RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/kirsten_gillibrand_wont_confirm_kavanaugh_but_confirms_that_she_is_an_idiot.html

I confess that I have always found Senator Kirsten Gillibrand to be a vacuous politician, someone who blows with the wind, seeks shallow advantage, and lacks good judgment. But last night, speaking on MSNBC, where she has no reason to worry about being challenged for verbal excesses, she let slip a statement so appalling that it ranks with her colleague Mazie Hirono’s notorious injunction to the male half of the populace (and her constituency) that its members “shut up.”

On Chris Hayes’s program, these words actually left her mouth:

Every time you hear on Fox News, “assume you’re innocent,” “you have to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” they’re trying to confuse voters.

To this mental midget, the assumption of innocence before proven guilty is indeed “confusing.”

Don’t believe me? Watch for yourself:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/beto-orourke-wont-get-brett-kavanaugh-treatment/

The media are curiously uninterested in investigating the unanswered questions surrounding criminal misconduct in O’Rourke’s past.

I used to see the mainstream media as an adjunct of the Democratic party. That’s debatable; it could be that the party is the adjunct. Either way, the most brazenly overt aspect of the partnership is that the press no longer even feigns interest in allegations against nominees; it is interested only in allegations against Republican nominees.

We await the next shoe to drop in the Judge Kavanaugh saga. Rest assured that if there’s a rumor that, in third grade, young Brett yanked on the ponytails of the girl in the second row (war on women!), the New York Times, NBC News, and phalanxes of their journalistic colleagues will be all over it.

Meanwhile, Representative Beto O’Rourke had a pair of felony arrests in his mid-to-late 20s, including a reckless drunk-driving incident in which he crashed into a car and allegedly tried to flee from the scene. The cases appear to have mysteriously disappeared without serious prosecution, notwithstanding that O’Rourke continues to deny basic facts outlined in at least one police report.

So, what really happened? We don’t know. See, Representative O’Rourke is a Democrat.

Not just that. O’Rourke is the Democrat running for a Senate seat against Ted Cruz, the Republican incumbent who is a favorite of grass-roots conservatives. Consequently, the press and Democrats have about as much interest in probing O’Rourke’s checkered past as they do in exploring allegations against Keith Ellison — the hard-Left Minnesota congressman, attorney-general candidate, and deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who has been accused of physically abusing his longtime girlfriend.

O’Rourke appears to be quite the character, notwithstanding the media’s indifference.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-trump-creating-new-republicans-1537560515

Current polls suggest that Republicans could be in for a rough November, but not as rough as one might expect among a key voting constituency.

Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report writes today that Democrats are confident about their support among suburban women, but enthusiasm among female Democratic voters “isn’t being replicated among another group of voters that theoretically should be as motivated — or more — to vote for Democrats: Latino voters.”

Ms. Walter explains:

Latino voter drop-off in midterm elections is nothing new, but the thinking was that President Trump’s rhetoric and policies around immigration, especially the issue of separating children from their parents at the border, would be a catalyst for higher Latino engagement in 2018. At this point, however, recent polling by New York Times Upshot/Siena College and Monmouth University, suggests that’s not the case.

In California’s 39th district — a racially diverse district that Hillary Clinton carried 52 to 43 percent — a Monmouth poll out this week found Republican Young Kim leading Democrat Gil Cisneros 46-42 percent.

Meanwhile on the right coast of the country, it seems that voters are also stubbornly refusing to play the roles they’ve been assigned in the conventional media narrative. Ms. Walter elaborates:

Republicans in Latino majority districts in South Florida are holding up better than their underlying infrastructure suggests they would. In a district Hillary Clinton carried with almost 57 percent, Republican Carlos Curbelo (FL-26) has a narrow lead over his Democratic opponent in the NY Times Upshot/Siena poll. And, in the 27th district, where moderate GOPer Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is retiring, private polls show former Clinton administration HHS Director Donna Shalala struggling to open a lead in a district Clinton carried by more than 58 percent.

In the sprawling southern Texas 23rd district — a district that is more than 70 percent Latino and voted narrowly for Clinton in 2016, Republican Rep. Will Hurd had a solid 51-43 percent lead over his Democratic opponent in the latest NY Times Upshot/Siena poll.

Finally, in the Los Angeles County 25th CD, a district that is majority minority and which Clinton won with 50 percent of the vote in 2016, the NY Times Upshot/Siena poll found Republican Steve Knight with a narrow lead over his Democratic opponent.

There’s another interesting campaign update, this one from the middle of the country. This week the Texas Monthly reports that expected Hispanic support for Democratic Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Lupe Valdez, who’s running against Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, hasn’t met expectations. Notes the Texas Monthly:

First came news that Valdez’s lackluster campaign is delivering equally lackluster results. A new Quinnipiac University poll on Tuesday—the first this season to measure sentiment among likely voters in Texas instead of simply registered voters—shows that Hispanics actually prefer Abbott to Valdez. Hispanic respondents, in fact, preferred the incumbent Republican by a margin of 49 percent to 45 percent over Valdez. While the 4.1 percent margin of error tightens that race a bit, the fact that Abbott leads with his substantial war chest mostly intact, suggests an election night slaughter for that race that could extend to higher than normal Hispanic support for the governor and potential coattails for people like Cruz. CONTINUE AT SITE

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/09/21/menendez_in_jeopardy_as_senate_challenger_makes_push_138139.html

The New Jersey Senate race was supposed to be a done deal with incumbent Bob Menendez easily cruising to re-election. It’s rated solid or likely to remain Democratic by most election watchers, and the Democrats were certainly putting it in their win column as they mapped out plans to retake the Senate.

But someone forgot to tell New Jersey voters that this race was uncompetitive. The polls show it to be tight — Menendez simply has not shaken Republican challenger Bob Hugin in a state Hillary Clinton carried by 14 points over Donald Trump two years ago.

Part of the reason seems to be that despite his acquittal in court on federal corruption charges, Menendez has not escaped the taint that came with his 2015 trial. Another is that Hugin, the wealthy former CEO of a biopharmaceutical company, had already spent nearly $16 million in the race. Throw into this mix a state with the worst affordability index in the country and an expected increase in the gasoline tax on Oct. 1 — on top of significant increases in state taxes enacted this spring. It seems a combustible mix in which an attractive and well-funded outsider with a sterling resume can give the political establishment heartburn.

Meanwhile, Menendez has a lot of baggage to defend. In 2015, he was indicted on federal corruption charges pursued by his fellow Democrats — the first U.S. senator to be indicted by the administration of his own party in 30 years. He was accused of doing favors for Florida eye doctor Salomon Melgen, who is now serving 17 years in prison for Medicare fraud. Prosecutors presented evidence of 19 free private plane trips and campaign donations, which they asserted came in exchange for political favors. According to prosecutors, one such trip to the Dominican Republic supposedly involved underage prostitutes. Menendez strongly denied those allegations, but in the #MeToo era, any lingering suspicion is unhelpful for a politician. And though he was not found guilty by the jury, Menendez was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee.

While he may have survived his legal battles, New Jersey voters have apparently not forgotten. In a June primary, an unknown Democratic opponent who raised less than $5,000 got 38 percent of the vote against Menendez. That challenger, Lisa McCormick, didn’t have enough money to run ads reminding the electorate of Menendez’s legal troubles. But Bob Hugin did. Hugin’s campaign began running hard-hitting television spots against the incumbent in February. Menendez was pounded by ads titled “Guilty,” “Screwed” and “Dead Last.” By July, Menendez was leading Hugin by two percentage points, and in an August poll he was up by only six.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/cory-booker-it-would-be-irresponsible-not-to-consider-presidential-run/

Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey seemed to confirm suspicions of a 2020 presidential run Wednesday, telling New York Magazine it would be “irresponsible not to” at least consider challenging President Trump.

“Of course the presidency will be something I consider. It would be irresponsible not to,” Booker said.

Booker, the former mayor of Newark, has emerged in recent years as a leader of the younger, more progressive wing of the Democratic party. Having just returned from campaigning for “almost every candidate in Nevada,” Booker described the physical toll of his midterm barnstorming.

“You’re catching me on a day when I’m physically depleted,” he said. “My spirits are up, but I just campaigned for nearly every candidate in Nevada: secretary of State; guy for AG; guy running for governor; uh, Jacky Rosen, who will hopefully be my colleague; some assembly and legislative leaders. Then flew to Seattle, landed, headlined an event there, and then got right on a plane at 6 a.m. and came back.”

Long considered a favorite for the 2020 Democratic nomination, Booker has taken a number of steps since Trump’s inauguration to position himself to the left of his older, more established colleagues, embracing Senator Bernie Sanders’s “Medicare for All” proposal and focus on income inequality.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/09/18/electorate_makeup_will_be_key_to_midterm_outcome_138090.html

With the last primary of the 2018 midterm cycle over, it’s now official: The general election has begun. With 50 days to go, who are midterm voters?

“A midterm voter is little bit older, a little bit whiter and more educated” than a presidential election voter, said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball Report. While this demographic is usually a positive for Republicans, he cautioned that “educated voters are becoming more Democratic with each election.”

Midterms tend to be low-turnout affairs. In presidential elections, somewhere between 60 to 70 percent of registered voters typically go to the ballot box, whereas in a midterm the number hovers around 40 percent. The drop-off is pronounced among millennials and minority voters.

Millennials are enthusiastic about issues but unreliable on Election Day, particularly in midterms. In the 2016 presidential election, 19 percent of the electorate was millennial voters, while only 13 percent of that group made it to the polls in the 2014 midterms. Similar trends are present among black and Hispanic voters.

In primaries, the top priority for candidates is to attract party loyalists, who are generally more partisan. But in a general election, candidates need to appeal to a wider audience by capturing centrist voters. Exit polling from the 2014 elections show that about 40 percent of the voters identified their ideology as moderate whereas 23 percent identified as liberal and 37 percent as conservative. In 2014, independent voters supported Republicans by 54 percent to 42 percent, and Republicans picked up 13 seats in the House. In 2016, independent voters supported Donald Trump by 46 percent to 42 percent, a margin that likely provided the difference in his victory. In tight elections, independents are often the voting bloc most crucial to victory.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/09/17/historic_midterm_trends_tell_usnothing_138087.html

There’s one question on Washington’s collective mind that hovers above the never-ending swirl of Trump news: Who will control Congress after the midterms?

As with everything in politics these days, there are lots of predictions – and those who manage to be right will be celebrated. But here’s the problem: It’s almost impossible to figure out if a blue wave will happen – and how big it might be – until it happens.

A quick look at House turnover in midterms since 1960 reveals one thing: uncertainty. The average midterm House loss for the sitting president’s party is 22 seats. Yet the actual numbers have been all over the map, ranging from +8 in 2002 for George W. Bush to -63 in 2010 for Barack Obama.

But can’t we look at some key indicators today to figure out what’s going to happen? Sadly, no. Here are just a few “leading indicators” that indicate… almost nothing.

GDP growth was at 4.2 percent in the second quarter – the highest since 2014 – which should help Republicans, right? Yes, that’s a strong number. But looking at second-quarter GDP over the past 58 years shows no correlation to House gains or losses. Indeed, Obama’s large loss in 2010 came at a time when second-quarter GDP was 3.7 percent. And Bill Clinton’s 54-seat loss happened with GDP sitting at 5.5 percent. By contrast, George W. Bush gained eight seats in 2002 with GDP growth at 2.4 percent.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/sad_and_pathetic_delusional_bill_kristol_prepares_war_machine_to_challenge_trump_for_2020_gop_nomination.html

Swamp fever has taken a toll on a number of DC-dwelling conservative pundits and driven them mad. They seem to be competing with each other to see who can bark at the moon loudest. There’s Jennifer Rubin, who has excoriated Trump for taking positions that she previously advocated. There’s George Will, who wished for a 50 state sweep for corrupt Hillary Clinton. But making a strong move to capture leadership of this cohort is Bill Kristol, who still fancies himself a kingmaker, despite the ignominious defeat of his second-choice Trump challenger Evan McMullin after first choice David French bowed out.

Paging Dr. Freud: Kristol’s chosen picture for his Twitter account looks like someone shooting himself in the head with his finger-gun

Recall that Kristol’s deep-think strategy was to have McMullin win the votes of (presumably straight-laced) Utah voters who shared McMullin’s Mormon faith, and thereby deny the “short-fingered vulgarian” Trump the electoral votes of the Beehive State, which Kristol theorized might swing the election to Hillary.

Undeterred by playing the fool in 2016, Kristol is, in the memorable words of Lieutenant General Honore, “stuck on stupid” and looking for a new patsy candidate to mobilize the inevitable defeat of Trump in the GOP nomination contest. Like cargo cultists building a model of a runway in New Guinea for the airplanes air dropping supplies, Kristol thinks he can create a ‘war machine’ that will prevail over a sitting president with 90% approval from Republicans.

Joe Concha of The Hill manages to report this announced effort without even using the expressing ”LOL.”

Conservative commentator and outspoken “Never Trump” critic Bill Kristol says he is building a “war machine” within the Republican party to challenge President Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign, according to CNBC.

Kristol told the network that he’s preparing “for a primary run against Trump,” adding that Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) is on his shortlist of possible candidates.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/far_left_triumphant_in_new_york_primary.html

The socialist insurgency against establishment Democrats in New York emerged triumphant as no fewer than six far-left candidates defeated establishment Democrats in races for the state Senate.

New York Times:

Years of anger at a group of Democratic state senators who had collaborated with Republicans boiled over on Thursday, as primary voters ousted nearly all of them in favor of challengers who had called them traitors and sham progressives.

The losses were not only a resounding upset for the members of the Independent Democratic Conference, who outspent their challengers several times over, but also a sign that the progressive fervor sweeping national politics had hobbled New York’s once-mighty Democratic machine, at least on a local level.

The most high-profile casualty was Senator Jeffrey D. Klein of the Bronx, the former head of the I.D.C. In that role, he was for years one of Albany’s most powerful players, sharing leadership of the chamber with his counterparts in the Republican conference and participating in the state’s secretive budget negotiations.

But on Thursday, he was defeated by Alessandra Biaggi, a lawyer and former aide to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, after a campaign in which Ms. Biaggi cornered Mr. Klein into spending more than $2 million, an astonishing sum for a state legislative race. (Cynthia Nixon, in her unsuccessful bid against Mr. Cuomo, spent less.)

Two things: First, the victories of socialists rid the Democrats of the last vestige of bipartisanship in the state Senate. This will make Albany an even more unruly place than it already is. Secondly, and most important, the march of socialism in the Democratic Party appears to be unstoppable and will make 2020 an Armageddon of sorts between right and left.

Which vision will the 50% of eligible voters who bother to go to the polls choose? The party of free stuff? Or the party of personal responsibility and the protection of liberty?

https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/14/why-black

The growing positive attitude of black voters towards President Trump is the wildcard in the coming midterm elections. It is real and it is expanding. Polls are showing anywhere from 20 percent to 36 percent of blacks approve of President Trump. The Democrats even may have lost 11 percent of black women.

The cracks in the black Democrat bloc voting are one of the most consequential results of Barack Obama’s presidency and the phenomenal effectiveness of President Trump’s pro-business policies. This could be a historic turning point.

Measurable Progress
Trump’s economic policies have improved the lives of black Americans, just as he promised they would during the election. Unlike Obama’s media hype, Trump’s progress is as real and as solid as his buildings. Black unemployment continues to fall. Good manufacturing jobs are coming back. Paychecks are rising, too.

The roots of this political watershed in the black community are more complex than job figures and will last beyond Trump’s tenure. I have been listening for hours to ordinary black Americans on the #Walkaway movement’s YouTube channel. This is a movement of former Democrats explaining why they are leaving their party. While each face, voice, and story is unique and fascinating, there are some striking recurring themes.

Ironically, the change seems to have started with President Obama’s election.

President Obama raised the hopes of black Americans to the highest they’ve been since Martin Luther King. The entire country expected he would devote himself to getting blacks better schools, more jobs, higher wages, and safer neighborhoods. Instead, Obama ignored those bread-and-butter needs. His signature initiative was to send Eric Holder to stoke up publicity and fear in the wake of the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown shootings.

In the short term, hyping fake white racism and police brutality worked to stanch the bleeding in black turnout in the 2012 election. In the long term, however, Obama’s reliance on racial fear and grievance increased black suffering. He broke people’s hearts and blew up many black voters’ loyalty to the Democrats.