Monday, February 26, 2024

Bolstering Bolsonaro


Friends, I don't know if you've been following the absurd, anti-democratic persecution of Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's former president, and indeed many other members of the opposition, by the socialist government of "Lula", the country's new (and also old) gangster-president, but you should be.  It's providing a road map for how to undermine democratic institutions in the name of "democracy" that so-called progressives in this country will be sorely tempted to follow.  The key difference is that, in Brazil, the Left controls the (very assertive, even dictatorial) courts, whereas in the U.S. there is still, for now, a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, and Democrats, for now, obey the high court's rulings.  In any case, perhaps the only card that freedom-loving Brazilians have left to play is mass action.  Possibly, the current rulers of Brazil will hesitate to stifle an opposition that is clearly popular.  Possibly, they would be afraid to trample the people of Brazil and their rights openly and brazenly.  And, in the end, we may come to a similar pass in the United States as well.  How to counter leftist "lawfare" against conservatives and dissidents?  Massive public rallies, like the one we saw in Brazil this past weekend, would go a long way.  So far we haven't seen any big demonstrations in defense of Trump or other victims of lawfare.  Maybe we should, and maybe we must.


And this article poses a most intriguing question: could Tulsi Gabbard, former Democrat, become Donald Trump's running mate in '24?  The author makes a strong case for Tulsi, and she may even be angling for consideration.  Personally, though, I consider it unlikely, because, above all, I suspect Trump will be looking for someone predictable and loyal.  Tulsi has shown great independence and courage in the past, which is to her credit in many ways, but those qualities don't necessarily recommend her as a running mate.

Thursday, February 22, 2024

Let's Party Like It's 1972!


Friends, no American craft has made a soft landing on the Moon since 1972.  Sad, isn't it?  Well, today we broke the spell and "Odysseus" parked itself near the lunar south pole.  Tellingly, it wasn't NASA, primarily, that despatched Odysseus.  It was a private company: "Intuitive Machines".  Let's hope this means that free enterprise will pick up where the U.S. government left off, because NASA's performance in space exploration has been sub-par for a long time.  I want a summer home on Mars, darn it!  And I strongly suspect that Elon Musk will deliver it to me way sooner than Joe Biden will.


In other news, there's an emerging trend in elite higher ed: standardized test requirements, which were abandoned during the pandemic, are being reinstated!  This is a small miracle, because wokeness dictates that objective measures of "merit" are part and parcel of "system racism".  But don't worry: Ivy League institutions will still be gaming the system, either overtly or covertly, to ensure that their demographic and ideological goals are met. 

Finally, this article argues that recent judgements against Donald Trump in New York, and Elon Musk in Delaware, are based on judicial animus towards these brazen dissidents against orthodoxy.  No kidding.  What's interesting is that the co-author of the piece is none other than Jeb Bush -- he who was defenestrated by DJT back in 2016!  If Democratic lawfare is scandalizing even members of the Bush family, you know the Left has gone too far...

Wednesday, February 21, 2024

Death By A Thousand Cuts (They Hope)


Friends, lefties are loving every minute of the Trump trials, and those multimillion dollar judgements against him are like candy to them.  Be that as it may, there's little or no evidence that thus far any of the cases have achieved their primary, essentially political, objective: to damage Trump as a candidate for the presidency.  Oh, he was already damaged and widely unpopular, but his favorables and unfavorables have barely budged overall -- and, given Biden's struggles, Trump is still in a very strong position to win in November.  The presence of so many candidates in the race makes his job even easier.

On this week's Newsmaker Show, Brian and I discuss Trump's travails, as well as the significance of the death of Alexei Navalny in a Russian prison, Democratic efforts to capture control of the redistricting process via the courts, how Republicans and conservatives are increasingly assuming the role of persecuted dissidents in America, Nate Silver's surging anxiety about Biden's electoral prospects, the future of the No Labels movement and the question of why Americans refuse to vote for third party candidates, Nikki Haley's defiant tone about staying in the race, the outrageousness of the phony "fraud" case against Trump in NYS, and the prospects for Joe Sempolinski as a potential candidate for the New York State Assembly.

From the Southern Tier of Western New York to the frozen wastelands of Siberia, we here at WaddyIsRight bring you the world!  And at no cost to you, I might add -- what a deal!




In other news, the New York Times is reveling in Democrats' crafitness in using state courts to advance their leftist agenda, and indeed the Dems have captured control of many critical purple state Supreme Courts.  The Times didn't mention that the first priority of many of these state-level judges is redrawing legislative and Congressional district boundaries so that Democrats can win the maximum number of seats.  As usual, the Dems are outperforming Republicans strategically and tactically, and we would do well to remember that, because of "judicial review", i.e. judicial supremacy, ultimately he who controls the courts controls everything.


Finally, among Republicans, apparently Ron DeSantis is the top choice to be Donald Trump's running mate.  Now, whether DeSantis is Trump's top choice is another matter.  I personally would love to see an alliance between these two men, first and foremost because it would put DeSantis at the head of the line of succession.  Right now, it's very unclear who will, or could, seize the Trumpian mantle after DJT himself goes to MAGA heaven.

Tuesday, February 20, 2024

The Silver Bullet?


Friends, I highly recommend to you this article by Nate Silver, who is an election guru highly respected by leftists.  He studies polls and election trends like the nerd he is, and his evolving view of the 2024 presidential contest is most interesting.  Basically, what he's claiming is that Joe Biden is losing, and he's very likely to lose in November unless he can dramatically improve Americans' perceptions of his energy level, dynamism, and competence.  As Silver points out, he's avoiding unscripted public appearances like the plague, which doesn't suggest that Silver's challenge is likely to be met.  Ergo, what Silver is really saying is that...Biden has got to go, and leading Dems need to approach him and convince him to pack it up.  The question, of course, is whether any "leading Dems" have the courage to tell Biden this to his face.  So far, they have not.


New York State, once known as the "Empire State", and now known as the state that was formerly an empire, but is now a smoking ruin, has lost another business.  No, I'm not talking about Trump, Inc.  I'm talking about gun manufacturer Remington.  Do the people of New York care?  Well, no doubt some of them do, but the truth is that the majority of voters in deep blue cities and states will gladly watch whole industries go down the tubes, along with their demographic standing, as long as Republicans and conservatives in general, and Donald Trump specifically, are screwed in the process.  It's asinine, yes, and, increasingly, it's the American way. 

Nikki Haley, in case you haven't noticed, is growing more and more critical in her comments about Donald Trump, and she's growing more and more defiant when asked why she isn't dropping out of the race.  It looks like Haley is determined to "go the distance", and it's somewhat baffling why.  My guess is that Haley thinks the GOP will totally reinvent itself once the bad dream that is the Trump era, from her perspective, ends.  In the meantime, she's enjoying the plaudits of the GOP establishment and the media, so why not carry on?


Finally, did you know that there's one acre of sacred ground in the U.K. that actually belongs to the United States of America?  Consider it a beachhead of sorts if we ever decide to conquer our erstwhile "mother country"...  The story behind it is most intriguing. 

Monday, February 19, 2024

Not Dead Yet


Friends, it's part of the human condition, alas, that we'll all die eventually -- especially you -- but the "No Labels" movement is at pains to prove to us that, despite Joe Manchin's decision not to run for president, they still have options and may yet find someone to loft their banner in 2024.  I hope they do, because my philosophy of American democracy is: "The more, the merrier!"  Who knows -- it's conceivable that a third party or independent candidate could win.  It's far more conceivable that electoral confusion will pave the way for a second term for Trump, and/or it may delay our country's seemingly inevitable slide into leftist dictatorship.  Who will No Labels seize upon as their presidential candidate?  I'd like to suggest Liz Cheney.  She's ever so "moderate", she loves loves loves our Constitution, and no one could accuse her of carrying water for Donald Trump (except back when that's all she did).  Sure, her presence in the race would make it even easier for Trump to win, but luckily she's delusional and probably won't notice.  Cheney-Kristol '24, that's the ticket!!!


In other news, the tone of this MSNBC article about Biden's extraordinary oldness is most interesting.  It repeats the soothing refrains from many Democratic insiders, to the effect that Biden is ever so sharp -- why, he probably holds the world's record for all-time sharpest knife in the drawer -- and accusations to the contrary are all Russian misinformation.  On the other hand, the authors are surprisingly realistic and even acidic when it comes to Biden's limitations, even entertaining the idea that pure "ego" is keeping him in the race.  This suggests to me that some Dems and lifelong leftists are nearing the end of their tether...but to what effect??? 

Saturday, February 17, 2024

A Blue Dog Is A Sad Dog


Friends, my latest article reflects on the pathetic, abortive presidential pretensions of West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, and more fundamentally on the strange, stubborn refusal of American voters to consider any choice other than a Democrat or a Republican (both of which they despise).  What a country, huh?

No Labels=No Hope for Victory...Or Does It?

Friday brought crushing news for allegedly conservative Democrats hiding out in the hills of West Virginia – a paltry demographic that may, at this stage, include only one person: Senator Joe Manchin. Manchin announced that he will not be running for president in 2024, as the “No Labels” candidate or in any way, shape, or form. Since even the people of West Virginia have been flagging in their enthusiasm for the last of the Blue Dog Democrats, this is no great loss, but it does raise the question: in this year in which the large majority of Americans express disgust with the presumptive presidential candidates of the two major parties, why couldn't a third party or independent candidate break through and win it all?

One is tempted to answer: because it's never been done, and indeed the Democratic and Republican parties have maintained a stranglehold on Congress and the presidency since the 1850s. This is puzzling, because few democracies, no matter how they are structured, have maintained stable two-party systems for so long. And yet, in America, the two parties enjoy so many advantages, in terms of perceived legitimacy, preferential access to the ballot, media exposure, fundraising, and the like that it often seems that the task of building a new party that could compete at the highest level is a fool's errand.

On the other hand, the fact that something is unprecedented does not mean that it is impossible. Few imagined that an actor could become president before Ronald Reagan made it happen in 1980, or that a brash real estate baron turned game show host could win the highest office in the land, but Trump proved definitively that it could be done in 2016.

In point of fact, we live in a time when robust levels of public cynicism (and poor knowledge of history and current events) make the violation and overturning of norms fairly easy. Witness the fact that impeachments at the federal level, which used to be extremely rare, are now almost yearly events, and are expected political maneuvers. Likewise, while it was once virtually inconceivable that a former president would face criminal charges, now President Trump is wrestling with 91 felony charges all at once! It would seem that, nowadays, when we decide to break with convention, we go all out.

Be this as it may, the biggest argument against a third party or independent run for the presidency has always been: why would anyone vote for such a candidate when they would have no chance of winning? Why “throw away” your vote? That is to say, Americans perceive third party and independent bids as futile, and they do not enjoy voting for candidates destined to lose – except, apparently, when voting for Democrats in a red state, or Republicans in a blue one, which they do all the time!

When one considers that a single voter, casting a single vote, has, statistically speaking, essentially zero leverage over the selection of the next president, the popular concern with a candidate's viability makes little rational sense, but it is, nonetheless, an important psychological factor that any ambitious third party or independent candidate would have to overcome. Either he/she would need to convince the American people that voting for a “protest” candidate – that is, a loser – was a respectable and principled thing to do, or he/she would need to convince voters that this time, unlike every other time, the third party or independent candidate could win the big prize. Changing such ingrained perceptions about American politics would be no easy task.

If we look at the polls, we see that, currently, when Americans are prompted to choose between Biden, Trump, Kennedy, Stein, and West – the declared candidates for president – they give, on average, only 13% of their support to Kennedy, and 2% each to Stein and West. Those are historically high numbers, when one considers the long-standing dominance of the two major parties, but they are nowhere close to winning numbers, so there is, as yet, little statistical evidence to support the idea that a partisan sea change is upon us, and the next president is likely to be neither a Democrat nor a Republican.

Probably the biggest hurdle that a third party or independent candidate faces is the fact that, absent a political vacuum that needs filling, new political constellations are speculative, at best. To put it another way, unless one of the two major parties collapses, it is hard to see why a new party, or a new political movement, would, could, or should arise to take its place, or to assume an important and permanent role in American politics.

We know that in 2020 Joe Biden and Donald Trump received, respectively, the most and the second most votes that any presidential candidate in U.S. history has ever gotten – and that in 2020 we notched the best turnout rate since at least 1960. While the public does not seem to hold either Biden or Trump in especially high regard, the ability of their respective party apparatuses to turn out massive numbers of voters on their behalf is not in doubt – and, in fact, seems to be improving with every comparable election cycle. The Democratic and Republican parties, in other words, are alive and well – and can afford to sneer, for now, at those candidates, parties, and movements that dare to challenge their dominion.

And so we confront the essential, inexplicable contradiction that looms over our country's political life: never have the parties themselves, the presidential candidates who they select, and the key institutions of our constitutional system in general, been less popular and esteemed by the voters – but, at the same time, never have those same voters been more willing to turn out to vote in huge numbers for the major parties and their candidates, and to write checks and to otherwise signal their loyalty and devotion to these immensely flawed and in many ways outmoded organizations.

If, as they say, “insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” then what level of madness is America's current political modus operandi: we do the same thing over and over again, expecting bad results, but hoping that, if we keep at it, we'll at least avoid something even worse. You would think that this strange species of political fatalism might be conquerable by the right kind of third party or independent candidate, no? No, apparently not. Or maybe yes. But probably no.

All we can say for sure is that Joe Manchin will not be the man to save us from ourselves.

Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: He appears on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480/106.9.

Friday, February 16, 2024



Friends, the frequency with which House Democrats impeached Donald Trump, and the fact that House Republicans have now impeached DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on somewhat speculative grounds, increases the danger that impeachment will be wielded casually in the future as a political cudgel -- and that the process and status of impeachment will become cheapened as a result.  In fact, I would say it's not just a "danger".  It's an inevitability.  And I do say it, and so much more, on this week's Newsmaker Show.  I also converse with Brian about the likely fate of the Ukraine aid bill percolating in Congress, the troubling antics of Travis Kelce, the sensation of RFK, Jr's Superbowl ad, the chances that Joe Biden will make it as the Democratic presidential candidate as far as November, the dynamics that produced Mazi Pilip's loss in the House special election, the necessity of Republican efforts to promote mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, and SCOTUS's final word on whether Donald Trump can and will appear on the presidential ballot in 2024.


It's a scorcher, folks!  Scorchingly insightful, that is. 




And, in a move that will surprise no one, the special counsel in charge of nailing Hunter Biden to the wall has decided instead to go after the whistleblower who alleged that the Bidens accepted bribes from a Ukrainian businessman when Biden was Vice-President.  After all, the purpose of the "justice system", as Democrats understand it, is to punish and silence their enemies.  They're moving down that "enemies list" systematically, I must say! 

Wednesday, February 14, 2024

Happy Trumpentine's Day!


Friends, I hope your favorite presidential candidate blows you lots of kisses this Valentine's Day, because you're ever so lovable and cute as a button!  In fact, I'm so smitten with you that I've decided to give you -- not flowers or a box of chocolates -- but the incomparable gift of my latest article, which focuses on hospitals' fradulent claims to be "charitable", which undergird their avoidance of local, state, and federal taxes.  Shame on them!  Check it out:


Well, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again!  That's what House Republicans did vis-a-vis Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and it worked!  Yesterday he was impeached, necessitating a "trial" -- be it ever so perfunctory -- in the Senate.  I have mixed feelings about this impeachment effort, and I certainly don't think it will amount to much in the end, although it may encourage lots more impeachments, based on essentially political and policy-based disagreements, in the years to come.  In any case, no matter how you feel about impeachment, Mayorkas' role in denying Secret Service protection to presidential candidate RFK, Jr. is absolutely reprehensible.  Shame on Mayorkas and the Dems for perverting the law -- consistently and shamelessly -- and ignoring it altogether whenever it conflicts with their progressive ideology and their narrow political interests.


Finally, I have to agree with much of the analysis of President Trump, who says that the GOP lost the special election in New York's 3rd Congressional district because they chose a weak, only vaguely "Republican" candidate.  Establishment Republicans seem to think that all you have to do is choose a candidate of the right gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or national background -- in other words, outdo the Left in identity politics -- and you'll win by default!  Well, it doesn't work that way.  The Left will always accuse us of racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. no matter what.  And, above all, to win elections you need to satisfy the base and get them to turn out and vote.  We neglected those fundamental lessons in this special election, and we lost.  We also, of course, got massively outspent, as per usual.

Tuesday, February 13, 2024

A Case of Mistaken Identity, or a Brilliant Campaign Strategy?


Friends, if you watched the Superbowl, you should have seen a 30-second ad for independent presidential candidate RFK, Jr.  It was an ad produced and paid for by a Super-PAC supporting Kennedy, and therefore not produced and paid for by the Kennedy campaign itself.  Ergo, Kennedy had no role in creating the ad, but he seems generally pleased by its messaging.  And that messaging is...remarkably unsubtle.  It makes a direct analogy between the candidacy of JFK in 1960 and RFK, Jr. in 2024.  In fact, it simply repackages a catchy pro-Kennedy ad from 1960 and turns it into a plug for RFK, Jr. in 2024.  Fair enough.  The strategy behind it is intriguing.  It suggests that the Super-PAC supporting Kennedy believes that his number one selling point is his pedigree.  It might even suggest a hope on the part of Kennedy's backers that people will vote for him mainly because they can't distinguish between him and his uncle.  Then again, maybe it's based on the theory that a little harmless nostalgia, if it gins up enthusiasm for RFK, Jr. and encourages people to take a first or second look at him, can only be a good thing for his campaign.  In any case, I liked the ad, and I especially like the fact that it will appeal to geriatric Democrats.  They're exactly the kind of people who we don't want voting for Joe Biden.  The more they consider Kennedy as an alternative, the better.  I wish RFK, Jr. all the best, and, if his slavishly Democratic family members are offended by his outside-the-box thinking, hard cheese!

Saturday, February 10, 2024

The Geezer Protocol


Friends, the Left is mighty indignant about Special Counsel Robert Hur's recent report -- you know the one!  It cited the president's poor memory and creeping senility as reasons why he shouldn't be indicted for crimes that no one really denies that he committed.  The potential liberal/Democratic responses are legion.  Why, Hur was "politically motivated", according to Kamala Harris.  If that doesn't fly, they'll say that criticisms of President Biden amount to "ageism".  Good luck with that!  If that doesn't work, they'll say that being an octogenarian isn't a liability -- it's an asset.  I mean, Sleepy Joe is so experienced and crafty!  If that doesn't work, they'll say that, yes, Biden's mind might be going, but take a look at Trump, who was crazy to begin with and is just getting crazier.  If that doesn't work, they'll just change the subject, which is naturally what they've been trying to do all along.  I agree with J.D. Vance's assessment: the root problem here is ego -- Biden's very robust ego.  He is unwilling to admit that he may be "past it", as the Brits say, and he's prepared to risk losing an election to Beelzebub to prove his point -- America be damned!  He reminds me a lot of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in that respect, and we all know how that turned out.  But I also agree with the New York Times, which has leavened its usual pro-Biden propaganda with a rare bit of honesty: it points out that Biden has been less accessible to journalists and ordinary Americans than any other president in modern times.  That suggests that Biden's own handlers don't regard him as particularly capable, and that they believe he needs to be shielded from the public (and vice versa) and spared the full rigors of the presidency.  If that's the conclusion that his own aides and Democratic Party insiders have reached, then why on Earth would Americans reelect him?  "Because he's been so great for America," the lefties will say, "and because Trump would be a million times worse."  That's been their line from the beginning, and I doubt very much that it will change.  I know a lot of conservatives expect the Dems to dump Biden.  I don't think they can, and I don't think they will -- and I don't think, if they did, that it would be remotely helpful to Republicans.  Sleepy Joe remains the best friend that candidate Trump ever had, and, on the strength of his weaknesses, the future of the GOP and conservatism look very bright indeed. 

Finally, I applaud the decision of Meta to stop its obnoxious habit of promoting selected (i.e. woke) political and news content.  It would seem that some social media companies are retreating from political activism and attempting to be less offensive to conservatives.  Hooray!  Let Americans decide for themselves where to get their news, and what is "news", I say.  Facebook and Zuckerberg should mind their own business.