Reason Roundup

Maybe Bernie Sanders Shouldn't Have Doubled Down on Cuba the Week Before Super Tuesday

Plus: Libertarian Party results, Bloomberg's bad showing, Gabbard gets one delegate, California targets porn performers, and more...

|

Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders were the big winners on Super Tuesday. Former Vice President Joe Biden took top place in nine Democratic Party presidential contests yesterday, while Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) was the top choice of Democratic voters in four states. The biggest states holding contests yesterday were split between the two candidates, with Texas going for Biden and California going for Sanders.

Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Virginia also went for Biden yesterday, with Sanders winning in Colorado, Utah, and his home state of Vermont. (The Maine primary results are still not out.) This gives Biden at least an additional 337 delegates (bringing him up to 390 total), and Sanders at least 270 new delegates (bringing him up to 330 total).

The roughest night was had by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), who not only finished third in her home state of Massachusetts but failed to win top place in a single state. Warren picked up just 27 new delegates in yesterday's primaries, which now gives her a total of 36.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) earned one delegate in American Samoa, which may at least be enough to get her on the last Democratic primary debate stage with Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders, and Warren. Gabbard did not take first place in any states.

Billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg got the most votes in American Samoa, earning him four delegates. Bloomberg also picked up a few delegates in Arkansas, Colorado, and Texasbringing him to a total of 12but overall failed to make much of an impact.

What does it all mean? For one thing, it means there were a whole lot of irate leftists on Twitter last night. Sanders supporters seem to have been counting on Biden's big shaming yesterday, which clearly didn't pan out.

(Perhaps Sanders following up his early primary wins with praise for Fidel Castro's literacy programs wasn't the best move?)

Many on the left blamed Warren for supposedly siphoning off votes from Sanders and have been calling for her to drop out.

The night also cast doubt on the idea that Sanders is better at motivating voter turnout than Biden.

In states with the biggest differences in voter turnout between yesterday and Super Tuesday 2016Virginia and South CarolinaBiden was the top candidate. And "exit polls for five southern states that Biden won—Alabama, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia—found that young voters did not show up at the polls in the numbers they did in 2016," notes USA Today.

And while it will surely do nothing to dampen enthusiasm for hysteria about "money in politics," Bloomberg's huge personal cash infusion doesn't seem to have helped him subvert democracy, or whatever it is that establishment Democrats have been fretting over. Besides embarrassing himself in a spectacular fashion, he helped show that fears about American oligarchs openly "buying elections" are overwrought.


FREE MINDS

Libertarian Party (L.P.) primary contests were held yesterday in California, Massachusetts, and North Carolina. In North Carolina, the top vote-getting L.P. presidential candidates were Jacob Hornberger (8.7 percent), John McAfee (8.2 percent), Kim Ruff (7.9 percent), Vermin Supreme (5.9 percent), and Kenneth Armstrong (5.3 percent). But the top choice overall was no preference/none of the above, with nearly 30 percent of the vote:

As of Wednesday morning, California and Massachusetts winners were still unclear (with Hornberger, Jo Jorgensen, and Supreme leading in California).

Meanwhile, McAfee announced Wednesday that he was leaving the L.P. presidential race.


FREE MARKETS

California legislators are making changes to a much criticized "sex worker permit" bill, but its sponsor still doesn't seem to get it. "We want to identify who can be the folks that can help us sound the alarm when there are any problems," Assemblyperson Cristina Garcia told NPR, adding that the bill would apply to "dancers, web performers, porn stars."

Garcia's comments "confirm[ed] the suspicions of adult performers that AB2389 is a law enforcement bill disguised as a workers' safety bill," writes Gustavo Turner at XBiz. More:

The bill would, among other things, require government-sponsored training of sex workers on "safety" issues—something that Alana Evans, president of the Adult Performers Actors Guild (APAG), said groups like hers have long provided for performers themselves. From XBiz:

"[AB2389] is an unnecessary thing for the government to get involved in," Evans added, before tallying up the annual cost to California taxpayers to $468,000 dollars, or $1.1 million if a new set of amendments Gullesserian has recently proposed were to be adopted.

"That's over $1 million to have people do something I already do," said Evans.

[…] The segment's final guest was Antonia Crane, introduced as "a stripper and a sex worker for 26 years and a leader of  Soldiers of Pole, a California exotic dancers union."

Asked about whether her group thought the state should be more involved in their work, Crane was unequivocal and succinct. "'Role for the state?' I'm with Alana. Kill the bill," she said. "This is a money grab dressed up as a safety issue."

More here.


QUICK HITS


  • The more you know:

  • How Reason staffers got through Super Tuesday results night:

Advertisement

NEXT: Today in Supreme Court History: March 4, 1861

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. …while Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) was the top choice of Democratic voters in four states.

    They just threw their votes away on a third party candidate.

    1. Vermin/McAfee 2020? That would be entertaining as well. Fill that boot with cocaine!

      1. Better than Johnson anyway.

        1. Better from a libertarian principles standpoint. I’d be willing to wager good money that none of the names on the LP ballots Tuesday would get the support Johnson got in the 2016 general.

    2. Are you sure that shouldn’t read, “Sanders was the top choice of four Democratic voters”

    3. And what does top choice mean when Bernie at most got about 1/3 of Democratic primary voters, so less than 20% of all voters (and perhaps 10% of eligible voters)?

  2. Warren is going to drop out but pledges to support the nominee, whoever it is, as long as the grass grows and the water run.

    1. As long as the sun will shiiine??

      I agree – even if she aligns closer to Bernie, she’ll back Biden – especially now that the mayor (the rich one) is toast.

      1. She will back Biden so that the establishment won’t walk away from her when she is primaried when she is up for re-election. Even Democrats in Massachusetts are tired of her.

        1. Here’s the thing–Biden’s campaign was fucking dead. I mean, stone-cold in the ground. He’s a bigger gaffe machine than Trump, he was threatening to fight people challenging him at his meet-and-greets, and Julian Castro called him senile right to his face. He was completely out of money, had minimum staffing, and his events couldn’t fill a high school auditorium.

          I suspect what happened is the DNC got together, decided that he was going to be their candidate, and informed the rest of the field, “If you want to play ball in the next administration, you better drop your campaign and get behind this guy, or we’re going to bury you.” Clyburn’s endorsement appears to have been the signal for these changes to happen. Bernie was polling neck and neck with African-Americans prior to that event, and Biden beat him with those voters like a rented mule yesterday. Every single neoliberal hack from the last 30 years started endorsing him, Buttigieg and Klobuchar both drop their campaigns at the same time even though they were doing BETTER than Biden overall, and Beto O’Dork emerges again to give his endorsement.

          I can’t wait to see what happens now that it’s plainly obvious Bernie’s going to get rat-fucked again. Will his supporters burn the Dem convention to the ground, or will they do the J-O-B just like Bernie ultimately will and vote for Biden?

          1. Black people won’t come out to vote for an angry shouting white guy.

            1. Unless he’s clearly senile, apparently

          2. The problem is that they can save Joe in their own primary but they can’t save him in the election. Joe will continue to be a gaffe machine and an embarrassingly bad candidate. And the corruption problems with his dead beat son are only going to get worse as time goes one and more information inevitably comes out.

            If the rest of them had been smart, they would have said no. There won’t be a Biden administration to be a part of. So, the establishment is making an illusory promise. The only issue becomes what they can offer in 24, and by that time 20 will be forgotten anyway.

            1. I think it’s less about potential positions in a Biden administration, and more “be a good party member or we’ll fuck you”
              Other than Bernie, it’s not like any of these hacks has a devoted following as individuals

          3. Amazing what can happen when party establishment shifts into “anybody but ______” mode. At least some Republican leaders must be taking notes.

            1. Ds have always had a more… imposing… party than the Rs

  3. Warren picked up just 27 new delegates in yesterday’s primaries, which now gives her a total of 36.

    Democratic voter misogyny knows no bounds.

    1. Her people were promised she would be the nominee. Instead, her campaign has been a trail of tears.

      1. Is there some kind of phrase we could use for when someone promises you something and then takes it back?

        1. What do you think she’ll do with all her tickets to the convention that she wont be needing anymore?

          1. This is highly problematic. I think

        2. Democrat?

      2. “…Instead, her campaign has been a trail of tears.”

        And how!

    2. she won the Chisholm Trail vote

    3. Or a crazy eyed gender neutral white woman.

  4. …Bloomberg’s huge personal cash infusion doesn’t seem to have helped him subvert democracy, or whatever it is that establishment Democrats have been fretting over.

    How dare you be so dismissive of their concern du jour.

    1. Evidence that you can’t buy an election.

      1. $750 million spent with no accountability.
        And the democrats say money is the problem and has to be strictly regulated. (unless it is spent on advertising for democratic talking points disguised as Bloomberg’s campaign)

      2. But you can buy an erection.

        1. Not without a license, state-sanctioned training, and the properly notarized permits, if Cristina Garcia has anything to say about it.

          1. I was making a urology joke, not a sex worker joke.

            1. In that case, you need a doctorate of medicine, a doctorate of pharmacology, and an act of God for the FDA to approve your little blue pill as well as everything else mentioned above.

            2. I read that with a Chinese accent so I thought you were disagreeing with me.

        2. Those are free.

    2. I guarantee establishment Democrats have never fretted over subverting democracy.

  5. Besides embarrassing himself in a spectacular fashion, he helped show that fears about American oligarchs openly “buying elections” are overwrought.

    But you’re forgetting about the multiplier effect.

  6. The roughest night was had by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), who not only finished third in her home state of Massachusetts but failed to win top place in a single state.

    I have seen the smoke from many of her campfires.

    1. Her villages burned, her men killed, her women defiled, her sacred land stolen.

      1. I’m sure she’ll be standing on the shoulder of a road somewhere, weeping because somebody littered.

        1. I hear Trump will occasionally let her raise the flag and lower it at the White House like you would throw a dog a bone.

          1. Petrified, but justified, are these Warren tears.

        2. So that was HER! I thought I noticed a resemblance.

      2. What is best in life?

    2. If Warren starts using Run to the Hills as a campaign song I will vote for her.

      Up the Irons!

      1. That would be awesome. And yeah, even I might vote for her.

      2. I’m in.

      3. +1

    3. She lost to Edward M Kennedy IX and Ken Kennedy LVI.

  7. The resounding win by No Preference/None of the Above in North Carolina’s Libertarian Party Presidential Primary…

    The inevitable Johnson/Weld correction.

    1. Nothing says “liberty” like a retred liberal Republican.

      1. Did you misspell “retarded”?

        1. The urban dictionary says “retred” is another word for “retard” but only the super cool use it. I thought John was going for retread like a tire.

          1. I was going for a “retred like a tire”. That metaphor is what fits. Both of them were worn out liberal republicans who were handmedowns to the LP.

          2. You never go full retred.

          3. I assumed “retired” as in hit in the head with a tire… again.

    2. Makes me wish we could require all ballots to list “none of the above” as a choice.

  8. Reminder… this was actually written at Reason yesterday.

    “Yglesias famously described Vox’s audience as “a graduate of or student at a selective college (which also describes the staff and our social peers)” and lamented that “if you assigned me the job of serving a less-educated audience [I’d] probably need to think about how to change things up.” He’s right;”

    While I understand the intention… there still seems to be a preference by reason to think of fellow reporters as smarter than they are. This comes across as condescending and quite frankly ignorant.

    1. Yglesias is so stupid that he admits that he is unable to follow to rules of grammar and spelling even when given the opportunity to edit his work. Rare is the person who can write letter perfect copy. Rarer still is the person who is unable to achieve even when given the opportunity to edit. Yglesias is just such a rare bird.

      You really can’t overstate how stupid most journalists are and particularly how stupid journalists under 40 are. They get paid to write and they can’t even do that well. Of course, they also have no specialized knowledge or expertise in anything or any marketable or useful skill. As a group, journalists are the least educated, least intelligent class of people in the country. The fact that the field is dominated by Ivy League graduates is the strongest evidence available of how far the Ivy League schools’ liberal arts’ majors have fallen.

      Journalists are, however, also profoundly dishonest. So, they have that going for them.

      1. As a group, journalists are the least educated, least intelligent class of people in the country.

        You obviously didn’t go to a government school.

        1. Journalists are worse than teachers.

            1. This jibes with a study I read years ago that of the majors offered at universities, education majors rank in the lowest group on the SATs and graduate students in education rank in the lowest group on the GRE.
              It also agrees with my personal experience after I got my engineering degree and was taking courses to get my certificate to teach physics and math at the secondary level. These were supposedly graduate level courses, and the people complained about having to read 15 pages a week. Never mind that a half-way competent bull-shitter didn’t need to read anything but the section headings and get an A in the course.
              And I include those who were going to be teaching HS science (as very few of them actually had scientific or technical degrees).
              Seriously, dumb as a box of rocks.

            2. I doubt those numbers, which put them as slightly higher than average IQ. I just don’t think they’re that high in the aggregate.

          1. I don’t know which group is the lesser educated and intelligent, but in my opinion journalists have a much greater discrepancy between their views of their intelligence and their actual intelligence.

            1. Becoming a public school teacher is an easier path to a middle class life than becoming a journalist. Since money talks, I think it is a good assumption that education attracts more intellectual talent than journalism.

              1. Not supported by the data though. Also, in my experience, people choosing the easier path are rarely loaded with intellectual talent.

                1. By the way, in case you missed it, that “Nope” is a link to a table (not the source, which I have seen but can’t find anymore) of degree vs. average IQ.

                2. Taking the easier path is the rational path. Both paths suck. Anyone with any brains or talent is going to do something else for a living. But if you are in that position, you are better off being a teacher than a journalist. That has to translate to more talent choosing teaching over all.

                  1. We will have to disagree on that point, but I’ll leave you with this: Remember a few years ago where some cop shop was sued for automatically disqualifying higher-IQ applicants? Their reasoning was something to the effect that higher-IQ cops would get bored with the job? You’re the lawyer, but IIRC the cops won that case.

                    Of course, I could be letting my massive distaste for teachers get in the way grokking your argument.

                    1. You hate teachers more than journalists and I hate journalists more than teachers. We both are probably guilty of confirmation bias to some degree.

    2. if you assigned me the job of serving a less-educated audience [I’d] probably need to think about how to change things up.

      The irony is that the hallmark of a genuinely educated and competent writer is precisely that they are able to explain complex ideas or difficult material so that less educated people can easily understand what they’re saying. The obsessive need to sound educated is usually the mark of someone who hasn’t mastered communicating and feels the need to deal with their own insecurities by puffing up their writing.

      1. You would think that a journalist would get paid to explain complex ideas in understandable prose. Ygliesies is paid to be a hack and repeat whatever party line he is told to repeat. Since he is an idiot, it never dawns on him that he might be expected to do anything else.

        1. Yglesias is not a journalist. he writes opinion pieces.

          1. True but the point applies just as well to opinion writers.

    3. “if you assigned me the job of serving a less-educated audience [I’d] probably need to think about how to change things up.”

      We desperately need more accurate terms.

      If you hold a college degree, you’re credentialed. You’re not educated until you actually know something.

    4. These are the type of people Michael Malice calls midwits.

  9. peanut-butter-infused rum daiquiri with banana liqueur

    I prefer Canadian Club on the rocks.

    1. I mean, you’re both degenerates.

    2. What a baby seal fears most.

      1. Ba-dum-tiss

      2. Rarely do I (or anyone else using the term) actually “LOL.” You got me with that one.

  10. Lefty Journalists angered by Fact Checkers at Facebook not blindly following their narrative. Applause actually needed for once from FB.

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/triggered-liberal-journos-finally-realize-facebook-fact-checking-can-be-used-against-them/

    1. Do they think Politico isn’t lying or are they just that willing to die on any hill no matter how stupid?

      1. They went with “Trump’s statements were somewhat vague, so here is the worst interpretation possible, ergo Politico was right.”

        1. There was nothing vague about them. So yeah, they will die on any hill no matter how stupid.

  11. I am instead
    Attempting to run
    For the Vice Presidential slot.

    Your resource usage can’t afford McAfee running in the background.

    1. Is it just me, or did this super Tuesday lead to the best one liners ever in this comments section?

  12. I have moderate hopes for this election cycle being peak-crazy entertaining. Between Sanders slurring support of despots, Biden’s confused ramblings and pugnacious attitude, and Trump’s knack for one liners and comedic timing.

    If I don’t like any of the candidates, might as well enjoy the circus.

    1. A one on one Biden Sanders debate would be the most epic trainwreck in American political history. Trump Sanders would be fun because Sanders is nuts and thin skinned. Trump would goad Sanders into some kind of crazy meltdown. I give it 50/50 that a Trump Sanders debate would result in Sanders going berserk and physically attacking Trump. Trump Biden would just be bizarre as Trump gives one liners and Biden struggles to figure out where he is.

      1. Either one of those debates would be professional wrestling level carny shows.

        The memes generated from the videos could possibly break the internet.

        1. Even though everyone was afraid to go after him, Sanders was seething in the Democratic debates. He does not handle being challenged well at all. If he ever gets on the stage with Trump, he will lose his shit.

          1. I mean the man’s engineered a political career around echo-chambers and not following through on shit. Are we shocked that the shouty old man who avoids anyone who disagrees with him is… well a cranky thin skinned old man?

  13. Garcia’s comments “confirm[ed] the suspicions of adult performers that AB2389 is a law enforcement bill disguised as a workers’ safety bill…”

    Long for the day Cali didn’t have to camouflage its law and order crackdown as something else.

  14. Gabbard (D–Hawaii) earned one delegate in American Samoa, which may at least be enough to get her on the last Democratic primary debate stage

    “We’ll get to you in just a minute, Congresswoman.”

  15. San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman wants to bring back bathhouses.

    Not in my backyard!

    1. That’s what Mrs. Fist said.

      1. Maybe on his birthday.

    2. I don’t understand. What does San Francisco have against bathing?

      (blinks)

  16. I vote for ENB to the National Honey Board.

    1. What are you going for here?
      I mean, who the fuck do you think you’re appealing to?
      Your posts are just desperate, dead space

      1. Yes, well, we can’t all aspire to the sophisticated soliloquies with which you enlighten our philistine monkey brains with every single one of your inspired comments.

        1. I like that your response is full of desperate, insecure effort.
          Characteristically played, eunuch

          1. Hey now, he used what he thinks are big words, which means it is enlightened sarcasm and well thought out.

            1. He tries so hard

  17. McAfee announced Wednesday that he was leaving the L.P. presidential race.

    Another casualty of Bernie’s Cuba comments?

    1. How does Bernie feel about Belize?

  18. Italy is closing all schools and colleges for two weeks to try to stop the spread of coronavirus in the country.

    The trains shall be delayed.

  19. One of our greatest journalists ever in Katy Tur is confused that a latino would vote differently than she expects them to.

    https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/03/03/watch-msnbcs-katy-tur-ventures-out-of-bubble-finds-out-all-latino-voters-do-not-think-alike/

    1. In a field of imbeciles, Tur’s imbecility manages to stand out. She is Ron Burgandy in a skirt.

      1. Her dad’s a mentally ill troon, it’s not like she has a solid genetic foundation to work from there.

        1. Wow. I just looked that up. The genes are not good.

    1. Biden might be the strangest person ever to run for President. Let that sink for a moment.

      1. “A strange man for a strange time.”

      2. “When the going gets weird the weird turn professional”

        Hunter S Thompson

  20. “Will the millennial aesthetic ever end?”

    Not if Ikea has anything to say about it.

    1. Ikea is slightly different I think? It’s less pink and motivational, more euro-sterile and minimalist.

      A lot of overlap, and it also makes sense to me, in general minimalism is the way to go with a cramped environment, helps prevent the feeling of clutter, and the millennial aesthetic is dominated by early-life urbanism.

      1. Ikea was around long before the millenials.

        1. As was minimalism.

          UnFun fact: Ikea (US) is a millennial, came over in 1985. The company as a whole though dates back to 1943, which actually pre-dates the minimalist art movement.

          1. Minimalist art is the best way to describe Ikea’s assembly instructions.

            1. This is one of the best commercials ever

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZxnJ9VXlhg

              It is funny because it is true.

  21. …most people calling for short-term speech controls almost always call for censorship that lines up exactly with their own political beliefs without considering the long-term downsides.

    I’m certainly not muzzling myself. Mine is the speech correct enough people need to hear it.

    1. Everyone who supports censorship assumes they will be the ones deciding what is censored.

      1. You two need to be muzzled and listen to your betters.

  22. I was rooting for certain strategies to lose–so Democrat candidates will be less likely to pursue them in the future. Judging where the Democrats are on that spectrum we might argue the following:

    1) 60% of Democrats abhor socialism.

    Bernie Sanders won about 40% of the vote in the Democratic primaries in 2016, and Bernie Sanders + Elizabeth Warren have won about 40% of the vote in the Democratic primaries in 2020.

    That might seem like a lot, but only about 30% of the country is registered Democrat, so 40% of 30% means about 12% of the country really likes socialism enough to see what it is, know what it is, and vote for it anyway. Mind you, Democrat voters may not be able to define it the way I do, but when they see someone who either calls himself a socialist or someone who says she wants the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, to ban fracking the day she’s elected, etc., they get about 40% of Democrats to vote for them from state to state. And that percentage holds up over the course of two election cycles.

    If you want the support of 12% of the American electorate, you should definitely call yourself a socialist or advocate those policies–just understand that 60% of the people who vote in Democrat primaries will vote against you. I’d mention all the Republicans and independents who will vote against you in the general election, but why bother since you can’t win the nomination as a socialist?

    2) The only thing Democrats abhor more than socialism is social justice warriors.

    The person waving the banner for social justice in this election was Elizabeth Warren. She led the social justice charge by going after Bernie Sanders for claiming that a woman can’t win a presidential election. Warren went after Bloomberg for the racism of stop and frisk, she went after him for sexual harassment, and she went afer Bloomberg for thought crimes against LGBTQI+ for calling women. “horse-faced lesbians”. Apart from being the socialist-lite alternative to Bernie Sanders, her social justice attacks were her distinguishing feature.

    Warren was so unpopular on Super Tuesday, she came in third in her home state of Massachusetts. She’s toast.

    The statistic to glean from that: Only about 10% of the people who show up to vote in the Democratic primaries (who are the more partisan than others, mind you) care enough about social justice issues to actually show up to the primaries and vote for a social justice nominee. Again, about 30% of the American people are registered Democrats, so that means 3% of the American people see social justice issues as the biggest factor driving their votes.

    You probably need the support of black voters to win the nomination in the Democratic Party, but if GenX and older women don’t care enough to show up and vote for Warren, who’s she targeting with her sales pitch? The correct answer is about 3% of the American people, who seem to be able to make themselves seem like a much larger chunk of American society than they are, probably because they dominate news media, Hollywood, and social media platforms. In reality, they are a non-entity.

    1. You need the support of black voters to win the nomination. Hard core socialism and losing your shit every day on Twitter about how much you hate Trump is what white people like. If Biden wins the nomination, it will be because all of the preferred candidates of the gentry white left bombed with black voters and Biden because of his association with Obama didn’t. The complete inability of candidates beloved by the gentry left like Warren and Sanders to garner any black support in Democratic primaries is indicative of a serious split in the party.

      1. “If Biden wins the nomination, it will be because all of the preferred candidates of the gentry white left bombed with black voters and Biden because of his association with Obama didn’t.”

        If Bernie Sanders or Liz Warren had been able to sell themselves as the pro-black alternative, Sanders would have won–but only because Bloomberg was absolutely excoriated for stop and frisk.

        Entering that debate ahead of Nevada was a terrible idea for Bloomberg because Nevada was the first contest where Black Votes Mattered, and he was the perfect punching bag for the rest o the field on that issue.

        Before Barack Obama, no Democrat had won the presidency without a Southerner on the ticket going back decades, and I think Obama was something of an honorary Southerner for his ability to get out the black vote as the first black nominee and president. Obama won Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida in 2008.

        There may be a corollary to that dynamic in the Democrat primary, too. Certainly, if you’re a socialist from Vermont or an ex-Mayor from New York City, you better have more support among blacks in the South than Bernie Sanders or Mayor Bloomberg had.

        The reason for that statistic for president may be because issues that make you popular in Vermont (like the Green New Deal) don’t mean much to blacks in the South and issues that make you a popular mayor in New York City, like being fully supportive of the public service unions behind New York’s Finest, make you unpopular in the South, where harsh discrimination by the police isn’t a distant memory.

        1. you miss the point Ken. They couldn’t sell themselves as preferred black alternatives because what appeals to gentry whites isn’t what appeals and motivates black voters. And that is a big problem for Democrats going forward.

          1. I’m agreeing with you–especially if by “gentry whites”, you mean Vermont liberals whose primary concern is climate change and liberal New Yorkers who supported Bloomberg because he supported the police union driven political machine that runs New York City.

            Climate change may not be near the top of the list of issues that resonate with black voters in the South, and support for police unions and stop and frisk in New York City is a huge turn off for black voters–no matter what the “white gentry” of NYC thinks about it.

        2. Obama was something of an honorary Southerner
          Kenya is pretty far south.

          1. somewhat special to be conceived on the bridge to Selma during a demonstration

    2. I personally prefer to go for the support of one to 3% of the electorate by espousing libertarian principles

      1. If and when I pitch Libertarian candidates, my intent is not to win an election and inflict libertarianism on the American people over their objections and against their will.

        My intention is to persuade people to think about the issues in libertarian terms. When we persuade enough of our fellow Americans to think about the issues in libertarian terms, the politicians we already have will fall all over themselves to become more libertarian than each other.

        That’s the way the world works.

        1) Cart.
        2) Horse.

        1. There’s some truth to this. We consistently see that the Overton window is moving left due to politicians like Bernie Sanders, even when he doesn’t win anything or when he does when he doesn’t do anything with the victory. We didn’t have actual Communists get this far in the process 20 years ago, we do now and it’s because the far left has been beating that drum relentlessly and it’s making incremental progress for them.

          There’s no reason the same can’t happen with libertarian ideas. We don’t currently have any mainstream politicians who even mention personal liberty in their campaigns, that’s how far away we are. Of course we’re not getting a real libertarian elected in 2020, but if we could get mainstream politicians to at least start talking about liberty we could start chipping away, just as the far left has over the last few decades.

          1. I don’t think the LP is trying to advance libertarianism

            1. I don’t think they are either, I’m replying to Ken about when he’s preaching libertarian principles.

              The party is useless, that doesn’t mean that actual libertarians can’t try to make incremental progress.

          2. “We don’t currently have any mainstream politicians who even mention personal liberty in their campaigns”

            It’s a shame if libertarian voices in the news media fumble the ball when President Trump negotiates a deal to get us out of Afghanistan or meets with Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul to discuss stripping the FISA courts of their authority over American citizens.

            YUGE opportunities to discuss issues in libertarian terms.

          3. //There’s no reason the same can’t happen with libertarian ideas.//

            The reason it cannot happen is because “libertarian” ideas are a melting pot of open borders (thus pissing off the right), extreme personal responsibility (thus pissing off the left), and “free market” ideological rigidity (at odds with reality).

            The only thing libertarians ever had to offer the broader American electorate was drug legalization. Well, as it turns out, one can have any number views on the proper scope of government (ranging from all totalitarian to completely anarchic) and still smoke weed without any apparent conflict.

            1. +100 All great and true points. The problem for Libertarians is that if you are a leftist is likes the open borders message, you can have that and your leftist economics by voting Democrat. If you are on the right and like the economic message, you can have that and reject open borders by voting Republican. So what does the LP offer? A niche product for those people who hate taxes but love pot and cheap Mexican labor. Their appeal is selective to put it mildly.

              1. One sometimes gets the sense that libertarian politics appeal primarily to extremely wealthy business owners seeking to maximize profits by minimizing labor costs and then celebrating their quarterly earnings at the end of the day with a big, fat blunt.

            2. If someone is doing it badly, that doesn’t mean it can’t be done well.

              Reason has done a great job in that past. Many of us can still remember it.

              1. It isn’t about doing it well, or badly. The presentation is not the problem. The problem is that libertarian ideas are incoherent and impractical, on top of being unpopular. You can only sell so many pet rocks before people start to realize they’re being sold worthless crap with nice packaging.

                The other problem is that libertarians are married to their inertia and, therefore, act as shoehorns for squeezing leftist delusion into American society. Why? Because libertarians are very comfortable with not doing anything. Border enforcement? Nah, that requires government. Clamping down on an ever expansive welfare state? Nah, that requires convincing people to give up things they like. Libertarians don’t want government solutions, but they are also loathe to propose any solutions that would make sense at the individual level.

                “I want clean streets. But, I don’t want government cleaning up the dog shit. But … I’m not cleaning it up; and, frankly, my neighbors shouldn’t have to either.”

                The above encapsulates what I believe your average libertarian tends to be. A man with principles comfortable with living on top of a big pile of shit.

                1. “The problem is that libertarian ideas are incoherent and impractical, on top of being unpopular.”

                  you know what’s incoherent and impractical?

                  ObamaCare.

                  Also, eliminating the use of carbon based energy in ten years.

                  Medicare for All.

                  Forgiving trillions in student loans.

                  That’s impractical.

                  You know what’s impractical?

                  The occupation of Iraq–until they turn into a U.S. style democracy with liberty and justice for all.

                  The Drug War. That’s impractical.

                  Yeah, I remember when libertarian ideas like marijuana legalization and gay marriage were impractical, too. So was bringing down the Berlin Wall. So was having a trade relationship with China.

                  You use that word “impractical”, but I’m not sure you know what it means. Suffice it to say that changing people’s minds is not impractical, especially when the libertarian and capitalist policies in question are steeped in reason.

                  P.S. “Incoherent” is another funny term. It’s okay if 330 million Americans oppose socialism and support capitalism for different conflicting reasons. Again, the solution isn’t to get everyone unified behind a single candidate and win an election. The solution is to persuade people to oppose socialism and support capitalism. The solution is to persuade the American people to oppose government coercion and support liberty, and it’s perfectly alright if they do so for myriad different and conflicting reasons.

                  1. Well, you listed a bunch of impractical, stupid policy decisions as though, somehow, the existence of bad policies justifies a plethora of pie-in-the-sky libertarian positions that are just as bad, if not worse, in practice.

                    But, you made sure to really put “marijuana legalization” on the pedestal it so richly deserves, obviously. As I said above, apart from making the world a safer place to smoke weed, libertarian ideas have yield little else.

                    For me, personally, that’s not enough. Even socialists like smoking weed.

                    1. Marijuana legalization isn’t the only libertarian idea I listed. Seems like maybe it’s just the only libertarian idea you like–and something doesn’t become practical or not just because you happen to like or dislike it.

                      Opposing impractical ideas like The Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and free college for everyone retroactively isn’t impractical.

                      Opposing the occupation of Iraq until they become as American as apple pie or hell freezes over isn’t impractical either.

                      Supporting trade with China isn’t impractical.

                      Regardless of whether you dislike any or all of these ideas, they’re as practical or impractical as they are anyway. Generally speaking, when the government interferes in markets, the results are almost always impractical–regardless of whether I like or you don’t.

                2. Burn that strawman!

            3. P.S. Don’t forget your part.

              You friends and family. Start with them.

              Getting them to address your concerns about the issues in libertarian terms makes them think about the issues in libertarian terms.

              1. I’ll convince my elderly parents to stop depositing their social security checks because they should have saved more earlier in life despite being forced to pay into the system against their will. It is the principled thing for them to do.

                Or, not.

                The efficacy of libertarian “solutions” is limited by an individual’s willingness to put themselves at risk as a test case. Nobody wants to be in a Mexican standoff with a libertarian on the sidelines yelling at them to lower their gun first.

                “Well, what about the other people with guns?”

                “Um …. well …. how about …. principles?”

                “Fuck off.”

                1. Why would you tell them to stop depositing money from a system they paid into?

                  1. Because principles.

                    1. “I’ll convince my elderly parents to stop depositing their social security checks because they should have saved more earlier in life despite being forced to pay into the system against their will. It is the principled thing for them to do.”

                      I’m not an Objectivist, but Ayn Rand cashed every single one of her social security checks.

                      There isn’t anything principled about accepting back a little of the money the government stole. If anybody steals money from you, you should be glad to get some of it back. The principle you’re talking about only exists in your mind.

                    2. “There isn’t anything [un]principled about . . . ”

                      —-Ken Shultz

                      Fixed!

          4. There’s no reason the same can’t happen with libertarian ideas.

            I’d bet money that you’re wrong about this. People don’t want what you think they should want and telling them what they should want isn’t going to change that. Progressives are winning because they’re offering what people do want, safety from everything and free stuff.

            1. I don’t know that progressives are “winning”. Otherwise, your first two sentences are spot on.

              1. The progressives are certainly beating out the libertarians.

              2. If the progressives weren’t winning something, the conservatives wouldn’t be trying so hard to be like them. They may not be holding the majority of political offices, but they’re certainly holding the majority of enough other culture war platforms that it’s seriously pissing off non-progressives.

  23. “peanut-butter-infused rum daiquiri with banana liqueur”

    I can’t actually imagine a more Suderman drink than that.

    1. Him and Megan sipping their peanutbutter banana daiquiris discussing the need to vote for Sanders to keep the deplorables at bay with the Baileys.

      1. But what would Welch, Shikha, Binion, Boehm, Gillespie, ENB, KMW, Stossel and Robby get hammered on?
        My thoughts on a few:
        Gillespie – Something that was hip in the 90’s. Maybe Rickard’s Red.
        Welch – Apple juice and sprite but pretend it’s a beer. Gets drunk anyway and tries to fight the smallest guy in the bar.
        Stossel – Scotch and soda.
        Shikha – The blood of the workers.
        Robby – Pink Raspberry Cosmopolitans.

        1. I see Robby as a Rose guy who doesn’t understand why everyone sniggers every time he orders it.

          1. Robby’s definitely an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink drinker – how complicated can I make this drink before the bartender spits in it? He’s incapable of making a simple decision, he sees 12 sides of every question (to be sure) and worries that he might be missing something if he doesn’t throw everything he can in there. I don’t know what he’s drinking, but it’s got five kinds of liquor, it’s served in a hollowed-out cantaloupe, it’s got some kind of frozen fruit balls and something not normally considered edible in it, and it’s got at least 8 garnishes including a live parrot and something that requires batteries.

            1. Oh yeah, and the barmaids all gather together, clapping rhythmically, carry sparklers and singing a song when they bring him the drink. They don’t want to do it, they’re not required to do it, they’ve never done it before, but it just somehow spontaneously happens. It’s that sort of drink.

              1. Robby would be anointed king at a TGI Friday’s bash.

            2. That might be the best post ever put on Hit and Run. Bravo Jerry Bravo.

              1. This whole thread is gold.

              2. Jerry’s been on a roll this week.

  24. BREAKING: Bloomberg suspends presidential campaign, endorses Biden.

    He came up short.

    1. “I’ve always believed that defeating Donald Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. … I’ve known Joe for a very long time. I know his decency, his honesty, and his commitment to the issues that are so important to our country – including gun safety

      Emphases added. He comes up short on phrasing, too.

    2. Tulsi now up to 4th!

  25. Bernie Bros don’t understand this and think they are getting robbed. The Dem convention gonna be Lit A.F.
    —-

    Bernie won Twitter. Biden won everybody else.

    In TX, NC, and TN, voters were asked, “Do you regularly use Twitter for political news?” Sanders won users by 6, 6, and 9 points, respectively. Biden won non-users by 5, 21, and 18.

    Only 12-15% of voters were users. So Bernie lost.

    1. They may not be getting robbed this time around, but it is going to be really easy to make the argument that pressuring the leading moderate candidates to get out of the way for Joe Biden to claim his Birthright was an establishment plot to prevent Bernie from winning.

      1. Pressuring the leading moderate candidates to get out of the way for Joe Biden to claim his Birthright was an establishment plot to prevent Bernie from winning.

    2. It will never dawn on the Bernie bros that Twitter purging everyone to the right of Lenin might have made it a bit less representative of the larger public.

      1. Social media finished the job Jon Stewart did in killing the Democratic party by creating an echo chamber where there is nothing human or salvageable about their political opponents, who deserve full time condescension and scorn.

        They can’t hear the rest of us, so they assume we can’t hear them.

        1. Well said. I’m stealing that last line.

  26. “Warren was so unpopular on Super Tuesday, she came in third in her home state of Massachusetts. She’s toast.”

    Is there anything more elitist than donating money to the Elizabeth Warren campaign, at this point, when the people of Massachusetts don’t even want her?

    Who cares what the people of Massachusetts or the American people wan? We want Elizabeth Warren anyway!

    Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren is pitching herself as the person who should be nominated in a contested convention (by the super-delegates) because she’s the best person to beat Donald Trump.

    To find something like the logic of Elizabeth Warren and her supporters, you might need to go all the way back to colonial times, when our governors served at the pleasure of King George III.

    This is the mentality we’re talking about when we talk about elitism, and this is the primary cause of populism.

    1. I recall the Republicans in 96 and again in 2012 being so bereft of ideas or so cowardly about the ideas they did have all they had to offer was the chance to vote against the incumbent. That didn’t work out so well. It never does.

    2. Warren’s disgusting attempt to try to smear Sanders as a sexist is going to go down as one of the biggest and most disastrous lead balloons in democratic primary history.

      After that, it dawned on even most people who were somewhat supportive of her that she’s such a pathological liar that you just can’t believe a word she says.

      1. If there’s a lesson here, it may be that average Democrats aren’t nearly as susceptible to the accusations of social justice warriors as is generally advertised. I remember Gloria Allred trotting out a small herd of women who claimed they were sexually assaulted by nominee Trump in 2016. Enough registered Democrats voted for Trump despite those accusations in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin anyway, that Trump became president.

        When the social justice accusations came out against Judge Kavanaugh, the media made it seem like their condemnation was just the tip of the iceberg, and everyone and anyone they accused was assumed to be another Harvey Weinstein by average Democrats everywhere–if not by the American people.

        I don’t believe average Democrats are that different from average people on things like unsubstantiated allegations. Average Democrats may be more likely to believe unsubstantiated allegations, despite their uncertainty, when the accusations are made by Democrats, but that doesn’t make them that much different from average Republicans.

        In other words, if the unsubstantiated allegations don’t make a difference when the choice is between two Democrats, then the difference when those unsubstantiated allegations are made against a Republican isn’t attributable to the unsubstantiated allegations. The difference is attributable to the allegations being made against someone from the other party.

        If Trump nominates another white man to the Supreme Court before November, it would be safe to assume that nominee will be accused of sexual improprieties by the left–and the media will make it seem like a really big social justice issue that will galvanize the left. It’s bullshit. It’s just social justice warriors in the media making things seem like a big deal. Because they’re the ones programming the news, what they think seems like a big deal–even if it only plays to 3% of the American people.

        1. If Trump nominates a justice before November it will be a woman or a minority to avoid exactly what you are talking about.

          1. I’m not sure whether that shit hurts him or helps him.

            Again, I don’t think Trump only won in 2016 despite the way the media covered him. I think he won, in part, because of the way they covered him.

            The other part of this is that the news media is the most widely reviled institution in our society. Their approval ratings are lower than Trump’s. They’re playing to that 3%, and plenty of people hate them for it–on both the right and the left.

            1. I think that the ridiculous behavior of the Democrats when it comes to nominees helps Trump. Prior to the Kavanaugh debacle, I was content with my decision not to vote for Trump in 2016.

              What they put that man and his family through was so brazen, and obvious, and wrong.

            2. That sounds like a market opportunity to me. I wonder why no one has launched a news organization not staffed & dominated by ideologues. A news organization that tries to report facts and tries to avoid publishing propaganda.

              1. I don’t want to bore people who seen me say this so many times before, but the fact is that plenty of media companies are valued for reasons other than the contribution they make to a company’s bottom line.

                Gates fronted the cash for MSNBC in the aftermath of the antitrust hearings against Microsoft. He was emulating his mentor, Warren Buffet, who bought up news and media properties to stave off criticism of his handling of various unions at the companies he ran. The reason Bezos bought the Washington Post wasn’t because he needs their contribution to his bottom line at Amazon. It’s to help insulate himself from criticism–both by other reporters in the news media as well as by politicians on the left who depend on the Washington Post for favorable coverage.

                MSNBC has news shows with fewer viewers than a mid-level ASMR channel on YouTube. The reason they can do that is because the value of these media properties isn’t just in their cash flow. It’s also a protection racket.

                1. If the losses incurred by owning a media company that’s bleeding money are lower than the risk of suffering another antitrust investigation, then owning a media company is turning a net profit–but it’s not the kind of profit that shows up on a balance sheet.

                  When I was young, I worked at a restaurant. The owner lived far away. His wife would come down to run the restaurant on the weekends, and she was such a holy terror, all the waitresses, the people working the wine bar, etc. were threatening to quit. The head manager called up the owner and explained the situation, then the owner told him the truth: The place was losing money. The only reason he kept the place open was to get his wife out of the house on the weekends. If she no longer came down to run the restaurant on the weekends, then there was no reason to keep the restaurant open–as far as he was concerned. Again, there was a lot of profit in that restaurant for the owner–even if he was losing money on the balance sheet.

                  The reason Bezos bought the Washington Post is presumably to help insulate himself from criticism for his efforts to pay his employees as little as possible and to thwart their unionization. If you’re a Democrat who cares about what the Washington Post says about you, you better keep your mouth shut about Amazon and Bezos. If you’re a reporter who someday might want to work for Amazon or the Washington Post, it might be a good idea to keep your mouth shut about Bezos and his employment practices, too.

                  How much is that worth to Bezos and Amazon?

        2. Here’s how I see it:

          SJWs: “Blah Blah sexual improprieties!”

          Republican: Bullshit, prove it.
          SJWs: Fuck, we forgot the proof thing.

          Al Franken: Ok, you may interpret a photo that way. I guess I’ll resign.
          SJWs: Fuck, we got one of our own.

  27. Creepy Joe Biden, Careless Whisper

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XqF4wA-dco

  28. Jacob Hornberger? Oh, I see he was the 70 years old white male candidate, libertarians don’t want to buck the trend

    1. He’s the only Libertarian on the ticket in my state.

  29. The American Advertising Council wishes to extend a heart-felt Thank You to both Tom Steyer and Ed Bloomberg!

    1. Mike “Ed” Bloomberg?

      1. Ooops.
        See what that half a billion bought?

      2. hell of an accountant.

    2. The big three networks will push off bankruptcy for another ten years thanks to those two clowns.

  30. After watching that McAfee video, I can’t imagine why anyone doesn’t take the Libertarian party seriously.

  31. Now that it appears that the original conventional wisdom was right all along and Sleepy Joe will in fact be the nominee, it’s going to be so awesome watching Trump absolutely destroy him.

    Once the rest of the country beyond the hard core political fanatics really starts paying close attention, it won’t take them very long to figure out that Sleepy Joe is already going senile and his mind at this point isn’t fit for even one term as president. The poor demented handsy old creep doesn’t have a chance.

    1. He’s getting worse too.
      Pressure of the campaign is too much.
      Not sure he’ll hold up to November.
      Not sure the DNC would mind him bowing out after the convention so they can slip someone in untarnished by a campaign, either

    2. Some Democrats try to deflect the issue of Joe’s senility by “whatabout” talking points where Trump said something nutty. The problem with that isn’t what Joe is saying so much as the way he’s saying it. Trump may come across as an asshole, but he’s an asshole who knows what he’s saying and just doesn’t care. Joe on the other hand comes across as an old dodderer who doesn’t know for sure what he’s saying or where he is.

  32. http://www.npr.org/2020/03/04/811729200/former-prisoner-recalls-sanders-saying-i-don-t-know-what-s-so-wrong-with-cuba

    An American who was being held in a Cuban prisoner met with Bernie while in prison and Sanders told him “I don’t know what’s so wrong with this country,”.

    I really want Bernie to win the nomination. I want to watch the Democrats and their toadies in the media like Mrs. Suderman have to publicly vote for this asshole. He is who they are and the candidate they deserve.

    1. From NPR, no less. Then again, they’re probably just working with the DNC to pave the way for the chosen one.

  33. Suderman’s tweet gives the appearance he lives in the Millennial Aesthetic article.

  34. “”Maybe Bernie Sanders Shouldn’t Have Doubled Down on Cuba the Week Before Super Tuesday””

    I have no problem with Bernie showing his true self during the election process.

  35. The people who think Bernie shot himself in the foot by saying nice things about Castro are probably the same ones who thought Trump shot himself in the foot when he slagged John McCain. He obviously wasn’t talking to you.

    “I was planning on voting for Bernie but then I heard him say something nice about communism so now I’m having second thoughts.” – Nobody Ever

    1. Yeah. It is who Bernie is. If Bernie didn’t like Castro, he wouldn’t be in the race at all.

    2. “”The people who think Bernie shot himself in the foot by saying nice things about Castro are probably the same ones who thought Trump shot himself in the foot when he slagged John McCain””.

      Apples and oranges?

      If Trump said something nice about white supremacists the left would say Trump was one of them because of the comment. So by the same philosophy, Bernie is a communist because of his comment.

      1. That’s kind of missing the point, though. Trump slagged on McCain because the people he wanted to appeal to with that already hated McCain’s guts, they were just looking for someone to say it publicly. It’s the same reason he bullied Jeb right out of the race–because the base didn’t want another Bush to act as a sacrificial lamb for Hillary, which is why the establishment Republicans and neocons were pimping him so hard.

        It’s the same thing with Bernie–he’s trying to appeal to the campus coffeehouse Marxists and radical left Chapos with those remarks, because they’re the exact same ones they use in daily conversation to defend 20th century communist dictatorships. He couldn’t have cared less what the neoliberal wing of the party thought.

    3. yes but a lot of middle-of-road democrats who would vote for Obama may not vote for Bernie after they learn more about his commie love.

      1. Which is ironic

  36. California legislators are making changes to a much criticized “sex worker permit” bill,

    Regulating sex is soooo unsexy.

  37. I think we can put to rest the notion that “telling it like it is” is a thing that wins votes. Sanders went down because he refused to cave to people who wanted Cuba to be the big bad enemy with no redeeming qualities. Instead, Sanders told it like it was and now arm-chair pundits are saying he was in the weeds and should have, well, should have made up pithy slogans and steered clear of nuanced arguments.

    Reince Priebus pontificated that voters went for “authenticity” yesterday and he lumped Trump in as authentic. Really? This is why we are where we are. Pundits do not like it when politicians go into the weeds and they equate reality-tv personas who are scamming people with BS and lies as “telling it like it is”.

    The bottom line, the media freaked out the last couple of weeks and we had a mountain of anti-Socialism articles thrown at us. Voters panicked and went back to the center, right where the investors in the mSM wanted us.

    1. “Sanders went down because he refused to cave to people who wanted Cuba to be the big bad enemy with no redeeming qualities.”

      Winning elections depends on winning marginal support, and if Sanders winning depended on the support of GenX and older, suburban white women in Texas, then he lost that by talking about the upsides of life in Cuba.

      P.S. The Cuban government has no redeeming qualities.

      1. exactly, on both points.

    2. “…Sanders went down because he refused to cave to people who wanted Cuba to be the big bad enemy with no redeeming qualities…”

      So we are to believe he went to prove to the world what a fucking idiot he is?

    3. Sanders didn’t tell it like it was. Cuba has one of the worst governments on earth that not only oppressed its own people but exported war, misery, and oppression all over Africa and Latin America. Bernie is a lying piece of shit.

      The bottom line, the media freaked out the last couple of weeks and we had a mountain of anti-Socialism articles thrown at us. Voters panicked and went back to the center, right where the investors in the mSM wanted us.

      Yeah because no one knew that socialism is the evilest most destructive ideology in history before the media told them about it. Why don’t you try reading a book written by someone other than Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky sometime?

    4. Suburban white women in Texas might invite Sanders to their dinner party because he’s against racism and they’re concerned about climate change. Misread that as an invitation to pick your nose at the table and extol the virtues of communism, and you’re not getting another invitation. That’s called “screwing the pooch”, and it simply isn’t done if you want to appeal to middle class, white women in the suburbs of places like Texas.

      That socialists need to sell their ideas to the people in a government set up like America’s is a great source of frustration to them, I know. That’s why they so often end up achieving power by violent means everywhere they go. That’s also why “democratic socialism”, like Venezuela’s, so often ends up trending towards authoritarianism. The socialists always run out of other people’s money, and because people like suburban white women in Texas won’t sacrifice their standard of living willingly, in the end, the socialists always have to rely on the coercive power of the state to achieve their goals. That’s why, whether they realize it or not, democratic socialists are America’s most horrible people.

    5. I’m so sorry they were mean to noted Truth Teller Commie man, and let Orange Man off the hook for being Bad yet again

    6. “”Sanders told it like it was “”

      Did he? No mention of censorship, authoritarian control, political prisoners and whatnot.

      I suppose you could have supported Mussolini because the trains were on time.

      1. You just don’t understand what socialism is.

        Public schools. That’s socialism.

        Why do you hate America?

        1. Wherever there is a boot on a face in the world, there is a Western progressive there to explain how the face has free education and healthcare.

          John Derbyshire gave us what is maybe the quote of the 21st Century there.

    7. Credulously repeating a totalitarian state’s propaganda only resembles “telling it like it is” to people with hydrocephalus.

      (What’s the Cuban literacy rate? Nobody fucking knows, because the Cuban government gathers the stats, and nobody in the chain of transmission will risk their life to tell the truth. It’s like Soviet economic stats; not only were the figures reported publicly fiction, so were the private figures the Politburo got from their minions.)

    8. Cuba’s political philosophy has resulted in 100+ million dead in the last century around the world. Their literacy program is pretty fucking small potatoes, dude.

      1. The true believers are terrifying. Someone told me yesterday “that’s a lame argument, capitalism has killed far more than communism”. The guy 100% believed that statement is true.

    9. I agree. Pol Pot’s literary policies are to be admired. Telling it like it is since 2019!

    10. Pure nonsense. Go away.

  38. California targets porn performers

    Goddamn Republicans!

    1. If you go to Las Vegas, there is an excellent BBQ place called Rolling Smoke BBQ.

      Like a lot of great BBQ places in Los Angeles, this one is in the middle of an industrial/warehouse district. These places rose up to cater to warehouse workers and truckers with great food and cheap rent at all hours. The thing is that when they’re zoning for adult industry uses, not just in the Las Vegas and Los Angeles, but all over the country, they typically confined adult entertainment businesses to warehouse districts, too. That’s definitely what they did there.

      The thing is that the area around Rolling Smoke BBQ has become so inundated with companies that are catering to the adult entertainment industry, people who are fleeing regulation in California, the San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles County especially, that all of the warehouse and industrial buildings that surround Rolling Smoke have been bought up and converted for the use of the adult entertainment industry.

      It’s not just warehouse that have been converted into studios. They have hospitals and surgery centers there that exclusively cater to strippers, adult film stars, and other women for cosmetic surgery. They have warehouses that have been converted to places that sell lingerie for use in the adult entertainment industry. They have exclusive gyms that men aren’t allowed to enter and with heavy security–so that the women who work in the industry, there, strippers, for instance, can work out without being bothered by guys that follow them.

      As an industrial development guy, I wish I’d seen that coming. With the infrastructure they’ve build around those places and the constant stream of visitors to one of the busiest airports in the country, I don’t think California will ever be able to get that business back. They’ve created like an adult entertainment Silicon Valley in Las Vegas, and on top of everything else, Nevada doesn’t have an income tax!

      It’s not that California and LA County are likely to chase the pornography industry out of the state with their regulation. It’s that it’s already happened and is already happening.

      1. I believe that started right after the condom law was passed.

  39. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) earned one delegate in American Samoa, which may at least be enough to get her on the last Democratic primary debate stage with Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders, and Warren. Gabbard did not take first place in any states.

    Tulsi! Tulsi! Tulsi!

  40. In international news that’s getting absolutely no attention whatsoever, in Israel Benjamin Netanyahu has just been re-elected yet again, for what feels like about the tenth time but probably isn’t quite that high.

    It’s kind of remarkable too, because Netanyahu is kind of the Israeli version of Trump. The Welchian/Brownian “mainstream” media almost universally despises him to the core, and yet all he does is keep winning, and winning, and winning some more.

    I guess it’s just more proof of the absurd disconnect that exists between the media and the full mass of actual normal human beings.

    1. Well, he got the most votes, but that’s not quite the same as winning.

      Same results, basically, as both the 2019 elections. Unless either Lieberman agrees to a coalition that includes the ultra-Orthodox, or Blue & White agrees to a coalition under Netanyahu (which didn’t happen after either 2019 election), all it means is there’s going to be a fourth.

  41. How much did the russians spend interfering in 2016 compared to Bloomberg in 2020? Does this finally put that controversy to rest?

    1. Our election process has meddling from New York autocrats!

    2. So citizens united was an invitation to let non americans pay to play as well? At least people are finally starting to admit it.

      1. Do you think it would be ok for a movie that put Trump in bad light should be prevented from release right before the election?

  42. Maybe Bernie Sanders Shouldn’t Have Doubled Down on Cuba the Week Before Super Tuesday

    SHUT UP BERNIE! Quit speaking your mind. Start acting like a politician and lie about what you really believe.

    1. Reason really does have a disconnect with the people they are trying to appeal to don’t they.

  43. The roughest night was had by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), who not only finished third in her home state of Massachusetts but failed to win top place in a single state.

    She, in fact, failed to place as high as second in any of the contests. Even Gabbard managed that much.

  44. most people calling for short-term speech controls almost always call for censorship that lines up exactly with their own political beliefs without considering the long-term downsides.

    Bleedin’ obvious. Did someone pay for this study? it’s like paying for a study to find out if men like to look at boobs.

    1. Has there ever been an example of someone calling for the censorship of ideas or art they liked or believed in? Ever in history? If there is such an example, I can’t think of it.

      1. One example that sort of fits might be in self-censoring in the early days of nuclear fission research because of the fear that it would be weaponized. Of course a lot of this research was happening in 1930’s central Europe, so you can imagine their reasoning.

        1. That is sort of fits. Reading your example makes me think that perhaps most people who argue for censorship wants something censored they themselves enjoy. People forever think they are the only ones who can handle something.

          1. You can argue that even in my example that Einstein, Szilard, etc had a selfish interest for keeping their work out of the public sphere. It just happened to also be very noble.

            Spoiler alert: they were exactly right to be concerned.

            1. Ain’t like admiring a nice rack is it? That is an act of creation, a wonder, the desire that brought each of us to this world.

              The physicists who brought the creative power and destructive ability of what they were finding.

              Oppenheimer had a famous quote. You know it. “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”. I am no scholar of Hindu philosophy. Some years later Oppenheimer said “the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”

              So have we all.

  45. I saw another “walls closing in!” article about the investigation into the Bidens and Burisma and Ukraine and people seem to think Joe might have his ass in a crack. Joe Biden insists he knew nothing about his son’s business, had no idea any of this stuff was going on, it never occurred to him to ask. And people seem to think that’s ludicrous – how could Joe not know what his son was up to? It’s like they don’t even know Joe.

    I, for one, completely and seriously believe that Joe Biden was right in the middle of this multi-million dollar corruption scandal and didn’t have the slightest clue it was going on. Joe Biden is like Forrest Gump’s dumber brother, he’s a perfect patsy because he not only doesn’t know he’s a patsy, he doesn’t even know what a patsy is. Joe’s cokehead whore-mongering two-bit grifter of a failed loser son with the morals of a marmoset in heat and half the intelligence managed to run intellectual rings around his old man – how dumb do you think that makes Joe? What has Joe ever said or done that makes you think he’s not still delightfully amazed by the “got your nose” trick? When Joe tells you he honestly didn’t know, regardless of what you’re discussing, you can believe him.

    1. He might’ve known at the time, but if he did he’s long since forgotten about it.

      At this point we could probably sit him down in a bingo hall that looked like the Oval Office, tell him he won, and all get on with our lives.

    2. The problem with all of that is that the DOJ and the Senate (and, of course, the Dem-controlled House) have absolutely zero interest in investigating any of it.

      Barr’s effectively put the kibosh on investigations into political candidates (don’t expect anything out of John Durham’s investigation besides another report), and Lindsey Graham has been lying about using Senate Judiciary to investigate Hunter Biden for months. He’s done zero work to get that investigation started…he keeps claiming he will just to keep the press off his back, but he’s very much buddies with Biden and doesn’t want to see his old running buddy swing.

    3. This makes a lot of sense.

  46. “San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman wants to bring back bathhouses.”

    So.
    Much.
    Poop.

  47. Thanks for sharing, Reason really does have a disconnect with the people they are trying to appeal to don’t they.https://www.indiannetbanking.com/csb-net-banking/

  48. The night also cast doubt on the idea that Sanders is better at motivating voter turnout than Biden.

    No it didn’t. Most of the people voting for Biden were doing so because they don’t want the unrepentant communist to win. Sanders very much motivated them to come out and vote…for a guy who is so clearly senile that it’s amazing he’s able to form even sentence fragments at this point.

    That may not be the kind of motivation Sanders was aiming for…but it is definitely motivation driven by Sanders.

  49. I would actually like to visit Cuba. From what I hear it is actually very nice. Good beaches, rum, cigars, good food, low prices, pretty scenery walking by.

    I really don’t know why we have this travel ban and embargo. The Cold War is over and you can go to other communist countries like Vietnam, another one on my bucket list.

    1. All that is fine, but the big issue is that you would be staying at a Cuban hotel, run of course by the Cuban government. Those are not so nice. PJ O’Rourke described one in “Eat the Rich,” and the money quote was along the lines of: “The next time some waiter in Paris is being obnoxious and arrogant to you, you can delight in the fact that this is the kind of place they have to go to on vacation.”

  50. Our agents earn around 12k Buck a month… Join them… and start working from comfort of your home! All you need is a computer and a internet connection and you are ready to start. Learn how to make a steady income for yourself on following web adress…
    Click Here

  51. May be Sanders should rent “a pair” and go after Biden. Biden is a corrupt sack of sheet, he even brags on tape.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.