Cold As Ice

Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 124 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    And I don’t think it’s obviously correct that if Trump would just be quiet, the left would continue to be as crazy as they are. So much of the left’s craziness is a reaction to Trump.

    Go back to the fall of 1980 and you had Democrats and media outlets claiming Reagan was an evil idiot who would start World War III the moment he took his hand off the Bible on inauguration day. Trump didn’t cause the left’s reactions today, but by aggressively fighting back, he’s simply heightened their reactions to the point of comic insanity, in part because they feel compelled to one-up his hyperbole in some immediate gratification hope that the next outrageous outrage will finally be the one that permanently turns all the swing voters against Trump.

    I should have been more specific. I meant their current hyper-craziness. The kind that could stop them from winning Presidential elections for decades to come, while their previous craziness wasn’t sufficient to prevent the elections of Clinton and Obama.

    Clinton was the product of three straight presidential election losses by the Democrats, which is why the left was quieter in 1992 than any any other time since LBJ’s win in ’64. Clinton could do things like attack Sister Soljuah and get away with it because the left was willing to shut their collective pie holes in order to get back some grasp of power (plus they were promised Hillary would keep Bill from straying too far to the center).

    Obama’s win was more of a ‘historic first’ election that ginned up black turnout. But at the same time, Obama’s handlers had him vote ‘present’ on several key issues so that swing voters could project him to be more moderate than he actually was, and they picked someone with a non-threatening Beta male personality, so that voters wouldn’t be reminded of someone Alpha male like Al Sharpton. That Obama doesn’t even beat Hillary in the primaries.

    • #121
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

     

    Go back to the fall of 1980 and you had Democrats and media outlets claiming Reagan was an evil idiot who would start World War III the moment he took his hand off the Bible on inauguration day. Trump didn’t cause the left’s reactions today, but by aggressively fighting back, he’s simply heightened their reactions to the point of comic insanity, in part because they feel compelled to one-up his hyperbole in some immediate gratification hope that the next outrageous outrage will finally be the one that permanently turns all the swing voters against Trump.

    I should have been more specific. I meant their current hyper-craziness. The kind that could stop them from winning Presidential elections for decades to come, while their previous craziness wasn’t sufficient to prevent the elections of Clinton and Obama.

    Clinton was the product of three straight presidential election losses by the Democrats, which is why the left was quieter in 1992 than any any other time since LBJ’s win in ’64. Clinton could do things like attack Sister Soljuah and get away with it because the left was willing to shut their collective pie holes in order to get back some grasp of power (plus they were promised Hillary would keep Bill from straying too far to the center).

    Obama’s win was more of a ‘historic first’ election that ginned up black turnout. But at the same time, Obama’s handlers had him vote ‘present’ on several key issues so that swing voters could project him to be more moderate than he actually was, and they picked someone with a non-threatening Beta male personality, so that voters wouldn’t be reminded of someone Alpha male like Al Sharpton. That Obama doesn’t even beat Hillary in the primaries.

    But now the left isn’t getting LESS crazy during the Trump four-possibly-eight years, to maybe convince a few more people it’s safe to vote for them.  Just the opposite.

    • #122
  3. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Clinton was the product of three straight presidential election losses by the Democrats, which is why the left was quieter in 1992 than any any other time since LBJ’s win in ’64. Clinton could do things like attack Sister Soljuah and get away with it because the left was willing to shut their collective pie holes in order to get back some grasp of power (plus they were promised Hillary would keep Bill from straying too far to the center).

    Obama’s win was more of a ‘historic first’ election that ginned up black turnout. But at the same time, Obama’s handlers had him vote ‘present’ on several key issues so that swing voters could project him to be more moderate than he actually was, and they picked someone with a non-threatening Beta male personality, so that voters wouldn’t be reminded of someone Alpha male like Al Sharpton. That Obama doesn’t even beat Hillary in the primaries.

    But now the left isn’t getting LESS crazy during the Trump four-possibly-eight years, to maybe convince a few more people it’s safe to vote for them. Just the opposite.

    But the history of the Democrats over the past half century has been to do exactly what they’re doing now — albeit not in such batshirt-crazy fashion — every time they lose control of the White House, because they’re always in denial during those four years that the public rejected their ideology. It’s always the miserable failure of a candidate that caused them to lose.

    Carter and Gore moved left after they lost their elections, but Mondale ran to the left of Carter in ’84 (where the left wanted Teddy as their nominee in ’80) and Kerry ran to the left of Gore in ’04. Toss in the blatant lurch left in ’72 from Humphrey to McGovern, and the Dems’ move left to Bernie here is normal behavior. But then they’ve always tried to hide their progressivism after the next loss, which might not happen here.

    • #123
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Something that might prove amusing would be if Bernie wins the presidency, but Republicans re-take the House and further increase the margin in the Senate.

    Would McConnell and others have the gumption to stand up against any Bernie nominees to the Supreme Court?

    • #124
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.