Sanders 2016, Sanders 2020

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s true that in 2016 Sanders got 60% of the New Hampshire primary vote to Hillary’s 38%. It’s also true that it was basically a dead heat in Iowa in 2016 for the two candidates.

How to compare to the 2020 results? After all, in 2016 Sanders was virtually the only seemingly-viable alternative to Hillary. So he got the entire not-Hillary vote. This year, voters are split among a host of candidates. And yet, Sanders is still leading in NH and pretty much won or came to a dead heat (depending on how the votes were counted) in Iowa. He has about a quarter of the Democrat voters in those two states rather than a half. I’d say that’s pretty darn good, considering the size of the field.

But what does it really mean? In other words – in a somewhat parallel situation to Trump and the Republican contenders in 2016 – as the field inevitably narrows, will those votes mainly go to Sanders or to another contender considered less radical?

Are Buttigieg and Klobuchar the Cruz and Rubio of 2020? Not in ideology, of course, but in terms of duking it out for way too long and splitting the vote, so that Sanders keeps winning?

In 2016 I thought if only either Cruz or Rubio (or other contenders) would drop out, all the others’ votes would go to the last Trump-opponent standing, and that person would win. But as time went on, I didn’t see that happening. I saw Trump getting a significant percentage of the votes of each person as that person exited. I began to realize that Trump could get the whole thing.

And I think something similar has a good chance of happening with Bernie. Will it? I certainly don’t know, but I see it as a strong possibility.

The Mueller investigation and Roger Stone: wheels within wheels

The New Neo Posted on by

There’s the deep state, and then there’s the deep deep state.

I think it’s wise to pay attention to Devin Nunes. So far, he has turned out to be spot on about what’s been happening behind the scenes:

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) warned as the onion is peeled on the Mueller team the American people will learn what they were “really doing.” In an interview with FOX Business host Lou Dobbs, Nunes also expressed his pleasure that President Trump is downsizing the National Security Council from roughly 500 people to 100.

“The lawyers that, you know, that stepped aside today that — that busted — that made the seven-to-nine-year recommendation — on the prosecutors, we believe that this is not going to be the only example. We think there’s other examples of things that they did during the Mueller investigation that I think you and your listeners and the American people will be very interested to learn in the coming weeks, as we start to unpeel the onion of what the Mueller team was really doing,” Nunes said Tuesday.

Nunes said Trump needs to look at other people that are part of “permanent bureaucracy” and remove them from the White House because the “place leaks like a sieve.” Nunes said given that there were a lot of Obama holdovers in the NSC it would be logical to assume that is where most of the leaks come from.

Please read the whole thing.

The left is up in arms about the resignations and the firings, which is absurd because Trump has every right to do what he’s doing, and if a Democrat had done it there would have been silence (or approval) from the MSM and the others.

During the Obama administration, many people remarked on how Obama and Holder were stacking the DOJ with leftist lawyers. It was no secret, and it was no secret why they were doing it, either. They had the right to do it, by the way. But it has borne fruit. And it was one of many many things Obama and his appointees did that made it clear what a leftist he was. The press thought it was just hunky dory, too. And they felt the same way when the Mueller investigation was stacked with leftists and Democrats as well (something that even a “fact-checking” site like Politifact found difficult if not impossible to refute, despite valiant efforts).

The bottom line is that Trump has not been allowed to be president. Even if he’s reelected by a strong majority, they still will not allow him. Everything he does can be twisted by his enemies into an abuse of power, and the MSM and the Democrats count on their voters to just take their word for it. For the most part, they do.

Those “moderate” Democrats

The New Neo Posted on by

Commenter “physicsguy” writes:

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.

Agreed.

Don’t underestimate the amount of sheer Trump-hatred out there. The more extreme fringe may not be very big, but the phenomenon sure is. If it were not so widespread, Trump’s approval ratings right now would be in the 60s and 70s. They’re definitely not.

If the Democrats manage to nominate a candidate who seems like he or she possesses enough marbles to not completely screw up, who mouths the right platitudes, and who appears moderate (despite being almost totally onboard with a Democratic agenda that is extraordinarily leftist), then many people will leap to that alternative and hold on tight.

Biden didn’t fill the bill in the “possesses enough marbles” category, and that’s why people are abandoning him. But whether the alternative ends up being Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Bloomberg, or a player to be named later, the Democratic electorate and its leadership is desperately seeking one and most likely will find one. Toss a coin at this point.

New Hampshire results

The New Neo Posted on by

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.

Waiting for Durham

The New Neo Posted on by

We wait and wait, but my guess is that only the lawyer who hid the CIA-asset status of Carter Page will pay any real price. I hope I’m wrong and that bigger fish get caught, but my faith in that kind of thing is non-existent after so many disappointments.

Sara Carter warns:

“Former senior FBI officials that say if there aren’t indictments — if people don’t actually pay the price for what happened here — which was an attempted coup, basically, on the president of the United States, and also just destroying the civil liberties of an American citizen, Carter Page, then what’s going to stop the next person?” she told host Sean Hannity.

That has been obvious from the start. It also has been clear that the perpetrators felt they would never be caught, either because Hillary would become president or just because. After Trump was elected, they certainly didn’t cease and desist, so they must have felt their protection would continue.

At this point, I fear that even if a few of them do suffer major consequences, it still won’t be discouragement enough. After all, they almost succeeded, and they certainly succeeded in getting Trump impeached and energizing the opposition mightily. For a while, anyway. And as far as I can see, their lies are still believed by the vast majority of Democrats.

A Rolling Stone postmortem on the Democrat fiasco in Iowa

The New Neo Posted on by

From Matt Taibbi:

When historians pore over the Great Iowa Catastrophe of 2020, much of the blame will be focused on Acronym and Shadow, the two firms associated with the balky app that was supposed to count caucus results. For the conspiratorial-minded, the various political connections will be key: Acronym co-founder Tara McGowan is married to Buttigieg strategist Michael Halle, while former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe sits on Acronym’s board. Shadow had also been a client of both the Buttigieg and Biden campaigns in 2019.

But garden variety disorganization and stupidity were the major story lines underneath the terrible optics. From the first moment the caucus proceedings were delayed Monday night due to what the Iowa Democratic Party called “inconsistencies in the reporting,” Sanders supporters in particular felt they were in déjà vu territory. Orlando native Patty Duffy, an out-of-stater who captained for Sanders in the small town of Milo, had flashbacks to the run-up to the Hillary-Bernie convention.

“It was like we were back in 2016,” Duffy said. “Except this was worse.”

I have no idea what really happened in Iowa, but I have no problem believing there were shenanigans to deny Sanders a victory. I also have no problem believing that whoever ends up being nominated, most Democrats and all Independent NeverTrumpers and ex-GOP NeverTrumpers will vote for him or her.

It is indeed interesting to see how relatively united the Republican Party is behind Trump, and how much disarray there is among Democrats at the moment. That chaos is both a cause and a result of their flailing around for the last three years with only two messages to deliver: Trump is evil, and I have good intentions.

Jordan Peterson is ill, and his critics are happy

The New Neo Posted on by

Ghoulish of them. But is that any surprise?:

Ironically, the anti-Petersonians now seem far more fanatical than Peterson’s most faithful fans. This became clear in recent days, when some of Peterson’s critics — including, amazingly, a professor at the University of Ottawa — went online to express satisfaction that Peterson is being treated for dependence on benzodiazepine, an anti-anxiety medication.

That’s the way social media seems to work these days. Peterson has many enemies. I haven’t read what they’ve written, but any expressions of glee wouldn’t surprise me. To them, Jordan Peterson is a dangerous man because (among other things) he is defending free speech, and doing it in a very articulate manner. Till his illness.

His illness has been explained this way:

So: a man who has been open about his struggles with depression becomes addicted to prescription benzos (e.g., Valium), and nearly dies in detox … and lots of people who hate Jordan Peterson laugh at that.

Peterson has always seemed to me to be a strange combination of fragile and steel-strong. He obviously is a very intense and exceptionally intelligent person, and such people often live on a psychological razor’s edge. In addition, Peterson has never been the least bit shy about talking of his long history of depression, which runs in his family. One of his children has had major and unexplained health problems her entire life, perhaps of an auto-immune nature. And recently his wife – whom he met and fell in love with when they both were children in a small town in northern Canada – was diagnosed with what may be a fatal cancer.

Add that to the extraordinary pressure of his public life, and the schedule he keeps, and no wonder the man was taking tranquilizers. His idiosyncratic and severe symptoms while trying to withdraw may be just another example of his especially vulnerable constitution.

I hope for a full recovery, but this doesn’t sound good at all. Please send healing thoughts and prayers for Peterson and his family.

In case you’ve been stranded on a desert island recently, today is the NH primary

The New Neo Posted on by

First, I’m going to make a prediction without reading the polls. I predict Sanders wins, Buttigieg second, Klobuchar third, Biden fourth. I think Sanders will lead because in 2016 he beat Hillary Clinton 60% to 38% in the New Hamphshire primary. That’s quite a margin.

As for Buttigieg, I think many voters are looking for a candidate they perceive as moderate – that is, a candidate a significant number of voters can be fooled into thinking is moderate. That’s a tried-and-true Democratic tactic. I think those voters are deserting Biden, and going both to Buttigieg and Klobuchar. That’s why I place Buttigieg second, her third, and Biden fourth.

Now I’m going to look at the polls. Pardon me for a moment.

I see that the polls pretty much agree with what I wrote above, except they have a tie for fourth between Biden and Warren.

The polls don’t even acknowledge Bloomberg, at least not the ones at the site I checked. And I had forgotten him, too – but I shouldn’t have. He’s another person who represents (at least for the moment) a refuge for Democrats who want a candidate less forcefully leftist. All people have really seen of him so far are his ads, and so they haven’t had much exposure to his off-the-cuff remarks or even his record except as he wishes to present it. I predict he’ll do surprisingly well, but still be in something like 5th place.

Oscar dresses 2020

The New Neo Posted on by

I care so little about the Oscars that I can’t even pay much attention to the fashions this year. But a quick perusal should tell you all you need to know.

Some were lovely. But some were – well, take a look at Kristen Wiig.

Saoirse Ronan (whoever she is) was my personal non-favorite. She looks as though she’s wearing a growth of wood ear fungus on her torso.

Ronan:

Wood ear fungus:

And someone named Blac Chyna was doing the sexier version of Ming the Merciless

But for the most part, even those stars who were wearing flattering gowns looked like they forgot to do their hair. There was a total disconnect between head and body. What’s up with that? (Yes, the punch lines write themselves.)

The Biden dog-face and pony-soldier show

The New Neo Posted on by

Bizarro Biden strikes again:

Have you noticed that almost all the MSM coverage explains this as a joke? And believe me, I’m not saying it wasn’t. But if it was a joke, it was the most obscure one humanly possible, unless Biden were to have spoken in tongues.

Was he quoting a John Wayne movie, as Biden and his spokespeople have claimed? Apparently he’s used the phrase before. But (a) so far, no one has been able to find the quote in any John Wayne movie, and (b) to use a quote properly in that fashion, it has to be something with which a fairly large number of people would be familiar. This most definitely is not.

So why on earth does Biden say it? Because he’s bizarre. Not only is he bizarre now, possibly because of his advancing age, but I have always felt there’s something “off” about him. That feeling goes back to when I was a Democrat, by the way. I could not understand why he thought he could become president way back when (see this and also this), or why anyone would support him. Fortunately, not many did then, and as it’s shaping up at the moment, not many do now.

[NOTE: I think part of Biden’s fondness for the phrase is its resemblance to “dog and pony show“:

“Dog and pony show” is a colloquial term which has come to mean a highly promoted, often over-staged performance, presentation, or event designed to sway or convince opinion for political, or less often, commercial ends. Typically, the term is used in a pejorative sense to connote disdain, jocular lack of appreciation, or distrust of the message being presented or the efforts undertaken to present it.

Rather fitting, don’t you think?]

How buffet restaurants make a profit

The New Neo Posted on by

Let’s have something lighter – or heavier, as the case may be.

I always wanted to know how buffet restaurants manage to do well financially, because so many are rather inexpensive. And now I do.

Every now and then I go to an Asian buffet near me, or one in a town I visit frequently. Most Asian buffets are inedible, but these two are pretty good. Decent (but not fabulous) all you can eat sushi for twelve dollars? Along with a whole bunch of other stuff, like spare ribs (a weakness of mine)?

I am very selective at these places. I know exactly what I want, and I go for it. If I try anything new, I take a teeny tiny piece first, because I can always go back for more if it passes muster. It rarely does, and then I never touch the stuff again. So I may be one of the people the buffets make a significant amount of money off of, although I also might be considered average – in which case they still make a little bit of profit from me, according to the article.