Category Archives: Elections

Posted on by

Bob Casey and his minions are desperately trying to cheat

Screen capture from Philadelphia Inquirer website main page, 8:45 PM EST on Monday, November 18, 2024.

We have been told, ever since the election of 2020, that no, of course not, there are no attempts to cheat on election results or vote counting!

Pa. Supreme Court again rules that Philly and other counties cannot count undated mail ballots

The ruling comes after several Philly-area counties defied the court’s previous guidance. The issue has come under close scrutiny as the race between Bob Casey and Dave McCormick undergoes a recount.

by Sean Collins Walsh, Gillian McGoldrick, and Fallon Roth | Monday, November 18, 2024 | 4:30 PM EST

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Monday issued a ruling reiterating its previous stance that undated or misdated mail ballots should not be counted in the 2024 election, dealing a blow to Democratic U.S. Sen. Bob Casey’s hopes that a recount and litigation will help him overcome his just over 17,000-vote deficit to Republican Dave McCormick as of Monday evening. Continue reading →

Posted on by

The Philadelphia Inquirer keeps up with the hate of Donald Trump even after the election

Wouldn’t the answer be, to children who might ask why former and future President Donald Trump beat current Vice President and future private citizen Kamala Harris Emhoff in the election, that the United States held a free and fair election, and as in every election, one serious candidate won, and one serious candidate lost? But no, the American left, having gone off the rails in their #TrumpDerangementSyndrome, think something else is required.

From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

How do we explain this election to our children?

Children need us to accept their gift of hope, even if we aren’t feeling it, and they need us to use it to fight for them.

by Gwen Snyder, For The Inquirer | Wednesday, November 13, 2024 | 6:00 AM EST

The past two months have been a whirlwind of autumnal novelty and stimulation for my preschooler. There was Sesame Place, then her 3rd birthday, then her first day of school. Just as things began to settle, we launched into a cascade of Halloween activities. And then, fast on their heels came the election.

Continue reading →

Posted on by

Let them eat cake!

This site noted, two days after the election, that the college-educated elites who supported Kamala Harris Emhoff just couldn’t understand how a majority of Americans didn’t just love her to death and cast the vast majority of their votes for her. We pointed out on Friday that working class voters along the Mexican border in Texas were casting their votes for Donald Trump because the economy that the Democrats told us was so very great wasn’t so great for them.

The following article from The Philadelphia Inquirer wasn’t about the election at all, but it seems to me that it says a lot about it:

$500 hair appointments are becoming the norm as the cost of cuts and colors rise

The increased costs of color and other products, as well as the greater complexity of trending hairstyles, have led many salon owners to raise their prices over the past five years.

Continue reading →

Posted on by

The Washington Post, which won a Pulitzer Prize for Bob Woodward’s and Carl Bernstein’s investigation of President Nixon and Watergate, bringing down a Republican president, chose to protect a Democrat.

“Democracy Dies in Darkness”, huh?

The Washington Post added that tagline to its masthead in February of 2017, claiming that it wasn’t an attack on newly inaugurated President Donald Trump, deciding “to come up with a slogan nearly a year ago, long before Trump was the Republican presidential nominee,” though nobody in particular believed that. I question the timing, as Robert Stacy McCain would say.

The paper’s owner, Amazon.com founder Jeffrey P. Bezos, used the phrase in an interview with The Post’s executive editor, Martin Baron, at a tech forum at The Post last May. “I think a lot of us believe this, that democracy dies in darkness, that certain institutions have a very important role in making sure that there is light,” he said at the time, speaking of his reasons for buying the paper.

I am glad that my favorite reporter, Heather Long, stepped back from the newspaper’s Editorial Board a couple of months ago, so that she can’t be blamed for this drivel.

Trying to protect Biden, Democrats sacrificed their credibility

Democrats’ coverup of the president’s decline hurt their claim of being the party of truth.

Continue reading →

Posted on by

Schadenfreude!

While it was not the reason that I voted for former, and now future President Donald Trump, I will admit to hoping for some major schadenfreude concerning the left if Mr Trump won. Well, he did win, winning the popular vote as well as the electoral college vote, and not that narrowly. As of 8:15 AM EST Friday, Mr Trump had 73,407,735 votes (50.7%), while Kamala Harris Emhoff had 69,074,145 votes (47.7%). Twitter — I refuse to call it 𝕏 — is chock-full of people wondering when Steven King and the rest are going to emigrate, and when Rob Reiner, best known as “Meathead” on All in the Family, is going to set himself on fire.

Neoconservative and warmonger Bill Kristol, net worth $5 million, who once founded and later destroyed the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard, because too many conservatives were not on board with his #NeverTrump obsession, apparently believes that free Americans somehow need an “excuse” for voting as they do. He tweeted that there’s “No excuse for the American people voting to make Trump president again.”

While in a free country, you can take your voting decisions any way you choose. The supporters of Mrs Emhoff even pushed the notion that yes, it’s a secret ballot, so women don’t have to tell their husbands or boyfriends how they voted, apparently not realizing that trying to estrange men and women could only push more men to vote against the Vice President.

The New York Times gave us some of those reasons people voted for Mr Trump:

‘An Earthquake’ Along the Border: Trump Flipped Hispanic South Texas

Donald J. Trump’s biggest gains anywhere were along the Texas border, a Democratic stronghold where most voters are Hispanic. He won 12 of the region’s 14 counties, up from five in 2016.

By J. David Goodman, Edgar Sandoval, and Robert Gebeloff Friday, November 8, 2024 | 5:04 AM EST

Nowhere in the United States have historically Democratic counties shifted so far and so fast in the direction of former President Donald J. Trump as they have in the Texas communities along the Rio Grande, where Hispanic residents make up an overwhelming majority.

In recent elections, the region’s mix of sprawling urban centers and rural ranch lands that had been reliable Democratic strongholds for generations were beginning to turn red.

Then on Tuesday, Mr. Trump brought South Texas and the border region firmly into his column, taking 12 of the 14 counties along the border with Mexico, and making significant inroads even in El Paso, the border’s biggest city. In 2016, Mr. Trump carried only five of the counties.

The support for Mr. Trump along the Texas border provided the starkest example of what has been a broad national embrace of the Republican candidate among Hispanic and working-class voters. That shift has taken place in rural communities as well as in large cities, like Miami, and in parts of New York and New Jersey.

A few of the reasons given:

Fabiola Rodriguez, 28, a single mother of two children, said just going to the grocery store had become a painful experience. When Mr. Trump was president, she said, she was able to fill her shopping cart for about $250. Now, she spends $300 for a cart that is less than half full. . . . .

She also feared that Vice President Kamala Harris would be unfriendly to the oil and gas industry, which draws many workers from places like Roma. She blamed the Biden administration’s policies in support of renewable energy for cuts to her father’s and her brother’s working hours in the oil fields.

Here’s what the Democrats missed in their push for the First Woman President: Miss Rodriguez was worried about the jobs held by two men, her father and brother. The left, in their tremendous concern for women’s empowerment can’t quite understand that women and men depend on each other. If you hurt a husband or boyfriend, you also hurt a wife and a girlfriend.

“Honestly, I never heard Kamala say any definitive response to anything,” (Rodrigo Burberg, a 32-year-old software engineer from Brownsville) said. “Democrats are saying the economy is really strong. But really, the metrics are not there to reflect what people are feeling. Who cares about G.D.P. if everything is spent on Ukraine?”

The economy is strong . . . if you happen to already have money. If you have a 401(k) or other retirement plan, the strong increase in stocks has significantly increased your retirement savings. But your retirement savings do not put food on your table now, do they?

“I’m in awe,” said Adrienne Peña-Garza, a former Democrat turned Republican activist in the border city of McAllen. “A lot of those people who used to attack us now say, ‘Y’all were right.’ The price of eggs, border security,” she said. “Hispanics, they’re at their heart conservative.” . . . .

“We were talking about prosperity and hope while the Democrat Party was talking about pronouns,” said Representative Monica De La Cruz, who in 2022 became the first Republican member of Congress elected to a district that stretches from the border to the suburbs of San Antonio. She was re-elected on Tuesday. “The Republican Party has become the party of the blue-collar voter,” she said.

Also read: Don Surber, “Drinking Liberal Tears“

Some have tried to say that Vice President Emhoff was a kind of moderate Democrat, but she never really came across as such.

For decades, the Democrats were the party of the working class, the party of labor, and of labor unions. Now most of the unions, other than those of government workers have dramatically contracted, and the left tout themselves as smarter and more highly educated and basically Our Betters. Republican voters, they tell us, are those who never went beyond high school.

But about 73% of adult Americans don’t have college degrees, and disparaging them doesn’t seem like a mathematically good idea; telling people that they’re stupid if they don’t vote the way the left tell them to vote might not be a winning strategy.

For all of his faults, and they are many, former and future President Trump, though never working class himself, understands the working class in a way that today’s Democrats simply no longer do.

Posted on by

Who were the winners on election day? It's simple: the winners were normal Americans!

Crying Kamala Harris Emhoff supporter.

I did something I rarely do: I watched CNN and MSNBC this Wednesday morning, to see the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth among the credentialed media and their Usual Suspect panelists. MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough blamed misogyny among black and Hispanic men, and the Reverend Al Sharpton — if you can remember how Rush Limbaugh used to mock the pronunciation of his name, go for it! — blamed white voters for not going where logic should have taken them. We had CNN panelists crying about how they’d explain this to their daughters.

In a way, what they were bemoaning tells us exactly who won the election. This election was won by normal people! It was won by people who might have some sympathy for the transgendered and homosexuals, but not the silliness which the far left have used to insist that males who think they’re women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports, nor the groomers’ efforts to push transgenderism and homosexuality as normal and acceptable in schools. They’re the people who hear the Democrats telling us how great the economy is, while having to pay their inflated grocery bills and the price of gasoline to fill their fuel tanks. They’re the people who might not like Russia and Vladimir Putin, but who still don’t want to see their tax dollars, and eventually their children, to fight Russia in Ukraine. They’re the people who like their Hispanic neighbors, but don’t like seeing waves of unregulated illegal immigration with its influx of criminals and the tremendous monetary and housing burdens being put on their communities to house and feed them. They’re the people who might have some sympathy for the ‘Palestinians,’ but don’t like the outrageous anti-Semitism of the pro-Hamas protesters, and who recognize that it was Hamas that started that war. They’re the people who might have some concern — though it’s not the main issue for more than a small percentage — about global warming climate change, but recognize that plug-in electric vehicles are impractical for their lives, and don’t want the government telling them how they can run their lives. They’re the people who might think keeping a pet squirrel or raccoon is silly, but were appalled that the state, a state run by Democrats, broke into someone’s home to seize and then slaughter ‘Peanut’ the squirrel. They’re the people who reject the normalization and excusing of crime.

We have been told, ad infinitum, by the left that if Donald Trump won, this could be our last election. Mr Trump will be in his final term under the Constitution, and is 78 years old; in four more years, he will be 82. Even if he wants to run again in 2028, he’s legally barred from doing so, and who could really run at that age? That’s where the Democrats failed: their claim that there’d be no future elections if Mr Trump won was an unbelievable one.

We were told, by the Democrats, that Mr Trump was ‘literally Hitler,’ something really overworn since the younger George Bush was also ‘literally Hitler,’ but he had already served four years in office, and regardless of his bombastic nature, he wasn’t Hitler and didn’t exceed what he could legally do. We were told, by the left, that the three-hour, unarmed protest on January 6th was the worst attack ever on our democracy, yet we had an actual Civil War between 1861 and 1865, making what amounted to a fraternity keg party spilling out of control seem silly. We were told that Mr Trump would throw all of his opponents in jail, yet it was the Democrats who actually prosecuted the Capitol kerfufflers and threw many in jail. We were told that Mr Trump was an evil, authoritarian fascist, yet it was the Democrats who were advocating restrictions on our Freedom of Speech, and crying that Elon Musk and Twitter — I refuse to call it 𝕏 — needed to be restrained for letting people sey what they wanted in public. We were told that Mr Trump really hates Jews, yet not only was he the best friend of Israel during his first term, but it was the left who were holding sit-ins, trespassing encampments, and anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas marches in our cities. We had the Usual Suspects telling us that they’d leave the United States if Mr Trump won, but they said the same things in 2016, and almost none of them did.

Basically, the left were lying to us all, and the credentialed media were promoting their lies.

Posted on by

I voted!

The rural counties of the Bluegrass State used to be solidly Democratic. Kentucky has had only a few Republican governors in recent memory, and up until the 2016 elections, the state House of Representatives was controlled by the Democrats, the one of the last legislative chambers in the South — I was tempted to write “in the Confederacy,” but Kentucky never seceded or joined the CSA — controlled by the Democrats.

Since then, the Bluegrass State has been solidly Republican. Donald Trump carried Kentucky in both 2016 and 2020, by huge margins.

How have things changed? I noted a sample ballot on the walls, and all of the candidates for the city council of the city of Irvine — where I do not vote — were listed as Republicans. Not a single one was a Democrat, which means that no Democrat even entered the May primary.

The races in which I could vote? Other than the presidential race, only the contest for Kentucky’s sixth congressional district were even contested. All but one had a Republican nominee, with no Democratic opponent, while one, for Commonwealth’s Attorney, had a Democratic nominee, but no Republican opponent. Naturally, I voted for all Republicans, but left the vote for Commonwealth’s Attorney blank.

The line was much longer than I had anticipated; there were well over fifty people who were in line when I was. And yes, the Commonwealth required a positive ID to be able to vote.

At least in our county, we had paper ballots, which we marked, and then fed into a machine reader. This way, if there is a recount necessary, the paper ballots have been retained for recount. This is the way elections should be held.

Posted on by

The butthurt children on the left.

I’ve never read Stephen King’s books. While he’s obviously a talented writer, to judge from the enormous sales he’s earned, it’s not that I am somehow boycotting his books due to his well-known liberal opinions, but simply that his particular niche, horror novels, just doesn’t appeal to me.

So, what has led to Mr King’s fit of pique?

The Washington Post says it will not endorse a candidate for president

Publisher William Lewis explained the decision as a return to the newspaper’s roots.

By Manuel Roig-Franzia and Laura Wagner | Friday, October 25, 2024 | 1:09 PM EDT | Updated: 8:17 PM EDT

The Washington Post’s publisher said Friday that the paper will not make an endorsement in this year’s presidential contest, for the first time in 36 years, or in future presidential races.

The decision, announced 11 days before an election that most polls show as too close to call, drew immediate and heated condemnation from a wide swath of subscribers, political figures and media commentators. Robert Kagan, a longtime Post columnist and editor-at-large in the opinion department, resigned in protest, and a group of 11 Washington Post columnists co-signed an article condemning the decision. Angry readers and sources flooded the email inboxes of numerous staffers with complaints.

In a column published on The Post’s website Friday, publisher and CEO William Lewis described the decision as a return to the newspaper’s roots of non-endorsement. The Post did not begin regularly endorsing presidential candidates until 1976, when the paper endorsed Jimmy Carter “for understandable reasons at the time,” Lewis wrote.

“We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable,” Lewis wrote. “We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.”

There’s more at the original.

Naturally, the left waxed wroth, as the newspaper’s Editorial Board already had a draft endorsement of Kamala Harris Emhoff in hand, and the order came down from on high: owner Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon.com, ordered the change. Only two days earlier, Patrick Soon-Shiong, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, blocked a planned endorsement of Mrs Emhoff, which led to the resignation of editorials editor Mariel Garza, editorial writer Karin Klein, and Pulitzer Prize-winner Robert Greene. The Post’s editor-at-large Robert Kagan quit, and other resignations are expected. The Spectator mused:

Of most interest to Cockburn, however, were the remarks of fellow columnist and MSNBC mainstay Jennifer Rubin to the LA Times resignations earlier in the week. In response to Sewell Chan’s resignation from the Times, she wrote, “Bravo. All respect.” Followed by, “and where are the rest of them?”

LOL! Mrs Rubin has now put herself in the position of either having to resign, or proving herself what we already knew she is, a total hypocrite. From Wikipedia:

Rubin has been one of the most vocal conservative writers to criticize Donald Trump, as well as the overall behavior of the Republican Party during Trump’s term in office. Rubin denounced Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement as “a dog whistle to the far right”, and designed to please his “climate change denial, right-wing base that revels in scientific illiteracy.” Previously, after Barack Obama had approved the agreement, Rubin characterized it as “nonsense” and argued that it would not achieve anything. Rubin described Trump’s 2017 decision to not implement parts of the Iran nuclear deal as the “emotional temper tantrum of an unhinged president.” She had previously said that “if you examine the Iran deal in any detail, you will be horrified as to what is in there.” Rubin strongly supported the United States officially recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Early in his presidency, she criticized Trump for not doing so, saying that it was indicative of his tendency to “never keep his word.” She concluded that Trump “looks buffoonish in his hasty retreat”. In December 2017, after Trump announced that he would move the embassy, she said it was “a foreign policy move without purpose.”

Also read: Robert Stacy McCain, “The Schadenfreude Smorgasbord“

Fourteen opinion columnists of the Post wrote that the decision not to make an endorsement — meaning: an endorsement of Mrs Emhoff — “is a terrible mistake,” but that, to me, brought a smile to my face. In all of this, I mused that perhaps Dr Soon-Shiong and Mr Bezos had devised a nefarious plot to reduce expenses at their newspapers, as some veteran columnists have, and might still, leave their jobs, without the owners having to fire them.

Does the Post really need fourteen opinion columnists?

Semafor reported:

One person familiar with the figures told Semafor that the decision already seemed to be impacting subscriptions. In the 24 hours ending Friday afternoon, about 2,000 subscribers canceled their subscriptions, an unusually high number, an employee said.

So, Stephen King and “Meathead” Rob Reiner and a bunch of other people have cancelled their subscriptions. Yet, had conservatives announced a bunch of subscription cancellations following the newspaper’s endorsements of Democrats — every presidential endorsement the Post has made has been for the Democratic candidate — the left would have called it childish petulance. The Philadelphia Inquirer just endorsed Mrs Emhoff, but I’m not going to cancel my subscription over that. It was something that everyone who reads the Inky expected.

Posted on by

Bernie Sanders tells us the truth.

Senator Bernie Sanders (S-VT)[1]Technically, Mr Sanders is listed as an Independent, who caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate, but I believe that S, for ‘Socialist,’ is far more accurate. is many unsavory things, but he does, on occasion, tell the truth. From USA Today:

Bernie Sanders told the truth about Kamala Harris trying to fool voters. Believe him.

Harris is tiptoeing around the positions on issues that won her elections in California and cautiously testing what voters will grab onto and what they will reject.

by Nicole Russell | Tuesday, September 10, 2024 | 5:11 AM EDT | Updated: Thursday, September 12, 2024 | 2:35 PM EDT

You may have heard Maya Angelou’s powerful saying, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Sometimes, when other people tell you who a person is, you should believe them, too. Especially if the person in question doesn’t want to tell you who they really are.

That is the case with Vice President Kamala Harris.

In an interview Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, a progressive independent from Vermont, said something about the Democratic presidential nominee that she isn’t willing to admit to voters.

NBC News host Kristen Welker asked: “She has previously supported Medicare for All, now she does not. She’s previously supported a ban on fracking, now she does not. These, Senator, are ideas that you have campaigned on. Do you think that she is abandoning her progressive ideals?”

Sanders: “No, I don’t think she’s abandoning her ideals. I think she is trying to be pragmatic and do what she thinks is right in order to win the election.”

You have to give the seasoned senator kudos for saying it like it is, especially because Harris has yet to describe her own campaign with such clarity.

There’s more at the original. If you get stopped by a paywall, you can also read the original here.

Also see: William Teach, in “Biden-Harris Admin Upset Over ‘False’ Pets Eating Stories“

Opinion author Nicole Russell stopped short of writing the unvarnished truth, but I will not: what the Distinguished Gentleman from Vermont was saying is that he believes that Kamala Harris Emhoff — just because the Vice President hasn’t shown enough respect for her husband to have taken his last name does not mean that I shall show him similar disrespect — has been lying to us! Mr Sanders told us, in effect, that he understands that the hard left policies that he has long advocated are not popular enough nationwide to win elections, and that he thinks that the Democratic presidential nominee knows the same thing.

Did Mrs Emhoff tell Mr Sanders thus? Was there a quiet conversation in which she whispered, “Don’t worry, Bernie, I can be my authentic self after the election?,” or is it simply something that the Bolshevik from Burlington believes to be the case? We don’t know the answer to that, but one thing has been pretty clear: a lot of the Vice President’s supporters believe just what Mr Sanders stated.

As it happens, I certainly believe that she would move harder to the left were Americans foolish enough to elect her.

Many voters also got caught up in all the laughter and joy. But when they started to look around to see what the frenzy was about, they found a record of flip-flopping on really progressive policies, running mate Tim Walz’s fabulism and a bunch of vague promises.

Sanders is right, of course. Harris’ pattern of flip-flopping on policies − like favoring a ban on fracking for oil and gas before opposing it now, or supporting mandatory gun buybacks in 2019 but opposing them now − isn’t about her growth as a leader or the evolution of her thinking.

It’s really about her campaign’s recognition that far-left ideas that played well in California won’t sell in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin.

At least her policy proposals didn’t play well enough, among Democrats, for her to make any headway in her campaign for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and she dropped out in December of 2019, before the first contest in Iowa. It didn’t help her that then-Representative Tulsi Gabbard Williams (D-HI) demolished her in a previous debate.

Gaslighting is not just bad form; it’s bad news for voters because it violates the principle of informed consent. Politicians have long tried to fool voters into believing they stand for one thing while they quietly support something else − as Sanders says Harris is doing now − but they deserve to be called on it as well.

The Democrats believe that as well, as they continually try to link former President Donald Trump to the so-called Project 2025, even though Mr Trump had nothing to do with writing or approving it, and has politically distanced himself from it.

At a certain point, it becomes laughable. Comedian (?) Kathy Griffin whined that if Mr Trump is re-elected, he’ll throw comedians like her in jail, even though he never tried to do so during his first term, despite the fact she posted a photo of her holding a Trump mask dripping with fake blood, as though he had been beheaded. The Philadelphia Inquirer and columnist Will Bunch in particular keep telling us that if Mr Trump wins, democracy is finished, while Salon writer Amanda Marcotte has gone just bat guano insane with #TrumpDerangementSyndrome.

If Mrs Emhoff really knows what she wants to do if elected, and that’s a very big “if,” she’s keeping it down to vague, broad-stroke proposals, trying not to offend anyone, but, in doing that, she’s concomitantly telling us that it will be the bureaucrats and functionaries who will be doing the governing. That’s not really a surprise, because that’s what happens in every modern administration, with the President setting a policy, and then the ‘experts’ trying to figure out how to make it work.

And that’s the real danger of a victory for the Vice President: the people she would bring into office with her will be uniformly hard-left, and they would be the ones who would destroy our society and economy, with proposals written in ways the voters would never approve. Mr Sanders knows this, and knows that the candidate has to temper what she says, but he strongly believes that he would get most, if not all, of what he would want were he the President.

I suspect that a lot of the further left people in the United States believe the same thing.

References

References
↑1 Technically, Mr Sanders is listed as an Independent, who caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate, but I believe that S, for ‘Socialist,’ is far more accurate.