PELOSI UNDER FIRE: Democrats Weigh Hysterical Options

PELOSI UNDER FIRE: Democrats Weigh Hysterical Options

Democrat Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi is under fire.

The burning question is “What took so long?!”

According to the Washington Post,

Narrow losses in two House special elections had Democrats once again trading recriminations Wednesday and pondering anew whether their leaders have them on a path back to power.

Especially painful was Jon Ossoff’s three-percentage-point loss Tuesday in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District after his campaign was buoyed by more than $23 million in donations, much of it from grass-roots Democrats across the country eager to oppose President Trump.

That funding surge was blunted by millions of dollars’ worth of TV ads and mailers from Republican victor Karen Handel and from outside GOP groups. A common theme in those efforts was to tie Ossoff to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — a figure both well-known and widely reviled, according to Republican polling.

Interesting that Democrats are now just holding Pelosi to task now?

And, after four, strike that–five recent losses.

What about the 1,080 losses over the past 8 years? Of course Barack Obama is the real culprit on that count. However, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid loved their black president, no matter what. Thus they followed him over the cliff.

Why didn’t somebody sound the warning bell at say, 200? But now, suddenly the loss of four Republican seats is the wake-up call the Democrats needed?

And they wonder why they lost in November?

This scenario reminds me of the man with the 150 pound scrotum. Exactly when did this guy decide he was tired of dragging his crotch around like a teenager hanging on his leg? Most people would have gone to see the doctor after only a few ounces, worse case a pound.

The Democrats watched election after election as they lost state legislators and Congressional seats. Then they lost Senate seats and governorships.

Donald Trump came along and Democrats dismissed the man. In fact, most Democrats thought beating Trump would be so easy a caveman could do it. Perhaps a caveman could have beaten Trump, but Hillary Clinton couldn’t.

Did Harry Reid see the writing on the wall? Doubtful.

But he was smart enough to retire. Or more likely, he was forced to do so. At the age of 77, he’s considered a youngster in leftist politics.

Speaking of age discrimination, the Democrats eat their young. Chuck Schumer inherited Reid’s post in the Senate, and Schumer is at the ripe young retirement age of 66.

The top Democrat presidential candidates for 2020 remain crooked Hillary Clinton, who would be 73. Then, there is Bernie Sanders, who would be 79 years old. The youngest candidate with notoriety would be Elizabeth Warren. In 2020 Warren will be 71 years old.

What choices do they have?

Democrats have no up-and-comers.

Corey Booker is an Obama clone, just less charismatic and dumber.

Julian Castro was plucked from San Antonio and put in charge of HUD. The move was meant to set him up for a VP spot with Hillary Clinton. But Julian was too dumb, and also lost over $500 billion in accounting screw-ups.

Jon Ossoff, perhaps. $31 million later and Ossoff is an also-ran. His political career is over before it’s even begun.

Democrats are rightfully desperate. Adding Eric Holder to the fight won’t help either.


Back to top button