After the panic settles down

What are Democrats going to do now that they have exposed what they have been saddled with in Let's Go Brandon as candidate? Dump him or stick with him? 

When they first announced that the first presidential debate would happen in June (JUNE!), I immediately wondered why the Let's Go Brandon campaign team, with their list of debate demands, wanted the first debate so early in the election cycle.  This right after Let's Go Brandon himself was basically saying any time, any place. My mind immediately went to "there's a plan behind this". With the scheming Democrats, that's what you have to assume. It's not conspiracy thinking to ask the question "Why?"

The logical conclusion (and there were other possibilities, but less likely) was that they wanted time to be able to dislodge Let's Go Brandon as the nominee if he tanked in the debate.  I think they probably knew he would - at least the insiders knew. And they needed to debate Trump because they are down in most swing state polls, consistently. They are playing catch up because the leftist policies are ruining the country, and more and more people know for themselves what the policies are doing, especially in contrast to how well things were going under president Trump. 

But with Let's Go Brandon it's a roll of the dice for Democrats; you either get the stumbling and mumbling version or the hopped up on goofballs, cracked-out Biden.  They got the former when they needed the latter.  But the planning behind the timing was certainly deliberate. What Democrats got was a disaster that most every Republican voter was expecting to see, but that Democrat voters were in many cases, shocked to see after the mainstream media has been running defense for Let's Go Brandon since 2020.

So all that was before the immediate panic set in (to be honest for both Democrats and myself). Democrat elites and operatives are reaping what they have sewn.  Did they honestly think they could make it through a second election cycle hiding Let's Go Brandon in a basement?

The immediate panic was along the lines of we have to get Let's Go Brandon to bow out of the race, and Kamala Harris too. We need to parachute in a winner. A bright, younger, shiny and slick snake oil salesman like Gavin Newsome who couldn't govern his way out of a paper bag but talks well. Someone like that can win the logic would go.

But after the panic settles down, there are some startling realities for Democrats to face. It's not so easy to just drop the top of the ticket this late in the game.  As has been mentioned in a few places, he's on the ballot in some states at this point unless he dies.  Wisconsin has been brought up as an example of that. If you hand Wisconsin to Trump, along with the other swing states that are probably unreachable for Democrats (Arizona and Georgia alone), Trump has won. You're a Democrat and you're going to do that? I don't think so.

Not to mention, can you imagine the chaos of a brokered convention, the nominee decided behind closed doors after a full slate of Democrat primaries where Biden was chosen? How many disaffected Democrat voters does that create - and not just for this cycle, but perhaps permanently. Danger to democracy is their current mantra, how does that scenario fit their narrative?

It's likely that Democrats are stuck with Let's Go Brandon. What that means in the bigger picture:

1. They need a strong second debate on September 10th
2. Gavin Newsome is probably positioning himself for 2028.  
3. Democrats may have to discourage early/mail-in voting
4. After the realization sets in, an avalanche of mainstream media support for Brandon

The first point is inarguable.  The taste left in voters mouths is going to linger for the summer. Unless every rally is great (or the media goes back into full cover mode to portray it as such) for Let's Go Brandon, he has to perform amazingly at the second debate. I don't think that's likely but they don't have much choice other than to try to make that happen.  Maybe a month of debate prep for the next one, Democrats?

The reason the first point is true is because of the third point, which I will get to shortly.  The second point, Gavin Newsome needs to say the right things now, because while I believe he wants to be president, I think this cycle is so tarnished for Democrats that he would probably prefer to run in 2028 and not have so many Democrat self-imposed hurdles to overcome.

With Democrats needing a Let's Go Brandon recovery, they face some additional obstacles. Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont and most notably Pennsylvania all have some form of early/mail-in voting that could run up against the debate date. Oregon is all mail-in voting. Pennsylvania "does not offer early voting, but counties may make absentee and mail-in ballot applications available to voters in person up to 50 days before Election Day."  That 50 days is September 16th. They are going to need Democrat voters to see a second debate win for Let's Go Brandon before casting a mail-in or absentee vote. 

Here's the problem; the second debate will most likely be a replay of the first debate.  While the hopped up on goofballs Let's Go Brandon is more likely to be the one that shows up next time (he has to be), no matter what the stimulants they fill him up with, he doesn't seem capable of what he was capable of doing at the State of the Union a mere few months ago. 

I'm not saying this race is over, dirty tricks from the Democrats are inevitable, cheating is inevitable, a miracle performance is possible too (however unlikely). We are seeing that with this half-thought out plan to have an early debate in case Let's Go Brandon failed miserably and they could replace him. What I'm saying is that Democrats have screwed themselves with their insatiable lust for power to the point it has become untenable.  It's not about Trump Derangement Syndrome - they hated Bush, they hated Reagan,  heck they even hated RINOs McCain and Romney when they ran for president. There is no Republican they will ever paint as human, let alone respectable in an election scenario. It's about retaining power and drifting the country evermore leftward through lies, deceit, manipulation and whatever else it takes. That is a house of cards that eventually HAS to collapse in on itself. I think we are seeing the beginning of that now.

The Oil Spill and The Birkenstock Crowd

Quickly on the oil spill off the coast of Louisiana, some observations.  This will likely re-energize the anti-drilling crowd, however it should not mute the pro-drilling crowd.  The fact of the matter remains that drilling is necessary and oil spills can come from foreign-owned drilling platforms just as easily as American based platforms.  Cuba has granted both China and Russia permission to search for oil.  And since there is no solar or electric grail on the 5 or 10 year horizon just yet, the United States is going to continue to need to use oil for the foreseeable future.  Here's the reality for those of you in the Birkenstock crowd - You can hope all you want for another reality but it won't change things.

More cards in the Democrats' house

Democrats have built themselves a house of cards. Not the Obama administration - 50 years of cobbling together a disparate group of specials interests has done so. But a house of cards, which can grow quite large is inherently weak, and easy to topple. Previously, Nonsensible looked briefly at the impact of immigration policy versus minimum wage policy, and it was in a word - non-sensible.

There are many more topple points. One interesting incongruity is the environmentalism embedded in the party. On the surface, it's very easy to be anti-pollution. Who wants pollution? It's another example of liberal arguments being emotional rather than intellectual. It's easy to say that we should keep the world clean. But when you get into specifics of how you want to go about doing that, you then realize the card in the house of cards runs contrary to some of the other cards it leans against. In the most obvious case, is another liberal card - unions. One of the main culprits of the economic degradation is humanity and its use of the automobile. The UAW needs an auto industry to create cars so it can create jobs.

But the automobile is anathema to environmentalism. The Democrats have to please a constituency that is against an industry that employees supporters to whom the Democrats are also beholden.

They couch this in the the intangible in that they will create millions of new 'green' jobs thereby placating both interests. But where the rubber meets the road, how do these new green cars magically appear? There's no plan for that. There's no reasonable time frame that transitions the production to electrical engines and manages to maintain jobs. Just mandates for tougher environmental standards that get imposed on auto makers and risk worsening margins and forcing layoffs. And there's the fabled millions of green jobs that will, pardon the pun, take root immediately apparently. It's a house of cards.

To further complicate matters they oppose offshore drilling. ANWR drilling. Any drilling. They probably oppose dental drilling. They then argue that $700 billion in transfers to oil producers is a bad thing for America. It is. But why does it exist? Because of overly cautious environmental protectionism has crippled domestic energy production. It's resulted in a loss of jobs, a loss of revenue and a transfer of funds to questionable nations, in addition to doing nothing to prevent the increase in the domestic or worldwide purchasing of automobiles.

A - preventing domestic power production (drilling) + B - a green plan without any planning or basis in reality = C - job losses for the United Auto Workers.

It's a house of cards. More cards, will follow.

Economic house of cards

When you stand back and take a look at the individual elements of the Democrats approach to the economy, whether it be in relation to the current economic 'crisis' or in an overall view of their belief system, a clearer picture of things starts to emerge. It's something conservatives haven't effectively tried to connect the dots on. Their approach to every issue ties into some other aspect of their approach. It's either a clever holistic approach or a patchwork of disparate agendas piled on top of each other that require certain philosophical approaches to keep things from coming apart at the seams. The latter seems more plausible, because upon taking time to examine the the structural integrity of the interconnections, the house of cards really begins to crystallize.

A house of cards is built by layering on multiples of legs standing against each other for support. There's an inherent structural weakness in that removing one card can cause a collapse. When someone therefore, makes an Empire State Building out of cards, it's quite impressive - an achievement of effort, dedication and patience. When a group of people try to cobble together a political philosophy on the same principle, it's inherently dangerous - for them as a political movement, and for the country as a whole.

The Democratic party has a few legs it is able to stand on that, especially in light of a massive spending bill, that apparently will get passed in some form. But a few of the elements that lean on each other do so in some untenable ways. For example, Democrats favor a minimum wage at a fairly high level. But they also favor naturalizing illegal immigrants. Which means scads of cheap labor I suppose the theory goes. But then they favor extensive family planning and legalizing abortion, which probably inhibits domestic population growth in the lower income range more than other ranges. Which means that the re-supply of cheap labor has to come once again from immigration, and to get the numbers needed, means that would include illegal immigration sourcing. Not to mention that the whole tying together of these practices seems as anti-African American as it does pro-immigration. If the African American population is under served by the United States educational system (and elsewhere), then how is adding to the population doing anything to support that demographic? It's just crowding it out - and family planning isn't helping the matter any. Yet the African American community is a pillar of Democrat support. Would it continue to be if it realized the situation fully? Hence the house of cards.

A - minimum wage + B - naturalizing illegal immigrants = C - cheap labor BUT

D - family planning/abortion = E - lower income families reduced = F - reduced labor supply = G - more immigration needed + G - domestic lower income families disenfranchised.

Further looking at the foundations around that leg, another card is the ACORNs of the world. The Democratic party either blindly or with a blind eye, is indirectly engaged in voter fraud. So if that intersects with illegal immigrants being made able to vote, and tangible proof is found, the whole leg of naturalizing illegals, and not preventing illegal immigration is exposed as duplicitous and again, the house would come collapsing down.

Keep in mind that the liberal agenda is all about creating a dependant class, that can be manipulated and controlled by promising them what amounts to a meager share of the opportunity to achieve the American Dream. When you take the time to connect the dots, it's pretty easy to find all sorts of weak spots in the liberal agenda. That makes our job as conservatives a lot easier to define, and the opportunity for victory that much easier.

Next up - a couple of other legs to remove from the house of Democrat cards.