"His fitness, his vigor, is beyond question."
— Kyle Martinsen (@KyleMartinsen_) July 18, 2022
— Biden Chief of Staff Ron Klainpic.twitter.com/wxQe6EyFOq
The number of Walkaway Campaign members is now almost 150,000. The new smear is to call them the work of "Russian bots".
I don't agree with this assessment, but I will also point out that not all these people just left the Democratic Party. Some left quite some time ago; one woman whose last name is Holder claims that she is Eric Holder's cousin and she left back when Reagan was running. Others are people like me and some of my online friends who were never Democrats.
But there are others who are the real deal. Click on the #walkAway tag at the bottom of this page to see some Youtube vids of the main type of member, people who have just been red-pilled like Candace Owens.
She is right. Most Trump supporters are really, really nice, and the other side uses name-calling in the place of arguments.
"I will never watch the mainstream media again." Beautiful.
NYT Editorialist Michelle Cottle's breathless over-reaction to the Kavanaugh appointment really piles on the BS in this excerpt:
Monday was the kind of day that the president lives for. As the clock ticked down to the announcement of his new Supreme Court nominee, the entire political world hovered in a state of suspended animation and frenzied speculation. Had the president made his decision yet? Who had he chosen? Would his pick get leaked ahead of time? Had any of the top finalists been seen anywhere near the White House?
With all of the build up to the 9 p.m. announcement, it’s a miracle none of the political commentators’ heads exploded from the suspense. The entire production was, in short, classic Trump — an overhyped, self-aggrandizing display aimed at focusing the spotlight on himself for reasons of both personal gratification and political expedience.
A pre-written — and poorly edited — statement from the Women’s March on President Trump’s Supreme Court nomination became the subject of mockery on Twitter on Monday night, including from Mr. Trump’s former press secretary.
The feminist group blasted out a statement shortly after Mr. Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh, saying him confirmation would “further erode protections for almost every marginalized group in America.”
The introduction to the statement read “In response to Donald Trump’s nomination of XX to the Supreme Court of the United States.
So why are Democrats leaving their party? Maybe it is because they are not sure what their party stands for anymore. Or, maybe what their party stands for is being revealed now and the membership does not like it so much. In a good article with lots of links to back up its claims, Christopher Roach asks the question "What does the Democratic party stand for?" I have no idea, but here is a little bit of what it is accomplishing (from the article):
The Democratic Party’s embrace of its left wing has done Donald Trump and the Republican Party a great service. Obama, after all, won in 2008 and 2012 by pretending to be a moderate, deploying unifying rhetoric, and providing social services, including affordable healthcare, to the middle class. Only after his 2012 win did he revert to his Hyde Park socialist background, taking sides on contentious issues like the Trayvon Martin shooting and the anti-police riots in Ferguson. In his second term, he finally decided to push for gun control and the normalization of transgenders in schools and the military. Most importantly, he made it clear that he would do nothing to stop the demographic re-engineering of America and its electorate by stopping immigration, instead, he de facto legalized the-so-called Dreamers through executive order.
As the continuity candidate, Clinton lost. The voters found a voice and a choice in Trump. Instead of going back to the drawing board—as Democrats did with Bill Clinton and his Democratic Leadership Council candidacy in 1992—they have instead shown they think the party simply needs to shout their message more loudly and with greater purity.
Really interesting new group of people disgusted with liberalism and the democrat party called the #WalkAway Movement or alternatively, the Unsilent Majority. The de facto leader is Brandon Straka, a gay dude from Nebraska who is sick enough of the intersectional groupthink lunacy of the left that he has formally left and is leading a movement out. Naturally he is good friends with Candace Owens, and therefore you are going to hear about taking the "red pill" if you hang around their pages.
The #WalkAway movement has a Facebook page. I don't think they have a regular site yet.
Oh yeah: they also have a Twitter page.
I like to listen to them because they're bold, fresh and unfiltered. Their movement is really new and so they have all kinds of equipment failures during their live feeds. I guess Straka's phone actually overheated once and blew up his presentation. But watching the recording actually inspired me to do my own show. It's just raw conviction. They will someday be laughing about this stuff on CRTV or Fox — wherever they end up.
One thing that characterizes all of them is a sort of joie de vivre that you don't see with former-conservatives—especially the anti-Trump Evangelicals—who have become staunch liberals. Usually those people are really anger driven, grew up in a fundamentalist home, etc. Both groups are rebelling against a certain type of self-righteousness, but whereas the #WalkAway people are stressing free-thinking and reason the Christian Leftists are mostly advocating for a more different, ideologically strict self-righteousness based on their newly found leftism. I just had a combox convo with some of them... hoo-boy.
I might be pleasantly surprised and the Democrats might take the 12-step plan to recovery as advised by Emil Henry. But I very much doubt it. Maybe a few will. Excerpt:
4: This step requires brutal self-reflection, taking fearless inventory of all the actions that led to the Democrats’ electoral humiliation. Examples might include: an examination of why the lawmakers ignored abuses of power such as the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservatives; illegitimate executive orders; and bogus accounts of the Benghazi murders. Above all, Democrats must reflect on their role in the enactment of ObamaCare, with all the Congressional Budget Office gimmickry, legislative shenanigans and crony giveaways that got it passed.
5: Democrats should openly admit the exact nature of their wrongs. Begin with the spending binge that left the country $18 trillion in debt; finish up with how the Harry Reid -led Senate ran interference for the president, and for Democrats in tough re-election fights, by burying hundreds of bills passed in the House.
6: To shed their main defect—the tendency to perceive America as the problem—Democrats should spend some time on the road examining what alternatives to free-market capitalism and the rule of law look like. Mandatory stops include the Middle East, where real wars on women are waged, and the eurozone, where economic stagnation from years of tax-and-spend liberalism is on ample display. Also on the itinerary: Cuba, Venezuela and, sadly, too many other places to mention, where central control or its first cousin, socialism, produces a certain kind of income equality—across-the-board misery.
This step calls on Democrats to meditate and pray for the wisdom to internalize these steps and the strength to remain on a path of recovery. The lawmakers should look for inspiration in the example of others who found the strength to shed their former liberal compulsions: Ronald Reagan, Condoleezza Rice , Rudy Giuliani and Phil Gramm.
Great Dem-doom piece by Charlie Cook. Excerpt:
But considerably less is being said about a parallel problem that Democrats are facing. Although the national red-blue maps of the partisan makeup of the House, the governorships, and, somewhat less so, the Senate are misleading in that they equate population with land area, the maps do illustrate where Democrats are strong and where they are not (interesting factoid: Only 14 percent of the land area in the U.S. is represented by a Democrat in the House). Increasingly, Democratic strength is concentrated primarily in urban areas and college towns, among minorities, and in narrow bands along the West Coast (but only the first 50-100 miles from the beaches) and the East Coast (but only from New York City northward). The South and the Border South, as well as small-town and rural America, are rapidly becoming no-fly zones for Democrats. Few Democrats represent small-town and rural areas, and the party is find it increasingly difficult to attract noncollege-educated white voters.
What's a big election victory without a Downfall Parody? I know that J-Carp will especially enjoy this. All the funnier that Tom Steyer's name sounds like Steiner giving that part of the video another layer of comedic resonance.
Speaking of reactions, the Daily Caller provides us with a great Top 16 Meltdown List from Democratic Underground posts reacting to the wipe-out of all they hold dear and the repudiation of the war-on-women façade with all the other left scare tactics. Here's a shorter list of my faves, along with my own comments.
I believe that Scott Walker's victory in Wisconsin is just as important as the Republicans winning the Senate. His model of fixing states can and will be copied by many Republican governors in years to come. This is because the model is successful, and success sells. Here's an excellent article about this from the Weekly Standard, and here are my favorite paragraphs about how Walker not only destroyed the democrats and their special interest groups but ate their lunch by taking away their base voters:
The key to Walker’s success was his performance among middle- and lower-income voters. Walker won those earning more than $100,000 by 20 points, just as Mitt Romney had in 2012. But he won voters earning between $50,000 and $100,000 by 17 points; Romney only won them by 1. Those earning less than $50,000 Walker lost by 9 points—whereas Romney lost them by 25. As reporter Molly Ball pointed out in the Atlantic earlier this year about that last group, “whether Democrats win these voters by a 10-point or a 20-point margin tells you who won every national election for the past decade.”Walker won over more of the middle- and working-class for one reason more than any other: His decision to balance the state’s budget by curtailing collective bargaining ultimately proved successful and popular. But it was far from clear that this would be the case when he took on the unions soon after he entered the governor’s mansion.
Who voted for Ed FitzGerald? I did see some yard signs in his hometown of Lakewood, Ohio, but it turns out that these people were in the minority. Here's a map from that article.
FitzGerald's neighbors in Lakewood Precinct 1H favored Gov. John Kasich, 249-140 on Tuesday.
It's not that the western Lakewood precinct is Democrat territory; voters there favored the Republican Kasich, 259-205, over Ted Strickland in 2010.
But FitzGerald's failure to pick up even 35 percent of the vote in his own neighborhood illustrates the depth of his loss.
You've come a long way baby, a long way down, that is. And that is saying something considering how low you started, Ms. Davis. From inflated abortion shill, to making fun of crippled people, to Lonestar Laughingstock.
I don't know which Wendy Davis concession speech is more enjoyable. The fake one posted by Red State yesterday, or the real one from last night. But it all depends on what you want to laugh at. If you want to laugh at what she would say if she were given some type of truth drug, read the Red State Parody. Excerpt:
Thank you, thank you to all of you for coming out here to show your support for our campaign. I know many of you have spent many long hours block walking, standing for hours in the rain at campaign events, running errands to make sure the campaign ran smoothly, standing up for Texas values and doing all the other things that (may I remind you) my opponent is physically unable to do. Although the people of Texas have sadly and emphatically rejected my candidacy, I believe strongly that all of you standing here can help me continue the important work we started.
I am proud of the fact that we ran a positive, issues-oriented campaign, and avoided the very obvious temptation to repeatedly make fun of the fact that my opponent literally can’t walk. I reject the contention raised by literally everyone in the media of all political stripes that many of my ads, speeches, and tweets indicated at least a subconscious bias against handicapped people. I am glad we were able to put that to rest when I dragged those crippled people out on stage with me to prove that some of my best friends are gimps. I am also disappointed that the people of Texas saw fit to elect a man who is opposed to interracial marriage, presumably even his own.
I believe that our campaign, though impressively unsuccessful, has demonstrated that even here in Texas, we are making great strides for women’s equality. I am proud that I was able to show both with my personal life and my campaign, that women are perfectly capable of convincing gullible men to give them large amounts of money for no discernible reason whatsoever.
I strongly believe that we have shown that by doing this, there is nothing we can’t accomplish. Except of course being elected to statewide office. That one is still a head scratcher.
Good for Ed Gillespie. It looks like he may have fallen short, but I'm glad he's not throwing in the towel early. He is so close — 12,150 votes! — and I think the hair-breadth margin should be kept in the news cycle for as long as possible.
“We’ve closed a big gap,” Gillespie said. “You know, when I got in, we were down 29 points to Mark Warner.”
On the campaign trail, Gillespie often pointed out that Warner has voted with President Barack Obama 97 percent of the time; meanwhile, Warner, argued that he had been an independent senator willing to work with both parties.
Gillespie ran an ad during Monday night football taking the side of the Redskins, the football team under attack by liberal politicians. “I’ll oppose the anti-Redskins bill,” Gillespie said in the ad. “Let’s focus on creating jobs, raising take-home pay, and making our nation safer, and let the Redskins handle what to call their team.”
Recently, Gillespie ran an ad accusing Warner of playing “politics with a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.” Gillespie also criticized Warner for using taxpayer-funded private planes.
Yesterday they start crying as I noted here. I just googled the phrase exit poll and found out that they have continued crying in this piece which should be headlined "PLEASE, DEMOCRATS, GO OUT AND VOTE AND DON'T GET DISCOURAGED BY THE DESTRUCTION OF YOUR PATHETIC CANDIDATES!!" The articles is replete with various boring examples, excerpt:
Take Missouri. According to the 2012 American Community Survey, which is conducted by the Census Bureau, there were 491,000 black adult citizens in Missouri. If 16 percent of 2.7 million Missouri voters were black, as the exit polls said, then there were 442,000 black voters in 2012. That would require 90 percent turnout among eligible black voters, which obviously didn’t happen.
Looks like Obama is helping his democrat friends lose the millennial vote.
Released by the Harvard Institute of Politics, the poll shows that 18 to 29-year-olds who say they will "definitetly be voting" next week plan to support Republicans by a margin of 51 to 47 percent.
In September 2010--just two months before the Republican landslides in those midterm elections--Republicans only had "43 percent" support among millennials.
Regarding Obama, only "43 percent" of millennials in general approve of the job he's done--"53 percent" disapprove. But when approval/disapproval questions are asked to millennials who will "definitely be voting" next week, Obama's approval slips down to "42 percent" and his disapproval jumps to "56 percent."
One of the biggest concerns for millennials is terrorism against the US. "61 percent" of millennials said they are "a great deal" or "somewhat" concerned with the prospect of another attack against the US. They also support the plan to "expand the US air campaign against ISIS" by a margin of "39 percent" to "20 percent."
The skies of November are turning ever gloomier for Ed FitzGerald. It turns out that it's not just crazy right-wingers like me who care about Ed FitzGerald's lack of a valid driver's license for over a decade. Cuyahoga County Inspector General Nailah Byrd nailed Fitz with a 45-page report which is summarized here in the Plain Dealer.
I think props are due to Byrd who a lot of people thought might give Fitz a pass. After all, he did appoint her. And hey, she could have waited another couple weeks until after Election Day to release the report.
Here are some nuggets from the article. The entire 45-page report is embedding there, if you are into reading such things.
Byrd had taken heat for not being sufficiently independent of FitzGerald, who recommended her for the job in 2011. But in the report she levies strong criticism, noting in its conclusion that the county under FitzGerald had disciplined other county employees for driving through the course of county business without a license.
"Based on this alone, it would be disingenuous and an apparent double standard if no discipline is pursued in this instance. Moreover, FitzGerald's disregard of County policies regarding operating personal or County vehicles on or in the course of County business, without a valid driver's license, is a breach of the public trust that sends the wrong message to County employees and taxpayers," the report reads.
Lauren Hitt, a spokeswoman for FitzGerald's gubernatorial campaign, said in an email that FitzGerald cooperated with the investigation so it could be released in a timely manner -- in contrast to recent state investigations that have involved Republicans.
From RCP. I guess it figures that someone whose nickname is now "Mark Uterus" would make a huge Freudian slip on the campaign trail.
"I'm so proud of our country," Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) said as he introduced First Lady Michelle Obama at a campaign event on Thursday. "We showed that Dr. Martin Luther King [Jr.] had it right. Which is that in America, at our best, we judge people by the content of their color."
Udall quickly corrected himself.
"The content of their character, not the character of their skin," he said.
"I got it right. I got it both ways!" he said the audience which gave an audible reaction.
