American interference in Canadian election

 It never fails. Every time I announce that I'm going to be off for a couple of days, something happens to change my plans. Murphy's law. But I would be remiss if I unplugged the computer without pointing out the hypocrisy of American politicans, Democrat politicians, who whined endlessly about "foreign interference" in the Presidential elections of 2016 and 2020, but don't hesitate to tell Canadians who to vote for. 

Here is the list of last-minute, desperate-measures-called-for endorsements, published yesterday and today.

Barack Hussain Obama (aka the Prez) has endorsed his "friend" Justin Trudeau. That's the second time. He did that in the last week of the 2019 campaign and it had the desired effect of reassuring "progressives" that Mr Socks was more than the shallow puppet he seemed to be.

Hellery Clinton, former US Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential candidate, has endorsed her "friend" Justin Trudeau. That's because he's a champion of "reproductive rights" (i.e. baby-killing), affordable child care and other issues of importance to wimmin. And...

(((Bernie Sanders))), another failed presidential candidate, has endorsed... wait for it... Jagmeet Singh, leader of Canada's Few Democrats. Mr Sanders sits in the US senate as an Independent, so maybe we shouldn't call him a Democrat. How about "Social Democrat" or "Demoratic Socialist"?

One thing these three have in common with Mr Trudeau is that they are all part of the Soros plan for One World Government. 

Just today, another tool of the New World Order, Filippo Grandi [= "Philip the Great"? Ed.], the United Nations Commissar for Refugees, reminded Canucks that their new government "must" [sic] honour the Liberals' promise to accommodate 20,000 Afghan refugees!

Dear Canadian friends, how do you like the prospect of the United Nations and the Democratic rulers of the Entitled States of America telling you (no matter which variety of liberals you elect) what to do? Not thrilled about it?  

VIDEO: Sleepy Joe promises to raise taxes... and he means it!

Movie time at the Trump rally today in New Hampshire. Those who have eyes to see, let them see; those who have ears to hear, let them hear.

   

 Don't forget to vote IN PERSON on November 3rd!

Is This a PANDEMIC or a DEMPANIC?

Ed. here. We rarely repost anything very lengthy, but since you're likely sitting at home with not much to do (thank you, corona virus!), we take pleasure in submitting, for your edification, "Is This a PANDEMIC or a DEMPANIC?", by Joan Swirsky, which originally appeared on March 21st in The Post & Email. Read it and learn who's really responsible for everyone in the Excited States of America (except The Smartest Guy in the Room) having their hair on fire.

Now that we’re in a de facto Martial Law mode -- a shutdown of entire industries and small businesses, nighttime curfews, social isolation, a run on goods, huge sports events cancelled, a “shelter-in-place” mandate in California, releasing prisoners in New York (God forbid these miscreants get a flu!), Broadway gone dark, and a craven media inciting and delighting in the panic they’re causing, it is relevant to ask:

Are the powers-that-be withholding information about a deadly germ-warfare attack on the entire world, started by an aggrieved Chinese Communist nation that was perfectly happy with the Bush1 and Clinton1&2 and Bush1&2 and Obama1&2 regimes that kowtowed to their outrageous demands and unfair trade deals but is now existentially threatened because a Patriot President expects more equitable deals?

Isn't it both alarmist and immoral, as reported in American Thinker by Andrea Widburg, that the fake-news media have never told the American people that the scary statistics from Italy are the result of Italy's recent Silk Road Project agreement with China, which resulted in more than 300,000 Chinese workers entering Italy?

Is it just one of those strange coincidences that one of the four richest men in the world, the uber-leftist and population-control fetishist Bill Gates -- just weeks after the corona virus hit in January -- stepped down from the Microsoft giant he founded in 1975, and just weeks earlier, in December, sponsored a "fictional" simulation of such a corona virus catastrophic event which spread wildly and caused 65 million deaths worldwide? Just asking.

What are the powers-that-be not telling us? The worldwide population is nearing eight billion. America has between 330-370 million people (the last 40 mil being illegals). Every day in America, 130 Americans die from an opioid overdose, 102 people from car accidents, and 2500 from heart attacks. And yet, so far in America, 19,000 people have contracted the corona virus and 256 have died from it. Got that? Over 330-million people; 256 deaths. The swine flu of 10 years ago caused 60.8 million illnesses, and 12,469 deaths.

Or is this yet another hysterical, sky-is-falling anxiety attack by the hand-wringing left designed to convince the American public that either Communist Bernie Sanders or a clinically cognitively-diminished Joe Biden -- both inveterate tax-and-spend liberals -- would be just the man to help America recover from this traumatic event and revive the stock market they both revile?

Of course, neither one of these Big Government hacks would be capable of such a feat. Thank God for the cool, calm, collected and seasoned business mogul, President Donald J. Trump, who is guiding us through the corona virus scare with decisive action and great success -- with no less than 56 bold initiatives -- and who not only brought us the greatest economy and employment record in the 243-year history of our country, but will revive it when this virus scare passes into history -- shortly, I predict!

WHERE ARE WE NOW?
A crazed, out-of-ammunition Democrat Party,
A doddering presumptive Democrat presidential candidate,
A deranged leftist media, furious at their low and devolving ratings,
Socialist/Communist/Islamicized Europeans,
Huge investors in the Globalist economy,
Angry Chinese leadership,
Failed Trump saboteurs Michael Avenatti (now in jail), Michael Cohen (now in prison), Anthony Scaramucci (now in nowheresville),
The Russian-collusion hoaxers of Obama’s FBI, CIA, State, Homeland Security, et al.
The exposed liars in the Ukraine phone-call hoax,
The losers of the crashing failure known as the impeachment hoax,
The cringe-producing sore-loser Hillary Clinton, who "lost|" $6-billion dollars when she was Secretary of State, and presided over the tragic loss of American lives in the Benghazi catastrophe––and then lied about it!
These are just a few of the forces who have been working overtime for the past four years to sabotage, undermine, and ultimately destroy both candidate and then President Trump, the man who single-handedly exposed:

The Left’s seditious and I believe traitorous anti-American agenda and behavior,
The criminality they’ve engaged in for decades with absolute impunity,
The gouging of the United States’ economy for their own ideological and personal benefit, extorting billions that was laundered and stuffed into their own pockets,
Their devoted allegiance to colossal hoaxes like Global Warming,
Their abject neglect of blacks in education and where ignorance leads––ta da––prison,
Their seething contempt if not downright hatred of the United States of America.

And yet, with all their impressive advanced college degrees, fancy credentials, exalted titles, tenure-for-life government jobs, social-media collaboration with leftist Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al, and the flagrant abuse-of-power they’ve gotten away with -- but not for long! -- such as illegal FISA warrants, lying witnesses, shadow-banning, rigging elections, the list goes on…they still could not bring down THE. SMARTEST. GUY.IN.THE.ROOM.

TEARING THEIR HAIR OUT
Now, almost eight months from a presidential election, all of these forces are desperate, anguished, just-about suicidal with frustration. What can we do, they are asking themselves, to stop President Trump from winning a second term and then crushing for all time the remaining malignant remnants of the leftist agenda?

While none of them are smart enough to have created the corona virus threat, they secretly celebrated the fact that this crisis would prevent the president from conducting his two or three rallies a week around the country, where upwards of 50,000-75,000 people line up for days on end to applaud and support their president.

Well, they got their wish. Now he is on TV every single day, showing the entire country (and world) what genuinely strong and effective leadership is all about -- which is why his approval ratings are skyrocketing!

Undaunted, the frantic left is spending untold billions, not to help the deserving people affected adversely by the corona virus, but, as Daniel Greenfield documents exhaustively, “to smear President Trump and undermine the administration. How patriotic of them.”

Greenfield cites the SuperPac which leftist billionaires  -- Hollywood producer Jeffrey Katzenberg, financier George Soros, the list is long––are using to attack President Trump over the corona virus. Many if not all of them are more successful and savvy than most people in the world––but I repeat, none of them a match for THE. SMARTEST. GUY.IN.THE.ROOM!

WHERE ELSE THE OPPOSITION COMES FROM
Three years ago, I wrote an article called “The Hate-America Death Squads” in which I described the forces we are witnessing today, all of whom exult when America has trouble.

DEATH SQUAD #1 is the Cloward-Piven Strategy, begun in 1966 and flourishing to this day. In short, the founders of this plan, from Columbia Univ., loathed America and insisted that capitalism could be collapsed by overloading the government with financial demands that could not be met. They also formed voter-fraud schemes like Project Vote, ACORN, etc, still extant only with different names. And (surprise, surprise) ACORN’s lawyer was none other than Barack Obama. Birds of a feather, and all that.

DEATH SQUAD #2 Saul Alinsky, a community organizer from Chicago, wrote the bible for hate-America leftists: Rules for Radicals. Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley thesis about Alinsky and remained close friends with him years after she graduated, and Barack Obama became a community organizer in the Alinsky mode. Both of them shared Alinsky’s real goal -- to destroy capitalist America and turn it into the socialist-cum-communist regime they preferred.

DEATH SQUAD #3 is and was the leftwing media -- or what Dr. Drew Pinsky calls “the corrupt, uninformed, morally reprehensible American press -- notorious for skewing the “news” in a Marxist direction. Remember, most media anchors and news readers take their marching orders directly from bosses who are extremely invested in the global economy and not in President Trump’s economy, which has brought millions of jobs and manufacturing and profits back to the United States in order to Make America Great Again and Keep America Great!

DEATH SQUAD #4 is the Muslim Brotherhood which seeks the downfall of America, a phenomenon writer Linda Goudsmit explains in explicit and exquisite detail: “Islam is an expansionist socio-political movement with a religious wing created 1400 years ago.” Then and now, Islam “seeks world dominion  -- the establishment of a worldwide Islamic caliphate ruled by Islamic sharia law,” which is incompatible and anathema to American law and the U.S. Constitution.

DEATH SQUAD #5 is comprised of leftwing billionaires, mentioned above, who fund the hate-America groups like Occupy Wall St., Antifa, et al, as well as the politicians who have brought us Sanctuary Cities, no-bail laws, and attempts to rob Americans of their First Amendment right of Free Speech, Second Amendment right to bear arms, the power of capitalism to lift all boats, and belief in God.

THE GOOD NEWS
Medications to treat the corona virus are now being discussed, as Scott Johnson from Powerline reports; among them is the anti-malaria drug, chloroquine. The Israeli pharmaceutical company Teva is donating six-million doses of the medication to U.S. hospitals starting March 31st, and by the end of April 10 million will be shipped.

President Trump has asked the Food and Drug Administration if it can expand the use of the drug as an experimental treatment for coronavirus patients. A related article in Gateway Pundit reported that a chloroquine study showed a 100% cure rate for patients infected with the corona virus.

And just as I’m writing this article, an explosive article is broadcast reporting that three international studies from China, Australia and France show that chloroquine with the antibiotic azithromycin shows 100% success in treating corona virus in six days!

The ridiculous ban on plastic grocery bags is being temporarily lifted because, as John Tierney reports, the reusable tote bags "that politicians and environmentalists have been so eager to impose on the public…can sustain the COVID-19 and flu viruses…[a fact] that was clearly demonstrated in a 2018 study published in the Journal of Environmental Health."

Nobel laureate Michael Levitt, an American-British-Israeli biophysicist who teaches structural biology at Stanford University…offered the public reassurance during the peak of China’s coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak. "Levitt did not discover a treatment or a cure…he crunched the numbers" and predicted that the spread of the virus would come to a halt." His forecasts turned out to be correct: the number of new cases reported each day started to fall as of February 7th. A week later, the mortality rate started falling as well."

All this is devastating to Democrats, but there is a solution. Simply plaster this poster in every newspaper and all over the Internet and watch how quickly the corona virus scare vanishes into thin air!

Thanks to Agent 6 for pointing us in the RIGHT direction!

Berned out! Sanders loses bigly in IL, FL, AZ primaries

So, farewell then, Bernie Sanders. Maybe that's a bit premature, but even Senator Sanders seems to be able to read the handwriting on the wall following losses in the Illionois, Florida and Arizona Democratic primaries.

Speaking to his supporters (Sid and Doris Bonkers) last night, Bernie didn't even mention the elections that were going on, but rather laid out what he said should be the proper government response to the coronavirus.

About 60% of voters in Florida, Illinois and Arizona yesterday voted for Old Joe Biden, against 40% for Senator Sanders. Last week the former Veep went five for six, and on Super Tuesday before that, he won 10 of 14 contests.

He now has more than 1100 delegates, of the 1991 needed to clinch the Democratic nomination, compared to just more than 800 for Senator Sanders. About 40% of delegates are yet to be allocated, but the commentariat agree that the race is effectively over.

Yes, there are still many states which have yet to hold primaries, but the Dumbocrats award delegates proportionally, making it extremely difficult for candidates to make up a lot of ground very quickly. There are also the "super-delegates" -- the Democratic establishment -- who some had thought would get behind Sleepy Joe if it looked like Bernie was leading. There's no way they will suddenly see the light and rally behind the "progressive" banner. They want to beat Trump, and they know that (as Walt said a couple of weeks ago) America just isn't ready for a Jewish president.

So what will Senator Sanders do now? Is it possible he's considering running as a "progressive independent"? That would make things interesting, but would all but guarantee the re-election of Still-President Trump, which looks like a pretty good bet anyway. (Lifetime pct .989.) So watch for the mainstream Democrats to cut some kind of deal with Mr Sanders and his socialists to paper over the huge crack in the party. Stay tuned.

Walt's advice to President Trump re the ballot question for November

As I predicted (lifetime pct .992), it's come down (already) to a fight between Old Joe and the old Jew. The once and future Vice-President Joe Biden scored victories from Texas to Massachusetts on Super Tuesday, revitalizing a presidential bid that was teetering on the edge of disaster. But (((Bernie Sanders))) seized the biggest prize with a win in California, ensuring that the self-styled democratic socialist will make the running in the Democrats' nomination fight for the foreseeable future.

The dust hasn't entirely settled yet, but as I write it looks like Mr Biden won Virginia (99 delegates), North Carolina (110), Alabama (52), Tennessee (64), Arkansas (31), Minnesota (75), Oklahoma (37), Massachusetts (91), Maine (24) and Texas (228). Mr Sanders won Vermont (16), Colorado (67), and Utah (29), and is leading in California (415). (((Michael Bloomberg))) spent half a billion dollars to win American Samoa (6). It should be remembered though that mail-in ballots are yet to be counted in CA, and some states, notably TX, don't follow the winner-take-all rule, but divide the delegates along regional or other lines.

Still, it's going to come down to a latter-day Messiah -- wasn't Jesus a socialist Jew? -- versus the would-be successor to the last Democratic emperor. If I had been in Jerusalem around A.D. 33, I'd have bet on the emperor. If I were in Washington today, I'd bet on Old Joe, because I know the DNC are going to pull out all the stops to keep the anti-establishment candidate from winning.

The contours of the Biden vs Sanders fight were made clear last night as the contenders trash-talked each other in victory speeches delivered from opposite ends of the country. "You cannot beat Trump with the same-old, same-old kind of politics," said Senator Sanders, ticking off a list of past policy differences with Mr Biden on issues such as Social Security, trade and military force. "This will become a contrast in ideas," he said.

For his part, Mr Biden promised, last night and in campaign speeches in the days preceding, that he would turn back the clock, and make America what it was during what is now referred to as "the Obama-Biden administration". No new ideas, just what Mr Sanders correctly refers to as "the same-old, same-old kind of politics." I don't call it SOSO - Same-Old Same-Old -- but SSDD -- Same Shit Different Day!

Therein lies the key to four more years for Still-President Trump. If Old Joe secures the Dumbocratic nomination, as seems likely, there will be those advising him who will recommend dredging up the Bidens' (père et fils) nefarious dealings in the Ukraine. That would be bad. The American public long since tired of hearing about that, and raking the muck yet again would bring back the Pelosi-Schiff charges that President Trump acted improperly in trying to get the Bidens investigated. Don't go there!

The real ballot question, in November, should issue directly from Mr Biden's promises to uphold the Obama legacy and continue with the inaction, indecisiveness and stagnation that marked the eight years of the Prez's administration. In 2016 American voters rejected the failed policies of the Democratic administration, and voted to Make America Great Again. What Donald Trump should be asking voters, from now until election day, is: Do you really, really want to go back to the way things were before? I believe the response will be a massive "NO"! (Lifetime pct. still .992)

UPDATE ADDED at 0755: (((Michael Bloomberg))) dropped out of the race this morning, after failing to convert his massive wealth into sufficient delegates in his first test at the ballot box. In a statement and social media posts, Mayor Mike said he would endorse Joe Biden.

UPDATED: Stop Sanders Stampede is ON!

I didn't post anything yesterday on the result of the South Carolina Democratic primary because I thought it better to wait until the dust settled. I was rewarded for my patience last night when Mayor Pete announced that he was bowing out of the contest to be The One Who Loses to Trump. (Lifetime pct .991) I congratulate him on bowing to the inevitable and getting out before being humiliated.

And who might the inevitable be? From this corner of the woods it looks like Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Or former Vice-President Joe Biden. [Note from Ed.: Can someone tell me whether it should be "Vice-President" or "Vice President"? We prefer the former, because the latter sounds like the President in charge of Vice". Which is politically correct?! But we digress...] Old Joe whupped the old Jew (and everybody else) in Saturday's SC primary, garnering not just a plurality in the large field, but a majority. Whoda thunk it? His blowout victory, combined with the exit of Mr Buttigieg, leaves him as the only one with a plausible chance of catching the Senator from Brooklyn.

The questions tomorrow, Super Tuesday, are does Mr Biden have the fuel to catch up? And what will be the effect of the presence (for the first time) on the ballot of another old rich New York Jew? Will the hundreds of millions of dollars (of his own money) spent on nationwide TV advertising -- including a video endorsement by Judge Judy -- win him enough delegates to be a real contender? Didn't work for Tom Steyer.

Super Tuesday is the biggest on the primary calendar: 14 states along with American Samoa will determine one-third of the pledged delegates – 1,344 out of the 1,991 needed to win – to the Democratic convention in Milwaukee. A dominant performance by Senator Sanders could make it nearly impossible for rivals to eclipse his delegate count. But a strong second-place showing by Sleepy Joe could position him as the moderate alternative who might, might be more acceptable to voters in November.

That's how Mayor Mike wants to be seen, but has he entered the field too late? And are Americans really ready to elect a Jewish president, regardless of whether he's a capitalist or a socialist? My political antennae tell me no. Lifetime pct .991. [You already said that today. Ed.]

It will also be interesting to see what happens when Fauxcahontas and Senator Amy Klobuchar drop out, as seems likely before the week ends. [Don't say it again! Ed.] The ladies are likely to win, or at least have a respectable result, in their home states (as will Bernie, in Vermont), but who will their delegates go to in the event of a brokered convention?

Time reports that a rally for Senator Klobuchar was cancelled last night as several dozen protesters took the stage, chanting "Black Lives Matter" [Is that still a thing? Ed.], "Klobuchar has got to go" and "Free Myon", apparently referring to the case of a black teenager convicted of murder after an allegedly flawed police investigation. A campaign spokesthingy told the meeja, "The campaign offered a meeting with the Senator if they (protesters) would leave the stage after being on stage for more than an hour. After the group initially agreed, they backed out of the agreement and we are cancelling the event."

Meanwhile, the Clinton News Network reports that Barack Hussein Obama has told his former Veep that he (the Prez) won't endorse anybody yet. He did manage to call Old Joe to offer his congratulations on the SC win, but his words of praise for Biden's commanding finish in the contest did not change the fact that the Prez still plans to stay on the sidelines and not insert himself into the primary fight as it intensifies. "A person close to Obama" told CNN, "We are skeptical that an endorsement coming from us could truly change the political winds right now," adding that, there is "a very real chance [an endorsement] backfires."

Further reading: "Why Biden's South Carolina Victory Increases the Odds of a Brokered Convention", by Matt Margolis on PJMedia, 1/3/20.

UPDATE ADDED at (almost) high noon: The Stop Sanders Stampede is ON! AP reports that Senator Klobuchar has announced the end of her campaign for the presidensity, and plans to endorse... wait for it... Sleepy Joe, whose rally in Dallas she will attend tonight. The withdrawal comes too late (I would think) to take her name off the Democratic primary ballot tomorrow, so I'm not how they allocate the delegates which she may win in her home state. The chances of her winning delegates in other state were slim and none.

VIDEO: Song for the Democratic primaries

Voting is under way in the Democratic primary in New Hampshire, and I don't know which way to bet. All I know is that whoever wins in NH, if he/she can carry the convention and become the candidate for the presidensity of the Excited States of America, is going to lose to Still-President Trump. I know that because I know there are millions of Americans who feel like Bryan Lewis, here, who sings about what it would take for him to vote Democrat again.

UPDATED AGAIN: Iowa caucuses: BIG RIG in progress

As a watery sun rises over the frozen, snow-covered cornfields of Iowa, [Get on with it. Ed.] voters, observers and the commentariat are waiting to pick over the entrails of the Iowa Democratic caucuses to determine who won, who lost, and who was most likely to become the Democratic candidate for the presidensity. Will it be (((Bernie Sanders))), Old Joe Biden, Fauxcahontas, or the paler, gayer version of the Prez, Pete Buttigieg?

But Houston, we have a problem! Hours after the polls closed, the number of precincts reporting results was 0 (ZERO). Dumbocratic officials told skeptical onlookers that there were "reporting issues" and "inconsistencies" which meant that vote tallies, and the number of convention delegates to be allotted to each candidate, would not be available until, errr, later today. Translation: We didn't get the result we wanted so we're bringing in experts from Chicago and Philadelphia to sort things out. Shorter translation: Rigging is still in progress.

I'm reminded of the 2008 presidential election in the Democratic Republic of Zimbabwe, which has been ruled by one party, ZANU-PF, ever since the country was "liberated" from the hated colonialists in 1980. In 2008, ZANU-PF's Comrade R.G. Mugabe was opposed by Morgan Tsvangirai, candidate of the Movement for Democratic Change. The waters were muddied by the presence of an "independent" candidate put up by ZANU-PF to split the opposition vote.

Early results from the first round of voting showed Mr Tsvangirai in the lead, to the consternation of the government-controlled Electoral Commission, which responded by suspending counting so that certain "reporting issues" and "inconsistencies" could be cleared up. Sound familiar?

Weeks later it was announced that Comrade Bob had topped the polls, but had failed to garner 50% + 1 of the votes, so a second round would need to be held. The election process was marred by violence against and intimidation of voters and opposition party workers, which eventually led to Mr Tsvangirai's withdrawal from the poll, leaving Mr Mugabe the winner.

Back to Iowa now. As Thomas Luongo wrote yesterday in "Can Bernie and Tulsi Survive Hillary's 'Urge' to Save the DNC?", the Democratic National Committee has its hair on fire at the prospect of (((Bernie Sanders))), a certified [certifiable? Ed.] anti-establishment democratic socialist, becoming the party's nominee. Even the 1/1028th Native American Senator from Massachusetts would be marginally more acceptable to American voters, they reckon, than the Brooklyn-born Jew.

Trouble is, Iowa Democrats didn't appear to agree. A number of polls showed Senator Sanders neck-and-neck with Mr Biden for the lead, with Senator Warren and Mayor Pete battling for third place, well behind the leaders.

What to do?! How about taking advantage of confusion caused by new rules to delay any announcement until paper ballots, tally sheets etc could be collected and "verified", in order to be certain that their preferred candidate -- step forward, Joe Biden -- had indeed won.

Wasn't it just last week that Rep. Adam Schiff  (D-CA) told the Senate that they must take away from Still-President Trump the power to rig elections, because the American people can't be depended on to make the right decision? The voters, he suggested, could be led astray by, for instance, the interference of foreign powers, and might be fooled into re-electing Mr Trump. So the Senate, Mr Schiff said, should pre-empt that possibility by removing Mr Trump from office and ensuring that he could never run again.

Is it possible that the DNC likewise doesn't trust Iowa Democrats to make the right decision? Is that why we're still waiting, as a watery sun rises over the frozen, snow-covered cornfields [Enough! Ed.] for the officially approved results of caucuses which began over 12 hours ago? Just askin'...

Footnote: The Iowa Democratic Party is saying now that the problem was a "coding issue" found in the app used to record and report votes. Robby Mook [Who he? Ed.] had nothing to do with it! Mr Mook was a campaign manager for Hellery Clinton, and was part of the project Defending Digital Democracy (DDD) — an initiative aimed at protecting elections from cyberattack — that tested the app ahead of the botched caucus.

UPDATE ADDED 5/2/20: The New York Post reports that the Democratic National Committee is "taking over" the accounting of results from Monday's botched caucus count as state party operatives remain unable to provide a timeline for releasing the remainder of the tally. I think we all know what that means! (((Bernie Sanders))) came close to winning so the vote tallies will have to be "verified" to bolster the totals for Mayor Pete. Stay tuned...

UPDATE ADDED 6/2/20: In case you didn't stay tuned, here's the latest from the backroom boyz at the DNC. This morning, chairman Tom Perez demanded that Iowa state officials immediately recanvass the caucus vote, amid fears that the delayed results could be "inaccurate or inauthentic." [Ya think? Ed.]

"Enough is enough," tweeted Chairman Tom. "In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass." Looks from here like they're going to keep doing it until they get it "right" (read: not left).

Democrats shun Hellery; Walt predicts old white man will win Iowa

I know Agent 2 and others who dislike the A-word will be miffed at seeing this meme, but the good folks over at Blazing Cat Fur thought it went well with the following story, and I liked it enough to copy it.

Naomi Lim, writing in the Washington Examiner yesterday, says "Hillary Clinton is finding out what it's like to be on the long list of Democratic also-rans. The party has, for years, discarded losing presidential candidates such as George McGovern, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis, among others — to the point that they're often treated as contagious diseases, seen at best as cautionary tales about how not to campaign for the White House. Fair or not, Clinton has, in many ways, had that dishonor bestowed on her."

Ms Lim refers to Friday night's Iowa campaign rally for Senator (((Bernie Sanders))), at which the well-known Muslim human rights activist [an oxymoron, shurely! Ed.] Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) booed Hellery from the stage. Referring to Mrs Bill Clinton's recent comments bashing the 78-year-old socialist candidate, Ms Tlaib said, "You all know I can't be quiet. No, we're gonna boo. That's all right. The haters will shut up on Monday when we win."

Mrs Clinton angered Dems when she said in an interview that she would be reluctant to support her 2016 nemesis should he secure the Democratic nomination for the presidensity this year. Many prominent Dumbocrats, Ms Lim writes, are wary about hearing from her anymore. She quotes Tommy Vietor — a former Obama administration official who worked on the 2008 Obama campaign that dashed Hellery's White House hopes back then — as calling her remarks about Mr Sanders "inexcusable".

"If Bernie wins the nomination, we all need to work our asses off to help him win," Mr Vietor tweeted. "If someone else is the nominee, we all do the same for them. Don't kick up this bullshit right before Iowa, especially after complaining about Bernie's lack of support in 2016." Ms Lim also quotes Democratic strategist Brad Bannon, who blasted Mrs Clinton's "popping off" at Sanders as "uncalled for" given "the main goal of Democrats is to beat Donald Trump." Mr Bannon also slammed her for "prioritizing herself over party unity."

Iowans are heading into their complex and arcane caucus meetings as I write. All of America -- or at least those who care -- will have to wait another 12 hours or so to learn which of the dozen or so Democratic presidential wannabes will be favoured by the states Democratic voters (George and Nancy Schmidt) to take on Still-President Trump. For what it's worth, Walt predicts the winner, by an RCH [an engineering term, I believe? Ed.], will be (((Bernie Sanders))). Or maybe Old Joe Biden. Who cares... Lifetime pct .991.

Further reading: "Can Bernie and Tulsi Survive Hillary's 'Urge' to Save the DNC?", by Thomas Luongo on LewRockwell, 3/2/20. "...never underestimate this woman’s narcissistic solipsism."

Obama not crazy about leading Dem presidential candidates

Walt is starting to see commercials on the idiot's lantern (read: TV) for Michael Bloomberg, who apparently has thrown his kippah into the ring for the Dumbocrat nomination for the presidensity. By my count, that makes four more or less serious contenders, not counting Pete Buttgag, who surely can't be taken seriously. The five are: two old millionaire Elders of Zion, a still older Gentile who has been (NB) vice-president, and, inevitably, Fauxcahontas. A possible late entry, not counted here, is Hellery Clinton, who declares that she's willing and able to "win again".

Which of these potential losers does former President Barack Hussein Obama support? In "Waiting for Obama", Politico reveals that the Prez isn't crazy about any of them, and once warned that he would intervene to stop Senator Bernie Sanders from winning the Democratic presidential nomination.

The title of the Politico piece -- "Waiting for Obama" -- is an infra-dig reference to a spoof that appeared in Garry Trudeau's [no relation to Mr Socks. Ed.] Doonesbury comic strip back in 1987. For a week, two characters in the strip discussed their hopes for Mario Cuomo to announce his intention to become the primary candidate for the Democratic party nomination for the 1988 election.

The burden of the Politico piece seems to be that President Obama thinks he would do better against Still-President Trump than any of the wannabes who are covertly seeking his endorsement. Some of them, he thinks, could destroy the Dumbocrats through their calls for radical change to America's social and political systems in the name of "social justice". His warnings are seen as a swipe at candidates like Senators Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Politico claims the Prez has said in private he'd speak out against Mr Sanders if it looked like he could actually win. "Back when Sanders seemed like more of a threat than he does now, Obama said privately that if Bernie were running away with the nomination, Obama would speak up to stop him," the report says. However, the report quotes an Obama spokesthingy as saying the former president has stated that he would get behind the Democratic nominee regardless of who it is.

One adviser said that while they personally had no knowledge of this, the threat of a Sanders nomination would likely be cause for action. "I can't really confirm that," the adviser said, regarding the possibility of Obama trying to stop Sanders. "He hasn't said that directly to me. The only reason I'm hesitating at all is because, yeah, if Bernie were running away with it, I think maybe we would all have to say something. But I don't think that's likely. It's not happening."

It's not just Mr Sanders that the Prez dislikes. He's against the other, lesser-known, farther-out candidates too. At an Obama Foundation Summit event in October, the founder took aim at political "wokeness" and cancel culture. Weeks later, at a gathering of the Democracy Alliance, Mr Obama warned 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls that most voters do not want to "tear down the system."

Mr Obama dismissed far-left positions as not being popular among average Americans, even if they make waves on social media. "Even as we push the envelope and we are bold in our vision," he said, "we also have to be rooted in reality and the fact that voters, including the Democratic voters and certainly persuadable independents or even moderate Republicans, are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain, you know, left-leaning Twitter feeds."

The same Politico report talks about Mr Obama's relationship with Creepy Joe Biden, whom he has not yet endorsed, despite Mr Biden's having served as vice president in the Obama administration, routinely touting on the stump their "special relationship". That's not how the Prez tells it. Politico says Mr Obama recalled to one candidate who came to him for advice how he himself had a bond with the voters that has since faded. He reportedly added, "And you know who really doesn’t have it? Joe Biden."

So who's left? Ryan Lizza, author of the Politico report, writes: "Over the next year, Obama, according to his closest advisers, will start to emerge with slightly bolder colors. The boldest might be riding into a battle unfolding on his own side, if he did lead a potential stop-Bernie campaign. But absent that unlikely development, one adviser suggested that Obama could also be pulled into the primary and forced to play a major role if Democrats failed to pick a nominee before the convention."

"A major role"? Such as what? The Prez can't be the Democratic candidate because Americans already made the same mistake twice. But there's nothing to bar his lovely and fragrant wife from accepting a draft, especially in a brokered convention. Michelle Obama is female (check), black (check), "woke" (check) and (most important) not any of those others. You read it here first!

The real reasons millions of Americans are voting for Donald Trump

Shock! Horror! The lamestream media are starting to awaken to the fact that Donald Trump is on track to win the Republican nomination. Mayday, Mayday, Mayday! The American people, or American Republicans at least, have suddenly become evil, xenophobic, Islamophobic, racists!

What's wrong with that last sentence? It's the inclusion of the word "suddenly". The Prez's statements that race relations in the US of A have never been better notwithstanding, the pundits tell us now that millions of Americans have been racist all along! And that, you see, is why The Donald is going to win the GOP nomination. "It's not over yet, but by Wednesday morning it might be," says the CBC's Keith Boag in "Conventional wisdom crumbles, yet again, in U.S. primaries".

The reason for Mr. Trump's popularity, they're saying now, is that he's appealing to the "latent racism" of white Americans. Trouble is, white Americans (and Canadians, Brits, Aussies, Frenchmen, Germans, Swedes, etc etc) don't like being called "racist" any more. Is it "racist" to be proud of your country's history, culture and language? Is it "racist" to have border controls and certain requirements for immigration and citizenship?

The limousine liberals and "human rights" advocates who promote massive immigration yell "racist" at people who aren't happy to welcome into their countries hundreds of 1000s of aliens who will not, indeed cannot assimilate into the culture of the majority. But the stone truth is that pro-immigration policies are antithetical to the natural human desire to associate and live with others of the same kind. Birds of a feather flock together... and the other birds can damn well flock off!

Oh... I'm so sorry... Did I just write "hate speech"? All I did was give voice to a sentiment which is now being called "racial nationalism". In the Globe and Mail, Doug Saunders, a frequent apologist for diversity, multiculturalism and all that liberal claptrap, says racial nationalism is the reason for the ascendancy of Donald Trump. He writes:

"Once upon a time, a lot of people voted not for candidates or parties but for the big, all-explaining ideas they embodied. The last century was the age of the totalizing ideology: communism, fascism, socialism, libertarianism, theocracy. Most of those big ideas have all but vanished from mainstream national politics. People generally vote for pragmatists of the left or right, who, in practice, support some variation on a market economy and a more or less pluralist society, or for charismatic individuals offering an equally ideology-free version of personal authority.

"There’s really only one totalizing ideology remaining, one overarching theory that is currently attracting voters. It is by no means a majority philosophy, but it is gaining in popularity, attracting voters who seem to hunger for a large, simple theory. That ideology is racial nationalism – the belief that each country is associated with a race, a people or a religion; that it is therefore threatened by the arrival or rise to power of different people; and that the country’s problems can be solved by preventing their arrival, ascent or empowerment.

"It’s certainly not a new idea. What’s interesting about it today is how it has filled the vacuum once occupied by other big-picture ideologies.... It appears that a lot of people voting for racial nationalists are not single-issue bigots, but rather people searching for satisfying large-scale answers, and racial resentment is the only one on offer."

As proof for that last sentence, Mr Saunders reports the findings of a large survey conducted this month by the Public Religion Research Institute. The key finding (according to Mr Saunders) is that, when given the statement "It bothers me when I come in contact with immigrants who speak little or no English", 64% of Trump supporters agreed! But fewer than half of those backing other candidates felt the same way (or admitted that they did). So Trumpers are, if not racists, at least racial nationalists. See?

But there's rather more to the survey findings than the erstwhile opinion-shaper suggesets. Follow the link and you'll discover other reasons why millions of people are going to vote for Donald Trump.

• Trump supporters are notable for the degree to which they believe society has become too soft and feminine in recent years. More than two-thirds (68%) of Trump supporters, compared to 57% of Cruz supporters, say society as a whole has become too soft and feminine. By contrast, more than six in ten Clinton supporters (64%) and Sanders supporters (69%) reject this notion.
• Nearly half (45%) of Americans report being worried that they or someone in their family will be a victim of terrorism. These Americans report much stronger support for a leader who is willing to break the rules. About six in ten (61%) Americans who say they are very worried about being a victim of terrorism agree that the country needs a leader who is willing to break rules to put things right, compared to 39% of those who are not at all concerned.
• A majority of Americans report a dim view of their current economic health, with 37% saying that their financial situation is fair and 17% saying it is poor. More than four in ten Americans say they are in good (36%) or excellent (8%) financial shape. Trump supporters do not report being in worse financial shape than Americans overall. Close to half of Trump supporters say that they are in excellent (12%) or good (34%) financial shape, while a majority say they are in only fair (35 percent) or poor (19 percent) financial shape.

The emphasis of "not" in the penultimate sentence of the previous paragraph is mine. The significance of that finding is this. Trump supporters are not poor or (economically) lower class, as the chattering classes keep telling us. They are the kind of people who fight poverty by working for a living! And they are not about to see their hard-earned money "redistributed" to those who sit idle on the front porch making babies [On the front porch?! Ed.] waiting for the "guaranteed annual income" which is the latest brainstorm of the Clintons and Sanderses and other "social Democrats".

So you see, there's more to the Appeal of The Donald than racial nationalism, although the existence of that phenomenon is not to be denied -- and nothing new, either. Mr Trump, like George Wallace in 1968 and 1972, is playing to a fundamental dissatisfaction in the populace, a populace that feels it has no voice. This makes him popular -- also (some say) dangerous and unpredictable -- but it doesn't mean there wasn't a problem in the first place.

Reflections on South Carolina and Nevada

There were no upset winners in yesterday's Democratic caucus in Nevada or South Carolina's Republican primary. There were, however, a couple of losers.

One loser was apparent and expected. That would be JEB! All the Establishment money couldn't save him, nor could his little big brother's endorsement. See "Republican voters: WATCH 'Fahrenheit 9/11'!" (WWW 17/2/16) So now JEB! has bid us a tearful farewell. Or has he?! How come no putative candidates quit any more? Why do they just "suspend" their campaigns? Are we to believe that if some horrible accident should befall the Donald (just sayin'), JEB! will rise Lazarus-like from his crypt in Coral Gables?

If you think about it, the big loser in the Republican primary wasn't JEB!, but Ted Cruz. At one point last night he was deadlocked with Marco Rubio, with exactly the same number of votes. In the end, Mr. Rubio squeaked into a distant second place, finishing ahead of TrusTED by just over 1000 votes. Mr. Rubio thus becomes the "moderate" or Establishment alternative to Mr. Trump, leaving Mr. Cruz, errr, nowhere.

Not really a surprise, since he was never going to get many MOR [= Middle Of the Road. Ed.] GOP votes. They hate him. To beat the Donald or even come close, Ted had to get the Tea Party voters, not just the happy-clappy Protestant fundamentalists. Too bad for him that the Tea Partiers hate him too.

Before we leave the Republicans, take a look at the results map appearing in today's Washington Post. The only counties who went for Mr. Rubio were around the state capital and along the coast near Charleston. Mr. Trump swept the rest. Those who think that the media darling SC governor's tearing down of the Southern Cross represented the true feelings of South Carolinians should give their heads a shake!

As for Nevada, Hellery Clinton's cries of victory seemed to me more relief than exultation. CNNPolitics calls her win "decisive", but they would say that, wouldn't they. Walt doesn't call 5.5% decisive, especially when you consider that just a couple of weeks ago her margin was expected to be in the double digits. Entrance and exit polls showed that Madame Clinton was backed by a majority of women, college-educated voters, those with annual incomes over $100,000, moderates, voters aged 45 and older and non-white voters. Bernie Sanders did best with men, voters under 45 and those less affluent and educated.

The once and (she hopes) future First Lady captured the backing of voters who said electability and experience were important. BERNie, however, did best with voters looking for a candidate who is caring and honest. That an aged socialist Jew from New England should come as close as he did in a state like Nevada tells me that Hellerey is far from home and dry. Keep looking over your shoulder, dear. The footsteps behind you aren't just Bill's!

Only one surprise out of New Hampshire

I wasn't surprised that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders won.
I wasn't surprised John Kasich finished second in the Republican race. I think that's as close as he's going to come to winning any of the remaining primaries. (Lifetime pct .983.)
I wasn't surprised that Marco Rubio finished fifth. Hey, I saw the debate.
What surprised me was that Jeb! managed to finish in a statistical tie with Ted Cruz. Did a memo go out from the Republican Establishment that Mr. Rubio isn't ready yet? (Nice hair though!)

So where are we now? There wasn't as much "winnowing" last night as the pundits predicted. Chris Christie is out, but he wasn't going anywhere anyway. Carly Fiorina and the black guy -- what was his name, again? -- have yet to announce the "suspension" of their campaigns, but so what. The Republicans are left with The Donald and Ted Cruz who have to slug it out to see who can be more of an "outsider", leaving the possibility that The Shrub may come up the middle and emerge as the candidate. The mind boggles.

On the Democratic side, it's hard to see Colonel Sanders winning states like South Carolina. A betting man would still have to take Hellery Clinton. Do it now while you can still get decent odds.

Oh, there was one more surprise. Who would have thought that Bernie could ramble on for so long, and reiterate the same point so often, in what should have been a short and gracious thank-you speech. I'm guessing that every minute he spoke, after the first ten, caused another million dollars or so to pour into the candidates' war chests -- not just the Republican war chests, but Mrs Clinton's too!