The Moderate Dems and Mayor Pete

Posted on by

From an outsider’s perspective, it looks as though Joe Biden will not be able to sustain a lead far enough into next year to sustain momentum.  Obviously, a vacuum would be created in the moderate wing of the Democratic Party if he were to drop out.  Proceeding from there leaves us to speculate on who will take his place.

Two possibilities:

First, someone will emerge from within the group of announced candidates.  This is difficult because none present as moderate as Biden; in fact, he has been forced to move so far left that he looks agonizingly uncomfortable when he tries to pass off as authentic.  He does not seem to have a clear grasp of the left agenda, which is much more important to his campaign than him actually believing his rhetoric.

HOWEVER…watch out for Mayor Pete.

Continue reading →

September observations (and an apology).

Posted on by
Reply

The Cynic sees it has now been over two months since his last post. Accordingly, he apologizes for the radio silence, and promises to try and do better about the frequency of his posting from here on out.

A few random observations on recent events:

  • It seems to the Cynic that by allowing hearsay as a “whistleblower” complaint, the Federal Government is actually encouraging leaking by Federal Employees.
  • The NCAA has, in the past few years, changed the game of NCAA basketball to the point that it has become virtually indistinguishable from the NBA. Now, it appears that the state of California will force the issue of paying college athletes (over and above full-ride scholarships) onto the college governing board. The lawsuits, Title IX consequences and, in all probability, outside money can’t help but have a deletery effect on college sports. But it will be fun to watch the consequences play out. Speaking of which…
  • Many of the Cynic’s friends and relatives are now certain that Trump has finally crossed the proverbial line and will be removed from office for his latest “crimes.” They watch MSNBC, CNN, and the major networks (as they always have). Any bets on whether these networks, which have been hopelessly and notoriously wrong since the 2016 election, will be right in this case?

A belated post on El Paso and Neil deGrasse Tyson…

Posted on by
Reply

Some of you may recall that in the aftermath of the El Paso massacre, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson caused mass indignation when he tweeted the following:

As callous as Tyson’s tweet may well have been, I seem to recall that a certain someone else was reported to have felt as Tyson does about things like this:

But [Obama] has never believed that terrorism poses a threat to America commensurate with the fear it generates. Even during the period in 2014 when ISIS was executing its American captives in Syria, his emotions were in check…. Obama frequently reminds his staff that terrorism takes far fewer lives in America than handguns, car accidents, and falls in bathtubs do.

The hubbub over Baltimore.

Posted on by
Reply

It seems that for some time now, pundits have been talking and writing about the deplorable conditions in some of our biggest cities.  But not until now has a president weighed in.  This, as it turns out, is an unpardonable sin.  Why?

Because when anyone but the President mentioned it, the mainstream media was free to ignore.  Now, the President has placed it front and center before the American people and the MSM have two choices:

  1. Address the problem.
    (or)
  2. Accuse the President of racism for having mentioned it.

No one is mentioning…

Posted on by
Reply

Bob Mueller’s testimony has been delayed.  Republicans are anxious to ask this question:

“When did you first realize there was no collusion?”

Sadly, his answer will probably be, “I don’t KNOW that he did not collude with Russia, I simply can’t prove that he did collude.”  This would be a dreadful soundbite for Trump and a power ‘bite for any Democrat’s campaign.

Google and Facebook? Trying to influence the elections!?!

Posted on by
Reply

From Breitbart:

A Google insider who spoke anonymously to Project Veritas claims the company is devoted to preventing anything like the 2016 election of Donald Trump from happening again.

The insider who spoke to Project Veritas also drew attention to the covert suppression of non-progressive voices on YouTube, a Google-owned platform, said that stopping President Donald Trump and other politicians like Trump has become a priority for the tech giant.

…

Project Veritas also obtained undercover footage revealing yet another Google executive declaring the company’s intention to intervene in its products to stop Trump in 2020. “Responsible innovation” head Jen Gennai was recorded stating that Google shouldn’t be broken up because smaller companies couldn’t prevent “another Trump situation.”

Really, though, shouldn’t we be surprised if they didn’t?

Throw in Twitter and Instagram and now it seems believable — even though they all deny it.

Debate preview.

Posted on by
Reply

Looking forward to this week’s Democratic debates.  It should be a contest to see which candidate can promise the most, to the most.  It may become difficult to keep all of the promises and their corresponding promises straight.

It could become a bit frightening if promises start to cause candidates to increase in popularity — then there may be no end to them.