Friends, you may have noticed that President Trump recently challenged President Biden to debate him, and, in an ordinary election year, we could count on the two major party presidential candidates mixing it up on the debate stage, probably three times or more. This, however, isn't an ordinary election year. If the Dems had their way, it would be a pro forma election year, because the Republican candidate would be ejected from the ballot, and third party candidates would be bureaucratically stymied and thus prevented from accessing the ballot. Ergo, Emperor Joe would win by default. It may not turn out quite that way, but the incumbent president still seems to regard himself as above participating in any kind of dialogue with Donald J. Trump. Presumably, Biden wouldn't want to acknowledge the existence of other candidates in the race either. Biden will say that Trump is a boorish barbarian, so there's no point in debating him. Will the American people buy that? Or will they think that Biden is dodging the debates because he's not up to the task? We shall see. In any case, it would be fitting for a progressive president to refuse to debate, since progressives in general seem to regard any and all dissent as beneath contempt. Not a very "democratic" attitude, but there we are.
I've said many times that, the more candidates there are in 2024, the more likely Trump is to win, and Biden is to lose. It's thus highly problematic for Team Blue that the No Labels sideshow appears close to naming a presidential candidate. Most of the leading contenders have taken themselves out of the running, so it's not clear that No Labels can be competitive, but, even if it drew 1% of the vote, that could easily be decisive in some states. I say: bring it on, "centrist" cranks!
Finally, in what will be an interesting test for free speech in the U.K., authoress J.K. Rowling has been reported to police for calling a transgender "woman" a "man". I particularly appreciate Rowling's observation that "there is no human right to universal validation". Amen to that!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: How terrible it is to think that prototypically democratic Britain itself may be modeling the totalitarian future the possibility of which we must consider with all due diligence here in the sprig of British civilization! That was an eloquent and germane quote from J. K. Rowling which you cited. The "thought police", once thought to be the thing of atavistic middle eastern potentates and assumed an unlamented injustice from our medieval past, has emerged from a centuries long seeming sojourn to plague Western civilization anew. J. K. Rowling has earned astounding success; could she perhaps turn her genius to politics, inherit the mantle of the great PM Thatcher and save Perfidious Albion from itself once again?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: The grotesquerie of the illustration you posted is beyond measure. As such it is fitting! Everyone knows that DJT would tie pitiable Pino Biden in knots in a debate. Of course he would! Not withstanding his carefully engineered performance in the "State of the Union from the Only Viewpoint Which Counts" recital, Biden would be the airy idealist '65 kumbayaa wimp confronting the street fighter DJT and having not the slightest chance of impressing, let alone besting, him. Should he venture to feebly chide DJT he would be shown, with dispatch , of what enthusiastic denunciation consists.Chances are the Dems have decided that Trump hatred, conveyed even by this slight man, is their only chance. "Why they have set their lives upon a cast and they will stand the hazard of the die" by golly! Oh how very self effacing of them that they would hazard this, for us, for US, as undeserving as we are here in flyover country.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Yeah, I heard today that "No Labels" is yet determined and is now in close conference over these monumental choices. Let us be as presumptuous as to offer suggestions to them: may I venture the following carefully considered emanations of my feverish aspect: for President - "Anonymous," for VP - a tub of lukewarm dishwater. I would expect these selections to have as much prospect for nominal success as ,say ,Romney and Sen.Angus King of Maine. None the less, I think your prediction that a noble "No Labels " run would benefit DJT is very likely.
ReplyDeleteJack, J.K. Rowling has certainly gotten the stuffing knocked out of her by sanctimonious trans activists and quite a few mainstream progressives, and I applaud her courage in drawing their fire, but I've never heard any hint of a suggestion that she might run for office. She USED TO BE a leftist. What she would call herself now is a good question. My sense is that she's a one-hit wonder, and, besides sticking up for "womankind", she isn't all that outspoken on political matters.
ReplyDeleteJack, I would not be so sure about the potential outcome of a Trump-Biden debate. Trump has now been in a bunch of debates, and he didn't score a knockout in any of them. Yes, there's a chance that Biden could soil himself onstage, but there's a greater chance that he would comport himself...acceptably, as he did in 2020, and as he did at the SOTU. My guess is that, if the two were to debate in '24, it wouldn't change much of anything -- unless someone else, like RFK, Jr., were allowed to participate. In any case, I'm pretty sure that the Biden camp will veto the whole concept. In that case, how about a debate between Trump and all the also-rans? What the heck... It would draw a big audience, and I don't see it doing Trump any harm.
Hmm. A No Labels ticket headlined by "Anonymous". You jest, but what about a slate of electors who were...uncommitted? Why not? It would be an intriguing gambit. "None of the above" might draw a lot of support!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Oh, I didn't "know from" J. K. Rowling. Let's hope some other Thatcher or Churchill is on the rise. Britain may soon have another sovereign and I think William V may be an activist but of what conviction, I "canna ken". Maybe, since DJT does display intemperate expression at times, the Biden team is doing him a favor by temporizing on debates. Perhaps they will wait for DJT to give them an opening and will then send a carefully propped up El Cid Biden into combat."See, we ain't afraid of debates!" Yes, we have anticipated for a long time now that this year will manifest astonishing things. Perhaps the 'uncommitted" phenomenon will burgeon to the point where nobody will have been elected Pres. Then the Speaker would ascend; may "all the gods that Romans bow down to" forbid it should be Madame Pelosi!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: No, I guess that some corporal candidates would receive votes and that would necessitate the House settling the matter by voting.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Remember how unforgivably conservative Mayor (when such a curiosity obtained in the eastern megalopolis) Frank Rizzo of Philadelphia said " a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged" . Perhaps J. K. Rowling has now had a similar experience with the totalitarian far left. But nonetheless my ignorant bad for having suggested her as a redeeming PM in a Britain enduring a new kind of Blitz now.
ReplyDeleteOh yes, 2024 could have plenty of (additional) surprises in store!
ReplyDeleteMy take on the debates is that, if they happen, they're unlikely to change the dynamic much. If they don't happen, because Biden balks, that will only reinforce doubts about Biden.
Could the House decide who the next president will be? It's possible! It would take someone other than Trump and Biden winning one or more states, OR it would take a handful of critical electors straying off the reservation. The latter is perhaps more likely. Now, as I've said before, given the nature of the process Republicans in the House would likely determine who the next president will be. Note that I said REPUBLICANS, not Trumpers, per se.