New Hampshire results
So far the results are pretty much as anticipated, minus a few details. It’s indeed Sanders, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, in that order and not all that distant from each other. Then instead of Biden and Warren we have Warren and Biden, both doing poorly.
I had anticipated Bloomberg might get more than a smattering of votes, but I hadn’t realized he’s not on the ballot. Between that and the fact that he hasn’t participated in a debate, he’s really not a player yet.
Bennett and Yang are out. Were they ever in?
Warren gave her people quite a turn when she began a speech with words that sounded as though she might be leaving the race as well. But never fear, Warren supporters. She’s hanging on. As is Biden, although he left New Hampshire in a tremendous hurry.
Klobuchar?
https://blog.independent.org/2020/01/30/the-new-mccarthyism-has-no-sense-of-decency/
At this point, 85% of the precincts are reporting. The only change in the line up (among candidates scoring > 1%) in the interval between 33% reporting and 85% reporting is that Tulsi has moved up to 7th place and Yang down to 8th place. It’s conceivable that Buttigieg could make up the 3,600 vote deficit vis a vis Sanders with the 50,000 or so untabulated votes, but the difference between them has hardly changed with the tabulation conducted to this moment.
The worst that can honestly be said about McCarthy is that he was sometimes unsavory, and became more so with increasing frustration that his fact-based concerns about communists in the federal government went unheeded, and then were totally blocked.
Sen. Tydings (D-MD) coined the “McCarthyism” term extremely early, while McCarthy was trying only to get the Senate to investigate his concerns. Interestingly, Tydings was not re-elected.
The bottom line is McCarthy was absolutely correct in his concerns.
The extremely researched book by Stanton Evans, ” Blacklisted by History” is a grave eye-opener.
So Warren and Biden will move to NC and continue to spend other peoples money on a filed enterprise. Of course they are not alone. And if one of them should manage to become President they will continue to spend other peoples money, only then it would not be freely given.
The worst that can honestly be said about McCarthy is that he was sometimes unsavory, and became more so with increasing frustration that his fact-based concerns about communists in the federal government went unheeded, and then were totally blocked.
No clue where these fantasies come from.
McCarthy was a cynical and self-aggrandizing publicity hound who accomplished very little other than generating anxiety and morale problems in the Foreign Service. His crusade began with a hoax – a false claim in a speech in Wheeling WVa that 205 known Communists were employed by the Department of State and ended with a wretched set of public hearings on McCarthy’s contention that Communists were being coddled at Fort Monmouth in New Jersey (for which the hook was that an Army dentist named Irving Peress – who had belonged to the American Labor Party in its terminal (red haze) phase – had received a promotion.
Nor do I have any clue how you got the idea that his ‘concerns’ were ‘unheeded’ given the ongoing congressional investigations in the House and the Senate, the expulsion of the red haze unions from the CIO in 1949, the investigations which led to the exposure of Alger Hiss, Lawrence Duggan, Lauchlin Currie, and Harry Dexter White; the string of prosecutions for espionage (of which the Rosenberg crew was the most prominent) and the activity of the FBI against targets large and small.
There goes my $1,000 a month…
‘Bennett and Yang are out. Were they ever in?’
Don’t forget Deval Patrick he’s out too. The amount of no shotters that run is ridiculous and it’s not only the Democrats the Republicans were the same last time. Remember that Jim something or other guy?
Guess they can put former presidential candidate on their resume for speaking engagements.
Patrick on February 12, 2020 at 12:28 am said:
There goes my $1,000 a month…
* * *
https://babylonbee.com/news/yang-campaign-collapses-when-its-revealed-hed-pay-for-1000-a-month-with-a-1000-a-month-tax
Regardless of who the Democrats finally select to face Trump, if he is re-elected, this is the operative scenario.
https://babylonbee.com/news/liberal-argues-rules-of-basketball-are-flawed-after-losing-pickup-game
Perhaps an explanation of how Biden sabotaged himself in a way other than just acting crazy.
https://www.nysun.com/national/biden-gets-borked-in-historic-irony-he-helped/91006/
“The curiosity is not that there were undoubtedly many Reds that made government their vocation, but that the entire Communist Party was not on the federal payroll.” h/t Artfldgr
President Sanders would fix that.
What electing a Socialist will lead to.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1227221880559542273.html
They really don’t have a clue.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/11/watch-bernie-sanders-supporter-explains-democratic-socialism-at-new-hampshire-victory-rally/
Interesting comment I read at another site.
“Notice the ones without Trump assigned nicknames doing well.”
Definitely Joe and Liz have nicks and did poorly.
Amy did well, no nickname.
Bernie and Mayor Pete won, I don’t think either gets much Twitter attention from the Pres.
Didn’t Ann Coulter write a book that says McCarthy was correct in his charges but was smeared?
Biden is done. Warren is done. I’m having a hard time believing Buttigieg’s support continues at this level. Klobuchar, as a moderate voice, has some staying power and broader appeal. Can Bernie get more than 30% support? Bloomberg is emerging as the candidate Democrats think has the best chance to defeat Trump.
Trump needs to watch out for Buttigieg and Klobuchar. I think the moderate wing of the D party is starting to assert themselves and either of these two could be a formidable candidate appealing to the LIVs and soccer moms.
I know I keep saying the same thing and others disparage it: but it’s a long time until November and never underestimate the opponent. The reelection of Trump is by no means a sure thing. And retaking the House even less so.
In 2016 Comrade Bernie received over 60% of the vote.
In 2020 he will get, perhaps, 26% of the vote.
This year Almost 3/4’s of Democrat voters want someone else to be President.
Is arithmetic too hard for people?
Tuvea:
“Is arithmetic too hard for people?”
Yang’s tag line was “math.” Maybe that’s why he dropped out.
OOT: I note that the Democrats all fall back on the same mission statement: “beat Trump.” Their claim to deserve the nomination is that they are better prepared than the other candidates to accomplish this. It occurs to me that having a positive goal of their own (other than giving stuff away for free) would be a better way to gain the nomination. But perhaps I am wrong on that — perhaps your average Democratic voter is more motivated by the prospect of beating Trump than they are by having a positive vision of America’s future.
physicsguy: “The reelection of Trump is by no means a sure thing. And retaking the House even less so.”
True dat.
Still, in my heart of hearts I am secretly WAY more confident now than at this same point in 2016.
Didn’t Ann Coulter write a book that says McCarthy was correct in his charges but was smeared?
Yes she did. A precise history of McCarthy’s activities might be in order, especially one not animated by the red-haze academy’s presuppositions. Coulter isn’t the one to write it. It’s reasonable to be fed up with the social fictions peddled by gliberals and leftoids about that era, but it’s a witless waste of time to be writing apologetics for an unscrupulous and obnoxious cretin like McCarthy, as if we had to peddle our own witless fictions just to get even.
Is arithmetic too hard for people?
He had one vigorous opponent in 2016. Messrs. O’Malley, Chafee, and Webb had no money and generated no public interest. He’s had four opponents in the last year who managed to build a satisfactory constituency in the voting public and there are in addition three others who can self-finance a campaign. You don’t have a binary contest, here or any other place. If you eliminated Biden, Warren, and Klobuchar, and had their supporters cast a ballot for one of the residue, one of the residue would win a majority vote (as happened in 2016).
Cicero
Sen. Tydings (D-MD) coined the “McCarthyism” term extremely early,
Nope…
Owen Lattimore was the source..
March 26 1950 was when McCarthy accused him..
“Unlike McCarthy I have never been charged with a violation of the laws of the United States or of the ethics of my profession . . . Unlike Budenz and Utley, I have never been a member of the Communist Party . . . Unlike Budenz, I have never been engaged in a conspiracy to commit murder or espionage . . .”
[Yes… THAT Utley – Frieda… whom i been trying to discuss but no one remembers, and no one will read about… a super changer Neo does not study! Kind of like wanting to know about elephants and refusing to acknowledge Jumbo or Satao sitting invisible in your room!!]
The Tydings Committee gave Lattimore a clean bill on July 17, 1950.
with Korea war starting..
…Lattimore was back before another Congressional committee, this one led by a charter member of the China Lobby, Pat McCarran, again with A&P at his side.
Others claim the source:
The term is said to have been coined by “Washington Post” political cartoonist Herbert Block (“Herblock”) in an editorial cartoon from March 29, 1950. The Army-McCarthy subcommittee hearings in the U.S. Senate ran from April to June 1954.
however those who study a lot more:
https://pages.jh.edu/jhumag/0900web/red.html
McCarthyism–a term Owen Lattimore is credited with coining— would trail the sinologist for more than five years: He was the target of Senate “loyalty” hearings, and a grand jury indictment on perjury charges that were finally dropped in 1955.
Lattimore died June 1st 1989 outliving McCarthy by a wide margin…
In the 1990s Boris Yeltsin released a lot of information on the Soviet government’s spying over the decades. The info implicated many people who had long been whitewashed by the media and the politicians.
In 1995, Senator Daniel Moynihan (D-NY) made public the existence of the Venona Papers. [a source much like the Mitrokhin Archives]
[none of this we actually discuss… we prefer to preserve the comfortable lies rather than correct them and discuss the implications!!!!!!!!!!!]
Like Bernie, and Schiff, they know that the history will be corrected in their favor, and so can act without worry about the long term… look how the left still defends the Rosenbergs, and any discussion does not tend to bring up what we know NOW vs what we knew then…
of Mitrokhin Moynihan later said that without it, we would not know what the real history was!!!!!! (and we still dont!!!!!!!)
“we know the Mitrokhin material is real because it fills in the gaps in Western files on major cases through 1985. Also, the operational material matches western electronic intercepts and agent reports. What MI6 got for a little kindness and a pension was the crown jewels of Russian intelligence – Trento
Former Communist Elizabeth Bentley, who regretted her spy work, came out of the cold and implicated White in 1945.
Another changer we do not discuss!!!! Bella Dodd is another.. and so is Whittaker Chambers… ALL changers deep in the soup. Chambers repented of his Communism, asked Hiss to do likewise, and when Hiss would not, Chambers confessed to his deeds and implicated Hiss.
Chambers was sued by Hiss, and then cut hiss throat with the pumpkin papers
[statute of limitations ran out so he was not prosecuted for that]
McCarthy was able to damage Truman’s credibility, help elect a number of GOP candidates to the Senate in 1950 and 1952, and help General Dwight Eisenhower win the election of 1952.
John F. Kennedy, as a congressman, criticized the ineptness and/or treachery involved in the fall of China to Communism. It didn’t matter to him it was Democrats who were to blame.
Acheson’s top China hand Owen Lattimore said, “The thing to do was let South Korea fall, but not to let it look like we pushed it.”
Throw the game…
It was revealed Lattimore lied in a number of publications about Soviet prison camps and other items to the benefit of Communists. Lattimore was a sympathizer of Communism who gave them cover as a writer. He was later outed as a Communist by former Communist Louis Budenz.
however, we do not remember THAT any more than we remember Frieda the way Reagan did… no only that, but when you hear Bernie Sanders worker talking about how the Gulags were not that bad, etc… they are referencing Lattimore…
but we dont discuss that either… i do, we dont..
[for fun… look up John Abt… McCarthy was right on him too.. and most dont know John Hinckley, was a family friend of the Bushes.]
And if you wanted… you could follow the line all the way from McCarthy, Lattimore, Prescot Bush, and others right up to the anti American “nodogooders” in office and the laws that were since changed that prevented someone from cleaning this ‘swamp’ out under the auspices that each time a new president came into office, so many civil servants would lose their jobs.
Putin was willing to let the 12 testify..
what did he want in return?
Putin at the press conference asked for American help on bringing William Browder to justice. Browder, the grandson of Communist Party USA chief Earl Browder, after the fall of Soviet Communism became a scavenger and allegedly stole $1.5 billion (with a B) from the Russian people. Browder renounced his American citizenship in 1998 to avoid taxes on his Russian grabfest. He now lives in Britain.
Who says communism doesn’t pay?
We have NEO COPPERHEADS… dont we?
but we wont discuss that either… will we?
we prefer to comment that the press stinks, but not look beyond the press
The Democrats learned from the Soviets … and from the Nazis. They have grabbed control of the police, the prosecutors, the intel, and the judges. Leftists also control schools, many churches, the media, and popular culture. They have tried to isolate their opponents from the public and from each other.
Much of this came from many sources…
Art Deco:
I request that Artfldgr write the book. And, Artfldgr, please do so as if writing for a college freshmen who has a real interest, but not much background, in history.
IMO, Klobuchar is the only one with a chance against Trump.
I’ve only watched bits and pieces of the Dem debates, but she comes across as not a nut job like most of the others. She seems like the only adult in the room sometimes.
Bernie’s a commie, Pete ain’t gonna get the black vote, and Warren/Biden are both hopeless.
I predict Klobuchar will pick up speed.
I once tried to explain to an actor why communism, “in theory,” as the useful idiots like to say, is bad. “You think, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” is a good idea.”
“Oh, yeah.”
“Well, suppose the state decided your ability was to be a sewer worker in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and sent you there?”
“But, no, I’m an actor!”
“Sure, you want to be an actor. You think you are an actor. But if the State decides your best abilities are as a sewer worker, that’s where you go.”
“That’s not fair!”
“That’s right, and that’s why communism is bad “in theory” as well as in practice.”
“No, it’s a good idea. . . ”
At that point I gave up. You can never explain anything to an actor. They have the brains of gnats. And those are the smart ones.
Excellent book about McCarthy: “Red Hunter” by Bill Buckley.
In no way is it an apology or lionization of J.McM.
What the NH results tell me was voters there don’t really want the Bernie / Warren brand. Sure Bernie came out ahead but the moderates actually won – granted with a split up vote. Bernie and Warren accounted for 36% of the vote while Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Bidden, Steyer, Gabbard and Yang [all moderates compared to Bernie / Warren] accounted for 64% of the vote.
That’s the voters [in NH] saying they want anyone other than Bernie. Only they can’t decide who!
I agree with M Williams, Klobuchar is the one to watch out for. Trump needs to give her a nickname!
Art Deco:
Unless you have read Stanton Evans’ thoroughly documented bio of McCarthy, I suggest you limit your vehemence.
Artfldr: The source of the smear word “McCarthyism” is the question, and you do not quote Lattimore as the source. Tydings was the source, in 1950.
Quoting from Evans’ book on the 1950 Tydings ad-hoc Senate subcommittee, p. 238:
” …the report next considered the public cases McCarthy had presented to the Tydings panel. As foretold by the conduct of the hearings, the method used throughout was to take the denials of each and every suspect at face value and adopt these as ‘findings’. Whether it was Dorothy Kenyon, Philip Jessup, Esther Brunauer, Owen Lattimore, Haldore Hanson, or John Service, the verdict was the same: the accused was free of subversive taint, was indeed an outstanding scholar or public servant, and McCarthy’s charges were baseless slanders.”
Kindly note what Artfldgr posted above on Lattimore.
The whole McCarthy history needs to be carefully reviewed by those who are used to using McCarthyism as an epithet.
Yes, McCarthy was unsavory and crude, given to drama and hyperbole. He was also an alcoholic. But he did his own poor best to bring the communist infiltration of what has become the Deep State to America’s attention, and there is no sin in that. He was widely and viciously smeared and his concerns were essentially ignored, blown away. By both Dems and Republicans, who were willfully blind to the truth.
The Venona papers confirm his concerns.
Unless you have read Stanton Evans’ thoroughly documented bio of McCarthy, I suggest you limit your vehemence.
Howlers like, “He was widely and viciously smeared and his concerns were essentially ignored” don’t turn into truths even if Stanton Evans ever uttered them. McCarthy was in the newspapers continually for 4 years and change and he was able to place a minion in charge of the State Department’s personnel office.
The ‘thoroughly documented’ Evans book published in 2007 has no bibliography. It has about 24 pages of end notes. It does list primary sources: Congressional committee hearings, publications of the Subversive Activities Control Board, archival collections associated with several of McCarthy’s antagonists (e.g. Millard Tydings) and about a half dozen FBI files. If his concerns are ‘ignored’, what are these congressional hearings about?
The Venona papers confirm his concerns.
No they don’t. The federal government already had counter-espionage programs underway in 1950. McCarthy added nothing.
Sure Bernie came out ahead but the moderates actually won – granted with a split up vote.
Identify one willing to enforce the immigration laws before you begin babbling about ‘moderates’.
Richard Saunders on February 12, 2020 at 1:29 pm said:
I once tried to explain to an actor why communism, “in theory,” as the useful idiots like to say, is bad. …
At that point I gave up. You can never explain anything to an actor. They have the brains of gnats. And those are the smart ones.
* * *
I have heard of some teachers trying to illustrate socialism by telling their students that, after an exam, the grades will be averaged and each student will receive that score, rather than the one they actually made.
Of course, the smart students are appalled and the not-so-smart enthralled.
I have never seen any follow-up story indicating that the smart ones thereupon renounce their previous approval of socialism.
In re actors: I know some smart people do take up acting, but having met some of the run-of-the-mill “talent” myself, your overall impression is correct.
Art Deco:
Well, one thing is clear: there were a lot of commies and near-commies in the burgeoning Deep State in 1950…and subsequently too, I am sure.
Maybe you don’t give a toot.
But I’m glad you had a look at Evans’ book and its 24 pages of end notes, which I consider documented evidence of research.
The congressional hearings were to minimize McCarthy’s claims and to demonize him; Alinsky at work: bash the SOB into oblivion.
Art Deco
I’m not babbling about ‘moderates’. They are moderates compared to Bernie. Their views on illegals is right in line with Bush and Obama, which believed in a path to citizenship for those that are not convicted criminals. But they are not opposed to enforcing laws at the border. Few are. Only Bernie wants to halt deportations.
I’m not babbling about ‘moderates’. They are moderates compared to Bernie. Their views on illegals is right in line with Bush and Obama, which believed in a path to citizenship for those that are not convicted criminals.
But they are not opposed to enforcing laws at the border. Few are.
I have news for you. The border hasn’t been ‘enforced’ with any degree of rigor in over 50 years.
Maybe you don’t give a toot.
You’ve made a number of lunatic remarks in this thread. Why not come back to Earth?
When all else fails, Art, resort to ad hominem.