The Nikki Haley Case

 

Trump says moderate Republicans are no longer welcome in the GOP: We are 100 percent MAGA now pic.twitter.com/Q2mvgGAR0x

— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) March 3, 2024

Although Kristin Welker is in some ways, Chuck Todd but different, in addition to her idiotic claim this morning that Trump "allegedly" tried to overturn the 2020 election as if he didn't do it on live tv, she managed to tease out of Nikki Haley an admission of sorts that she might not support Trump for president despite the loyalty pledge the GOP imposed on its candidates. 

This is something I wanted to hear, not because I support Nikki Haley, but because I need to see Republicans walk away from Trump because our national security and national sanity depends on it. 

Trump said he didn't want Nikki Haley people to sign on to his campaign. They were "permanently barred." What is that supposed to mean? Is that like when Kari Lake said she didn't need the "McCain Republicans", lost her election, and then got so groveling she nearly begged Meghan McCain to not treat her like the dirt that she is? 

I feel like he gave her all the off ramp she needed to never do his business again. 

What the Hell Are You Doing? 5: Jeb! Sucked!

I really, really hate to do this, because, as you have to know, I think Joe Biden has done a lot of really good stuff and I already semi-dragged him (respectfully, because some respect is still due) over the touchy-feely thing, but here I go again:

Jeb Bush was not, even if Biden was just trying to be nice, "a hell of a governor".  I guess that could be meant in a handful of ways. There is a backhanded way to be "a hell of" anything. Maybe he meant it as the "good job, Brownie" of damning with faint praise. ( "Hell of an" anything could also be seen as "praising with faint damn".) He could be saying Jeb governed the hell out of Florida, but in also having Scott and DeSantis (who actually somehow doesn't seem as bad as the least Bush or the lizardlike billionaire scam artist), there is a hella governing that has been and is being done.

There is a fascinating history of this kind of clipped false comity that could be unpacked here, from the topic of what "Minnesota nice" is really all about, to what the southern US term "Bless her/his/their heart" really means. For the unclued, there is a measured and important distance between "that is a great dress" and "that dress looks good on you" and a still further gulf to "that dress is interesting".  It is meaningful to note that "a hell of a governor" is in the "interesting governor" state of affairs, but unfortunately, our modern age wants a little less conversation, and a little more action, baby.

It's a nice idea to think that there is a crossover thing where Democrats and Republicans can still find common ground and love on one another and do shit together like a comprehensive immigration bill or health care or whatever. But for a lot of Democrats, Jeb and his Sec of State and their handling of his brother's 2000 presidential election and the disenfranchisement of voters (still ongoing, witness Andrew Gillum's race and ongoing work)  is a major sore spot. Also, the fake religiosity regarding the medically managed death of Terri Schiavo. Who was already very medically understood as being beyond repair.

Jeb! was ignorant about abortion.  And Biden's history about this isn't historically ideal, any more than his position on segregation.

I don't even hate Joe Biden, I just think his time is past. Praising, even if with faint damn, Jeb Bush, who many Democrats will always see as the rotter brother who helped George W. steal an election, is a failure to have his finger on the pulse of where we are right now. Pink pussy hats should be viewed as a sort of war bonnet, and the approach to win the Democratic base needs to be exceptionally 21st century. We are not looking back and we are not finding the common ground. Tell us outright Jeb! sucked and Trump is worse. Say things plain. Even in public settings where it seems like damns should be forbidden.

GOP delenda est. Lather, rinse, repeat. GOP delenda est.

Jeb Out

There's nothing surprising about Jeb Bush dropping out of the 2016 race at this stage--looking back over the campaign that was is a joyless task I'm in no way interested in, and I'm mostly just happy not to have to watch him run, or whatever it was he thought he was doing, anymore.

What I am reminded of, though, was when WI Gov. Scott Walker dropped out. He had said at the time:

“I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to consider doing the same, so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current front-runner. This is fundamentally important to the future of the party and, more importantly, to the future of our country.”

At the time, I joked that you just couldn't talk the other losers in the race to bow out in favor of Jeb Bush, as being the handiest example of the "establishment" favorite. And of course, nothing of the kind did happen. And for some reason, Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich all have reason to like their odds at this point, even if I think Rubio's the default. (Carson's campaign is really just buckraking, and it's sort of peculiar that that actually still has any flavor left for the rubes to chew on.)

It's too late to "what if" how things might have been different with a narrower field from the beginning. But it is clear that Jeb was never the guy everyone was going to rally around. I'll tell you when I was sure of that--when Donald Trump said that Jeb had to like immigrants because of his wife. Jeb should have jumped down Trump's throat for that on general principles, never mind because you have to hit in a political contest.  He asked for an apology. Big whoop.

So when I see a handful of pieces about the Bush campaign's "civility"--I wouldn't actually call it that. The only good thing about his campaign was that it proved that campaign spending can only do so much for a poor candidate.

Jeb Bush Is Trying New Things

New hairstyle, contacts instead of glasses...but I'm thinking it might be a bit late to change parties!

(He was laughing, so maybe it was that awkward Bush sense of humor?)

Trump Fatigue

Many apologies to my regular readers for my temporary absence from blogging, but I have been mentally laid up with a tremendous case of Trump Fatigue. The recent episode of Donald Trump vs the Media, pitting His Nibs against Fox News (and particularly Megan Kelly) was just a stunt too far for me to go on trying to write about this as politics, and it isn't even exactly media criticism--the only way to discuss this is as a television review for a reality show.

I had long wondered what debates mean to people who don't follow policy minutia. I no longer do. They are a talent contest for political spokesmodels. Who delivered cleverer lines? Who looked poised? Did one candidate or the other seem nervous or badly prepared for some ambush question? It's superficial--and backing out of the tiresome thing makes sense for a frontrunner who considers himself far enough in the lead to get no benefit out of it whatsoever--and already anticipates he won't get slammed for it. So Trump created his own counter-event. It even drew two of the undercard debate performers, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee, who seek attention like blind snakes seeking warmth. Did they realize they were practically signaling an endorsement? (Who knows what people with this little likelihood of winning the nomination, who still claim to be in the running, actually are aware of?)

Without Trump, the debate went on, arguably with more discussion of the issues. Sen. Ted Cruz took his shots at the absent frontrunner--but it looks like none of the other stiffs on the stage felt like that was their cue to take advantage of the opportunity to bury Trump while he was offstage. I found it a source of disappointment, but not surprise. They could have said he "cut and run" and challenged his seriousness, but no. Jeb Bush tussled with Marco Rubio. Rubio tussled with Cruz. Boring.

So Trump gambled that he wouldn't get painted as unserious for ditching the debate to have a rally for disabled vets--and was proven absolutely right. He flatfooted the competition, who simply did not know how to respond. And he won the media cycle, because once again, he was all the news could talk about.

I don't know when everyone else will be as exhausted by this sort of thing as I am, but I feel like the media should catch on that they are being played for publicity, and maybe his nasty little habit of turning on journalists who displease him only stops when they do what his GOP rivals refused to.

Jeb Bush Makes Me Feel Bad

Jeb Bush has secured the crucial "Jeb Bush's mom" endorsement https://t.co/7nxhoNBLOo

— NowThis (@nowthisnews) January 23, 2016

This week, Jeb Bush seems to have brought his mom around to supporting his campaign, which is great, because she wasn't that excited before, to be honest. This surely means Jebmentum is on its way. Or not.

See, I think the guy has a "unforced error" problem that is going to be insurmountable. Take the water crisis in Flint. Now, Marco Rubio ducked and said he didn't really know about it, and Donald Trump ducked and said he didn't have anything to say about it. But here is Jeb Bush:

“I admire Rick Snyder for stepping up right now. He’s going to the challenge, and he’s fired people and accepted responsibility to fix this,” Bush, a former Florida governor, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Yep. "Heckuva job, Rick Snyder." After a year and a half or so of covering it up and ignoring it, the Michigan Republican is finally getting around to spreading the blame between his administration and anybody else he can point at. And Jeb calls that leadership. But when you're happy to tout getting an endorsement from your mom, maybe a participation trophy does look like a major award.

Jeb Bush's PAC is Sending Video Players

What will likely be the most talked about mailer in the '16 election. @JebBush #nhpolitics #FITN #strategy @politico pic.twitter.com/MxWqcYVX1F

— Douglas J. Palardy (@djpalardy) January 18, 2016

This is kind of neat in that a video player can be sent, but in a whole other way I'm thinking: why? It's like a tv ad you get in the mail. And even if these video mailers cost less than "a bottle of good Scotch"--they would have to cost in the ballpark of a lousy bottle of scotch each, you'd think? I don't know if, cool (and potentially disposable) as the technology is, it's really a mind-changer. It's more of a reminder of how lousy with money his PAC is.


But this really opens up a new frontier in collectible campaign materials, I'll give it that.

I missed blogging about the State of the Union

Missed President Obama's final #SOTU last night? Check out his full remarks. https://t.co/7KHp3EHK8D

— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) January 13, 2016

I always do this--I find there's some major event to do political blogging about, blow it off for something more interesting like getting a decent night's sleep, and then find that I am blog-blocked until I get a few paragraphs about it out of the way. So here goes:

It was a good speech in that it was optimistic about what the US can achieve together as a nation. President Obama said it would be shorter than previous SOTU speeches, and I think it was, barely. I think expressing a commitment to investing in a cure for cancer is a an admirable goal, and putting VP Biden in charge of it is a great idea because he is a very motivated person of great capability. This kind of government pledge to start a "War on Cancer" had been previously declared by President Nixon, but I think the past four decades have given us more reason to be hopeful--take a look at the immunotherapy that has resulted in President Carter's cancer being undetectable.

I think one of the more positive things about the evening was that there wasn't a whole bunch of rebuttals--SC Governor Nikki Haley gave the Republican rebuttal and I think she did fine. It's not an easy act to follow, she was maybe a little stiff, but she didn't say anything weird, reach about for beverages, or wear a really distracting tie. For a position where the bar is "not screwing up"--she gets an A for not screwing up. She spoke in favor of the US being a welcoming and diverse nation and for civility in politics. It kind of astounds me that this was found objectionable by some far-right voices like Ann Coulter (who Tweeted that her Fatherland Figure Donald Trump should deport the Governor of SC--who was born here! Seriously?)

Jeb*: I, Clod-I-is II

As I previously explained, sometimes Jeb* reminds me of I, Claudius, except he really is that thick. Here are two Tweets that basically sum up Jeb*'s day:

#1

On the Katrina nickname, here is the full quote from Bush after he was introduced by state Sen. Katrina Shealy pic.twitter.com/rU93uYnkZT

— Ashley Killough (@KilloughCNN) December 31, 2015

#2

Asked Jeb about Tamir Rice today. He initially responded by saying that Chicago has a lot of work to do. Transcript: pic.twitter.com/rHqYfacGEU

— Candace Smith (@CandaceSmith_) December 31, 2015

One could comment, but one need not.

* Punctuation to be named later.

Jeb Bush and Exclamation Point to Part Ways

The candidate and his punctuation mark in happier times.

On word that a split had occurred between 2016 Presidential candidate Jeb Bush and the iconic exclamation point that served in not one, but two campaign logos, the crack political team at Strangely Blogged  sought to set the story straight. Now, we don't actually have the kind of access to check this with Jeb(punctuation mark to be named later), but our editor is on pretty good terms with Exclamation Point, who graciously gave us a short interview. (Exclamation Point steers away from interrogatives, but have you ever interviewed Question Mark? A riddle wrapped in an enigma.)

VS: Exclamation Point, thanks for the interview. Now, we've had news that Jeb Bush is abandoning his previous campaign logo...

EP: No! Not at all! First, call me EP--look, this was a very amicable split, and I don't feel like this logo was "abandoned" in the least. As you know, Jeb Bush and I worked together back in '94.

VS: When he failed to unseat incumbent FL Gov. Lawton Chiles.

EP: Right, right. Well, we lost that one, but it was a good fight, and if there were any hard feelings, he wouldn't used me again this time around--but to be honest, the split is mutual.

VS: You parted with Jeb Bush?

EP: Well, when Bush said that he hated being a front-runner, I realized I had better start putting out some feelers. Because he hasn't been one...

VS: So, what's ahead for you, EP?

EP: Well, there is literally always work for a punctuation mark in this business. Everybody gets work. Parentheses. Semi-colons. Ellipses... You know, Pound Sign used to do a little phone work, but when she changed her name to Hashtag, she reinvented herself for the internet age.

VS: Bush has been trying to make something work with Hashtag.

EP: Yeah. She's popular. (Distractedly.) And of course Ben Carson is looking to shake things up--so there could be a place for an Exclamation Point in there.

VS: So, no hard feelings then?

EP: Not at all. And you know, there's always the private sector for me--I mean, whenever a fast food chain wants to convince customers that their salads are just as tasty and filling as their double patty bacon cheeseburger--who do they call?

VS: You?

EP: I make up in the appearance of sincerity what I lack in honesty! Say, you don't have Ted Cruz's number?

VS: Sorry, no. Thanks, EP.

After following three letters for much of this campaign, it looks like Exclamation Point still has plenty to say!

Where Does Trump Go from Here?

Donald Trump's campaign would like to deny that the candidate was mocking the disability of a reporter whose recollection of certain disputed events differs from the candidate's own recollection. The campaign would prefer that one believe that the candidate does not know what the journalist in question looks like.

Oh, really? Because the exact words out of Trump's mouth before he scrunched up his right arm were:

“Now the poor guy, you ought to see the guy,” he said as he gestured, drawing condemnation from the Times and disability advocates.

Right. You ought to see the guy, like Trump knows what he looks like, and in case you don't...?

Tacky. But this is an interesting thing--why did Trump single out this reporter's disability? To discredit him. Why use this to discredit him? Because in Trump's mind, any weakness is to be exploited. Naturally. Of course the disabled guy's reporting is faulty. In the Trump regime, don't actually expect that weakness will be suffered or cozened. Actually, expect that if you have weakness, you are suspected of trying to weaken the entire corpus Americanus. There won't really even be a place for charity towards the ill.

What the hell does that sound like? See, when I hear "Make America Great"--in part I hear, "Make Americans Pure". And that purity might not entail someone you know.

Trump doesn't need "sensitivity training". He isn't being chided for being less than politically correct. He knows who the hell that reporter is, and he mocked him like a child who knows no better might mock someone before being advised that he lives in a world with a lot of other people of varying strengths all of whom have value. But he is not a child. And he shouldn't have to be taught like one.

Carrying a Cross and Wrapped in the Flag

I don't like the flavor of the current political atmosphere much these days, as I keep returning to how the attacks in Paris turned into a hotbed of concern about accepting Syrian refugees in the US. Tengrain, at the risk of Godwinning, took a look at the kind of things that were being batted around, and heard that as the "dog whistle heard round the world." I think that's exactly right. Politicians right here tend to not realize there is a whole entire world outside of the US with the ability to see what we're doing. And what we're doing is very Christian-signifying.

Take the idea that being Christian should specifically be privileged in accepting refugee applications. I really hate this idea. The Assad government isn't specifically bad to Christians at all, but they definitely have a problem with Daesh and other militant Islamist groups--I just don't see how this makes life worse for them than Muslims who apply, or why we should view them as better because "there's no meaningful risk" of Christians committing acts of terror. And sure, in context, Syrian Christians won't, and for the same reason Muslims wouldn't--pretty fucking grateful to be here and not where the bombs and bullets are!  But if the slinger of that bullshit, son of a Cuban refugee and a supporter of refugees until like, a minute ago, Ted Cruz, wants to talk about whether Christians ever do terror--yeah. Right here in the US, they sometimes do.

"We'll See What Happens"

Dr. Ben Carson recently gave an interview on foreign policy where he suggested he'd be fine with the US shooting down a Russian plane. When questioned about the possible aftermath of that decision, he replied:

"If they violate it, we will, in fact, enforce it. We'll see what happens. For us to always be backing down because we're afraid of a conflict, that's not how we became a great nation, Chris," he said.

We'll see what happens.  Yes, two nuclear-armed states potting each others' planes over Syria. We'll see what happens.  That doesn't seem to me to be how responsible people think. But what else did he say?

"My point being that if we get out there and we really lead and it appears that we're making progress, that all of the Arab states and even the non-Arab states who are, I think, beginning to recognize that the jihad movement is global" will join, Carson said.

"Beginning to recognize that the jihad movement is global"? This isn't new to the rest of the world--this is only new to Carson. And the "really lead" stuff: please for the love of anything, Google "US-led coalition" and get back to us.

Now, I'm not going to pretend that Dr. Carson is uniquely unqualified on foreign policy--after all, Senator Marco Rubio is throwing around some "clash of civilizations" crap that is specifically unhelpful (I'd say it makes more sense to consider Daesh "anti-civilization"), and Jeb Bush, whose brother did not keep us safe, seems to think that we should only take in Christian refugees. (Senator Cruz says that, too, but wouldn't he? Really?) And then there's Governor Huckabee, who doesn't seem to know that Iran is at war with Daesh, also.

Yes, guys, let's be idiots and make this about Christians versus Muslims, exactly how the terrorists want us to behave.

These Republican candidates are just awful. Are they so warped by the need to appeal to the lowest common denominator of their base that they can not articulate even one reasonable response? (Yes, that was rhetorical.)

Update:  You know, parse this statement from Sen. Cruz's website:

“Such steps, however, are defensive reactions to an enemy that will continue to try to attack us until they succeed once again. We must immediately recognize that our enemy is not ‘violent extremism.’ It is the radical Islamism that has declared jihad against the west. It will not be appeased by outreach or declarations of tolerance. It will not be deterred by targeted airstrikes with zero tolerance for civilian casualties, when the terrorists have such utter disregard for innocent life. We must make it crystal clear that affiliation with ISIS and related terrorist groups brings with it the undying enmity of America—that it is, in effect, signing your own death warrant.”

 So, because Daesh has indiscriminate disregard for life, we should tolerate civilian casualties just like they do to show that anyone associated with them (like the people they kidnap, capture, oppress, sell) should die? I don't think that helps. I really don't.

Tragedy, then Farce

It seems like it was only a couple months ago (it was only a couple of months ago) that I was lamenting the current GOP field and strongly suggesting that Mitt Romney had certain qualities that not any of the current challengers could even fake, up to and including the ability to fake it.

It took them two months to catch up with me, but some of the good conservative show-runners are thinking of knee-walking to Mitt and seeing if the dream is still alive.

What do you think they'll get?

This city is afraid of me...I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll look down and whisper "No." They had a choice, all of them. They could have followed in the footsteps of good men like my father or President Truman. Decent men who believed in a day's work for a day's pay. Instead they followed the droppings of lechers and communists and didn't realize that the trail led over a precipice until it was too late. Don't tell me they didn't have a choice. Now the whole world stands on the brink, staring down into bloody Hell, all those liberals and intellectuals and smooth-talkers... and all of a sudden nobody can think of anything to say.

Or he'd be like "If I have to, but you have to hold your fucking end up, peasants." And we'd be having something like an election I even recognize.

Marco in the Middle

If the other candidates in a primary think the time is right to attack you, it might probably mean you are perceived as a threat. So, this is where Marco Rubio finds himself, having successfully deflected Jeb Bush's criticism of him at the previous debate, and having not done too badly at this past one. Outside of debates, we see that Jeb Bush made the typically Jeb Bush move and his campaign telegraphed what they would attack Rubio on, allowing his campaign to produce a kind of inoculation against it.

But here's a curious conundrum--Jeb Bush's campaign thinks they can ding Marco Rubio on being too conservative regarding abortion rights. (Seriously Jeb!?)  But no, really, Rubio is horrific regarding abortion rights. Alleging women would be pushed to abortion for monetary reasons is a pretty heinous world-view. But this is a Republican primary--how is "too conservative" even a thing except as a general election argument that Jeb! can't win either?

But what's really rich about Jeb! calling Marco Rubio "too conservative" is that Ted Cruz has decided to label Rubio an "establishment candidate".  If that means a candidate who doesn't show up at a "kill the gays " rally, well, I'd say that is an improvement.

I don't think the best arguments against Marco Rubio are to depict him as too conservative or too establishment--this issue between Bush and Cruz could leave Rubio appearing to be "just right". The best arguments against Rubio are probably right out there where anyone could get at them. And if he got the primary nod, we'd see'em come up in the general for sure.

Ben Carson's Biography

Do people remember violent things? I remember when a knife was held on my mom in a bus on the way to her obstetrician when I was about six years old. Would I know any of the other people on the bus who saw that? Nope. Would they be easy to track down? Nope. This happened over thirty years ago, so I know that while I recall this thing, it would be hard to pin down. I can understand how people inquired about some of what Carson lays down regarding his trying to hit people with bricks, or stabbing a friend with a knife, or hitting his mom with a hammer, wouldn't know anything about that. And yet, I think it's really weird that the standard of ones veracity is verifying the degree to which one was, once, a violent sociopath.

Most candidates for elective office do not rely upon a verification of their being a formerly violent sociopath as proof of their honesty. It's a wild double-bind, no? On one hand--such a liar! On the other, such a violent sociopath! Why is this an argument we're having about a guy who never held office and doesn't seem to have real policies? Why aren't both sides of this question equally disqualifying, all other things considered?

The Jeb Fix

Gov. Jeb Bush's new slogan, from the minds of the same people who probably came up with "Why Jeb?":

Jeb Can Fix It.

Josh Marshall asks the obvious question. (I think he's subliminally sending a message about his campaign to the donors.) But there's a lot of less-obvious fun that the Internet has been having with "Fix it Jeb". Gawker darkly reminds us that Jim'll Fix It was a long-running British children's program that starred, it turned out, a monstrous pedophile. Jeb Bush says he eats nails in the morning--doesn't that impair his ability to...fix it?

He wants to have a more positive campaign, and claims that he'll somehow fix Washington gridlock. I'm just not sure he has the proper toolkit.

The Soft Bigotry of Lowered RNC Expectations

I think RNC Chair Reince Priebus is making a bit of a tactical error in following the Senator Ted Cruz whinge about the toughness of the questions posed by the CNBC moderators and making this a stand against CNBC's parent company, NBC. For one thing, a good argument could be made that questions were tough, but fair, and not appreciably different than questions at the previous GOP and Democratic debates. And for another--why should you make these primaries a cakewalk for these not-ready-for-prime-time buggers if the general election then proves to be a minefield?

The optics of blaming the moderators solely for the shitshow made of the Republican field is a failure to own up to the reality that it consists of three outsiders, and an assortment of part-time grifting Hackenstein Monsters. They sort of are politicians, when they aren't self-promoting. They are post-government. They have policies stitched together from other pols that have gone on that they mean to charge with their own electricity. But their complaint is--don't ask us hard questions: great. So, if you find the questions hard to stomach, what about when you are dealing with real-life situations?

Whimper because Vladimir Putin's tone is too harsh? Complain because the Ayatollah seems kind of biased against you?

What's Donald Trump going to do when he gets the 3 AM phone call? Ignore it because he has something more important on the other line? What's Ted Cruz going to do under pressure--blame someone else when he's supposed to be the guy in charge?

That's not presidential--it's bush league (yeah, pun intended).

There was a Presidential Debate Tonight!

A presidential debate--yayayayayayay!

A GOP debate. Oh. Well....

So, I could seriously analyze it--but let me start off by saying the format where there's an undercard "kid's table" debate is starting to seem really insulting and like a rotten waste of time. So why aren't these people dropping out of the race so they can stop wasting our time? It's not that they have no right to run--they just have no reasonable expectation to win anything. But even the main event debates seem like maybe they are a little too populous. I don't think Mike Huckabee is really looking to be president. I'm kind of wondering what Chris Christie really thinks his odds are. And again, the outsiders, Carson and Trump, say really odd things that make it questionable whether they have the firmest grasp on policy.

The winner and loser of the debate seem to be above. Rubio was capable of dealing with questions with reasonable political instincts and impressed people watching the debate. Bush didn't do a lot of talking, and frankly wasn't about being there.

General impressions:

Rubio: Polished like a finger nail, and about as deep. But his debate coaching must be immaculate. But gosh he seems young. You know how sometimes a parent is asked if maybe their kid should have another year of kindergarten? Sort of like that. But sheesh--he's so tired of the Senate kindergarten.

Fiorina: She has no regard whatsoever for the facts, and says things that are completely wrong with utter confidence. How has FOX News not picked up on her yet? Also she will simplify the tax code to three pages--and that was when I realized she was about that grift, ladies and gents. She also said all of Obama's policies and all of Clinton's policies are just the worst. FOX News, are you listening?

Jeb: Dead Candidate Walking?

First, we were hearing that the Jeb! campaign was making cutbacks to staff and payroll, then we heard he was meeting with donors and his family. Some could say it's a little early for the pre-post mortems, but, as I've been saying, even if he had the money to hang in there, he's kind of an awful candidate and it might be a good idea of he just didn't hang in there. The US News pre-post mortem I linked to has a beautiful line in it--"he can't ad-lib a fart". Of the cuff, Jeb! is kind of a clod. The sad thing is, with preparation, he's just not much better.

When the family gathers round him to square with the facts, I have the feeling his mom and dad might just tell him that his campaign is going off to live on a farm in the country, where it will have plenty of room to run around, and Jeb won't see it anymore--but won't the campaign be so much happier? And maybe Jeb! will understand.