that’s a storybook, man.”
Biden was blown away by the fact that Obama was “articulate, bright, clean and a nice-looking guy” despite being an African American. Wow, just incredible! Who would have thought we’d ever see the day?
Then there was that time in 2008 when Biden said “you cannot go into a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts without a slight Indian accent.”
He was talking to an Indian guy and bragged that Delaware’s biggest population increase came from Indian immigrants. Biden then proudly proclaimed that, in fact, there were so many Indians in Delaware that you couldn’t even walk into a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts without a slight Indian accent.
Never let it be said that Joe Biden is not a friend to the Indian-American community.
Then there was that time in the 1990s when Joe Biden said of young black men that we must “take them out of society” because in 15 years, they’re going to be “predators”:
Joe we wont FORGET your words, “ they havent been socialized, they will become the predators. “ Who’s they Biden? Black Men? You’re on a RAMPAGE of LIES, don’t u need to look in the mirror for the 1994 Clinton Crime Bill? $9.7 billion that HURT all Americans including blacks. pic.twitter.com/z9Uy7fXi2A
“Unless we do something about that cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing, because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity. We should focus on them now, not out of a liberal instinct for love, brotherhood and humanity–although I think those are good instincts–but for simple, pragmatic reasons: if we don’t, they will, or a portion of them will, become the predators 15 years from now. And Madame President, we have predators on our streets, that society has, in part because of its neglect, created.
Again, ti does not mean that because we created them that we do not take them out of society to protect my family and yours from them. They are beyond the pale, many of those people. Beyond the pale. And it’s a sad commentary on society: we have no choice but to take them out of society.”
He doesn’t use the term “black” here but it’s quite obvious who he’s talking about.
Will the Diversity Party like this?
Finally, I don’t know what to make of his 1975 comments opposing de-segregation and busing. Have a look:
“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride,” said Biden.Desegregation, he argued, was “a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”
In “colorblind,” post-MLK America, Biden’s comments would certainly have been received negatively. The whole ethos from the 1960s until quite recently was to forget about race and treat everyone equally. It was all about being Americans–not white Americans, not African-Americans–and integrating and mixing everyone, because close proximity to one another would automatically erase all racial differences and gaps.
But might Biden’s 1975 have been unintentionally 2019 Woke?
Post-Ferguson, America’s racial activists have done a 180 on the whole idea of promoting a colorblind society and integration. Now, racial differences are to be emphasized and overriding. Black people are to be treated differently because of their race. White people are to be discriminated against because of their race.
So Biden’s comments from back in the 1970s that racial integration would erode black culture might actually be well-received by the Democratic Party of 2019. Nevermind that Biden was probably making the comment cynically and just looking for an ostensibly pro-black excuse to continue the pro-white policy of segregation–Biden was woke before woke was a thing!
This thing with Biden is stupid. We all know that Biden’s behavior does not rise anywhere close to the level of sexual assault. I don’t like the guy and disagree with everything he says and I don’t want him to be president, but the bad faith BS by conservatives just annoys me.
Of course we know Biden’s creepiness is not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things. He’s obviously not in the Harvey Weinstein category nor has he even been accused of any sexual misconduct to speak of. In fact basically all the “allegations” against Biden have been caught on camera and probably aired on national television over the past decade or so.
None of us actually think Biden sniffing a lady’s hair or even resting his hand on her thigh rises to the level of disqualifying or indictable.
But that’s not the point. The point is making the left play by the same rules they make us play by. And that means pretending Biden’s relatively benign creepiness is totally disqualifying and equivalent to forcible rape.
This is what #MeToo has done: mundane physical contact gets conflated with straight-up felony rape.
It was always going to come to this: first came the allegations against Harvey Weinstein and actual genuine sexual predators and rapists, and then came all the “inappropriate touching” or simply “male creepiness” piggybacking and exaggeration to capitalize on the mass hysteria.
The mentality is, “Well, if it’s open season on men and #BelieveWomen is the low standard of proof that must be met, then fire at will.”
Once the floodgates opened, it was inevitable that it would come to this. Once the Weinstein stuff went public, it began a cascade of allegations–some true, some false, some serious, some not serious–based on the presumption that every one would be believed and grouped in with the worst, until finally, everyone just concludes that men are all dangerous predators, period, and that masculinity must be “abolished.”
If that is how the game is to be played, then at the very least Democrats should have to play by those rules, too. If masculinity is toxic, then that includes Democrat men.
This is Democratic fratricide and we’re just egging it on in hopes of causing maximum damage.
So quit your bitching, Principled Conservatives. Quit your moral fretting and stop pretending this is “beneath you.” The leftists you so desperately try to please and gain the moral approval of are the worst offenders at bad faith character assaults.
We Right Wing Conspiracy Theorists™ have been pointing out Joe Biden’s creepiness for years:
This guy consistently gets way too close for comfort to just about any woman–or girl–that has the misfortune of coming within arms reach of him.
Here he is KISSING Chuck Grassley’s wife on the lips:
We’ve been saying this for years: what the hell is wrong with this guy, and if he’s this handsy in public, how much worse must he be in private?
Our valid questions about this creep have consistently been either ignored or dismissed as Conspiracy Theorism by the “mainstream media.”
But now the Creepy Uncle Joe storyline is back in the public eye again, and not because of us pesky rightwingers: this time, it’s a Democrat who is apparently trying to #MeToo the former Vice President.
“In 2014, I was the 35-year-old Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor in Nevada. The landscape wasn’t looking good for my party that year. There were no high-profile national races to help boost turnout, and after the top candidate bowed out of the governor’s race, “None of the Above” ended up winning the Democratic primary.
So when my campaign heard from Vice-President Joe Biden’s office that he was looking to help me and other Democrats in the state, I was grateful and flattered. His team offered to bring him to a campaign rally in an effort to help boost voter turnout. We set the date for November 1, just three days before election day.
[. . .]
I found my way to the holding room for the speakers, where everyone was chatting, taking photos, and getting ready to speak to the hundreds of voters in the audience. Just before the speeches, we were ushered to the side of the stage where we were lined up by order of introduction. As I was taking deep breaths and preparing myself to make my case to the crowd, I felt two hands on my shoulders. I froze. “Why is the vice-president of the United States touching me?”
I felt him get closer to me from behind. He leaned further in and inhaled my hair. I was mortified. I thought to myself, “I didn’t wash my hair today and the vice-president of the United States is smelling it. And also, what in the actual fuck? Why is the vice-president of the United States smelling my hair?” He proceeded to plant a big slow kiss on the back of my head. My brain couldn’t process what was happening. I was embarrassed. I was shocked. I was confused. There is a Spanish saying, “tragame tierra,” it means, “earth, swallow me whole.” I couldn’t move and I couldn’t say anything. I wanted nothing more than to get Biden away from me. My name was called and I was never happier to get on stage in front of an audience.”
Now nothing in Flores’ story is Weinstein-esque and disqualifying, nor does she break any new ground as it pertains to Creepy Uncle Joe–unless of course you consume a news diet of exclusively Uniparty Propaganda, in which case Biden’s creepiness has never before been brought to your attention.
But the real story, again, is that the complaints against Biden today are now coming from Democrats rather than Republicans.
Why are Democrats turning on Biden? Because the party’s leftwing base can already see what’s happening: Biden 2020 is just like Hillary 2016, i.e. the Establishment Approved™ candidate who will talk a big game about “change” and “feeling your pain,” but ultimately exists to protect the status quo.
In every election, the Uniparty Establishment pushes candidates from each party on the American public. They have their “frontrunner” candidates that they want most, but they also have backups in case their frontrunners flop. For example, in the 2016 GOP primary, the Uniparty’s “frontrunner” was Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio was their backup.
Almost every time, the Uniparty Establishment’s candidates become the major party nominees.
If the American people must be allowed to vote, and the Uniparty Establishment can’t really do anything about that, then they will rig our elections by making us choose between two Uniparty candidates, who despite being from different parties can each invariably be counted on to continue the same Uniparty policies: pro-Big Business, pro-endless war, pro-immigration, pro-free trade, anti-American.
That’s why I use the term “Uniparty.”
No matter who wins the election, the Uniparty always wins.
The only time in recent history when the Uniparty’s chosen candidate did not win a major party nomination was 2016, when Donald Trump beat out Jeb Bush.
You could also argue for 2008, when Obama beat out Hillary Clinton, but Obama was always full Uniparty Establishment. He may have seemed like the longshot outsider candidate in 2008, but the eagerness with which major corporations (three of his top seven largest donors were Megabanks) and Establishment politicians flocked to him proved otherwise.
And so Joe Biden is the Uniparty Establishment’s frontrunner candidate for 2020 for obvious reasons: he’s a known quantity, having been in politics for over 45 years and therefore fully corrupted, and is about as Establishment as it gets these days.
The Uniparty Establishment hopes Biden will be able to appeal to white working class voters in the Rust Belt–who after several decades of voting Democrat went for Trump in 2016–and bring the White House back in to Uniparty Establishment hands.
This is why you’re seeing the Uniparty Media spring to Biden’s defense. The Bezos Post spins it thusly:
C’mon, it’s just “Biden’s affectionate, physical style.” Bezos Post also wrote off Biden’s creepiness as part of his “warm, upbeat persona.”
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that the Bezos Post has for the past two months now been attacking Bernie Sanders, one of the few Democratic candidates not controlled by the Uniparty Establishment:
Yesterday’s edition of Meet the Propagandists Press continued the Defend Joe mission:
Please excuse me while I vomit over the phrase “fleshy world of 60s and 70s politics.”
And here we’ve got Establishmentarian Dick Durbin playing defense for Biden:
It could not be more transparent what’s going on here.
Despite the fact that the increasingly “diverse” Democratic Party is growing increasingly unaccepting of white people, the Uniparty wants Biden as the 2020 Democratic nominee because they know the path to retaking the White House goes through the Rust Belt, and a Diverse™ Democratic nominee like Kamala Harris or Cory Booker will have little to no appeal in those critical states.
But the Democratic base (more nonwhite and socialist than ever) can already sense that the Powers That Be are forcing a white, male neoliberal, Biden, on them. And so the rebellion against Biden has begun.
This is not just my speculation, either. Lucy Flores herself admitted it after she published her article about Biden:
Joe Biden's accuser Lucy Flores, who says part of the reason she came forward is Biden's moderate past on abortion, was spotted at Beto O’Rourke’s first big campaign rally last weekend. https://t.co/D1iBYt0Ozi
Flores was a Bernie supporter in 2016 and is on-record opposing Biden. She was recently spotted at a Beto rally.
The Democratic base does not want Biden.
No, the Democratic base wants to be force-fed Beto O’Rourke instead.
“We don’t want the hand-picked candidate of the Uniparty Establishment! We don’t want another Hillary Clinton!”
They want Beto, a media-manufactured, astroturfed pseudo-phenomenon foisted upon idiots who believe they’re supporting a “movement” and going against the Establishment.
But guess again: there would be no Beto O’Rourke if the Establishment Media did not build him up and promote him 24/7 last year.
I live in Chicago and saw multiple people walking around with “BETO” shirts and laptop stickers. The guy was running for Senate in Texas. The only way he gains national prominence is through a deliberate and concerted media effort. The media wouldn’t shut up about Beto skateboarding and playing in a rock band. It’s utterly laughable to suggest Beto is a grassroots, anti-Establishment candidate.
Beto is Obama all over again.
Revolt against Biden and the Uniparty all you want, Democrats.
Just know that the Uniparty has backup candidates, and the Fake Hispanic from Texas you’re swooning over has Establishment written all over him.