hotair--2020-03-04--Coronavirus patient: Screw your quarantine, pal

New Hampshire ’ s first confirmed coronavirus patient was discovered recently and as has been happening in many places around the country , the hospital worker was told to stay home and remain isolated for 14 days .
Seems like a solid plan , right ?
Perhaps not so much .
We ’ ve now learned that there was some sort of “ invitation only ” event on Friday that the patient really wanted to attend .
So they did .
Without telling anyone .
Now the original patient is supposedly back home and in self-quarantine , but so are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in “ close contact ” with them .
How many people each of them came in close contact with before being quarantined remains unknown .
( NBC Boston ) New Hampshire ’ s first coronavirus patient , a hospital employee , went to an event tied to Dartmouth business school on Friday despite being told to stay isolated , officials say , and all others who went to the event are now being told to stay isolated .
The announcement on Tuesday came as state health officials said a second person in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus , COVID-19 .
That person was in close contact with the first patient , and the officials expect more coronavirus cases may be found as they investigate .
The second , presumed patient is a man , according to the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services , which didn ’ t provide additional details or say exactly where he came into contact with the first patient .
I ’ ve pretty much given up on asking whether or not we learned anything from the Ebola outbreak back in 2014 because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A self-quarantine solution only works if every single person involved goes along with it .
If you have ten infected people and nine of them stay in isolation , the one person who refuses can infect ten more people in no time flat .
And if somebody is going around to events and shaking hands , coughing or whatever , the other people there have no reason to suspect there ’ s a potential pandemic in their midst and they return home or to work none the wiser .
How do we know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because it always happens .
Let ’ s take a short stroll down memory lane for a moment and remember a young lady named Kaci Hickox from Maine .
She ’ s a nurse who was overseas treating people with Ebola in 2014 .
When she returned home , her flight arrived in New Jersey and she was ordered to go into quarantine while doctors figured out what to do .
How did she respond ?
She sued the Governor and threatened to just leave anyway , claiming that mandatory quarantines were cruel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and went back to Maine where she was supposed to be staying inside her home .
But she was soon seen out bicycling around the neighborhood .
That cause the state government in Maine to move to make her home quarantine mandatory .
So she threatened a fresh round of lawsuits .
And keep in mind that we ’ re talking about a nurse .
A nurse who literally worked with Ebola patients .
If anyone should have known better it was her , but she just flipped everyone the bird and did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re seeing the same pattern in New Hampshire .
I ’ m still holding out hope that this virus remains non-lethal for the vast majority of infected persons .
If so , it may yet just wash over the country with most people never even needing to go to the hospital and leave the population with native immunity .
But if this thing morphs into Captain Trips , our chance at containing it is probably already lost .
And self-quarantines aren ’ t going to be the answer .

New Hampshire’s first confirmed coronavirus patient was discovered recently and as has been happening in many places around the country, the hospital worker was told to stay home and remain isolated for 14 days. Seems like a solid plan, right? Perhaps not so much. We’ve now learned that there was some sort of “invitation only” event on Friday that the patient really wanted to attend. So they did. Without telling anyone.
Now the original patient is supposedly back home and in self-quarantine, but so are all of the event attendees who came in “close contact” with them. How many people each of them came in close contact with before being quarantined remains unknown. (NBC Boston)
New Hampshire’s first coronavirus patient, a hospital employee, went to an event tied to Dartmouth business school on Friday despite being told to stay isolated, officials say, and all others who went to the event are now being told to stay isolated. The announcement on Tuesday came as state health officials said a second person in the state is presumed to have the new coronavirus, COVID-19. That person was in close contact with the first patient, and the officials expect more coronavirus cases may be found as they investigate. The second, presumed patient is a man, according to the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, which didn’t provide additional details or say exactly where he came into contact with the first patient.
I’ve pretty much given up on asking whether or not we learned anything from the Ebola outbreak back in 2014 because we’ve obviously learned nothing. A self-quarantine solution only works if every single person involved goes along with it. If you have ten infected people and nine of them stay in isolation, the one person who refuses can infect ten more people in no time flat. And if somebody is going around to events and shaking hands, coughing or whatever, the other people there have no reason to suspect there’s a potential pandemic in their midst and they return home or to work none the wiser.
How do we know this is always going to happen? Because it always happens. Let’s take a short stroll down memory lane for a moment and remember a young lady named Kaci Hickox from Maine. She’s a nurse who was overseas treating people with Ebola in 2014. When she returned home, her flight arrived in New Jersey and she was ordered to go into quarantine while doctors figured out what to do. How did she respond? She sued the Governor and threatened to just leave anyway, claiming that mandatory quarantines were cruel and inhuman.
Hickox flew the coup and went back to Maine where she was supposed to be staying inside her home. But she was soon seen out bicycling around the neighborhood. That cause the state government in Maine to move to make her home quarantine mandatory. So she threatened a fresh round of lawsuits.
And keep in mind that we’re talking about a nurse. A nurse who literally worked with Ebola patients. If anyone should have known better it was her, but she just flipped everyone the bird and did as she pleased. And now we’re seeing the same pattern in New Hampshire. I’m still holding out hope that this virus remains non-lethal for the vast majority of infected persons. If so, it may yet just wash over the country with most people never even needing to go to the hospital and leave the population with native immunity. But if this thing morphs into Captain Trips, our chance at containing it is probably already lost. And self-quarantines aren’t going to be the answer.


hotair--2020-03-04--Today's deep question: Did Schumer "threaten" conservative Supreme Court justices with rally rant? <

Today's deep question: Did Schumer "threaten" conservative Supreme Court justices with rally rant? Update: Roberts chastises Schumer

Answer : Only on a slow news day .
The Supreme Court heard arguments today in a contentious abortion-restriction law in Louisiana , one of a likely string of challenges they ’ ll hear as states probe the new SCOTUS lineup to see how far it will go to roll back Roe and/or Casey .
This gave the activists on both sides a chance to demonstrate for their cause , including Chuck Schumer , who can be seen in this video going the full Nicolas Cage to impress his audience .
Bear in mind when you watch this short clip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter Venkman , nobody choosed nothing yet : We ’ ll get back to the main question in a moment , but let ’ s provide some context first .
Today ’ s session was oral arguments on June Medical Services v Russo , challenging a state law requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their location .
The Supreme Court struck down a similar Texas law in 2016 in Whole Women ’ s Health v Hellerstedt on a 5-3 decision .
So is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Women ’ s Health ?
Not exactly ; this appeal was brought by the abortion providers , who lost when the appellate court avoided the earlier precedent and ruled that the time frame provided by Louisiana in its law made it relatively easy for clinics to comply .
If the Supreme Court wanted to keep the law in place , they could have just denied cert .
Instead , John Roberts initially joined the liberal wing to suspend the Louisiana law , and then voted in favor of its review by the full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the last opportunity to discard the law , not put it back in place .
The hearing itself was held to benefit the side on which Schumer stands .
Want a little more context ?
Gorsuch and Kavanaugh had little to do with this , and in fact Gorsuch never even asked a single question : With all that context , people can come to the correct conclusion , which is that Chuck Schumer is a hopeless windbag demagogue rather than a serious person worthy of public trust .
It may very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Whole Women ’ s Health ruling to allow for legislatures to define public-health requirements for abortion clinics ; it ’ s just as possible that they will end up affirming Whole Women ’ s Health .
One thing ’ s for sure , which is that the Supreme Court hasn ’ t yet done anything with this case yet except hear arguments .
And the only reason they did that much was because the abortion providers demanded it .
Now , let ’ s get back to the original question : was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on , man .
“ You won ’ t know what hit you ” is a rhetorical device relating to the politics of the issue ; it ’ s not a threat , not in the Brandenburg sense and not in any realistic sense either .
No one really thinks that pasty senior-citizen Schumer was physically threatening anyone , do they ?
Even as a political threat , it ’ s empty talk .
Schumer can ’ t do a damned thing about their decisions , and both he and they know it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mindless hackery that has to arise from time to time to remind us of the value of lifetime appointments to the federal bench .
Those reminders don ’ t come around often , so enjoy them while you can .
Addendum : Cage did it better in Vampire ’ s Kiss , Chuck .
Addendum II : In anticipation of the “ what if a Republican had said this ” argument , let me assure you that I have read my contract , and I am not required to lose my mind every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contract may vary .
Void where prohibited .
Update : Well , it appears Chief Justice John Roberts disagrees with me about “ threatening.
” He is not amused :

Answer: Only on a slow news day. The Supreme Court heard arguments today in a contentious abortion-restriction law in Louisiana, one of a likely string of challenges they’ll hear as states probe the new SCOTUS lineup to see how far it will go to roll back Roe and/or Casey. This gave the activists on both sides a chance to demonstrate for their cause, including Chuck Schumer, who can be seen in this video going the full Nicolas Cage to impress his audience.
Bear in mind when you watch this short clip that, in the immortal words of Peter Venkman, nobody choosed nothing yet:
Did Senate Democrat leader Schumer just threaten two conservative justices? Where is the media? “I want to tell you Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch: You have unleashed a whirlwind, and you will pay the price”pic.twitter.com/MellytNNp5 — Mark Meadows (@MarkMeadows) March 4, 2020
SCHUMER: They’re taking away fundamental rights. I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind! And you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions!
We’ll get back to the main question in a moment, but let’s provide some context first. Today’s session was oral arguments on June Medical Services v Russo, challenging a state law requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their location. The Supreme Court struck down a similar Texas law in 2016 in Whole Women’s Health v Hellerstedt on a 5-3 decision.
So is this appeal an attempt to reverse Whole Women’s Health? Not exactly; this appeal was brought by the abortion providers, who lost when the appellate court avoided the earlier precedent and ruled that the time frame provided by Louisiana in its law made it relatively easy for clinics to comply. If the Supreme Court wanted to keep the law in place, they could have just denied cert. Instead, John Roberts initially joined the liberal wing to suspend the Louisiana law, and then voted in favor of its review by the full court.
In other words, this is the last opportunity to discard the law, not put it back in place. The hearing itself was held to benefit the side on which Schumer stands.
Want a little more context? Gorsuch and Kavanaugh had little to do with this, and in fact Gorsuch never even asked a single question:
Another closely watched questioner Wednesday was Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court’s newest member and replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been a key vote for preserving abortion rights. Justice Kavanaugh questioned the challengers’ argument that an abortion law requiring admitting privileges would never be valid, and he asked what would happen if abortion providers were more easily able to obtain such privileges. … Justice Gorsuch didn’t speak during Wednesday’s argument.
With all that context, people can come to the correct conclusion, which is that Chuck Schumer is a hopeless windbag demagogue rather than a serious person worthy of public trust. It may very well turn out that the court narrows its Whole Women’s Health ruling to allow for legislatures to define public-health requirements for abortion clinics; it’s just as possible that they will end up affirming Whole Women’s Health. One thing’s for sure, which is that the Supreme Court hasn’t yet done anything with this case yet except hear arguments. And the only reason they did that much was because the abortion providers demanded it.
Now, let’s get back to the original question: was anything Schumer said a threat? Come on, man. “You won’t know what hit you” is a rhetorical device relating to the politics of the issue; it’s not a threat, not in the Brandenburg sense and not in any realistic sense either. No one really thinks that pasty senior-citizen Schumer was physically threatening anyone, do they?
Even as a political threat, it’s empty talk. Schumer can’t do a damned thing about their decisions, and both he and they know it. It’s the kind of mindless hackery that has to arise from time to time to remind us of the value of lifetime appointments to the federal bench. Those reminders don’t come around often, so enjoy them while you can.
Addendum: Cage did it better in Vampire’s Kiss, Chuck.
Addendum II: In anticipation of the “what if a Republican had said this” argument, let me assure you that I have read my contract, and I am not required to lose my mind every time a Democrat loses theirs. Your contract may vary. Void where prohibited.
Update: Well, it appears Chief Justice John Roberts disagrees with me about “threatening.” He is not amused:


hotair--2020-03-04--This Cenk Uygur meltdown captures the progressive zeitgeist (and is pretty funny)

Not since the Lawrence O ’ Donnell “ Stop the hammering !
” tape leaked have I enjoyed a progressive meltdown this much .
The difference is that this clip of Cenk Uygur didn ’ t leak it was put out on purpose .
And honestly he seems about one step away from turning into Alex Jones ranting about gay frogs .
“ A week ago I would have told you—I did tell you !
—Super Tuesday I think we got this , ” he said .
He continued , “ We thought it was almost over , Bernie was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not over .
Now we ’ re in a tie .
And now we got absolute , dig in warfare against the establishment .
“ But we didn ’ t start the war !
They ’ ll lie about it again .
We didn ’ t start the war .
They started the war !
” As Uygur gets more worked up he begins to clap his hands together for emphasis : Smack !
“ Obama said the same thing !
” “ And so , you want to go to war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Uygur said .
He then tore into Joe Biden .
“ Biden is either near senile or actually senile .
Watch any of the tapes .
And Biden lies non-stop !
He ’ s going to get caught !
” “ You ’ re going to run that guy against Trump and we ’ re going to lose to Trump again and maybe lose our democracy .
Hell no !
Hell no !
No !
” Here ’ s the clip : Uygur ’ s meltdown isn ’ t the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that suggests progressives are losing it .
The hashtags # BernieorBust2020 , # RiggedElection and # WarrenDropOut are all trending .
A sample of the sort of thing I ’ m seeing : Despite these apparently sincere reactions , some are suggesting the hashtags themselves were created by the right to sow division .
I don ’ t know who started the hashtags but it ’ s pretty clear that Bernie Bros are upset their candidate didn ’ t perform as promised yesterday .
Now they are looking for someone else to blame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Warren , billionaires , etc .
They are going to ride this train into a ditch , screaming about the one percent as they go .

Not since the Lawrence O’Donnell “Stop the hammering!” tape leaked have I enjoyed a progressive meltdown this much. The difference is that this clip of Cenk Uygur didn’t leak it was put out on purpose. And honestly he seems about one step away from turning into Alex Jones ranting about gay frogs.
“A week ago I would have told you—I did tell you!—Super Tuesday I think we got this,” he said. He continued, “We thought it was almost over, Bernie was going to win. Now it’s not over. Now we’re in a tie. And now we got absolute, dig in warfare against the establishment.
“But we didn’t start the war! They’ll lie about it again. We didn’t start the war. They started the war!” As Uygur gets more worked up he begins to clap his hands together for emphasis: Smack! “Obama said the same thing!”
“And so, you want to go to war, we’ll go to war,” Uygur said. He then tore into Joe Biden. “Biden is either near senile or actually senile. Watch any of the tapes. And Biden lies non-stop! He’s going to get caught!”
“You’re going to run that guy against Trump and we’re going to lose to Trump again and maybe lose our democracy. Hell no! Hell no! No!” Here’s the clip:
Uygur’s meltdown isn’t the only sign appearing on social media this morning that suggests progressives are losing it. The hashtags #BernieorBust2020, #RiggedElection and #WarrenDropOut are all trending. A sample of the sort of thing I’m seeing:
I'm so sick of this shit. No. No I'm not voting for your terrible candidate that hasn't earned my vote. Don't blame your losses on people who refuse to eat a shit sandwich and pretend to like it. Make a better sandwich and we'll be there. #BernieForPresident #BernieOrBust2020 https://t.co/gIISwfKn9S — Pacizzles Wants Everything… for Everyone🌹🏡♥ (@pacizzles87) March 4, 2020
Now, more than ever, I’m still #BernieOrBust2020 — Becky Meyer (@electricfire89) March 4, 2020
Oh, you are frustrated with being screwed over? Now you know how Sanders supporters feel every day against the corrupt establishment. #BernieOrBust2020 — Post-Scarcity-Pal 🏴 🍞📚🛸 (@PostScarcityPal) March 4, 2020
Dear Berners, If the DNC continues rigging the primaries against we the people's choice – @BernieSanders – and Biden is installed as the nominee, what will you do? Feel free to comment, especially if it's other! #RiggedElection #RiggedDNC #NotADemocrat — Jennifer (@teddy_cat1) March 4, 2020
The Democratic Party is clearly in a civil war, and with the way this election is going, things could get VERY ugly. #RiggedElection — Becky Meyer (@electricfire89) March 4, 2020
Who here would have ever guessed Mike Bloomberg would wind up being more honorable than Elizabeth Warren?#WarrenDropOut — 🌹 Mr Rimbaud 🌹 (@LuckyBoulevard) March 4, 2020
these feminist millenial people really just want a female president and dont actually care about policies or ethics or ANYTHING #WarrenDropOut — dannihilator 1312 (@hateshack) March 4, 2020
I want so badly for Warren to prove me right against the Snake Emoji people. She must drop out now and endorse Bernie the progressive movement is her priority. #WarrenDropOut https://t.co/rPuiKP1JrT — Keith Burgun (@keithburgun) March 4, 2020
Despite these apparently sincere reactions, some are suggesting the hashtags themselves were created by the right to sow division.
#BernieOrBust2020 #RiggedPrimary are hashtags designed by Trump, Russia or people oozing with Privilege (White or otherwise) who want to divide Democrats and re-elect Trump. It's that F***ing Simple!!! — (((DeanObeidallah))) (@DeanObeidallah) March 4, 2020
The only people tweeting #BernieOrBust2020 or #RiggedPrimary are Russian operatives or Trump supporters. Remember, if you don’t vote against Trump then you are voting for him. I’ll let you explain to your grandchildren what the hell you were thinking. — Mrs. Krassenstein (@HKrassenstein) March 4, 2020
I don’t know who started the hashtags but it’s pretty clear that Bernie Bros are upset their candidate didn’t perform as promised yesterday. Now they are looking for someone else to blame, i.e. the establishment, Biden, Warren, billionaires, etc. They are going to ride this train into a ditch, screaming about the one percent as they go.


Unbelievable -- almost: Bernie defended Fidel's Cuba -- to American hostage in Havana

Imagine being held as a political prisoner in Fidel Castro ’ s workers ’ paradise for a few years , a Yanquí accused of espionage for bringing wider Internet access to a small enclave of Jews in Cuba .
Your guards allow you to dress in normal clothes to greet a congressional delegation of three senators from your home country .
The first two bring you sympathy , conversation , pledges of assistance , and candy .
The third sits quietly throughout most of the meeting , and then at the end wonders why everyone talks badly of your jailers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Alan Gross had to live it with Bernie Sanders , and he ’ s through being quiet about it : American Alan Gross , a prisoner in Cuba for five years during the Obama administration , is accusing Sen. Bernie Sanders of commending the communist country when he came to visit him behind bars .
Sanders visited Cuba as part of a congressional delegation in 2014 , along with Sens .
Heidi Heitkamp and Jon Tester .
During the one-hour meeting , Sanders told the prisoner that he didn ’ t understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in an interview with NPR .
“ He said , quote : ‘ I don ’ t know what ’ s so wrong with this country , ’ ” Gross recalled .
If that quote seems ambiguous in its reading six years later , it wasn ’ t ambiguous at all to Gross at that time .
In fact , Gross can still hardly believe Sanders had the nerve to say it : Gross , as a prisoner in that country , said he took offense to the remark .
“ I just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stupid thing for him to do , ” Gross told NPR .
“ First , how could he not have seen the incredible deterioration of what was once the grandeur of the pre-Castro era .
And two , how could be so insensitive to make that remark to a political hostage — me !
” To extend our imaginations a bit further , consider what the impact might have been if Alan Gross told this story over the last two weeks prior to Super Tuesday .
Bernie Sander might not have even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ salvage from his front-runner debacle — California , Utah , and Colorado .
Well , maybe not California : This is right in line with Sanders ’ usual apologetics for left-wing tyrants and juntas , although usually he had the good sense not to proselytize their inmates .
I argue in my column at The Week that Bernie ’ s Fidel comments turned the tide for Biden in last night ’ s primaries : How did Biden manage to pull off this feat , especially with his underfunded organization and tendency to stick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got a lot of help from Sanders , the media , and perhaps the biggest loser of Super Tuesday : Fidel Castro .
Until Sanders surprised everyone by jumping out into the lead in the early contests , the media focus on his campaign was generally softer and more positive .
Once Sanders became the frontrunner , his past statements got a lot more scrutiny , thanks in large part to Bloomberg ’ s oppo-research machine .
Past statements got unearthed , mainly the same statements that got unearthed four years ago by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the media while Sanders remained in the underdog role .
Those writings and remarks run the gamut from the weird to Wobblies nostalgia , but until a few weeks ago Sanders maintained the narrative that he was pushing for “ Scandinavian ” socialism .
That all came crashing down in a 60 Minutes interview when Anderson Cooper confronted Sanders over his support for Fidel Castro , the Sandanistas , and the Soviets .
After playing some of his past public statements of support for these brutal dictatorships , Cooper asked Sanders to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sanders essentially doubled down by praising Castro ’ s “ massive literacy program , ” whose success and supposedly singular nature is a canard by any measure .
Two days later in a CNN town hall , Chris Cuomo tried to give Sanders an opportunity to respond to outrage from Florida Democrats over his praise for Castro .
Rather than apologize , Sanders added Chairman Mao to his list of praiseworthy figures .
“ China is an authoritarian country , ” Sanders told Cuomo , “ but can anyone deny — I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they have taken more people out of extreme poverty than any country in history ?
” One supposes that Sanders isn ’ t counting the 45 million who died of starvation between 1959-1962 in Mao ’ s Great Leap Forward .
Very belatedly last week , the Washington Post reviewed Sanders ’ decades-long public record of support for socialist regimes and reported that it was hardly limited to a “ Scandinavian ” strain : But a Fix review of more than 10 hours of Sanders appearances over the past three decades reveals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ downplay abuses of authoritarian regimes , instead focusing on aspects and programs he admired .
During his two presidential bids , Sanders has at times appeared to contradict or try to explain away his earlier views on authoritarian regimes , examples of which you can watch in the video above .
In 1985 , Sanders praised Cuban dictator Fidel Castro for his education and health-care programs .
In 1986 , he recalled being “ very excited ” by Castro ’ s revolution .
And after he returned from a trip to Cuba in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders as calling Cuba a “ model of what a society could be ” for Latin America .
At the time , Castro ’ s human rights abuses had been documented in media reports and by Congress .
… Returning from a trip to Nicaragua in 1985 , Sanders downplayed reports of abuses by the Sandinista-led government , instead lauding the country ’ s democratic rights , civil liberties and food lines .
In 1988 , Sanders discussed the government ’ s media censorship by pointing to previous U.S. crackdowns on press freedoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second world wars .
He ’ s been a useful idiot for a very long time , and convincingly so among people who know no better .
That does not include Alan Gross , who learned the hard way about the nature of socialist regimes and their innately authoritarian character .
Even when faced with a victim of it — a fellow American , in fact — Sanders was more interested in his ideology than in its realities .
One has to wonder why it took two presidential bids to finally get some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now that Michael Bloomberg has dropped out of the race , will we see any further probing of Sanders ’ socialist apologetics ?

Imagine being held as a political prisoner in Fidel Castro’s workers’ paradise for a few years, a Yanquí accused of espionage for bringing wider Internet access to a small enclave of Jews in Cuba. Your guards allow you to dress in normal clothes to greet a congressional delegation of three senators from your home country. The first two bring you sympathy, conversation, pledges of assistance, and candy. The third sits quietly throughout most of the meeting, and then at the end wonders why everyone talks badly of your jailers.
You can afford to imagine it. Alan Gross had to live it with Bernie Sanders, and he’s through being quiet about it:
American Alan Gross, a prisoner in Cuba for five years during the Obama administration, is accusing Sen. Bernie Sanders of commending the communist country when he came to visit him behind bars. Sanders visited Cuba as part of a congressional delegation in 2014, along with Sens. Heidi Heitkamp and Jon Tester. During the one-hour meeting, Sanders told the prisoner that he didn’t understand why others criticized Cuba, Gross said in an interview with NPR. “He said, quote: ‘I don’t know what’s so wrong with this country,’ ” Gross recalled.
If that quote seems ambiguous in its reading six years later, it wasn’t ambiguous at all to Gross at that time. In fact, Gross can still hardly believe Sanders had the nerve to say it:
Gross, as a prisoner in that country, said he took offense to the remark. “I just think, you know, it was a stupid thing for him to do,” Gross told NPR. “First, how could he not have seen the incredible deterioration of what was once the grandeur of the pre-Castro era. And two, how could be so insensitive to make that remark to a political hostage — me!”
To extend our imaginations a bit further, consider what the impact might have been if Alan Gross told this story over the last two weeks prior to Super Tuesday. Bernie Sander might not have even won the three states he managed to salvage from his front-runner debacle — California, Utah, and Colorado.
Well, maybe not California:
According to exit polls, a majority of California Democratic voters have a favorable opinion of socialism. https://t.co/dejxP1aVYS pic.twitter.com/hDoLxUIS6u — CBS News (@CBSNews) March 4, 2020
This is right in line with Sanders’ usual apologetics for left-wing tyrants and juntas, although usually he had the good sense not to proselytize their inmates. I argue in my column at The Week that Bernie’s Fidel comments turned the tide for Biden in last night’s primaries:
How did Biden manage to pull off this feat, especially with his underfunded organization and tendency to stick his foot in his mouth? He got a lot of help from Sanders, the media, and perhaps the biggest loser of Super Tuesday: Fidel Castro. Until Sanders surprised everyone by jumping out into the lead in the early contests, the media focus on his campaign was generally softer and more positive. Once Sanders became the frontrunner, his past statements got a lot more scrutiny, thanks in large part to Bloomberg’s oppo-research machine. Past statements got unearthed, mainly the same statements that got unearthed four years ago by the Clinton campaign but were never pressed by the media while Sanders remained in the underdog role. Those writings and remarks run the gamut from the weird to Wobblies nostalgia, but until a few weeks ago Sanders maintained the narrative that he was pushing for “Scandinavian” socialism. That all came crashing down in a 60 Minutes interview when Anderson Cooper confronted Sanders over his support for Fidel Castro, the Sandanistas, and the Soviets. After playing some of his past public statements of support for these brutal dictatorships, Cooper asked Sanders to explain them. Rather than admit error, Sanders essentially doubled down by praising Castro’s “massive literacy program,” whose success and supposedly singular nature is a canard by any measure. Two days later in a CNN town hall, Chris Cuomo tried to give Sanders an opportunity to respond to outrage from Florida Democrats over his praise for Castro. Rather than apologize, Sanders added Chairman Mao to his list of praiseworthy figures. “China is an authoritarian country,” Sanders told Cuomo, “but can anyone deny — I mean, the facts are clear — that they have taken more people out of extreme poverty than any country in history?” One supposes that Sanders isn’t counting the 45 million who died of starvation between 1959-1962 in Mao’s Great Leap Forward.
Very belatedly last week, the Washington Post reviewed Sanders’ decades-long public record of support for socialist regimes and reported that it was hardly limited to a “Scandinavian” strain:
But a Fix review of more than 10 hours of Sanders appearances over the past three decades reveals how Sanders has often been quick to downplay abuses of authoritarian regimes, instead focusing on aspects and programs he admired. During his two presidential bids, Sanders has at times appeared to contradict or try to explain away his earlier views on authoritarian regimes, examples of which you can watch in the video above. In 1985, Sanders praised Cuban dictator Fidel Castro for his education and health-care programs. In 1986, he recalled being “very excited” by Castro’s revolution. And after he returned from a trip to Cuba in 1989, the Rutland Daily Herald paraphrased Sanders as calling Cuba a “model of what a society could be” for Latin America. At the time, Castro’s human rights abuses had been documented in media reports and by Congress. … Returning from a trip to Nicaragua in 1985, Sanders downplayed reports of abuses by the Sandinista-led government, instead lauding the country’s democratic rights, civil liberties and food lines. In 1988, Sanders discussed the government’s media censorship by pointing to previous U.S. crackdowns on press freedoms during the Civil War and first and second world wars.
He’s been a useful idiot for a very long time, and convincingly so among people who know no better. That does not include Alan Gross, who learned the hard way about the nature of socialist regimes and their innately authoritarian character. Even when faced with a victim of it — a fellow American, in fact — Sanders was more interested in his ideology than in its realities.
One has to wonder why it took two presidential bids to finally get some mainstream-media investigation of this track record. Now that Michael Bloomberg has dropped out of the race, will we see any further probing of Sanders’ socialist apologetics?


hotair--2020-03-04--Carville: Let's face it, Bernie should drop out

Via the Daily Beast , he ’ s under no illusions that Sanders will take his advice and quit soon .
What he ’ s suggesting is that this race , which looked so different from the 2016 primaries a week ago , might soon look eerily similar — a well-known establishmentarian clearly ahead nationally , with enough of a delegate lead that they can ’ t plausibly be caught , and Bernie forging on anyway for month after month because his “ revolution ” refuses to bow to electoral reality .
Why do it again , asks Carville ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ some unique threat to American democracy , as it regularly claims , why prolong a divisive primary once the writing ’ s on the wall ?
It ’ s jarring to hear someone make a credible case that Bernie should fall on his sword when Sanders seemed like the inevitable nominee so recently , but look at it this way .
Despite his string of early victories , in what way has Bernie outperformed his 2016 showing thus far ?
He basically tied with Buttigieg in Iowa ; the same happened with Hillary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hampshire primary — as he did in 2016 , with a much higher margin of victory .
He picked up a state this year that he lost in 2016 when he won Nevada , but his overall vote share wasn ’ t any higher this time .
It was slightly lower , with Bernie dropping from 47.3 percent to 46.8 against a divided field this time .
He lost badly in South Carolina in both years but finished with a lower share of the vote this time , 19.8 percent , than he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 26 percent .
Right , granted , again he was facing a divided field this year versus a one-on-one with Clinton four years ago .
But Bernie invested a lot of time and money to try to improve his showing in SC in 2020 , knowing that the media would watch the state closely to see if he had made inroads among black voters .
How ’ d that work out ?
Last night he lost three states that he won in 2016 : Maine , Minnesota , and Oklahoma .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is a big deal , but given the explosive momentum Biden enjoyed yesterday from same-day voters , Bernie probably would have lost California too if not for the many weeks of early voting that went on there , before Biden ’ s huge win in SC .
He now seems in dire peril of losing Michigan next week after taking that state from Hillary in his most impressive victory of the 2016 cycle .
So , with the benefit of hindsight , having processed the Super Tuesday results , what reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more formidable candidate now than he was four years ago , when he had the benefit of facing a less personally popular opponent in Hillary Clinton ?
His fans can ’ t even credibly whine this time that the nomination is being “ stolen ” from him .
Stolen how ?
Hillary crony Philippe Reines makes a fair point : The biggest endorsements Biden got were James Clyburn in SC and then Buttigieg and Klobuchar after he crushed them in that state .
There ’ s nothing novel or unfair about an ideologically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s vanquished them ; the left is expecting Warren to do that by endorsing Bernie at any moment , in fact .
Nor did the plutocrat , Mike Bloomberg , ever unload on Bernie with a meaningful barrage of negative ads despite his phenomenal ad spending .
Sanders had every chance to put the race away with a good showing in South Carolina .
He blew it , fair and square .
And the most important way he ’ s blown it is by not delivering on the huge surge in youth turnout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Bernie ’ s entire theory of the case on electability : He doesn ’ t need as many black voters or suburbanites in November because he ’ s going to unleash a zombie horde of DSA twentysomethings who ’ ll swamp the polls and usher in the golden age of socialism .
He desperately needed those people to show up last night and snuff out Joementum before it got going .
They didn ’ t .
In Alabama , North Carolina , South Carolina , Tennessee , and Virginia , young voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year than they were four years ago .
Now , that doesn ’ t mean their raw numbers were smaller ; it may be that other demographics — like , say , Biden-friendly suburbanites — simply turned out in massive numbers this time in the name of crushing the socialist .
Either way , the bottom line is that Bernie needs freakishly high turnout among his base to offset his disadvantages among more moderate demographics .
And he ’ s just not getting that , despite how well positioned he was even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination this week .
Even the one group where he has made some gains is being offset by losses in others : There ’ s another problem , as several liberals noted in commentary today .
Bernie is the ultimate WYSIWYG candidate , a guy who seems incapable of being something other than he is even if it ’ s to his electoral benefit to be so .
He ’ s a socialist ; he ’ s been one for 78 years ; he ’ s not going to start watering down his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undecided Democrats a little more comfortable .
The shining example of this was his refusal to back away from his admiration of Castro ’ s literacy rates in Cuba , a golden opportunity for him to show that critics who call him a useful idiot have been unfair to him .
Bernie didn ’ t budge .
He is a useful idiot , and proudly so .
WYSIWYG .
David Faris is aghast : Ezra Klein found a more pragmatic reason to scold Sanders , the fact that his “ unyielding revolutionary ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cult but terrible for building majority coalitions .
What was his back-up plan for getting to 51 percent if the great youth wave never materialized and his attempt to win over black voters didn ’ t pan out ?
Was he prepared to make any deals with Warren or other influential party pols to secure their endorsements ?
Was he willing to back off Medicare for All for the time being , if only on grounds that it can ’ t feasibly be passed until Congress turns considerably more progressive ?
Bernie ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He ’ ll proclaim the gospel of socialism and wait for you to be converted .
And if you aren ’ t , he ’ ll … go on proclaiming it and hope your heart softens .
Eventually .
Any day now .
I ’ m curious now to see how next week ’ s primaries shake out , whether there really is some evidence of the party uniting around Biden a la Carville ’ s suggestion in the clip below .
Of the six states scheduled , Bernie won four of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is he going to match that this year or underperform again ?
If Biden sweeps , what ’ s the point of fighting on to Florida , where Sanders is sure to get smoked ?

Via the Daily Beast, he’s under no illusions that Sanders will take his advice and quit soon. What he’s suggesting is that this race, which looked so different from the 2016 primaries a week ago, might soon look eerily similar — a well-known establishmentarian clearly ahead nationally, with enough of a delegate lead that they can’t plausibly be caught, and Bernie forging on anyway for month after month because his “revolution” refuses to bow to electoral reality. Why do it again, asks Carville? If the left believes that Trump is some unique threat to American democracy, as it regularly claims, why prolong a divisive primary once the writing’s on the wall?
It’s jarring to hear someone make a credible case that Bernie should fall on his sword when Sanders seemed like the inevitable nominee so recently, but look at it this way. Despite his string of early victories, in what way has Bernie outperformed his 2016 showing thus far? He basically tied with Buttigieg in Iowa; the same happened with Hillary in 2016. He won the New Hampshire primary — as he did in 2016, with a much higher margin of victory. He picked up a state this year that he lost in 2016 when he won Nevada, but his overall vote share wasn’t any higher this time. It was slightly lower, with Bernie dropping from 47.3 percent to 46.8 against a divided field this time. He lost badly in South Carolina in both years but finished with a lower share of the vote this time, 19.8 percent, than he did in 2016, when he notched 26 percent. Right, granted, again he was facing a divided field this year versus a one-on-one with Clinton four years ago. But Bernie invested a lot of time and money to try to improve his showing in SC in 2020, knowing that the media would watch the state closely to see if he had made inroads among black voters. How’d that work out?
Last night he lost three states that he won in 2016: Maine, Minnesota, and Oklahoma. He’s probably going to pick up California, which is a big deal, but given the explosive momentum Biden enjoyed yesterday from same-day voters, Bernie probably would have lost California too if not for the many weeks of early voting that went on there, before Biden’s huge win in SC. He now seems in dire peril of losing Michigan next week after taking that state from Hillary in his most impressive victory of the 2016 cycle.
So, with the benefit of hindsight, having processed the Super Tuesday results, what reason is there to believe Sanders is a more formidable candidate now than he was four years ago, when he had the benefit of facing a less personally popular opponent in Hillary Clinton?
His fans can’t even credibly whine this time that the nomination is being “stolen” from him. Stolen how? Hillary crony Philippe Reines makes a fair point:
Biden has raised less than Bernie. Biden has spent less than Bernie. Biden hasn’t run TV ads everywhere. Bernie has. Biden doesn’t have offices everywhere. Bernie has. This isn’t the establishment, not insiders, not donors. There’s no rigging. It’s voters fucking voting. — Philippe Reines (@PhilippeReines) March 4, 2020
The biggest endorsements Biden got were James Clyburn in SC and then Buttigieg and Klobuchar after he crushed them in that state. There’s nothing novel or unfair about an ideologically similar candidate backing an opponent who’s vanquished them; the left is expecting Warren to do that by endorsing Bernie at any moment, in fact. Nor did the plutocrat, Mike Bloomberg, ever unload on Bernie with a meaningful barrage of negative ads despite his phenomenal ad spending. Sanders had every chance to put the race away with a good showing in South Carolina. He blew it, fair and square.
And the most important way he’s blown it is by not delivering on the huge surge in youth turnout that he keeps promising. That’s Bernie’s entire theory of the case on electability: He doesn’t need as many black voters or suburbanites in November because he’s going to unleash a zombie horde of DSA twentysomethings who’ll swamp the polls and usher in the golden age of socialism. He desperately needed those people to show up last night and snuff out Joementum before it got going. They didn’t.
Even Sanders’ home state of Vermont showed a lackluster turnout of young millennials and ‘Gen Zers.’ Only 11% of the state’s electorate was under 30 compared to 15% when he ran against Clinton, according to exit polls. And a similar trend played out in other Super Tuesday states such as Texas, where 15% of voters was between 17 and 29 compared to 20% in 2016, and Massachusetts where the share of young voters dropped from 19% four years ago to 16% Tuesday. The common theme in all those states: Sanders fared worse this year than he did when he faced eventual nominee Hillary Clinton four years ago.
In Alabama, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia, young voters were a smaller share of the electorate this year than they were four years ago. Now, that doesn’t mean their raw numbers were smaller; it may be that other demographics — like, say, Biden-friendly suburbanites — simply turned out in massive numbers this time in the name of crushing the socialist. Either way, the bottom line is that Bernie needs freakishly high turnout among his base to offset his disadvantages among more moderate demographics. And he’s just not getting that, despite how well positioned he was even 72 hours ago to wrap up the nomination this week.
Even the one group where he has made some gains is being offset by losses in others:
Okay, looking at it more closely, the Sanders’ coalition has changed and is shrinking from 2016. He did much better with Hispanic voters this year, but against Clinton, he won more non-college whites. Biden is winking them now, combining them with black voters and suburban women — Michael Brendan Dougherty (@michaelbd) March 4, 2020
There’s another problem, as several liberals noted in commentary today. Bernie is the ultimate WYSIWYG candidate, a guy who seems incapable of being something other than he is even if it’s to his electoral benefit to be so. He’s a socialist; he’s been one for 78 years; he’s not going to start watering down his socialism now just because it might make undecided Democrats a little more comfortable. The shining example of this was his refusal to back away from his admiration of Castro’s literacy rates in Cuba, a golden opportunity for him to show that critics who call him a useful idiot have been unfair to him. Bernie didn’t budge. He is a useful idiot, and proudly so. WYSIWYG. David Faris is aghast:
He can’t do it. He can’t walk back a mistake. And it’s terrifying. I hope this is obvious by now but there is zero conceivable political benefit to soft-pedaling your criticism of Fidel. Pro-Castro voters in America are like less than 1 percent of the electorate. As Andrew Yang might say: MATH. Someone in a position of authority in the campaign needs to pull Sanders aside and just give him a script about the 1970s and 1980s and tell him never to deviate from it. Memorize it, carve it in block letters on his arm, and read it out robotically whenever anyone asks about Cuba or the Sandinistas. Wash, rinse, shout, repeat.
Ezra Klein found a more pragmatic reason to scold Sanders, the fact that his “unyielding revolutionary” approach is great for building an ideological cult but terrible for building majority coalitions. What was his back-up plan for getting to 51 percent if the great youth wave never materialized and his attempt to win over black voters didn’t pan out? Was he prepared to make any deals with Warren or other influential party pols to secure their endorsements? Was he willing to back off Medicare for All for the time being, if only on grounds that it can’t feasibly be passed until Congress turns considerably more progressive? Bernie’s more a preacher than a politician. He’ll proclaim the gospel of socialism and wait for you to be converted. And if you aren’t, he’ll … go on proclaiming it and hope your heart softens. Eventually. Any day now.
I’m curious now to see how next week’s primaries shake out, whether there really is some evidence of the party uniting around Biden a la Carville’s suggestion in the clip below. Of the six states scheduled, Bernie won four of them in 2016, including Michigan. Is he going to match that this year or underperform again? If Biden sweeps, what’s the point of fighting on to Florida, where Sanders is sure to get smoked?


hotair--2020-03-04--Candidate endorsed by AOC, Sanders was defeated in TX-28 (Update: AOC is so proud)

As I write this Wednesday morning , the Associated Press has just called this race .
Henry Cuellar , a moderate Democrat has defeated progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros in Texas ’ 28th district : TX-28 was one of the most-closely watched races on Super Tuesday .
Cuellar is one of a handful of moderates which AOC , Bernie Sanders , Elizabeth Warren , and Justice Democrats had sought to primary .
Cisneros is expected to speak in about an hour but even before that the disappointment is rolling in : To really appreciate what a big loss this is for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this race was built up .
Here ’ s how HuffPost described the race on Monday : In South Texas ’ s vast 28th Congressional District , progressive immigration attorney Jessica Cisneros , 26 , is hoping to unseat conservative Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar , who is 64 .
Cuellar ’ s history of opposition to abortion rights , gun regulation and tougher union protections , as well as his support for the fossil fuel industry and some of President Donald Trump ’ s immigration policies , have earned him the enmity of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights and progressive groups… A win for Cisneros “ would show that progressivism , as exhibited by Ocasio-Cortez , can even reach into the recesses of South Texas , ” said Texas politics expert Terence Garrett , who chairs the public affairs department at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley .
“ It would be a dramatic shift.
” … The youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement is calling on its army of activists to make calls and knock on doors for Sanders , Cisneros and two other Democrats competing in primaries to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House .
Sunrise ’ s calculation is that making electoral inroads in Texas , where the oil and gas industries are strongly influential , would be a major coup for the Green New Deal movement .
This was the big organizations of the left teaming up against Cuellar .
And yet , it seems the support was mostly at a distance .
Despite her endorsement , AOC never actually came to TX-28 to show support for Cisneros .
Given how close the race was , that may have been a mistake .
Nick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supports Bernie Sanders told HuffPost : “ AOC is venerated like a rock star down here .
If she came down , if Bernie came down , it would be pure insanity.
” But that didn ’ t happen and a few moments ago Cisneros sent out a statement claiming a moral rather than an actual victory : There ’ s another reason this loss is a big one for AOC and especially Bernie Sanders .
Sanders ’ theory of the race is that he can afford to turn off some moderate voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s going to attract a lot of people to the polls who otherwise might stay home .
But as we ’ ve discussed before , that hasn ’ t happened so far .
Cisneros ’ race in TX-28 was another proving ground for this theory of the race .
Could a bold progressive challenger beat a conservative Democrat in a solidly blue district ?
You can think of it as a microcosm of the larger battle between Sanders and Biden or even between Sanders and Trump ( if it comes to that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be : Close but no cigar .
It turns out a Trump-supporting , pro-life , pro-2nd Amendment Democrat beats a bold progressive even in a blue district .
That should be worrying Bernie Sanders and his supporters this morning .
No comment on the outcome of the race so far from AOC or Justice Democrats .
I ’ ll update this post if they react to the news .
In the meantime , here ’ s a report from last August about Cisneros titled “ This 26-year-old Running for Congress Wants to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Executive Director of Justice Democrats : So if bold progressives need the element of surprise to win elections , how is that supposed to work out for Bernie Sanders ?
Up above I mentioned Sanders theory of the race .
Here ’ s more proof it isn ’ t happening :

As I write this Wednesday morning, the Associated Press has just called this race. Henry Cuellar, a moderate Democrat has defeated progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros in Texas’ 28th district:
TX-28 was one of the most-closely watched races on Super Tuesday. Cuellar is one of a handful of moderates which AOC, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Justice Democrats had sought to primary. Cisneros is expected to speak in about an hour but even before that the disappointment is rolling in:
The @DCCC & @SpeakerPelosi need to look themselves in the mirror this morning & realize their thumb on the scale narrowly protected an ANTI-LGBT+, ANTI-CHOICE, KOCH-BACKED NRA-BACKED, FOSSIL FUEL $$ SOAKED TRUMP SUPPORTER, but the Cuellar-Machine's days are numbered! #TX28 https://t.co/mCTtNfQRDD — Our Revolution Texas (@OurRevTexas) March 4, 2020
To really appreciate what a big loss this is for the left, you have see how this race was built up. Here’s how HuffPost described the race on Monday:
In South Texas’s vast 28th Congressional District, progressive immigration attorney Jessica Cisneros, 26, is hoping to unseat conservative Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar, who is 64. Cuellar’s history of opposition to abortion rights, gun regulation and tougher union protections, as well as his support for the fossil fuel industry and some of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, have earned him the enmity of an array of labor unions, reproductive rights and progressive groups… A win for Cisneros “would show that progressivism, as exhibited by Ocasio-Cortez, can even reach into the recesses of South Texas,” said Texas politics expert Terence Garrett, who chairs the public affairs department at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley. “It would be a dramatic shift.”… The youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement is calling on its army of activists to make calls and knock on doors for Sanders, Cisneros and two other Democrats competing in primaries to take on incumbent Texas Republicans in the House. Sunrise’s calculation is that making electoral inroads in Texas, where the oil and gas industries are strongly influential, would be a major coup for the Green New Deal movement.
This was the big organizations of the left teaming up against Cuellar. And yet, it seems the support was mostly at a distance. Despite her endorsement, AOC never actually came to TX-28 to show support for Cisneros. Given how close the race was, that may have been a mistake. Nick Kiersey, a political science professor who supports Bernie Sanders told HuffPost: “AOC is venerated like a rock star down here. If she came down, if Bernie came down, it would be pure insanity.”
But that didn’t happen and a few moments ago Cisneros sent out a statement claiming a moral rather than an actual victory:
In the inbox: Cisneros formally concedes in #TX28 pic.twitter.com/XOkL7RpIQg — Alex Clearfield (@AlexClearfield) March 4, 2020
There’s another reason this loss is a big one for AOC and especially Bernie Sanders. Sanders’ theory of the race is that he can afford to turn off some moderate voters because by being a bold progressive he’s going to attract a lot of people to the polls who otherwise might stay home. But as we’ve discussed before, that hasn’t happened so far.
Cisneros’ race in TX-28 was another proving ground for this theory of the race. Could a bold progressive challenger beat a conservative Democrat in a solidly blue district? You can think of it as a microcosm of the larger battle between Sanders and Biden or even between Sanders and Trump (if it comes to that). And the answer seems to be: Close but no cigar. It turns out a Trump-supporting, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment Democrat beats a bold progressive even in a blue district. That should be worrying Bernie Sanders and his supporters this morning.
No comment on the outcome of the race so far from AOC or Justice Democrats. I’ll update this post if they react to the news. In the meantime, here’s a report from last August about Cisneros titled “This 26-year-old Running for Congress Wants to be the AOC of Texas.”
Update: Here’s AOC’s response.
I am so incredibly proud of Jessica Cisneros. At 26 years old, she ran for office for the first time to offer TX28 new leadership that fights for workers, gender rights,& a climate agenda. She stood up to Koch brother money & incumbency, & she came closer than anyone imagined. https://t.co/3NiBVMfDrf — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 4, 2020
And from the Executive Director of Justice Democrats:
After @AOC defeated Crowley, we didn’t have the element of surprise, and the party machine and big corporate donors on the other side fought us back hard. This is just the beginning for Jessica, and it’s certainly not the end of the movement being built in #TX28. — Alexandra Rojas (@alexandrasiera) March 4, 2020
So if bold progressives need the element of surprise to win elections, how is that supposed to work out for Bernie Sanders? Up above I mentioned Sanders theory of the race. Here’s more proof it isn’t happening:


hotair--2020-03-04--You won't believe who's leading the race to replace Baltimore's last corrupt mayor

When Baltimore ’ s previous mayor , Catherine Pugh left office , it was because she was preparing to do a three year stretch in prison for scamming nearly a million dollars out of various organizations using her self-published children ’ s books .
She was replaced by City Council leader Jack Young , who has thus far been doing a competent and honest job by all accounts .
Unfortunately , Young said from day one that he was only an interim mayor and he had no intention of running for a full term of his own .
That means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year to select the next mayor and the Democratic primary ( which is pretty much the same as the general election because of the city ’ s overwhelming Democrat constituency ) is coming up quickly .
At this point , it ’ s worth reminding everyone that Charm City has been on something of a bad luck streak in terms of mayors for several years now .
Ever since Martin O ’ Malley left to become governor , it ’ s been all downhill from there .
He was replaced by Sheila @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office after being convicted of embezzlement .
She was replaced by Stephanie Rawlings-Blake , who didn ’ t even bother trying for a second term after she let the city burn down around her during the Freddie Gray riots .
( She ’ s now a campaign co-chair for Mike Bloomberg . )
And she was followed by Ms. Pugh .
So who is currently leading in the polls to replace Jack Young as Baltimore ’ s next mayor ?
It ’ s none other than… Sheila Dixon .
Yes , the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of embezzlement .
And no… I ’ m not even kidding .
( Baltimore Sun ) Former Mayor Sheila Dixon has opened up a slight lead in a crowded , competitive race to become Baltimore ’ s next mayor , a new poll for The Baltimore Sun , the University of Baltimore and WYPR shows .
Dixon is favored by 16 % of the likely Democratic primary voters polled .
That ’ s six percentage points more than her top competition : City Council President Brandon Scott and former Maryland Deputy Attorney General @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % support .
Former Baltimore Police Department spokesman T.J. Smith was close behind in fourth place with 9 % , while the incumbent Mayor Bernard C. “ Jack ” Young trailed the leaders with 6 % support .
It ’ s difficult to even know where to start with this story , but let ’ s look at another nugget from the survey that produced these results .
When asked what their top concerns were , one-half of voters said it was the city ’ s rampant crime problems while 21 % cited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Honestly , I can ’ t understand how someone can be driven from office after literally being convicted of embezzlement and then have the nerve to show their face to apply to get back on the ballot again .
And Dixon has now done it twice !
( She ran in the primary against Catherine Pugh and narrowly missed defeating her . )
Perhaps the only thing more amazing than that is the idea that a measurable number of residents are willing to vote for her again .
And she might just win @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here for Baltimore ’ s voters ?
I suppose rather than electing someone new who might wind up being a corrupt thief , you avoid all the worry and go with a known quantity who already has an established reputation as a corrupt thief .
Cuts out all of the uncertainty , you see .
If this actually happens , I ’ m going to be changing one of the concerns and positions I ’ ve held regarding Baltimore for quite a while .
I used to say that the citizens of Charm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corrupt and incompetent leadership .
But if they vote Dixon back into office while knowing what we already know , I will have lost any and all sympathy for Baltimore ’ s denizens .
You ’ re bringing this on yourselves and you deserve everything you get after that .

When Baltimore’s previous mayor, Catherine Pugh left office, it was because she was preparing to do a three year stretch in prison for scamming nearly a million dollars out of various organizations using her self-published children’s books. She was replaced by City Council leader Jack Young, who has thus far been doing a competent and honest job by all accounts. Unfortunately, Young said from day one that he was only an interim mayor and he had no intention of running for a full term of his own. That means that a new election will be held this year to select the next mayor and the Democratic primary (which is pretty much the same as the general election because of the city’s overwhelming Democrat constituency) is coming up quickly.
At this point, it’s worth reminding everyone that Charm City has been on something of a bad luck streak in terms of mayors for several years now. Ever since Martin O’Malley left to become governor, it’s been all downhill from there. He was replaced by Sheila Dixon, who was forced out of office after being convicted of embezzlement. She was replaced by Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, who didn’t even bother trying for a second term after she let the city burn down around her during the Freddie Gray riots. (She’s now a campaign co-chair for Mike Bloomberg.) And she was followed by Ms. Pugh.
So who is currently leading in the polls to replace Jack Young as Baltimore’s next mayor? It’s none other than… Sheila Dixon. Yes, the same Sheila Dixon mentioned above who was convicted of embezzlement. And no… I’m not even kidding. (Baltimore Sun)
Former Mayor Sheila Dixon has opened up a slight lead in a crowded, competitive race to become Baltimore’s next mayor, a new poll for The Baltimore Sun, the University of Baltimore and WYPR shows. Dixon is favored by 16% of the likely Democratic primary voters polled. That’s six percentage points more than her top competition: City Council President Brandon Scott and former Maryland Deputy Attorney General Thiru Vignarajah, who each had 10% support. Former Baltimore Police Department spokesman T.J. Smith was close behind in fourth place with 9%, while the incumbent Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young trailed the leaders with 6% support.
It’s difficult to even know where to start with this story, but let’s look at another nugget from the survey that produced these results. When asked what their top concerns were, one-half of voters said it was the city’s rampant crime problems while 21% cited “concerns over honesty and integrity.”
Honestly, I can’t understand how someone can be driven from office after literally being convicted of embezzlement and then have the nerve to show their face to apply to get back on the ballot again. And Dixon has now done it twice! (She ran in the primary against Catherine Pugh and narrowly missed defeating her.) Perhaps the only thing more amazing than that is the idea that a measurable number of residents are willing to vote for her again. And she might just win.
So what’s the theory here for Baltimore’s voters? I suppose rather than electing someone new who might wind up being a corrupt thief, you avoid all the worry and go with a known quantity who already has an established reputation as a corrupt thief. Cuts out all of the uncertainty, you see.
If this actually happens, I’m going to be changing one of the concerns and positions I’ve held regarding Baltimore for quite a while. I used to say that the citizens of Charm City were suffering as a result of corrupt and incompetent leadership. But if they vote Dixon back into office while knowing what we already know, I will have lost any and all sympathy for Baltimore’s denizens. You’re bringing this on yourselves and you deserve everything you get after that.


hotair--2020-03-04--Team Warren: Come the zombie apolcalypse, you'll all be sorry, or something

Wait — isn ’ t Bernie Sanders ’ socialist-crank campaign a zombie apocalypse in itself ?
YMMV , but after last night ’ s shutout on Super Tuesday , one can hardly blame Elizabeth Warren ’ s campaign for not connecting those particular dots .
At the moment , Alex Thompson writes at Politico , they need a reason to keep their campaign together , even though her dismal night will likely intensify calls for Warren to drop out .
If that means offering a science-fiction scenario , so be it : Other staffers , who are usually unflappably positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with sexism , Sanders supporters , and the state of the race .
The night even had two staffers openly exchanging barbs on Twitter over whether some Warren aides were too “ privileged.
” ( POLITICO sent screenshots of the tweets to a Warren spokesperson but did not receive a response . )
For the most disciplined campaign in the Democratic field , the public infighting was another sign that the string of losses has rattled and demoralized her team .
The campaign ’ s design director was especially dark , writing : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sad drunk brain and a lifetime of sci-fi , but I keep thinking about the Coronavirus and fiction universe in which it turn us all into zombies and a small group of heroes try to go back in time to elect Warren because she was the only one with a plan.
” So far , Trump ’ s plan seems to be working out OK , so we can skip the time travel .
If that were possible , though , perhaps someone could go back in time and tell Warren not to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change stories on why she stopped teaching , and also to put together plans to pay for her plans .
Warren ’ s current status speaks volumes about the capabilities of those time-travel squads .
Unfortunately for Warren , it also speaks volumes about her current status in the race .
As of this morning , though , Warren has chosen to ignore it .
She sent out an urgent fundraising message to supporters to fight on until at least next Tuesday ’ s six primaries : “ We need your help to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , please .
Another quote is less hilarious but no less dishonest .
“ We might not know the full results from states like Texas , California , and Colorado for a few days , ” Warren ’ s message declares , but we know enough to say that Warren won ’ t win any of them , and won ’ t finish in second place either .
She might still win a handful of delegates , but Warren will still be left in double digits while both Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what exactly is her argument for the nomination now ?
Not only did Warren fail to carry her home state , she came in third .
Even in her professed core demographic — women — Warren lost by ten points to Joe Biden .
That was in deep-progressive Massachusetts , tool ; next Tuesday ’ s states are mainly Rust Belt/Midwestern with an exception in Washington State .
There are zero reasons to believe that Warren ’ s on the cusp of a breakout performance in any of them after last night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to Politico ’ s Thompson : Clearly there isn ’ t a path that involves overtaking Biden and Sanders .
If Warren thinks she can win a brokered convention , it might be worth sticking around , although she doesn ’ t have the $ 55 billion fortune that Michael Bloomberg can use ; she ’ ll have to convince donors to keep coughing up cash while she tries to bleed delegates off and skate to the convention .
Now that Bloomberg ’ s opting out of the fight and endorsing Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lane open to her .
If she can convince people to fund it , that is .
Addendum : The path-assessment phase has begun , however …

Wait — isn’t Bernie Sanders’ socialist-crank campaign a zombie apocalypse in itself? YMMV, but after last night’s shutout on Super Tuesday, one can hardly blame Elizabeth Warren’s campaign for not connecting those particular dots. At the moment, Alex Thompson writes at Politico, they need a reason to keep their campaign together, even though her dismal night will likely intensify calls for Warren to drop out.
If that means offering a science-fiction scenario, so be it:
Other staffers, who are usually unflappably positive on social media, vented their frustration with sexism, Sanders supporters, and the state of the race. The night even had two staffers openly exchanging barbs on Twitter over whether some Warren aides were too “privileged.” (POLITICO sent screenshots of the tweets to a Warren spokesperson but did not receive a response.) For the most disciplined campaign in the Democratic field, the public infighting was another sign that the string of losses has rattled and demoralized her team. The campaign’s design director was especially dark, writing: “This is a product of a sad drunk brain and a lifetime of sci-fi, but I keep thinking about the Coronavirus and fiction universe in which it turn us all into zombies and a small group of heroes try to go back in time to elect Warren because she was the only one with a plan.”
So far, Trump’s plan seems to be working out OK, so we can skip the time travel. If that were possible, though, perhaps someone could go back in time and tell Warren not to claim Native American ancestry, not to change stories on why she stopped teaching, and also to put together plans to pay for her plans. Warren’s current status speaks volumes about the capabilities of those time-travel squads.
Unfortunately for Warren, it also speaks volumes about her current status in the race. As of this morning, though, Warren has chosen to ignore it. She sent out an urgent fundraising message to supporters to fight on until at least next Tuesday’s six primaries:
Warren message to supporters: "There are six more primaries just one week away, and we need your help to keep up the momentum." pic.twitter.com/zr2QlQOVqk — Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) March 4, 2020
“We need your help to keep up the momentum“? Oh, please.
Another quote is less hilarious but no less dishonest. “We might not know the full results from states like Texas, California, and Colorado for a few days,” Warren’s message declares, but we know enough to say that Warren won’t win any of them, and won’t finish in second place either. She might still win a handful of delegates, but Warren will still be left in double digits while both Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden have well over 400 each.
Besides, what exactly is her argument for the nomination now? Not only did Warren fail to carry her home state, she came in third. Even in her professed core demographic — women — Warren lost by ten points to Joe Biden. That was in deep-progressive Massachusetts, tool; next Tuesday’s states are mainly Rust Belt/Midwestern with an exception in Washington State. There are zero reasons to believe that Warren’s on the cusp of a breakout performance in any of them after last night’s debacle.
That brings us back to Politico’s Thompson:
Warren’s campaign declined to comment on her next steps after her dismal Super Tuesday performance. But allies who speak regularly with the campaign say the mood was bleak. A small wave of last-minute endorsements from groups like EMILY’s List, along with late financial help from a super PAC, did not significantly move the needle. That’s left the Warren campaign to wonder whether a path forward exists.
Clearly there isn’t a path that involves overtaking Biden and Sanders. If Warren thinks she can win a brokered convention, it might be worth sticking around, although she doesn’t have the $55 billion fortune that Michael Bloomberg can use; she’ll have to convince donors to keep coughing up cash while she tries to bleed delegates off and skate to the convention. Now that Bloomberg’s opting out of the fight and endorsing Biden, though, Warren does have that lane open to her. If she can convince people to fund it, that is.
Addendum: The path-assessment phase has begun, however …


hotair--2020-03-04--The muddle in the middle is over: Bloomberg quits, endorses Biden

It took four days for Dems to move from a seemingly intractable stalemate in the center lane of the primary that was destined to assure Bernie Sanders ’ s nomination to a completely clear field for new frontrunner Joe Biden .
The lesson , now as always : Don ’ t skip the early states , kids .
Even if you have more money than God .
Axios ably summarized the Bloomberg battle plan for the race , which seemed surprisingly astute — until South Carolina : He ended up spending $ 5.1 million per delegate and won exactly one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 351 people voted .
And isn ’ t even a state .
Serious question : If Mike Bloomberg had qualified for the ballot in South Carolina , would Super Tuesday have looked the way it looked last night ?
I don ’ t think he would have beaten Biden in SC , given Joe ’ s huge margin of victory .
But if he had held Biden ’ s numbers down by taking , say , 15 percent of the vote , maybe the media buzz about Joe over the weekend wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And so maybe , instead of winning Minnesota and Massachusetts and Texas last night , Biden would have fallen just a few votes short .
For all the ( justifiable ) hype lately that Bloomberg was helping the socialist in the race by taking votes from Joe , he ended up doing Biden a much bigger favor by skipping SC , giving Joe a last clear chance to establish himself as the moderate champion .
Which Biden seized with both hands .
A week ago it looked like Bernie Sanders would be the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( so long as the economy remained solid ) .
Then Biden blew the doors off in SC , but that was okay — suddenly the race looked like a long , bitter , divisive slog , with Biden forced to try to gradually erase Bernie ’ s delegate lead while Bloomberg remained tied around his ankles like an anchor in key states .
Now , after last night ’ s Joementum eruption , it seems like we may be in line for a surprisingly short race .
Bernie ’ s not going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationally even if he wins big in California , and in fact might end up trailing Biden once the votes are counted .
Bloomberg is now out and probably set to bankroll Biden , either by funding his campaign against Sanders or unloading on Trump ahead of the general election or both .
Biden no longer has to compete with Buttigieg or Klobuchar or Tom Steyer for anti-Bernie votes either .
And he has a slew of states coming up that are demographically favorable to him , allowing him to extend his national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats in future primaries to administer the coup de grace to Bernie in the name of uniting against Trump : We can try counting up the “ Bernie states ” versus the “ Biden states ” that are still left on the calendar , but one of the shining lessons of last night is that some “ Bernie states ” aren ’ t as guaranteed as they seem .
Minnesota and Massachusetts were supposed to be Bernie states .
Biden won both .
Bernie led in nearly all polls of Texas over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too .
Next week voters will go to the polls in Michigan , the site of Sanders ’ s most shocking upset in the 2016 primaries against Hillary .
Given the strength of Biden ’ s momentum and the emerging possibility that undecided Dems are coalescing behind Joe , does anyone want to bet that Bernie ’ s going to hold serve there ?
If he doesn ’ t , and he begins *underperforming* his 2016 results , it ’ s hard to see how we end up with a long primary .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ guessing that Bloomberg ’ s decision to quit will erode whatever defiance is left in Elizabeth Warren about quitting the race too .
I think she really , really wants to be part of that March 15th debate between Bernie and Biden in order to offer herself as a middle-ground option between them , but finishing third last night in Massachusetts has made her a joke .
She might have considered soldiering on anyway if Bloomy were still hanging around and taking votes from Joe , but now that Biden ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from progressives on Warren to get out and clear the leftist “ lane ” for Bernie will be unbearable .
She ’ s already getting dogged for it by Sanders surrogates like Ilhan Omar : King Troll is trolling her over it too .
If she hangs in and continues to take votes from Sanders she ’ ll become one of the most despised figures in the Democratic Party to Bernie cultists .
In fact , Warren may have ended up enabling Biden ’ s journey to the nomination in more ways than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company ’ s NDAs during his debate debut a few weeks ago , she seems to have wounded him mortally .
His upward climb in the polls halted immediately , helping Biden .
For her own political health , she has to quit now before she antagonizes the left any further .
Bloomberg ’ s withdrawal leaves her no choice .
Exit question : Will Bloomberg immediately start bankrolling anti-Bernie ads for Joe ?
My guess is … no .
Not because Bloomy is unwilling , perhaps , but because Team Biden probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a huge task trying to reconcile with disappointed Sanders fans if they end up running Bernie off the field over the next month or two , but right now they ’ re relatively well positioned to do that .
Sanders lost last night not because he was outspent by corporate America or because Barack Obama jumped in and took him out or whatever .
He lost because black voters in South Carolina launched Biden like a rocket nationally .
That ’ s a “ fair and square ” loss , relatively easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ star starts spending Bernie into the ground , though , then Biden ’ s looming victory becomes a sort of dirty trick played on the left by a Wall Street plutocrat .
If I were Joe I ’ d tell Bloomy to hang back , at least for now , and try to take out Sanders myself cleanly , on the strength of Joementum .
Keeping Bloomberg out of this will make party unification more feasible this summer and fall , an absolutely necessary condition to beating Trump .

Four days.
It took four days for Dems to move from a seemingly intractable stalemate in the center lane of the primary that was destined to assure Bernie Sanders’s nomination to a completely clear field for new frontrunner Joe Biden.
The lesson, now as always: Don’t skip the early states, kids. Even if you have more money than God.
I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers. I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done. — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) March 4, 2020
Axios ably summarized the Bloomberg battle plan for the race, which seemed surprisingly astute — until South Carolina:
Bloomberg bet Joe Biden was toast. He was wrong. Bloomberg bet Democrats would rally around him as the Electable One. He was wrong. Bloomberg bet he could buy support with TV ads, while avoiding tough media interviews. He was wrong. Bloomberg bet on a brokered convention. That could still happen, but he appears dead wrong that Democrats would turn to him as their savior.
He ended up spending $5.1 million per delegate and won exactly one state. In which a grand total of 351 people voted. And isn’t even a state.
Serious question: If Mike Bloomberg had qualified for the ballot in South Carolina, would Super Tuesday have looked the way it looked last night? I don’t think he would have beaten Biden in SC, given Joe’s huge margin of victory. But if he had held Biden’s numbers down by taking, say, 15 percent of the vote, maybe the media buzz about Joe over the weekend wouldn’t have been so electric. And so maybe, instead of winning Minnesota and Massachusetts and Texas last night, Biden would have fallen just a few votes short. For all the (justifiable) hype lately that Bloomberg was helping the socialist in the race by taking votes from Joe, he ended up doing Biden a much bigger favor by skipping SC, giving Joe a last clear chance to establish himself as the moderate champion. Which Biden seized with both hands.
Trump is gloating but privately he’s nervous.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1235228511314620416
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1235232818692792320
Bloomberg replied:
A week ago it looked like Bernie Sanders would be the nominee, a favorable match-up for Trump (so long as the economy remained solid). Then Biden blew the doors off in SC, but that was okay — suddenly the race looked like a long, bitter, divisive slog, with Biden forced to try to gradually erase Bernie’s delegate lead while Bloomberg remained tied around his ankles like an anchor in key states. Now, after last night’s Joementum eruption, it seems like we may be in line for a surprisingly short race. Bernie’s not going to get much of a delegate lead nationally even if he wins big in California, and in fact might end up trailing Biden once the votes are counted. Bloomberg is now out and probably set to bankroll Biden, either by funding his campaign against Sanders or unloading on Trump ahead of the general election or both. Biden no longer has to compete with Buttigieg or Klobuchar or Tom Steyer for anti-Bernie votes either. And he has a slew of states coming up that are demographically favorable to him, allowing him to extend his national delegate lead. Which may convince fencesitting Democrats in future primaries to administer the coup de grace to Bernie in the name of uniting against Trump:
The list of states where Biden would be poised to replicate tonight's success is pretty long: FL, GA, MD, MS, MO, LA, NJ, CT. In short, he's currently on track for the nomination. — Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) March 4, 2020
There is a real chance, as in 2004, that Democratic primary voters won’t want to prolong these primaries and will rally around their presumptive nominee. — Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) March 4, 2020
We can try counting up the “Bernie states” versus the “Biden states” that are still left on the calendar, but one of the shining lessons of last night is that some “Bernie states” aren’t as guaranteed as they seem. Minnesota and Massachusetts were supposed to be Bernie states. Biden won both. Bernie led in nearly all polls of Texas over the past two weeks. Biden won that too. Next week voters will go to the polls in Michigan, the site of Sanders’s most shocking upset in the 2016 primaries against Hillary. Given the strength of Biden’s momentum and the emerging possibility that undecided Dems are coalescing behind Joe, does anyone want to bet that Bernie’s going to hold serve there? If he doesn’t, and he begins *underperforming* his 2016 results, it’s hard to see how we end up with a long primary.
In the meantime, I’m guessing that Bloomberg’s decision to quit will erode whatever defiance is left in Elizabeth Warren about quitting the race too. I think she really, really wants to be part of that March 15th debate between Bernie and Biden in order to offer herself as a middle-ground option between them, but finishing third last night in Massachusetts has made her a joke. She might have considered soldiering on anyway if Bloomy were still hanging around and taking votes from Joe, but now that Biden’s “lane” is clear, the pressure from progressives on Warren to get out and clear the leftist “lane” for Bernie will be unbearable. She’s already getting dogged for it by Sanders surrogates like Ilhan Omar:
Imagine if the progressives consolidated last night like the moderates consolidated, who would have won? That’s what we should be analyzing. I feel confident a united progressive movement would have allowed for us to #BuildTogether and win MN and other states we narrowly lost. https://t.co/lAj2mhI3GR — Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) March 4, 2020
King Troll is trolling her over it too. If she hangs in and continues to take votes from Sanders she’ll become one of the most despised figures in the Democratic Party to Bernie cultists. In fact, Warren may have ended up enabling Biden’s journey to the nomination in more ways than one: By torching Bloomberg over his company’s NDAs during his debate debut a few weeks ago, she seems to have wounded him mortally. His upward climb in the polls halted immediately, helping Biden. For her own political health, she has to quit now before she antagonizes the left any further. Bloomberg’s withdrawal leaves her no choice.
Exit question: Will Bloomberg immediately start bankrolling anti-Bernie ads for Joe? My guess is … no. Not because Bloomy is unwilling, perhaps, but because Team Biden probably is. They’re going to have a huge task trying to reconcile with disappointed Sanders fans if they end up running Bernie off the field over the next month or two, but right now they’re relatively well positioned to do that. Sanders lost last night not because he was outspent by corporate America or because Barack Obama jumped in and took him out or whatever. He lost because black voters in South Carolina launched Biden like a rocket nationally. That’s a “fair and square” loss, relatively easy to digest. If the Bloomberg death star starts spending Bernie into the ground, though, then Biden’s looming victory becomes a sort of dirty trick played on the left by a Wall Street plutocrat. If I were Joe I’d tell Bloomy to hang back, at least for now, and try to take out Sanders myself cleanly, on the strength of Joementum. Keeping Bloomberg out of this will make party unification more feasible this summer and fall, an absolutely necessary condition to beating Trump.


hotair--2020-03-04--Epic: Jill Biden wrestles protesters like a boss during Joe's victory rally

While Sleepy Joe was soaking up the glory of turning himself into the comeback kid Tuesday night , it was Jill Biden who stole the show .
A couple of anti-dairy protesters interrupted Joe Biden ’ s victory speech in Los Angeles and Dr. Jill wasn ’ t having it .
Jill Biden in her bright green jacket , released her inner Hulk and sprung into action as the first protester jumped onto the stage .
She went right for Joe so Jill put herself between the protester and her husband .
The protester held a “ Let Dairy Die @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After the first protester was given the bum ’ s rush off the stage , a second protester jumped on the stage .
This time Jill Biden had an assist from Team Biden ’ s senior adviser , Symone D. Sanders .
While Jill stiff-armed the protester , Symone tackled her as other staffers dragged her from the stage .
All the while Joe Biden and his sister were looking on , stunned .
A photographer for Bloomberg Politics captured one of the two scuffles perfectly .
The obvious question is where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
What kind of security operation does his campaign have set up for the elderly former vice-president ?
This isn ’ t the first time that Jill Biden has had to act as Joe ’ s bodyguard – it happened in New Hampshire in February when a man rushed up as Biden spoke from a podium at a campaign event .
Jill Biden stopped him by shoving him away before others stepped in to help .
For the record , this kind of interruption at a rally happened to Bernie Sanders in Nevada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ torqued-up political atmosphere , all of the candidates are vulnerable to attempted assault by out-of-control protesters .
Some asked on social media about Secret Service protection , since he is a former vice-president .
Biden doesn ’ t have that now , though , because vice-presidents are only entitled to six months protection upon leaving office .
In 2008 , legislation was passed ( H.R .
5938 ) that provided limited protection to former vice-presidents , their spouses , and children under the age of sixteen .
Protection can be extended by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it was not for Biden .
After the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in 1968 , Congress authorized Secret Service protection for major presidential and vice-presidential candidates and their spouses within 120 days of the presidential election .
We aren ’ t within that timeframe yet in this election cycle .
DHS has offered Secret Service protection to candidates before the 120 day time period in past elections .
There are guidelines that the DHS follows .
DHS considers several factors when deciding which candidates will be covered , according to the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is whether the candidate is polling at 15 % or higher for at least 30 days .
Campaigns have to request the protection , and sometimes they don ’ t because it can make it more difficult to connect with voters .
Then-Sen. Barack Obama received his Secret Service detail in mid-2007 , months before he won the 2008 Democratic nomination .
The campaigns of Ben Carson and Donald Trump sought Secret Service protection in October 2015 , according to news reports at the time .
Fortunately , the only injury that happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of , was that Symone broke a fingernail .
It seems to me that Team Biden should have some legitimate security in place for Joe .
He ’ s old , he ’ s frail despite his continual challenges to others to prove how physically fit he is , and he ’ s a target of the wacky left .
This is a concern now that the anti-Sanders Democrats are falling in line to support Biden and his Jomemtum grows .
In the earlier days of his campaign , his crowds were small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him unless he made a gaffe .
He needs two or three agile men standing guard on the edges of the stage , ready to spring into action when the wackadoos rush in .
Jill Biden and Symone Sanders ’ actions remind me of that time Wendy Deng Murdoch , then the wife of Rupert Murdoch , leaped into action when a protester tried to throw a pie at Rupert during his testimony before the British Parliament .
Remember the pie-throwing craze back in 2011 ?
She slapped that protester away from her @ @ @ @ @ @

While Sleepy Joe was soaking up the glory of turning himself into the comeback kid Tuesday night, it was Jill Biden who stole the show. A couple of anti-dairy protesters interrupted Joe Biden’s victory speech in Los Angeles and Dr. Jill wasn’t having it.
Jill Biden in her bright green jacket, released her inner Hulk and sprung into action as the first protester jumped onto the stage. She went right for Joe so Jill put herself between the protester and her husband. The protester held a “Let Dairy Die” poster and was shouting a slogan. After the first protester was given the bum’s rush off the stage, a second protester jumped on the stage. This time Jill Biden had an assist from Team Biden’s senior adviser, Symone D. Sanders. While Jill stiff-armed the protester, Symone tackled her as other staffers dragged her from the stage. All the while Joe Biden and his sister were looking on, stunned.
A photographer for Bloomberg Politics captured one of the two scuffles perfectly.
This is probably going to be my most tweeted photo of 2020 on assignment for @bpolitics of #JillBiden defending @JoeBiden https://t.co/K7vl3mqnrX — Patrick T. Fallon (@pfal) March 4, 2020
The obvious question is where was Joe Biden’s security detail? What kind of security operation does his campaign have set up for the elderly former vice-president? This isn’t the first time that Jill Biden has had to act as Joe’s bodyguard – it happened in New Hampshire in February when a man rushed up as Biden spoke from a podium at a campaign event. Jill Biden stopped him by shoving him away before others stepped in to help.
For the record, this kind of interruption at a rally happened to Bernie Sanders in Nevada last month. In today’s torqued-up political atmosphere, all of the candidates are vulnerable to attempted assault by out-of-control protesters.
Some asked on social media about Secret Service protection, since he is a former vice-president. Biden doesn’t have that now, though, because vice-presidents are only entitled to six months protection upon leaving office. In 2008, legislation was passed (H.R. 5938) that provided limited protection to former vice-presidents, their spouses, and children under the age of sixteen. Protection can be extended by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but it was not for Biden.
After the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in 1968, Congress authorized Secret Service protection for major presidential and vice-presidential candidates and their spouses within 120 days of the presidential election. We aren’t within that timeframe yet in this election cycle. DHS has offered Secret Service protection to candidates before the 120 day time period in past elections. There are guidelines that the DHS follows.
DHS considers several factors when deciding which candidates will be covered, according to the U.S. Secret Service website. Among the factors is whether the candidate is polling at 15% or higher for at least 30 days. Campaigns have to request the protection, and sometimes they don’t because it can make it more difficult to connect with voters. Then-Sen. Barack Obama received his Secret Service detail in mid-2007, months before he won the 2008 Democratic nomination. The campaigns of Ben Carson and Donald Trump sought Secret Service protection in October 2015, according to news reports at the time.
Fortunately, the only injury that happened to either woman, that we know of, was that Symone broke a fingernail.
I broke a nail. #SuperTuesday — Symone D. Sanders (@SymoneDSanders) March 4, 2020
It seems to me that Team Biden should have some legitimate security in place for Joe. He’s old, he’s frail despite his continual challenges to others to prove how physically fit he is, and he’s a target of the wacky left. This is a concern now that the anti-Sanders Democrats are falling in line to support Biden and his Jomemtum grows. In the earlier days of his campaign, his crowds were small and no one paid much attention to him unless he made a gaffe. He needs two or three agile men standing guard on the edges of the stage, ready to spring into action when the wackadoos rush in.
Jill Biden and Symone Sanders’ actions remind me of that time Wendy Deng Murdoch, then the wife of Rupert Murdoch, leaped into action when a protester tried to throw a pie at Rupert during his testimony before the British Parliament. Remember the pie-throwing craze back in 2011? She slapped that protester away from her husband and it was awesome.