Monday, December 16, 2019

DEMOCRATS FIGHT AGAINST DIVERSITY - IS ALL THEY WANT A BORDER TO BORDER LA RAZA "The Race" SUPREMACIST MEXICAN WELFARE STATE?



Democrats Don’t Want Diversity

The 2020 field isn’t diverse because Democrats of all races and gender don’t want diversity.
 
Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
"It's been coming up in connection to my campaign: is America ready for that? Are they ready for a woman of color to be President of the United States?" Senator Kamala Harris whined as her campaign collapsed.
Senator Cory Booker and Julian Castro, the remaining diversity candidates, treated Kamala as a martyr to diversity. "It is a problem when an immensely qualified, widely supported, truly accomplished black woman running to lead the party — a party that is significantly empowered by black women voters — didn't have the resources that she needed to continue here in Iowa," Booker complained.
Harris had raised $11.6 million in the third quarter. That’s a whole lot of money for nothing. Were donors expected to keep giving to a campaign that, toward the end, was polling at 2%?
The California politician had raised $36 million overall. That's not too shabby considering Joe Biden had about the same fundraising totals. When you subtract self-funded candidates like Tom Steyer, John Delaney, or Michael Bloomberg, the fundraising totals were dominated by Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg, all of whom are some kind of diverse. Even if it’s a diversity of white Democrats.
Joe, the only conventional straight white man in the race, only marginally outraised Kamala. And Booker, who's whining about not having enough cash, has raised over $20 million.
That's despite consistently terrible polling across the board.
Booker took in $1 million after whining about how unfair fundraising is to minority candidates.
How many millions are the big donors who financed both Kamala and Cory supposed to kick in to showcase their commitment to diversity by backing unpopular candidates with no future?
Julian Castro complained that the media “held her to a different standard”. His only real example was, “the earliest critique that she has no black support.” That was a legitimate critique since toward the end she only had the support of 4% of black voters. The Democrats had a very diverse 2020 field and a very diverse electorate. The current state of the field is down to the choices of that electorate.
If black voters had gotten behind Kamala or Cory, they would have had a real shot at the nomination.
Black voters represent almost a quarter of the electorate. Biden dominates the field because of black voters. As far back as the summer, 76% of black voters were enthusiastic about Joe Biden, 53% about Kamala Harris, and 43% about Cory Booker. Diversity has never been the issue in this campaign.
A Monmouth poll earlier in the year asked Democrat voters how important diversity was to them.
Only 5% of Democrat voters wanted a "person of color" as the candidate. 6% wanted a white candidate. 87% said it didn't matter. 7% wanted a woman. 12% wanted a man. 77% said it didn't matter. And that's in a survey whose demographic composition was 63% female and only 58% white. It turns out that women don’t especially want female candidates, and minorities don’t want a minority candidate.
Cory Booker is complaining about a lack of diversity caused by a very diverse electorate.
Why are black voters backing Biden? There’s an easy answer that nobody wants to hear.
Only a fifth of black voters and less than a quarter of Latino voters consider themselves very liberal. Half of African-American voters describe themselves as moderate or conservative.
Kamala Harris and Cory Booker gambled on sweeping the table by running on race while pulling leftward. Instead of getting both black voters and lefty voters, they ended up with nothing.
They’re too radical for black voters and not radical enough for the Warren/Sanders base.
The Democrats don’t have a diversity problem. Their problem is that their diverse voters have minds of their own. The Left has been tugging the Democrats leftward by promising them a new majority-minority coalition spurred by immigration and birth rates. But even young minorities are less likely to identify as lefties than young white voters. That diversity is what’s cracking up the Democrats.
While white college voters are pushing sharply leftwards, black voters are holding steady.
That’s why Joe Biden won’t go away. If the Democrat electorate were all white, Sanders or Warren would be leading. It’s the conservativism of black Democrats that prevents that from happening.
In the tussle between black moderates and white lefties, three old white politicians top the field.
But those three old white politicos stand in for white lefties who spend the most time shouting about diversity, but whose flagbearer is a white woman who lied about being a minority, and for black voters who are less interested in diversity than in the Obama legacy even if its bearer is a racist old white man.
Neither the white diversity-shouters nor the minorities who are that diversity want diverse candidates.
This repudiation of identity politics is a good thing even as it’s taking place in a party that runs on identity politics. The reality of the 2020 field shows just how detached identity politics is from reality.
Democrats of all colors and ideologies have chosen to put ideology ahead of race and gender.
The Democrats who jumped into the 2020 race under the mistaken belief that they could run on identity politics, Senator Kamala Harris, Senator Cory Booker, Julian Castro, have been humiliated. Harris is out. Booker and Castro are teetering on the edge of oblivion. Their pandering misfired, their attempts at playing the race card failed, and yet it’s the only thing that they know how to do or are able to do.
The 2020 race tells us that the Democrats don’t really believe in the identity politics credo their movement dumped on campuses and businesses. Sanders and Warren supporters have been forced to argue that ideology matters more than the race of its practitioners. Meanwhile the media circles the uncomfortable reality that the black voters who obstinately won’t abandon Joe Biden, refuse to embrace Pete Buttigieg as the alternative, aren’t flocking to Sanders or Warren, and rate Trump well, are transforming the party and the electorate in a very different way than the one they anticipated.
 The Democrats have shed working class whites, but black voters, once a tilting force, are becoming the new working-class whites, frustratingly more conservative and less radical than the Left would like.
The Obama era was meant to usher in a new coalition of lefties and minorities. Now that coalition has splintered badly as southern black voters and northern white lefties are pulling in opposition directions.
Booker’s race card is the pathetic last hurrah of a newly irrelevant generation of young technocratic multiracial politicians, the new Obamas, who, to their own surprise and that of their party, are done.
Once, Obama was the future. Now he’s the past. And so is his party.
The Democrat 2020 race is not infused with the voice of a new generation. Or even Generation X. Instead it’s become a battle between elderly black voters who want 2009 back and elderly white socialists who want 1899 back. There’s no vision of the future, only a race to the past.
Biden, Sanders, and Warren, three old hacks, are the candidates of bringing back the past.

But soon enough, the reality of Barack Obama’s unpopularity, the reality of the criminal abuse by his administration in trying to frame and otherwise take down President Trump, and the reality of a booming economy helping all Americans, would take the air out of her balloon. Eric Georgatos

"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

They Destroyed Our Country

“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years.   MATTHEW VADUM




Barack Obama: Women ‘Indisputably Better’ Leaders Than Men

Former US president Barack Obama (L) and wife Michelle Obama (R) attend a side event for the Obama Foundation in Kuala Lumpur on December 12, 2019. (Photo by Mohd RASFAN / AFP) (Photo by MOHD RASFAN/AFP via Getty Images)
Mohd Rasfan/AFP/Getty Images
1:44

Former President Barack Obama declared Monday that women are better leaders than men, musing that the world’s living standards would increase if the fairer sex ran the world.
Speaking in Singapore at a private event on leadership, Obama conceded that while women have their flaws, he argued that they are “indisputably better” than men, the BBC reports.
“Now women, I just want you to know; you are not perfect, but what I can say pretty indisputably is that you’re better than us [men],” the former president said. “I’m absolutely confident that for two years if every nation on earth was run by women, you would see a significant improvement across the board on just about everything… living standards and outcomes.”
Obama went on to argue that older men in power are largely responsible for many of the world’s most pressing problems and urged for a younger generation of leaders to take their place.
“If you look at the world and look at the problems it’s usually old people, usually old men, not getting out of the way,” he stated. “It is important for political leaders to try and remind themselves that you are there to do a job, but you are not there for life, you are not there in order to prop up your own sense of self importance or your own power.”
Obama’s remarks come as he and former first lady Michelle Obama are in southeast Asia to promote women’s education in as part of the Obama Foundation’s Girls Opportunity Alliance program. Last week, Michelle Obama, Hollywood actress Julia Roberts, and former Miss Malaysia Deborah Henry visited a high school in Vietnam, where they spoke to female students about the importance of education and leadership.

Forget ‘Michelle for President’

Our betters in the MSM, and related ruling-class mouthpieces, have set the narrative:  the lackluster, too-crazy pack of Democrat presidential candidates, even with a few token billionaires, will ultimately give way to the entry of Michelle Obama into the race.  The former First Lady, author of an apparently best-selling memoir, will inject palpable blue energy throughout the nation, return black America to a 95+% Democrat voting bloc, consolidate the Obama voting coalitions that won two presidential elections, and the evil interloper Trump will be sent packing.
Don’t buy this narrative.
In a country of 320+ million people, there is always a sizable segment who will not be willing or able to discern or question anything beyond what they are told by the MSM, and will follow the narrative.  That segment is actually becoming smaller every year; the reality of fake news has diluted the MSM’s influence to a far greater degree than they understand.  But that’s not why I’m not buying the narrative.
Here’s why:
‘Obama’ is how we got Trump.  For all the gigabytes devoted to explaining how Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, the simplest two-word explanation has always been:  Barack Obama.   
Most Americans never agreed with the radical left-wing policies that President Obama instituted, nor did they appreciate his subtle, persistent denigration of America’s character, identity and place in the world. But Americans did salute to the notion that we should be especially careful not to criticize America’s first black President. 
In short, the absence of strong criticism of President Obama and his policies was not due to their popularity, but rather due to a surrender to the political reality enforced in great degree by the MSM that any such criticism would be labeled as racist.  His policies and view of America were in fact alarming to many Americans, who silently bided their time until he was out of office.
The truth is that Barack Obama was and is a radical leftist ideologue who in his own words sought to fundamentally transform America.   A few observers saw this agenda from the beginning of Obama’s appearance on the national scene, but they were voices in a wilderness dominated by a sycophantic media.  The American people never supported a fundamental transformation of their country -- in leftist terms, a shredding of America’s Judeo-Christian heritage in favor of a godless, George Soros-vision of an Open Society, directed and controlled by almighty secular government -- and the more they understood the truth of who Obama was and what he was trying to do, the angrier and more resentful they became
Donald Trump was the anti-Obama for one simple reason:  he loves America.
And so…the “Michelle Obama riding on the residual goodwill of the Obama name!” campaign narrative, doesn’t resonate.
‘Blexit’ is real.  Candace Owens deserves tremendous credit for branding and building the “Blexit” movement, and for devoting her amazing intelligence and energy to its articulate messages.  Yet well before Blexit was a thing, Donald Trump planted the seed with black Americans when he said in August 2016:  What do you have to lose by trying something new, like Trump?”
Three-plus years later, with black unemployment the lowest in recorded history, polls that show roughly a third of likely voting black Americans supporting President Trump are not an accident or a fluke.  (And they may just mark the floor of his support in 2020.)  They reflect conscious recognition among black Americans of simple truths:  black lives generally did not get better under eight years of Obama; black lives generally have gotten much better under less than three years of President Trump. 
And so…the “Michelle Obama will bring back the good old days of black prosperity!” campaign narrative falls flat.
Barack Obama is the elephant in the room re Barr/Durham.  Of all the names that engaged Americans associate with the Russia Collusion hoax -- Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Rosenstein, Simpson, Steele, etc. --  there is one that is going to loom larger and larger in public thought as the Horowitz IG report and Barr/Durham followup becomes public:  Barack Obama. 
Our own guess is that when the truth finally comes out, Americans across the political spectrum will be stunned at the level of criminality and corruption in the Obama administration.   It will shock the collective conscience of the nation that all of this was directed to brazenly and arrogantly overturning the will of the American people for the ugly but simple reason that Donald Trump was an outsider who threatened the Obama/leftist/globalist hold on power.   
If the Horowitz report and Barr/Durham follow-up reveals, as seems increasingly likely, the deliberate and nefarious concoction of the Russia Collusion Hoax by leaders in the CIA, FBI, and DoJ, the vast majority of Americans, including millions who have historically identified themselves politically as Democrats, will be fiercely offended at this historic, unconscionable abuse.  And who is at the top of all the plotting and scheming and lying and weaponization of government against the will of the people?  Barack Obama.
And so…the ”Michelle Obama will bring back the days of the scandal-free Obama administration!” campaign narrative reeks.
Michelle’s heart isn’t in it… and may not be a happy heart anyway.  Mrs. Obama is on record saying she has no interest in running, and of course, those words by themselves mean nothing as to whether she will enter the race.  But we think they do signal that at her core, her heart is not in it.  And ‘it’ refers to the pressure, the nastiness, the unrelenting spotlight, the every-word-and-every-smirk-on-video scrutiny of an American presidential race.
Michelle Obama’s eight years in a soft, adulatory spotlight as First Lady are not the same as the brass tacks rough-and-tumble of a presidential campaign.  And even if the MSM did everything in its power to shield her (and it surely would), the MSM is not the gatekeeper it once was.   Plus, winners tend to be happy warriors.  There has always seemed to be an undercurrent of anger in Michelle Obama’s countenance, and if it ever flared on the campaign trail, she could quickly find herself in a big hole.  Anger doesn’t win elections.
Michelle Obama may or may not get into the race; it’s probably a 50/50 proposition at this point.  And if she does get in, she’ll have access to the best messaging talent the left can buy.   So she’d make waves for a while.  But soon enough, the reality of Barack Obama’s unpopularity, the reality of the criminal abuse by his administration in trying to frame and otherwise take down President Trump, and the reality of a booming economy helping all Americans, would take the air out of her balloon.  “Bring Back Barack” is not a winning campaign theme.  And if a tweet or two happened to get under her skin, the result could be ugly. 
“Michelle Obama for President” is not inevitable or invincible.
Eric Georgatos is a former corporate lawyer who operated the Brushfires of Freedom blog from 2008-2016 (a book of top postings from the blog is available at America, Can We Talk?).

THE OBOMB WAS COUNTING ON ILLEGALS VOTING FOR HIM AGAIN!


Obama ‘Very Confident’ He Would’ve 

Won Third Term

1:34

Former President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that he was “very confident” he would have won a third term had the Constitution and his wife allowed him to run again.

Speaking to his former top adviser David Axelrod at a live recording of the “The Axe Files” podcast at the University of Chicago, Obama said he believes voters felt that he had “taken the job seriously, worked hard, been true to my oath, observed and hopefully strengthened the norms and the rules and the values of our democracy.”

“I feel very confident that I was in a position—had it not been for both the Constitution and Michelle—to continue in office,” Obama said.

Axelrod had earlier said that some people would like Obama to serve in perpetuity and joked about some of Obama’s supporters even wanting him to run for vice president.

The former president, though, added that he is “not sure it is a healthy thing” to serve more than two terms, pointing out that in countries without term limits, “even very good people… lose their edge and get stale and comfortable in the position.”
Obama said it is “useful to have a democracy have to continually evolve.”

Had Obama been allowed to run for a third term, he would have faced off against Donald Trump in 2016. But when Axelrod asked whether Obama believed he could defeat President Trump in 2020 in a hypothetical one-on-one matchup, Obama did not take the bait.

“I will not answer that direct question for obvious reasons,” Obama said.



MICHELLE OBAMA ANNOUNCES SHE WILL RUN FOR THE WHITE HOUSE AND BE BARACK’S THIRD TERM FOR LIFE.
MEXICO WILL ELECT HER!

The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years.   MATTHEW VADUM


Editorial Reviews: Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

GET THIS BOOK!

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses

BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s OBAMANOMICS TO SERVE THE RICH AND GLOBALIST BILLIONAIRES.

'Don't bet against Michelle Obama': Tucker Carlson predicts former first lady will be 2020 Democratic nominee


Fox News host Tucker Carlson told voters not to rule out the possibility of the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination going to former first lady Michelle Obama, despite her insistence that she isn't planning a run.
"If you're wondering who the Democratic nominee will be, don't bet against Michelle Obama," he said on Monday's Tucker Carlson Tonight. "Last week, the former first lady issued a statement claiming she has no interest in being president, but there are signs that’s not true."
Carlson then pointed to several examples that have made him suspicious about a potential Obama bid, including David Axlerod's attacks on 2020 front-runner and former Vice President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama's refusal to endorse Biden in the race so far, and reports that the former president tried to convince his No. 2 not to enter.
"If Obama had endorsed Biden, the race would be over ... Obama hasn’t endorsed Joe Biden because he doesn't want to. Why? Maybe he’s got other plans," he speculated. "Obama's presidential memoir was also supposed to come out this year. Now, its release has been delayed until the middle of the Democratic primaries. In other words, at exactly the moment when Democrats will be thinking deeply about how to beat Trump, America will be talking about the Obamas. Coincidence? Maybe."
He added, "Maybe it’s also a coincidence that Michelle Obama just released yet another book last week, one that will require her, of course, to get on the road and talk to crowds ... The Democratic Party is ripping itself apart over race, and gender, and class. Michelle Obama, let's be honest, is one of the only people who could unite its warring factions."
Carlson then pointed out that the former first lady was found to be the most admired woman in the world in a recent poll. He also warned his viewers to expect the unexpected.
"One of the main lessons of Donald Trump's 2016 election is that you never really know. Unexpected things happen far more often than we imagine," he said, before playing a 2006 clip of Barack Obama insisting he wasn't planning on running for the Oval Office in 2008. "Just months after he did that, Barack Obama joined the presidential race. Three years later, almost to the day, he was inaugurated president of the United States."
In addition to being the most admired woman in the world, another poll found that Michelle Obama would be a front-runner in New Hampshire, a key early voting state, if she runs. While she's insisted there is "zero chance" she'll seek the Oval Office, family friends of the Obamas have publicly said she'd make a "good president."
If she were to enter, she'd be joining a crowded field of 18 Democrats and has already missed some filing deadlines. However, that hasn't deterred other late-entry candidates, including former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who launched his campaign on Sunday.
The Washington Examiner's Joseph Simonson contributed to this report.


Ain’t this sweet?

Michelle Obama: ‘Many’ Around the World Feel Barack Is ‘Their President’ 

Scott Olson/Getty Images
27

Former first lady Michelle Obama said Tuesday that her husband, former President Barack Obama, could have built his presidential library anywhere in the world because many feel he is “their president.”

Obama, speaking at the Obama Foundation Summit at the Illinois Institute of Technology, explained Chicago’s Jackson Park was selected as the site for the Obama Presidential Center because it was close to the couple’s former home and situated near her South Side childhood home.
“There’s power in the selection of Jackson Park,” the former first lady said. “Barack and I don’t do things incidentally. There’s a strategy.”
Obama then argued the library could have even been built outside of the United States.
“Barack’s presidential library could have been anywhere in the world, because there are so many people who feel like he is their president,” she stated.
“New York wanted it. Hawaii wants it. Because it’s also an economic engine,” she added.
Michelle Obama appeared at the fireside chat with her brother, Craig Robinson, and interviewed by The Warmth of Other Suns author Isabel Wilkerson.
In June, a federal judge ruled plans to build the $500 million presidential center on Chicago’s lakefront could move forward, dismissing advocacy group Protect Our Parks’s lawsuit objecting to the use of public park land.


The bottom line 3 is this: If Operation Crossfire Hurricane wasn’t a plot to restore Barack Obama to the Presidency, why wasn’t the op shutdown after  the election was over? It wasn’t. Instead it ramped up with the appointment of a special prosecutor whose only raison d’etre is to cover up the original crimes during the primary season and in the run up to the election.

“Obama would declare himself president for life with Soros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”

What no one will say, but I will, is that the ObamaGate /MuellerGate /SpyGate scandal is an ongoing plot to restore Barack Obama to the Presidency. Before heads explode let me explain.


"That phase of the takeover was started in 2008 by President Barack Obama.  Throughout his eight years in office, Obama practiced divisiveness and hammered away at the Second Amendment while pouring gallons of fuel on the fire of the "Black Lives Matter" lie.  His administration was rampant with corruption, pushing the envelope with every new scandal." RICK HAYES

They Destroyed Our Country
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”

These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy. 

“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”

“Attorney General Eric Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden Obama years.” DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG

No comments: