Trump v. Warren

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

 

 

Official Theme Song of the Trump 2020 Campaign?

 

 

I often tell people that I practice law not for the money but for the entertainment value.  If it is Trump v. Warren next year, as I expect, politics should be very entertaining indeed.  Matthew Walther at The Week gives us the details:

Then there is the related question of her composure. If you don’t think Trump is capable of getting under her skin, remember that last year he single-handedly convinced her to take a freaking DNA test, the results of which she proudly reported, not-so-accidentally endorsing the “one-drop” theory. Native Americans were, rather understandably, appalled. Everyone else, with the possible exception of Trump himself, was confused. This is not how a sober-minded person responds to jibes from someone who has spent his entire life insulting people.

The Native American ancestry controversy is not going away, even if Warren does somehow manage to beat the current Super Tuesday math, which still favors Biden. How many Pocahontas jokes do you think she can stomach? Is she ready for Trump to tweet “Colors of the Wind” with her face superimposed on the Disney princess character by some teenaged alt-right sludgelord? Is she ready for the rally at which Trump tunelessly declaims — in that affectless monotone he adopts whenever he is trying to read something — the lyrics from Cher’s “Half Breed”? Talking about postal banking in the middle of all this is going to require a very cool head.

Go here to read the rest.  Every great comedian needs an earnest straight man.  In Warren, a humorless scold who lies with all the plausibility of Nixon attempting to do a polka, Trump has been granted a straight woman for the ages.  I don’t know if Trump prays much, but if he goes up against Fauxcahontas God has granted him another perfect opponent to run against.

 

More to explorer

Just Because

  Bohemian Rhapsody and Shakespeare go together like pepperoni pizza and bleach.  Enjoy.

Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association

Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We, of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal

Saint of the Day Quote: Blessed Josephine Leroux

Among the last of the nuns to be martyred during the French Revolution, she and seven other nuns were guillotined on October

18 Comments

  1. Ugh! Warren needs heap good medicine man to get the odds in her favor! Better start-um chants and dances now to get the Great Spirit to give you election. And I’m not talk-um about big heap Chief Hillary, Fauxy!

  2. Mr. Dalton,

    I won’t be surprised if Dame Hillary makes a push to run a third time. Biden (to China, Ukraine, and others he sold his office) is toast. Sanders is too old and now had a heart attack. The others are smaller personalities than six of the the seven dwarves. Warren is unelectable: dishonest and too far left.

    Never say, “Never.” The lefts’ control over schools may have produced sufficient idiots to elect a nitwit they think is a bloody genius like Obama.

  3. The Democrats could nominate a dead dog in the road and they’d get 45% of the vote. The question is what the swing voters will do. Trump can’t seem to close the deal with them.

    I have no clue why people fancy HRC will be a candidate or would like to be. In living memory, just about the only candidates who have made more than two competitive runs for the office were all incumbent Presidents their last time up. There have been exceptions to that rule, but they all occurred under the ancien regime of delegate selection and every exception was past their peak, receiving the ballots of a modest corps of votaries and trailing the leaders by a large amount. As for Mooch, she’s not interested in politics or law. She’s interested in the decorative arts. She’s got more in common with Nancy Reagan and Barbara Bush than she does with HRC, just more introverted and with a lower energy level.

  4. The question is what the swing voters will do. Trump can’t seem to close the deal with them.

    Almost all the general election polls in 2016 radically underestimated Trump strength. Considering the insane vilification of Trump supporters in many parts of the country since his election, I suspect that the underestimation is magnified in current polls. Obama did fairly poorly in hypothetical polls in 2011. A better metric of strength for an incumbent right now is fundraising, and Trump is raking in the funds.

  5. We need a better term than swing voters. E.g. the catholic vote swings. Catholics went for Bush in ’04, Obama in ’08, (I don’t remember) in ’12, and Trump in ’16. This tells me that Catholics vote, but there’s no such thing as a “Catholic vote” (and probably hasn’t been in quite some time).

    Does the swing vote swing because it’s independent? Because it’s stupid and easily led? Because it’s influenced by the popularity contest/horse race aspect of media coverage? Because it doesn’t know much about either the issues or the candidates, and can’t be bothered to get a clue, but shows up to vote anyways. Oe because it’s lazy and indifferent and makes up it’s mind at the last minute?

    I don’t think Trump won by getting the swing vote. He won by getting non-voters
    /discouraged voters in rust belt states to vote again. I think he wins again by growing those numbers in the rust belt and by depressing the Democrat turnout, either by winning this impeachment fight outright, or by continuing to encourage the out of control insane Left to drive the Democrats over the cliff.

  6. What about the Feminazis and those voters who will vote for Warren only because she would be the “first” woman president?
    Like republican businessmen who voted for Obama because he would be the “first” black president. “Righting a wrong”, one of them told me. He changed his tune during that administration but the damage was done. Perhaps I still live too close to DC. 103 miles away isn’t far enough.

  7. Like republican businessmen who voted for Obama because he would be the “first” black president. “Righting a wrong”, one of them told me.

    Obama’s connection to the domestic black population has been that he married into it. He’s about as black as Peggy Lipton.

    We haven’t had a child of the wage-earning strata in the White House since Andrew Johnson. Ergo, he should have voted for Mike Huckabee. We’ve never had an Eastern or Southern European ethnic in the White House. All of the consequential candidates who’ve fit that description (Edmund Muskie, Michael Dukakis, Paul Tsongas, Tom Harkin, Rick Santorum, Bernie Sanders) have lost. (Well, there was Spiro Agnew). No Korea vets and no VietNam vets. We’ve had one actual draft-dodger in the President’s chair (who, whaddaya know, is never referred to by partisan Democrats when they start talking about ‘draft-dodgers’).

  8. I didn’t vote for Trump (or Hillary) last time around, because:
    A) as an IL resident I knew our electoral vote was going to Hillary no matter what, therefore my vote for a non-Democrat would have no electoral impact;
    B) at that time I believed that Trump was probably just playing Lucy to the pro-life/pro family/pro religious freedom voters’ Charlie Brown and would inevitably yank the football out from under us yet again.
    Thankfully I was wrong about B). Next time around, I will happily vote FOR him, even if I am just spitting into a Category 5 hurricane generated by the Chicago Machine. One reason being that even if the nationwide popular vote doesn’t ultimately count under the Constitution, it does in public perception. So votes for Trump in deep blue states won’t be “wasted” in that sense — add as much as we can to the popular vote totals and MAYBE it will shut up the “abolish the Electoral College” crowd….

  9. In the years proceeding Trumps election I’ve often thought the rock song “Lunatic Fringe” summed up the Dems fairly succinctly. Warren included.

  10. I look at the Obama years as being in effect the second and third terms of the Carter administration.

    The OCR run amok and the Energy Department as Venture Capitalist shticks were Carteresque. Other things, not so much. For one thing, the Federal Reserve during the BO years wasn’t run by incompetents.

  11. I was more thinking the ineffectual foreign policy and the whole malaise business.

    Different sort of malaise. As for what was up abroad, BO had better luck than Carter.

  12. The problem is what would have been ‘lunatic fringe’ in the Democratic Party 20 years ago is now their mainstream. It’s not costing them many votes, I think because voting is identity-driven to a degree it wasn’t in, say, 1995.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.