Tuesday, January 15, 2019


Senator Bernie Sanders becoming the Dem’s 2020 candidate would indeed be a disaster for the GOP-in 2024. In 2024 the Republicans would facing the seeming iron rule, since 1952, of presidential elections-that a two term administration of either party has little chance of the successor candidate being elected.

On the other hand most first term presidents, or their successors in office e.g. Kennedy/Johnson Harding/Coolidge being one administration, get re-elected

In the twelve presidential administrations from 1920 only three presidents, Hoover, Carter, GWH Bush were not re-elected and not surprisingly all were done in by poor to disastrous economies. The Roosevelt/Truman
Democratic administrations ran to five victories in a row.

With those historical precedents in mind the odds are that President Trump will be receive a second term. If the economy continues to improve and the unprecedented benefits as regards employment for Blacks (with whom Sanders did poorly) and Hispanics continues its current pace then Trump would be positioned for a landslide win.

In such circumstances the opposing party gives vent to its most radical or out of touch elements and nominates a Goldwater a McGovern a Mondale and suffers a massive electoral college rejection-Mondale’s being the worst only carrying his home state of Minnesota and D.C.

Sanders, with his army of “Bernie Bros.” mass support among the progressive wing of the Dem’s ticks every box in the crusade type candidacy. It is challenging to see the American electorate at a time of near full employment electing what would be perceived as a tax raising socialist and conveyor of who knows what new list of politically correct social restructuring.

The prospect of a Sanders candidacy is very real. He has not yet made any moves in that direction but to discount such a possibility would be foolish. Nathan Robinson at the leftist ‘The Guardian’ hails Sanders as “the most progressive choice for president.”

Notably, according to the Daily Beast’s  Michael Tomasky a high profile Sanders partisan David Sirota has attacked “Beto” O’Rourke, a younger potential rival for the progressive left’s hearts while Tomasky, a Hillary supporter has attacked Sanders. David Brook at NBC’s “Think” goes further and attacks Sanders fans as potential “poisoners”-game on.

 More importantly Sanders leads by a large margin in polls of progressives and in second place to former VP Joe Biden in various wider polls of prospective nominees. He has his mass of supporters to reignite, and the second time around as a known factor to the left, would make that a simple task as would the raising of substantial funding.

While a Sanders candidacy would be welcomed by Republicans the reality is a more traditional Democratic candidate would, historically at least, also lose to Trump which scenario bodes poorly for the GOP in 2024.

If Sanders were to run and lose the natural result would be the Democratic  party, with the radicals humbled, would turn to a centrist candidate which would make the job of the successor to Trump very difficult against the “third term” hoodoo.

Conversely, if Sanders were again denied the nomination after a vigorous campaign with mass rallies attended by hordes of youthful leftists and their Hollywood supporters once again, the pressure for a similar candidate in 2024 would be unstoppable.

President GWH Bush broke the third term jinx by having the good fortune to run against an utterly hopeless incompetent in Mike Dukakis who blew an 18 point poll lead. Whoever the GOP’s successor to Trump is she or he can only hope that Sanders is denied the 2020 nomination and a similar radical is the Dem’s choice in 2024

Sunday, January 13, 2019

Democratic Clown Car Here's 8 Now Declared Of 138 Registered With Electoral Commission

As the number of declared Dem candidates continues I will update the page. Nobody, not even former State Senator Richard Ojeda's own campaign has made any buttons so a T-shirt will do until any surface (if they do).
Cut and past link.

Monday, January 7, 2019


A quick recap of the current state of play in the liberal’s social agenda.  Homosexuality was decriminalized along with sodomy in 2003, same-sex Civil Unions followed suit in 2000 and then same-sex marriage in 2015
Abortion was decriminalized in 1973 and American abortion laws are considered “among the most permissive in the world.” Pending a Supreme Court decision transgendered people can serve in the military. It would appear that, barring one or two further Trump appointed Supreme Court justices, all is rosy in liberaland, with one serene Gay person tweeting “I am more involved with planting roses along my white picket fence than having any concern about Gay rights now.”

The position of feminism is, I have no qualms whatsoever in stating, so complex with such a massive numbers of variants, as shown by a simple Google of “Feminism” which commences with “Cultural, Ecofeminism, Mainstream, French, Liberal, Libertarian, Multiracial, Poststructural” and it is beyond the scope of this article, or anyone except the most intrepid to navigate through such a vast field. Perhaps it is sufficient to say that such diversity in itself represents a liberal achievement.

The liberal feminist challenge has come from a perhaps unexpected quarter where transgendered males are cleaning up in women’s sports especially weightlifting and rugby and, as illustrated a testosterone heavy female “transitioning” to male appears to be doing as well as might be expected against oestrogen disadvantaged females.

While athletes and parents have been complaining about this apparent sporting imbalance it appears to have gone unaddressed by feminists of any wave but pressure will surely make it a matter of notice. Not least because also unaddressed is the problem of inequality in sport In general. Why for example, are there only mixed doubles in tennis?

 For true equality doubles could include two females against two males, or an NFL championship featuring the top men’s team against the top female’s team. For liberals it must be surmised that there should simply not be such outdated concepts as “male” or “female” sports or teams and all such should be composed of fifty percent of each gender or gender belief.

However there are some further, current, aspects of these and other liberal cultural desiderata, that appear to have matters still unfulfilled for some while creating a challenging dichotomy for others. If the above social changes are applauded by liberals what social constraints do currently meet with their approval? This is where the dichotomy appears.

“Where there is love there should be marriage” this driving message for same-sex marriage appears not to apply to Gay same-sex polygamy nor heterosexual polygamy. The apparent lack of logic seems quite striking as how much more love must there be between a man and say six men or a woman with six men or six women?

Pederasty appears to have a cast of liberal opprobrium but the “love” message seems to apply even here with “NAMBLA” The North American Man/Boy Love Association have battled for decades to have this aspect of love legalized. It appears that Man/Girl love is a step too far, currently, for even the most activist of liberals but who knows what the future holds.

It might be thought that bestiality or “Zoosexual Activity” would be beyond the attention of even the most progressive but to the contrary it is making strides in that most liberal of countries, Trudeau’s Canada where the Supreme Court ruled that “only penetrative sexual acts with animals is illegal while not sanctioning “other beastly activities.” 

With further good news for those so inclined they have ruled that ownership of “zoophilic pornography” can be enjoyed at leisure without any legal problems. For Americans, American Samoa, The Marianas and Guam give unfettered (or fettered if preferred, I don’t know if “mutual agreement applies’) access. It is Legal for civilians at the U.S.A’s Guantanamo Naval Base but servicemen there have been banned from such perceived pleasures only since 2016.

Rape, surely, has universal condemnation from liberals but even here there are qualifications. As set out in The Federalist  “You can still assault women and be a good feminist” Rebecca Schoenkopf Editor of that most leftist progressive journal “Wonkette” advised  “To sum up, I think Bill Clinton could very well have raped Juanita Broaddrick,” she writes. “It doesn’t make him an evil man, or irredeemable (I’m Catholic; we’re all forgiven, if we’re sorry, and Broaddrick says Bill Clinton personally called her up to apologize). It doesn’t even necessarily make him a bad feminist — you know, later, once he stops doing that.” It could be inferred that rape by a liberal is, with qualifications, OK.

The Supreme Court ruling on abortion has not satisfied some liberals who want no restrictions whatsoever whether a foetus is viable or not. The now Alabama Senator Democrat Doug Jones advised I am not in favour of anything that impinges on a woman’s right and freedom to choose…[I] become a pro-lifer after the child is born.”

It appears that for liberals while there is much to be celebrated there appears to be much work to be done and complete and settled positions to be taken on outstanding social issues e.g. Sharia law, female genital mutilation as cultural expression (good?) Male genital mutilation (circumcision) as cultural expression (bad?)  Before liberal America is firmly and irrevocably in place.