Y'know, we Liberals here in the Land of Lincoln are very fond of our governor. He has signed into law a lot of legislation that gladdens our hearts, cleaned up a lot of our budget mess, and he has enough f-you money to bankroll much of the Illinois Democratic party, with enough left over to spread around to other critical elections beyond our boundaries.
Plus, he's not afraid to throw elbows in a political fight, which, in Illinois politics, is right up there with rooting for da Bears, or standing up and cheering when The Bear takes home an armload of Emmys.
But when he's wrong, he's wrong. And even when his wrongness looks as mouthwatering as a rack of ribs from Lem's to a Democrat hungry for good news, we must demure. We must speak the truth as we know it. This is what separates us from the MAGA freaks.
Pritzker on Iowa: Almost Half of GOP Base Rejected Trump in Show of Weakness
The Illinois governor said that Trump's margin of victory in the Iowa caucuses shows his general election weakness.
Speaking to Rachel Maddow on MSNBC Monday night as Iowa Caucus results poured in, Illinois Governor and Biden surrogate J.B. Pritzker put the results into perspective.
"Almost half of the base of the Republican party showing up for this caucus tonight voted against Trump. Think about that," Pritzker said, as Trump hovered around 50% of the vote with more results still to be determined.
Pritzker continued, "So, I think that is telling. It tells you the weakness of Donald Trump."...
First of all, kudos to MSNBC to finally figuring out that we have some pretty formidable and successful Democratic leaders out here in flyover country, and putting one of the best on the air in prime time.
Second, sadly, Pritzker's math is just wrong. This was also a mistake make by veteran political strategist Joe Trippi on Xwitter, and by Lawrence O'Donnell on the aforementioned MSNBC. Here's why it's a mistake. The Meidas Touch article continues:
Trump claimed over the weekend that 95% of the Republican Party is MAGA. Yet, entrance polling showed that only 49% of Iowa caucusgoers in the Republican Party considered themselves to be part of the MAGA movement.
To cite no less of an authority than Dr. Julius Hibbert (The Simpsons):
"And hillbillies prefer to be called 'Sons of the Soil,' but it ain't gonna happen!”
Don't You Dare Call It 'Trump-ism'The Media is attempting to separate the Republican Party from Donald Trump. Who voted for him again?It isn't Trumpism. It's the Republican Party. And it has been for far longer than Donald Trump has been running for President...
"He is a con artist. He runs on this idea he is fighting for the little guy, but he has spent his entire career sticking it to the little guy — his entire career."
-- and two days ago, wholeheartedly endorsed him:
When Trump was in WH I achieved major policies I had worked on for years (like expanded Child Tax Credit & tough sanctions on regime in Cuba & Venezuela) because we had a President who didn’t cave to special interests or let bureaucrats block us.
— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) January 14, 2024
I support Trump because that…
When I look at Iowa, I don't see a Republicans party riven by division, half-MAGA and half fleeing MAGA, ready to shatter. Instead, like Dave Weigel, I see a party where all the available alternatives are aligned with Trump, regardless of what they call themselves:
MAGA (Trump): 51%Reformed MAGA (DeSantis): 21%Orthodox MAGA (Vivek): 8%Republican Classic: 19%
So, sorry JB. If Democrats are focused, aggressive and well-financed, it's a fair bet they can peel off enough Republican voters in enough swing states to win in November. But it's long past time to stop pretending that some Republican "fever" is going to break and half the party will return to "normal".
Trump is the new "normal",
He and his brand of fascism are the new normal because the Republican party and Conservative media spent the last +40 years and billions of dollars trying to build an electoral doomsday machine with no "off" switch.
And they succeeded.
8 comments:
Simply to get my forecast said: orange sh!stink is not going to be on Nov. balls. Not even if alive.
And it strikes me that calling Haley "Republican Classic" is not ideal either. From this side of the pond, she reminds me so very much of Liz Truss - the recent convert to the cause that means that she is acting more like a swivel-eyed true-believer than even DeSantis can manage.
I mean, I accept that she is less outrageously terrible than the others in terms of her presentational ability to pretend that history never happened (I understand she was effectively denying slavery again today) but she's on that same MAGA train as the rest of them.
Well, not related to article content, but worth a look (I hope): Oh, whoops! We can't dunk on Trump's lawyer Joey Tacopina any more. Not because he changed his name, but because he's NOT Trump's lawyer any more.
(Poor guy. I have a very insultable last name, too. I feel for Joey solely on that basis, not on the basis that he thought legally representing a monster was a good idea.)
Wonder if Trump forgot to pay 'em? That's what "people are saying," so it must be true. Right? Riiiight???
Thanks for all y'all do.
Good evening, Mr. Glass.
The Reasonable Republican Revolution is quite the seductive concept, isn't it?
Best to you and your loved ones
MAGA Fascist-Classic - Trump
Deformed MAGA - DeSantis
Deranged MAGA - Ramaswamy
MAGA Lite - Haley
Of all the has-beens-who-never-were (Christie, Hutchinson, Pence, Scott, Hurd), and wannabes-who-never-will (Bargum, Elder, Johnson, Suarez), all but Hutch and Hurd will kiss the gold-leaf ring on Dear Leader's lady finger while swearing "undying loyalty" on bent knees. Being from NJ, I wouldn't trust Christie any further than I could spit the GW Bridge (past, after all, is prologue).
Everybody mentioned is basing their conclusions on a 5% sample of eligible Iowa voters that does not meet the statistical standard of "representative sample".
While I recoil from the idea that 50,000 right-wing lunatics in a snow-bound state have decided the presidential contest, I agree with DG that there is no 'silent majority' of reasonable Republicons waiting to oust the Con in Chief. He'll roll to the nomination, because so many of his voters love to be conned. They think they are in on it, so those others they hate are the marks. They are the marks and they never learn.
However, it is hard to discern where the Con in Chief is supposed to add voters to his coalition. Every person who could conceivably stomach a reprehensible character like him is already on board. All we have to do is show up (which may mean overcoming vote suppression tactics in Republicon-led states) and we win.
The important point to make is that the number of republican voters is way down (about 100,000 in 2024) compared to 2016 (180,000) and way less than the 240,000 Democrats who voted when there was a lot of enthusiasm in 2008.
Post a Comment