National Gun Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
53,782 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anna L. Stark
December 5, 2019


The Democrats are in disarray and a perfect storm of events is brewing once again, almost identical to what happened 52 years ago. The Democrat’s feeble attempt to craft a convincing impeachment narrative drags on, but is dwarfed by a clutter of 2020 Presidential candidates, none whom have majority support. It’s early, but hard to ignore the severe ideological division between the radical socialist revolutionaries competing against the more moderate liberals, the DNC still hampered by deadweight candidates, and everyone anticipating a latecomer surprise candidate added to the mix. One thing is for certain: the DNC convention next July has all the makings of a 1968 redux.

For those old enough to remember, the DNC 1968 Convention, held in Chicago was an absolute disaster. There was no clear popular Democratic candidate on opening day. President Lyndon Johnson decided not to seek reelection in March because of lackluster support due to his mishandling of the war in Vietnam, and the Democratic party was still reeling from the assassination of Robert Kennedy a mere two months before. Heading into the convention, there were six declared candidates, but no single candidate atop the leader board. Adding to the palpable unrest on the convention floor among delegates was bloody violence, rioting, and college student protests against the war waged not only on the streets of Chicago, but in city parks, hotel lobbies, and on the doorstep of the convention arena. At one point, antiwar protestors accessed the arena and chaos erupted as police attempted to arrest and remove the agitators. Some delegates joined the protest while the network television cameras kept broadcasting. When the tear gas finally cleared, Hubert Humphrey was anointed the nominee, but the gruesome impression of what occurred in Chicago was hard to erase from memory.

If history serves as the best teacher, the Democratic party is tasked with some very difficult, but necessary choices between now and Iowa caucuses in February in order to stave off a repeat of 1968. If the goal is to nominate an electable Democratic candidate next July, it’s time to cull the herd and coalesce around one person in order to effectively compete against Trump. The once 28-person gaggle has winnowed down to 15, but there are still far too many candidates for consideration. More importantly, the gaping chasm between the radical left contingent versus liberal moderates requires closure before it’s too late. In summation, socialist candidates Sanders and Warren don’t stand a chance against Trump. Their Marxist ideology will be ripped apart and laid bare to the bone by the incumbent. Financially strapped candidates Booker, Gabbard, and Castro need to lick their wounds and call it day. Going forward, they’re simply wasting other people’s money. Likewise for the no-name-recognition candidates; Bennet, Delaney, Klobuchar, Patrick, and Williamson. It’s over, turn off the lights and go home. Rounding out the list is a trio of very rich, single-issue nonpoliticians: Bloomberg, (anti-gun) Steyer (climate change), and Yang (universal income); all of whom have money to burn, but realistically have zero chance of buying their way into the White House, which leaves which leaves bumbling Buttigieg of bad optics (South Bend is calling), and bumbling Joe Biden. He’s managed to avoid an uncomfortable media grilling regarding his son’s egregious Ukrainian dealings, but should he become the nominee, there is no doubt Trump will eviscerate him on the debate stage. His inability to recall history, fumbling of facts, tales of grandeur, moments of delusion coupled with bouts of dementia, licking of his wife’s finger, and creepy hairy leg story isn’t setting him up to be the “one.” Joe Biden the train wreck is most likely paving the way for either Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama to be nominated from the convention floor.

Hillary has never stopped campaigning since her 2016 loss, calling Trump illegitimate and claiming she won the popular vote. Purposely remaining in the media spotlight, she claims there has been a deluge of mail begging her to run. Contrary to Hillary’s quest for power, Michelle Obama has stated repeatedly she has no desire to run for President; however, failing to remove Donald Trump from the Oval Office has left deranged Democrat zealots desperate and more determined than ever. While Hillary’s mail deluge is probably limited to fawning notes from former campaign staff, there’s always the possibility of Michelle, the “Last Minute” Messiah.

Don’t count her out yet.




https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/dj_vu_1968.html
 

·
Aim true !
Joined
·
10,012 Posts
Michelle is a very popular woman. She seems like a decent woman too. I think she would win the primaries.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
696 Posts
Michelle is a very popular woman. She seems like a decent woman too. I think she would win the primaries.
Any American that would stand up in public and say to the World on National TV---This is the first time in my life that I have felt like an American--- should never have the accolades that "woman" has gotten. JMO
 

·
Aim true !
Joined
·
10,012 Posts
I missed when she said that. We should feel like and be proud to be Americans every day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,432 Posts
Upon arriving and settling into Chicago with her husband, Michelle didn't feel ashamed to accept a $300,000 a year job as "Neighborhood Advocate" in a hospital. The job was "arranged" by the Obama's future "BFF", Valerie Jarret. The position vanished when Michelle and hubby moved to Washington D.C. when he became a senator, for 14 months before beginning his presidential campaigning. Valerie, of course, accompanied the Obama's to "D.C." and allegedly was the "in-residence house-sitter" at the Obama's "D.C." residence.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,685 Posts

·
Aim true !
Joined
·
10,012 Posts
Wow i did not know she had this evil side. Boy i was fooled.
 

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
53,782 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Michelle O-Hole is an anti-American, racist and, despite her formal education, a not very smart and classless woman. Her presidency would be a disaster for the US as it would be a more tyrannical extension of her husband's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,185 Posts
I can't see her hubby taking the role of "First Hubby"............
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coalcracker

·
Aim true !
Joined
·
10,012 Posts
Good education here on political figures thanks. I thought maybe she was less evil than the others that are currently running. I wouldn't vote dem regardless.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top