RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/03/fool_and_his_money_good_riddance_tom_steyer.html

Well, it’s over.

A couple of years and $250 million later, Tom Steyer’s presidential run has left him exactly where he started in the presidential race, at zero.

The poor wretched monomaniac of greenie virtue now goes the way of Jay Inslee, the qualified, but leftist, governor of Washington state who, like Steyer, was also global warming bore and washed out because of it. You’d think maybe Steyer would have noticed how unimportant this ‘sky is falling’ greenie cause was with voters by that point, but nope, Steyer continued to sell that snake oil to voters, thinking a barrage of television ads would make them catch on. He never had a clue.

Now he has his clue, $250 million dollars later, no delegates, a pathetic third place finish in South Carolina, prompting him to finally cut his losses, and exit the race.

Actually, he probably had some clues, given that he changed his tune to South Carolina’s voters from global warming to ‘racial justice,’ something he claimed “not enough people” cared about but, trust him, he did, in what was an obvious pander for the black vote in South Carolina. Turns out another old white guy, Joe Biden, got there first, succeeding in that machine pol way of his, through endorsements from old-line black politicians such as Rep. James Clyburn — gaffes, exaggerations, and all.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/goodbye-liz/

She flip-flopped, fibbed, and pandered her way out of the race.

In a recent interview with 60 Minutes, former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg tried to describe the political scene:

A few years ago, there was a revolution against the intelligentsia. People said, “You know, those people, particularly on the coasts, are trying to tell us what to do.” They wanted a change. That explains Donald Trump. Now, people seem to have changed. This cycle, people want stability.

Have they changed so much? Bloomberg thinks the tides are turning in his direction. I’m not so sure on either count. If people wanted the intelligentsia, if they wanted someone on the coasts telling them what to do, Elizabeth Warren would be on her way to the Democratic nomination. Instead, she is soon to be packing up her campaign. Her job will have been to knife Michael Bloomberg before he could launch a sneak attack on Sanders on Super Tuesday.

Warren was clearly the favorite candidate of academics and journalists — the intelligentsia. Why? Because she was the quintessential “front row” candidate, to borrow a term from author and photographer Chris Arnade. The image of her campaign will be her on a debate stage, hand raised, ready with an answer — but losing support roughly every minute she speaks.

https://spectator.us/four-takeaways-joe-biden-south-carolina-victory/

1) Joe Biden lives to fight another day, bloopers, gaffes, and all. But on Tuesday he needs to win a major state or finish a strong second to seize the spot as Bernie Sanders’s chief competitor.

Biden’s poor showing in Iowa and New Hampshire meant the South Carolina primary was his last stand. His recent polling showed his lead was small and decreasing. So the stakes were high and the situation dire. But the former VP was right to go all-in for South Carolina, which he always called his firewall. His loyalty to President Obama and his endorsement by Rep. James Clyburn were crucial in a state with a large African American population. Clyburn, the highest ranking African American in the House of Representatives, is widely respected in his home state of South Carolina, and he revered in the black community. His backing and his political network helped Biden immensely. So did Biden’s relatively moderate positions, which are more popular among African-Americans than Bernie’s harsh radicalism.

2) Biden’s victory calls into question Mike Bloomberg’s basic ‘theory of the case’, which was that Biden was too weak to survive and would leave the middle of the field open after his candidacy collapsed.

Bloomberg was only half right. He was right that there is no strong, fresh candidate in the middle lane. Mayor Pete Buttigieg did well in Iowa but hasn’t caught fire and has little support among key minority constituencies. Amy Klobuchar hasn’t done well, either. For now, then, it looks like Biden is Mayor Mike’s main obstacle in that lane.

But Bloomberg was wrong that Biden would drop out quickly or that the former New York mayor’s huge advertising budget could hide his glaring defects as a retail politician. He was wrong, too, in deciding to debate twice before Super Tuesday. To call him a poor debater is a vast understatement. He was fairly effective in CNN’s one-on-one town hall last week, but he was dreadful in the multi-candidate debates, which were more like food fights than intelligent discussions of public policy. Bloomberg is, at heart, a corporate manager, and he sounds like one.

Bloomberg is the only Democratic candidate confirmed to speak at the bipartisan pro-Israel lobby event.

By Aaron Sull, World Israel News

Democratic presidential candidates Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar announced this week that they will not attend next week’s American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference.

The reason given for their decision was that it interfered with their campaigning efforts leading up to next week’s Super Tuesday’s primary, JNS reports.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/02/27/the-necessary-temporary-democratic-party-suicide/

The “Gong Show” of a Democratic presidential primary debate Tuesday night just made it clear how desperately this intellectually bankrupt rag-tag team of harpies and hustlers truly is. They are the heirs of the Clinton-Obama place men who mismanaged America, corrupted the Justice Department and the intelligence services, and created such a scarcity of serious candidates for the presidency.

The former mayor of New York City announced he was seeking the nomination because the 20 declared candidates were inadequate. He was correct—but so, on the face of things, is he inadequate. The debate in Charleston on Tuesday was like a scene from Lord of the Flies as a disorderly, screechy group of misbehaving superannuated juveniles spoke and shouted over each other, waving their arms in the air and exchanging epithets. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), her hopes withered by her mendacity, robotic uniforms, and humorless righteousness, is reduced to hurling vitriol at Mike Bloomberg.

Bloomberg was more responsive than in his first debate, but still exuded a presumption that everyone in America is enviously fixated on the Big Apple, and his attempts at humor bombed somewhat embarrassingly. It is hard to believe that more than $400 million has already been spent trying to promote the idea that this is the redeemer of Trump’s (increasingly well-satisfied) America.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), finally targeted as the frontrunner, was querulous and belligerent, shouting back at the audience and more demonstrative and short-tempered than ever. He is almost majestic, barricading himself into his praise of Fidel Castro and not budging an inch on the authoritarian extravagance of his compulsory medical care plan that would sweep away the satisfactory arrangements that 180 million Americans have already made with their physicians of choice.

It is the majesty of a persevering and cranky old man, but it is also acoustically irritating nonsense and anyone who imagines that the American electorate is going to put this raving, neo-Marxist, charmless, cantankerous old dervish into the White House is in the same fantasyland as the candidates.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/26/donald-trump-wins-over-hispanics-despite-strict-im/

He was told being strict on illegal immigration would doom him among Hispanic voters.

Yet President Trump has defied their predictions, from the moment he delivered his iconic address to the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2013 — warning the Republican Party that legalizing 11 million illegal immigrants was political suicide — through the 2016 presidential election and into the White House.

Now nine months out from his second Election Day, and despite a tenure in the White House that has involved building a border wall, stepping up deportations and insulting some Latin American nations as “s—hole” countries, Mr. Trump is as strong as ever among Hispanic voters, according to the polls.

One poll puts his approval rating as high as 44% and shows him winning 41% of the Hispanic vote in a head-to-head match-up with Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont. That would best his 2016 showing of 28% support and put him in the running with President George W. Bush for the highest share of Hispanic votes for a GOP candidate.

“Latinos have lost the fear of Donald Trump,” said Alfonso Aguilar, who ran the Department of Homeland Security’s citizenship office in the Bush administration and now runs the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles.

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

The strategic mistake to which I refer was the one made by Michael Bloomberg to enter the Democrat primary for President, rather than to run as an independent. At least, that is my belief. The error was understandable in that no third-party candidate has won the Presidency, since the current two parties began competing in 1860. But, to use those over-worked and dangerous words, this time is different. The incumbent is a man who has never received more than 50% approval, despite the fact that the economy and employment are doing well. At the same time, Democrats have moved decidedly leftward, leaving their center undefended.

In his recently published book, A Time to Build, Yuval Levin wrote, “…[political] parties have been de-professionalized, cannot control their own internal processes, and are increasingly exposed to the power and pressure of political celebrity culture.” What he wrote is visible to anyone with eyes to see. The 2016 presidential election changed the Republican Party. The old way of doing things no longer applied. The 2018 midterm elections, which brought Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) and Ilhan Omar (D-MI) to the House, changed the Democrat Party, swinging it far to the left. Optimism for the future was replaced with hatred of the past. In both cases, the change reflects the fact that elections have become less about policy and enacting bi-partisan legislation, and more about platforms for radical ideas. Traditional party members, on both sides of the aisle, have become as isolated from real concerns of the people, as they are distanced from the victorious radical newbies who joined their party. In part, this has to do with the mathematical fact that our national legislature is less representative of the people than it once was. In 1800, the House of Representatives consisted of 106 members; in 2020, there were 435 House members. So, while the overall population has grown by a factor of 72, the number of Representatives has increased by just over four times. In other words, legislators are less representative – in sheer numbers – than they were two hundred and twenty years ago. But these changes also reflect a cultural shift that demeans family, history and tradition. Both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have taken advantage of the fact that many voters feel that politics as usual no longer applies.