While campaigning on behalf of former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) had an embarrassing verbal flub when she accidentally told a crowd of Biden supporters that she was joining the ticket as the nominee’s vice president. 
According to Amanda Golden of NBC News, Klobuchar had a “bit of a Freudian slip” when the former Democratic presidential candidate said she “couldn’t think of a better way to end my candidacy than join the ticket.” 
After the statement, the crowd applauded the senator. Klobuchar, however, immediately backtracked, amending her remarks to note that she was joining the “terrific campaign of Joe Biden,” not the Democrats’ general election ticket itself. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Bit of a Freudian slip&#8230;while stumping for <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeBiden?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JoeBiden</a> just now in Grand Rapids, MI <a href="https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@amyklobuchar</a> says she “couldn’t think of a better way to end my candidacy than join the ticket&#8230;” to big applause. She quickly corrected to say “join the terrific campaign of Joe Biden” <a href="https://t.co/axoOR1cX9D">pic.twitter.com/axoOR1cX9D</a>
— Amanda Golden (@amandawgolden) <a href="https://twitter.com/amandawgolden/status/1236318609045151745?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
Klobuchar dropped out of the primary race ahead of Super Tuesday, throwing her support behind Biden, which likely contributed to the former vice president’s success in her home state of Minnesota and potentially more places. 
While the Biden campaign has not indicated that they have chosen a vice presidential nominee, Biden has told reporters previously that he wants a woman to accompany him on the ticket. 
As the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-reveals-four-women-he-might-choose-as-vice-president">Daily Wire</a> previously reported, Biden revealed during a town hall last November that he was considering four women for the slot. Although he declined to name them directly, fearing that “the press will think that’s who I picked,” Biden offered plenty of details to piece together who he was talking about. 
<blockquote>Biden then described four women, starting with “the former assistant attorney general who got fired,” a reference to former Assistant AG Sally Yates, who was axed by President Trump after she refused to enforce his travel ban in early 2017.
Biden then suggested “the woman who should have been the governor of Georgia,” an overt reference to failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who has refused to fully concede the race she lost to Republican Brian Kemp by 55,000 votes, blaming supposed racist voter suppression despite no evidence to corroborate her claims….
The third and fourth potential running mates Biden floated were “the two senators from the state of New Hampshire,” a reference to Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D) and Maggie Hassan (D).</blockquote>
However, the remarks were made shortly before Senator Kamala Harris (CA-D) dropped out of the race, and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/who-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-will-pick-for-vp-2020-3">Business Insider</a> recently reported that a Democratic operative working closely with the campaign believes Biden will pick the California Senator as his running mate. 
&#8220;I&#8217;d be surprised if it wasn&#8217;t Kamala Harris,&#8221; the source told the news agency. &#8220;I actually think [she] is pretty pragmatic. I think Kamala Harris is closer to Joe Biden&#8217;s form of politics than she ever was to the stuff she was trying to do on the campaign.&#8221;
Biden has also acknowledged that Harris would be a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-justice-harris-biden-floats-possibilities-for-senator-in-higher-office">potential choice</a> for anything from the Supreme Court to a vice presidential nominee pick. But former Second Lady Jill Biden recently remarked that the California senator delivered a gut punch after she attacked Biden in a debate over forced bussing policies last year. 
“Our son, Beau, spoke so highly of her and, you know, and how great she was,” said Jill Biden, referencing her late son. “And not that she isn’t, I’m not saying that. But it was just like a punch to the gut. It was a little unexpected.”
The report has been updated to clarify that Senator Amy Klobuchar misspoke when she told the crowd she was joining the ticket.

Presidential Candidate Sen.Amy Klobuchar Holds A Town Hall In New Hampshire

Amy Klobuchar Misspeaks, Accidentally Tells Campaign Crowd She’ll Be Biden’s VP, Receives Applause

2020 Election

Amy Klobuchar

Joe Biden

Democrat presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar dropped out of the race on Monday after performing poorly in the South Carolina primary over the weekend.
The New York Times reported that Klobuchar is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/02/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-drops-out.html">set</a> to endorse former Vice President Joe Biden.
Klobuchar, who tried to bill herself as a moderate and who was the least extreme Democrat candidate in the race, still would have been more far-left than any president in decades The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-elizabeth-warren-nytimes-endorsement.html">noted</a> in its endorsement of her campaign.
&#8220;Klobuchar’s prosecutorial background, gentle public (though <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/43852/klobuchar-abusive-toward-staff-stories-eating-hank-berrien">perhaps not private</a>) demeanor, and background from a largely rural state combine to make her somewhat more centrist-oriented than many of her 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination rivals,&#8221; The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-amy-klobuchar-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">reported</a>. &#8220;However, Klobuchar can still be fairly characterized as a full-spectrum leftist/progressive. Her 2020 presidential campaign <a href="https://amyklobuchar.com/">emphasizes</a> universal/socialized medicine and climate change, among other issues.&#8221;
Klobuchar performed poorly throughout the Democrats&#8217; first four primary contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina.
Klobuchar&#8217;s decision to drop out of the race came after she was forced to cancel a rally in her own state last night after far-left Black Lives Matters protesters took over the stage and called attention to Klobuchar&#8217;s record of prosecuting blacks.
Campaign manager Justin Buoen <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/01/politics/amy-klobuchar-cancel-event-protestors/index.html">said</a> regarding the event last night, &#8220;We had a negotiation and had an agreement with the organizers of the protest to meet with the senator on site. She was in the room ready to meet with them and then they changed the terms and decided that they didn&#8217;t want to meet with her. Really wish that we would have been able to one, do the meeting, and listen to the protesters, but also have the event.&#8221;
Here are some of Klobuchar&#8217;s policy stances on key issues:
<blockquote>Constitution: Klobuchar consistently supports a leftist/progressive view of the Constitution and rule of law. She supports Roe v. Wade and <a href="https://amyklobuchar.com/issues/a-strong-democracy/">opposes</a> Citizens United v. F.E.C., the Supreme Court’s landmark political speech-affirming ruling in 2010. Klobuchar is generally defensive of Fourth Amendment-inspired civil liberties, although she had a more centrist record on the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs earlier in her Senate career. She supports gun control measures that would restrict Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Klobuchar <a href="https://urbanmilwaukee.com/pressrelease/historic-comprehensive-lgbt-non-discrimination-legislation-re-introduced-in-congress/">supports</a> the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47176/hammer-house-democrats-equality-act-both-josh-hammer">Equality Act</a>, which would expand LGBT protections at the behest of private property rights and religious conscience rights alike. Her expansive view of the federal government’s role in regulating the economy is consistent with legal progressivism.
Economy: Klobuchar supports a robust role for the federal government in matters pertaining to economic regulation and, more generally, her views on economics reflect those of modern progressivism. Klobuchar’s 2020 campaign website touts her belief in the need for “<a href="https://amyklobuchar.com/issues/shared-prosperity-and-economic-justice/">shared prosperity</a>,” and supports a greater governmental role in <a href="https://www.brainerddispatch.com/news/government-and-politics/4427911-klobuchar-leads-roundtable-discussion-child-care-shortage">child care</a>. Like many of her 2020 Democratic presidential rivals, she <a href="https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1098652573685477378?lang=en">supports increasing</a> the federal minimum wage to $15. Klobuchar supports greater governmental investment in infrastructure. She supports strong labor unions and opposes “right to work” laws that would increase worker freedom.</blockquote>
Continue reading The Daily Wire&#8217;s profile piece on Klobuchar <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-amy-klobuchar-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">here</a>.
This report has been updated to include additional information.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate In Charleston Ahead Of SC Primary

Amy Klobuchar Drops Out Of Presidential Race, Set To Make Endorsement

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was forced to cancel a rally in her home state on Sunday in response to a raucous Black Lives Matter protest, which lasted for over an hour and featured protesters taking over the stage after &#8220;a deal&#8221; between the protesters and the campaign fell apart. Video of the incident has circulated widely online.
The home state protest of Klobuchar was fueled by her past role as a prosecutor in the conviction of an African-American teenager, Myon Burrell, who, activists believe, may have been wrongly convicted. Amid growing attention on the case, protesters converged on Klobuchar&#8217;s rally in St. Louis Park, Minnesota on Sunday evening.
&#8220;Organizers gathered outside of St. Louis Park High School with signs and megaphones in support that Burrell was wrongfully convicted in 2002. Klobuchar was the Hennepin County attorney at the time,&#8221; <a href="https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/03/01/protesters-for-myon-burrell-delay-klobuchars-rally-in-minnesota/">CBS Minnesota</a> reported Sunday. &#8220;The protesters made their way into the rally and onto the stage, which delayed Klobuchar’s rally scheduled to start at 8 p.m. After about a 40-minute delay, the rally was confirmed to be canceled.&#8221;
As video posted by CBC News campaign reporter Nicole Sganga shows, the protesters completely took over the event.
&#8220;Protesters in Senator Klobuchar’s home state have stormed the stage at her campaign rally, with dozens chanting, &#8216;Free Myon!&#8217; and &#8216;Klobuchar has got to go!&#8221;&#8221; Sganga reported on social media along with footage of the event. &#8220;Protesters chanting &#8216;Black Lives Matter&#8217; and &#8216;Free Myon&#8217; have now occupied Senator Amy Klobuchar’s rally for well over an hour, taking over the stage and effectively shutting down the campaign event. The rally in Klobuchar’s home state was slated to begin ten minutes ago.&#8221;
Sganga also reported that Klobuchar&#8217;s campaign attempted to &#8220;arrange a deal with protesters&#8221; before choosing to cancel the event entirely, which the campaign confirmed in a statement.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Protesters chanting “Black Lives Matter” and “Free Myon” have now occupied Senator Amy Klobuchar’s rally for well over an hour, taking over the stage and effectively shutting down the campaign event. 
The rally in Klobuchar’s home state was slated to begin ten minutes ago. <a href="https://t.co/B0iTyExXQ0">pic.twitter.com/B0iTyExXQ0</a>
&mdash; Nicole Sganga (@NicoleSganga) <a href="https://twitter.com/NicoleSganga/status/1234300379040493568?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Attendees are leaving the Klobuchar rally as protests continue.
A Klobuchar campaign official says the campaign is actively attempting to arrange a deal with protesters at her rally in St. Louis Park, MN. <a href="https://t.co/06jXLj9eyo">pic.twitter.com/06jXLj9eyo</a>
&mdash; Nicole Sganga (@NicoleSganga) <a href="https://twitter.com/NicoleSganga/status/1234303175617908737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Klobuchar&#8217;s campaign has since issued a statement to the press explaining why they decided to shut down the event. &#8220;The campaign offered a meeting with the Senator if they (protesters) would leave the stage after being on stage for more than an hour,&#8221; said the campaign. &#8220;After the group initially agreed, they backed out of the agreement and we are canceling the event.&#8221;
As reported by the <a href="https://apnews.com/115076e2bd194cfa7560cb4642ab8038">Associated Press</a> last month, the Burrell case has gained increased attention amid new evidence. After conducting a review of &#8220;thousand pages of police records, court transcripts and interrogation tapes,&#8221; and having &#8220;interviewed dozens of inmates, witnesses, family members, former gang leaders, lawyers and criminal justice experts,&#8221; AP suggests that Burrell, now 33, should not have been convicted for the death of an 11-year-old girl, Tyesha Edwards, in 2002.
&#8220;An Associated Press investigation into the 17-year-old case uncovered new evidence and myriad inconsistencies, raising questions about whether he was railroaded by police,&#8221; AP reports. Burrell, who is still behind bars, continues to maintain his innocence and has rejected all plea deals. Some of the problems with the case detailed in the report include:
<blockquote>The case relied heavily on a teen rival of Burrell’s who gave conflicting accounts when identifying the shooter, who was largely obscured behind a wall 120 feet away.
With no other eyewitnesses, police turned to multiple jailhouse snitches. Some have since recanted, saying they were coached or coerced. Others were given reduced time, raising questions about their credibility. And the lead homicide detective offered “major dollars” for names, even if it was hearsay.
There was no gun, fingerprints, or DNA. Alibis were never seriously pursued. Key evidence has gone missing or was never obtained, including a convenience store surveillance tape that Burrell and others say would have cleared him.</blockquote>
This article has been revised for clarity.

WATCH: Klobuchar Cancels Rally After Black Lives Matter Protesters Take Over Event

Black Lives Matter

Race

To the great despair of his political enemies, James Woods is back on Twitter after taking a little break, and he&#8217;s hit the ground running. Unlike many Americans, the unflinchingly anti-PC, leftism-mocking actor took the time to watch the Democratic debate in Las Vegas Wednesday night and offered his followers some live tweets and follow-up comments on the &#8220;simply appalling&#8221; event. Over the course of the evening, he also noted one thing he &#8220;loves&#8221; about their &#8220;dismal&#8221; debates and pointed out through contrast what should be a particularly troubling development for the Democrats.
The Democratic debate Wednesday was the first to include billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who&#8217;s been rapidly climbing in the polls as former frontrunner Joe Biden has collapsed, and the other candidates were clearly gunning for him early and often. While Bloomberg got bloodied, he also managed to take perhaps the most effective shot of the night at the new official frontrunner, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bloomberg-nails-socialist-bernie-youre-a-millionaire-with-3-houses">pointing ou</a>t that America&#8217;s &#8220;best known socialist happens to be a millionaire with three houses.&#8221; The overall effect was perhaps the most divisive and generally damaging of the debates so far — and Woods was happy to chronicle it.
The actor and widely followed Twitter personality started off by providing some of his responses to the various contenders.
&#8220;Dear Lord, how can any man live within hearing range of Warren’s voice? It is literally fingernails on a chalkboard,&#8221; Woods tweeted in the first of a series of posts on the event (posts below).
&#8220;What is that centipede on Buttigieg’s upper lip? Is that not unnerving, just the slightest bit?&#8221; he wrote in a follow-up post.
&#8220;It is simply impossible to watch Amy Klobuchar without picturing her eating salad with a dirty hair comb,&#8221; he added in another. &#8220;The cadence of her voice sounds like she’s choking on a fur ball.&#8221;
Woods also pulled out a few GIFs to help him better express his response to the debate. &#8220;If you’re just tuning into tonight’s <a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr" role="link" href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocratClownShow?src=hashtag_click" data-focusable="true">#DemocratClownShow</a>, here’s the first hour in a nutshell&#8230;&#8221; he wrote, posting a GIF of a downed &#8220;Bloomberg&#8221; getting kicked and clubbed by the rest of the group. 
&#8220;Sanders and Warren give <a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr" role="link" href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MiniMike?src=hashtag_click" data-focusable="true">#MiniMike</a> the Taint Torture,&#8221; he wrote in another. &#8220;Here is tonight’s <a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr" role="link" href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebate?src=hashtag_click" data-focusable="true">#DemocraticDebate</a> in one gif&#8230;&#8221; The video included in that post is better seen than described:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If you’re just tuning into tonight’s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocratClownShow?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocratClownShow</a>, here’s the first hour in a nutshell&#8230; <a href="https://t.co/83RSwiEGHc">pic.twitter.com/83RSwiEGHc</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230330370102419456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Sanders and Warren give <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MiniMike?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MiniMike</a> the Taint Torture. Here is tonight’s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocraticDebate</a> in one gif&#8230; <a href="https://t.co/dySMaM98M4">pic.twitter.com/dySMaM98M4</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230333526064525313?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The conservative actor later explained one thing that he particularly enjoys about Democratic debates. &#8220;I love these [Democratic Debates]. They are a piñata full of video clips [Republicans] will use relentlessly to re-elect the greatest President America has had since Reagan,&#8221; he mused.
Following the event, Woods summed up his response to the brutal debate. &#8220;That motley crew on the Vegas stage tonight was the worst gaggle of miscreants ever to aspire to the presidency in my lifetime,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;Simply appalling. Though funny for a while, it’s become a dismal, terrifying state of affairs.&#8221;
Before the whole thing got going, Woods provided what should be a very troubling contrast for the Left between the Democrats&#8217; current situation and Republicans&#8217;.
&#8220;While the weasels snap at each other in the [Democratic Debate], here are Americans celebrating the President who saved this country from the last lying socialist,&#8221; he wrote along with footage of a massive line of Trump supporters waiting to get into an arena in Phoenix for his rally Wednesday.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
While the weasels snap at each other in the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocraticDebate</a>, here are Americans celebrating the President who saved this country from the last lying socialist. <a href="https://t.co/ay9W34WjOJ">pic.twitter.com/ay9W34WjOJ</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230327017662369793?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Below are Woods&#8217; Democratic debate tweets in order:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Dear Lord, how can any man live within hearing range of Warren’s voice? It is literally fingernails on a chalkboard.
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230328742330818560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
What is that centipede on Buttigieg’s upper lip? Is that not unnerving, just the slightest bit?
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230329594877603842?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If you’re just tuning into tonight’s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocratClownShow?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocratClownShow</a>, here’s the first hour in a nutshell&#8230; <a href="https://t.co/83RSwiEGHc">pic.twitter.com/83RSwiEGHc</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230330370102419456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Sanders and Warren give <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MiniMike?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MiniMike</a> the Taint Torture. Here is tonight’s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocraticDebate</a> in one gif&#8230; <a href="https://t.co/dySMaM98M4">pic.twitter.com/dySMaM98M4</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230333526064525313?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It is simply impossible to watch Amy Klobuchar without picturing her eating salad with a dirty hair comb. The cadence of her voice sounds like she’s choking on a fur ball.
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230335352142888960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I love these <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebates?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocraticDebates</a>. They are a piñata full of video clips <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rebublicans?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Rebublicans</a> will use relentlessly to re-elect the greatest President America has had since Reagan.
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230338821600038912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
That motley crew on the Vegas stage tonight was the worst gaggle of miscreants ever to aspire to the presidency in my lifetime. Simply appalling. Though funny for a while, it’s become a dismal, terrifying state of affairs. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocraticDebate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocraticDebate</a>
&mdash; James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1230346369224675328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chaos-erupts-after-mexico-trivia-question-klobuchar-to-buttigieg-you-trying-to-say-that-im-dumb">Chaos Erupts After Mexico Trivia Question; Klobuchar To Buttigieg: ‘You Trying To Say That I’m Dumb?’</a>

James Woods

James Woods Sums Up Democrat Debate, Points Out One Big Problem For Dems, One Thing He ‘Loves’

Bernie Sanders

Democratic Party

Elizabeth Warren

Michael Bloomberg

The Democratic presidential primary debate was momentarily derailed after Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was asked to explain why she was unable to name the president of Mexico during a recent interview with Telemundo, the American Spanish-language news network. 
“I don’t think that the momentary forgetfulness actually reflects what I know about Mexico and how much I care about it,” Klobuchar told the moderators. “But when it comes to Mexico, I am the one person on this stage that came out first to say I was for the U.S.-Mexican-Canadian trade agreement. That is going to be one of the number one duties of a president – is to implement that.”
After moderator Vanessa Hauc, who works for Telemundo, pressed Klobuchar on the incident further, Klobuchar retorted: “That’s right. I said I made an error. I think that having a president that maybe is humble, and is able to admit that here and there maybe wouldn’t be a bad thing.”
Hauc then asked Pete Buttigieg for his two cents, as the former mayor was actually successful in naming the Mexican president during a recent interview. “I wouldn’t liken this to trivia,” said Buttigieg, who then directed an attack back at Klobuchar. 
“But you’re staking your candidacy on your Washington experience,” said the former mayor. “You’re on the committee that oversees border security. You’re on the committee that does trade. You’re literally part of the committee that oversees those things.”
Klobuchar then issued a strong response to Buttigieg: “Are you trying to say that I’m dumb? Are you mocking me, Pete? I said I made an error.” 
The Minnesota senator then volleyed an attack about electability against Buttigieg: “I am the one, not you, that has won statewide in congressional district after congressional district. And I will say, when you tried to run in Indiana, Pete, what happened to you? You lost by over 20 points.”
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who was on offense the entire debate, then came to the defense of Klobuchar, calling the ability to memorize a name silly. 
“This is not right. I understand that she forgot a name. It happens. It happens to everybody on this stage,” Warren told the crowd, implying that the question was trivia-like in nature. “Let’s just be clear, missing a name all by itself does not indicate that you do not understand what’s going on. I just think this is unfair.”
During the series of tangents, former Vice President Joe Biden tried to chime in, unsuccessfully, on account that he had previously met the president of Mexico. Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT), not wanting to be the only one not to offer his opinion on the matter – aside from former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg – responded to Biden with an enthusiastic “Si!”
Following a short break, a debate moderator jokingly asked the primary candidates if they were ready “to play some Nevada trivia.”

Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate In Las Vegas Ahead Of Nevada Caucuses

Chaos Erupts After Mexico Trivia Question; Klobuchar To Buttigieg: ‘You Trying To Say That I’m Dumb?’

democratic debate

Mexico

Pete Buttigieg

It&#8217;s been a terrific month for democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and the latest polling out of the third primary state, Nevada, indicates that his momentum will continue at least through South Carolina (Feb. 29). The story for two former frontrunners &#8212; former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) &#8212; however, couldn&#8217;t be more different: both are rapidly seeing their chances of securing the nomination evaporate, while billionaire Mike Bloomberg&#8217;s self-financed campaign is rapidly looking like Sanders&#8217; biggest threat. Here&#8217;s the latest national and key state polling data.
In national polls, Sanders has now taken a sizable lead over the field after Biden&#8217;s stunningly bad performance in both Iowa and New Hampshire. <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html">Real Clear Politics</a>&#8216; current average of the national polls gives Sanders a double-digit lead, with Biden now holding only a narrow edge over the surging relative moderate Bloomberg.
Despite strong performances in the first two primary contests, both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar continue to be stuck at disappointing levels of national support (10 percent or below in most polls). Below are RCP&#8217;s latest averages of the national polls:
<ul>
<li>Sanders 28.6 (+11)</li>
<li>Biden 17.6</li>
<li>Bloomberg 15.9</li>
<li>Warren 12.3</li>
<li>Buttigieg 10.3</li>
<li>Klobuchar 6.6</li>
<li>Steyer 2.3</li>
<li>Gabbard 1.7</li>
</ul>
<div>
A new <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-surges-into-national-lead-in-new-post-abc-poll/2020/02/19/868266a4-5280-11ea-929a-64efa7482a77_story.html">Washington Post-ABC poll</a> gives Sanders an even more impressive lead, his support improving by nine points since January, his close-second in Iowa and first place finish in New Hampshire clearly having a significant impact on Democrats&#8217; views of his national viability. The opposite is true of Biden.
According to the Post&#8217;s survey, Sanders now has 32 percent of the Democratic vote, while Biden, who enjoyed the same percentage of the vote back in January, has plummeted to just 16 percent support. Biden, the Post writes, &#8220;faces significant hurdles as he attempts to mount a comeback, with his hopes pinned on success in Nevada and especially South Carolina, where he had long been the favorite of African American voters who make up a hefty majority of the Democratic electorate there.&#8221;
Bloomberg, despite not participating in the first two primary contests, is on the verge of overtaking Biden, earning 14 percent of Democratic support, up six points since January. The combination of the collapse of relative centrist Biden and Bloomberg&#8217;s expensive ad blitz appears to be fueling the former Republican mayor&#8217;s rise.
</div>
Warren, meanwhile, is mired in the low teens (12 percent in the Post&#8217;s poll), where she&#8217;s been for a few months. Buttigieg is similarly stuck at disappointingly low support (8 percent) despite his surprise primary performances in the early states.
Nevada
Heading into the Nevada caucuses this Saturday (Feb. 22), Sanders remains the prohibitive favorite. <a href="http://filesforprogress.org/datasets/2020/2/nv/nv_2_17_2020.pdf">Data for Progress</a>&#8216;s latest survey gives Sanders a 19-point lead over the field (Sanders 35, Warren 16, Buttigieg 15, Biden 14, Steyer 10, Klobuchar 9, Gabbard 2), while <a href="https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/nevada/sanders-holds-lead-heading-into-nevadas-democratic-caucuses-poll-finds-1957583/">Las Vegas Review-Journal</a> gives Sanders a 7-point advantage (Sanders 25, Biden 18, Warren 13,  Steyer 11, Buttigieg 10, Klobuchar 10). <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nv/nevada_democratic_presidential_caucus-6866.html#polls">RCP</a> currently gives the following averages from the most recent Nevada polls:
<ul>
<li>Sanders 30</li>
<li>Biden 16</li>
<li>Warren 14.5</li>
<li>Buttigieg 12.5</li>
<li>Steyer 10.5</li>
<li>Klobuchar 9. 5</li>
</ul>
South Carolina
<div>
<div id="bling-3" data-google-query-id="COut08fo3ecCFRbOWwodSqkGVg">
Biden is still clinging to his lead in South Carolina, but the situation is getting precarious for the former dominant frontrunner. Even without Bloomberg in the mix in key polls, Biden&#8217;s lead is now merely 4 points by average, Sanders closing the gap over the last few weeks. Below is the averages of the polls as calculated by <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-6824.html#polls">RCP</a>:
<ul>
<li>Biden 25.5</li>
<li>Sanders 21.5</li>
<li>Steyer 17</li>
<li>Buttigieg 11.5</li>
<li>Warren 8</li>
<li>Klobuchar 7.5</li>
<li>Gabbard 1</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483577-biden-sanders-tied-for-first-place-in-south-carolina-poll#.Xk03Bx_F-_A.twitter">Change Research</a>&#8216;s latest polling data from the state gives an even more troubling picture for Biden. According to the survey, conducted late last week, Biden and Sanders are tied at 23 percent support, while Steyer is just 3 points behind.
</div>
</div>

Mike Bloomberg

Democratic Primary Update: Bernie Builds Lead, Biden Collapses, Bloomberg Makes Move

Democratic presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar was grilled late last week in an interview with Telemundo over her lack of knowledge on Mexico.
Telemundo’s Guadalupe Venegas interviewed Klobuchar on Friday and pressed her on her knowledge of Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, also known as AMLO.
After several moments of trying to dodge questions, Klobuchar admitted that she didn&#8217;t even know who he was.
WATCH:
<iframe title="Amy Klobuchar habla de su apoyo a los hispanos tras olvidar quién es AMLO | Noticias Telemundo" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WeOMjXDMeNw?start=76&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>GUADALUPE VENEGAS: Mexico is our neighbor to the south. Trump has decided not to visit Mexico. There&#8217;s a lot going on there between Trump and the Mexican community.
AMY KLOBUCHAR: Yes.
VENEGAS: What do you know about the Mexican president?
KLOBUCHAR: Okay. Well, what I will tell you is that I will visit Mexico in the first 100 years- 100 days. I will visit there.
VENEGAS: You are running for president. You would like to be the Democratic candidate.
KLOBUCHAR: Yeah.
VENEGAS: What do you know about the Mexican president now?
KLOBUCHAR: Uh, well, I know that he is elected in the last few years. I don&#8217;t know him personally. I&#8217;ve met with the ambassador and I was actually supportive of the trade agreement, so I worked with the embassy on that. They came to meet with me-
VENEGAS: Do you know, and I ask because it&#8217;s so important especially in Nevada, California, Arizona, Texas &#8211; this is our neighbor to the south.
KLOBUCHAR: Yeah.
VENEGAS: Do you know anything about him? Specifically his politics, what he&#8217;s doing? Since this would be the country you would share a border with? Anything you can tell me about him?
KLOBUCHAR: Um, well, I just, I know that they are our neighbors and regardless of who the leader is, that it is someone that I will work with.
VENEGAS: Do you, I&#8217;m sorry to ask this, but do you know who he is? Do you know his name?
KLOBUCHAR: Yeah, yeah- I know that he is the Mexican president.
VENEGAS: But can you tell me his name?
KLOBUCHAR: No.
VENEGAS: Don&#8217;t you think it would be important if you&#8217;re running for president to know who the president of Mexico, the country to the south of the United States is?
KLOBUCHAR: Yes.
VENEGAS: Because it affects so many Americans. Mexican Americans are the largest Hispanic &#8212; the largest number of Hispanics in the US are Mexican-Americans.
KLOBUCHAR: Of course it is, yes.
VENEGAS: Is there anything specifically you can tell me that you do know about Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador or what he&#8217;s doing in Mexico that has a direct effect on all of our border communities?
KLOBUCHAR: Well, what I do know is that we have had issues of course, with asylum and people coming up. I actually visited Mexico under the previous president and went there and led a delegation there to work on human trafficking. And I met with the attorney general at the time and we had a very positive meeting. So I didn&#8217;t meet with the president. I met with the attorney general.
VENEGAS: OK.
KLOBUCHAR: And then I also, um &#8212; if I could finish &#8212; and I also have been very supportive of the USMCA trade agreement. I&#8217;ve also been very supportive of trying to work on the asylum cases and the like.
VENEGAS: We have limited time, just one final question. How do you plan to win the support of the Hispanic vote in Nevada and the whole southwest if you can&#8217;t tell me who the president of Mexico is? Who is our neighbor to the south and has a direct impact on our communities for a number of reasons that I&#8217;m sure you know.
KLOBUCHAR: Because my heart is with the people of this country and my heart is with immigrants and I have a strong track record of working with immigrants.</blockquote>

Democratic Presidential Candidates Attend Clark County Democrats Rally At The Tropicana In Las Vegas

WATCH: Klobuchar Grilled In Interview Over Her Lack Of Knowledge On Foreign Leader

Following the absolute debacle that was the Democrats&#8217; first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses last week, tonight offers the Democrats a shot at redemption, of sorts, with the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary.
Here is what I&#8217;ll be watching for.
1. How long will we have to wait for results, this time? The first and most obvious question is not even a substantive question, but a procedural one. There is dropping the ball, there is really dropping the ball, there is really, really dropping the ball, and then there is the absolutely catastrophic dumpster fire that was the Iowa Democratic Party&#8217;s performance last week. Deep-dive essays, and perhaps full-length books, will assuredly be written that analyze just how badly the Iowa Democratic Party managed to botch its quadrennial moment in the sun. &#8220;<a href="https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/you-had-one-job">You had one job</a>,&#8221; as the popular meme goes. Alas, we shall see if Iowa manages to keep its first-in-the-nation status, come 2024. Hopefully in New Hampshire tonight, unlike in Iowa, we actually get results before we go to sleep.
2. Will favorite Bernie Sanders pull it off? Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the Fidel Castro-praising communist who decided to ditch possible sojourns to the Caribbean or the Pacific islands in order to (literally) honeymoon in the frigid former Soviet Union, demolished Hillary Clinton in the 2016 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary. He is well-positioned to win yet again tonight, <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html#polls">leading by an average of 7.4% in recent polling</a> and having led the overwhelming majority of Granite State polls conducted over the past month or so. If Sanders indeed does wipe away the field tonight, then he only buttresses his status as the <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination">clear favorite</a> for the presidential nomination. All signs currently point toward Sanders pulling it off.
3. Can Pete Buttigieg pull off the upset and start two for two? If you believe the Iowa Democratic Party&#8217;s troubled (to put it mildly) results-reporting process, former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg left the Hawkeye State with the highest delegate count. He enters tonight in a clear second place position in New Hampshire, and he is the only person not named Bernie Sanders to outright lead a New Hampshire poll in nearly a month. If Buttigieg pulls off the upset tonight, he likely overtakes Sanders as the slight favorite for the nomination; after all, since the advent of the modern political party presidential nominating contest in 1972, no candidate has won his/her party&#8217;s first two nominating contests (Iowa and New Hampshire) and gone on to lose his/her party&#8217;s presidential nomination.
4. Can neighboring state Massachusetts&#8217; Elizabeth Warren resuscitate her ailing campaign? New Hampshire may be a last stand, of sorts, for the troubled socialist-lite candidate from the neighboring Bay State. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) emerged toward the end of last summer and into early autumn as a frontrunner, but her campaign has all but collapsed and enters tonight&#8217;s battle as a shell of its former self. Warren desperately needs a shot in the arm tonight — at bare minimum, she cannot afford to be outpaced tonight by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).
5. Could Joe Biden really get fifth place? Former Vice President Joe Biden is starting to look an awful lot like a (politically) dead man walking. He <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-leaving-new-hampshire-early-i-think-ill-win-the-nomination">isn&#8217;t even sticking around tonight</a> to watch New Hampshire&#8217;s full results, and polls currently show him duking it out for fourth place. The man who was the frontrunner for most of the past calendar year could easily get fifth place tonight, making his so-called South Carolina &#8220;firewall&#8221; seem less and less like an actual firewall. My best guess? Biden is out by the time South Carolina is over.
&nbsp;
RELATED: <a href="http://lp.dailywire.com/getelectionwire/">Sign up here for Daily Wire Editor-at-Large Josh Hammer’s weekly newsletter on election news, polling data, and analysis: “Election Wire.”</a>
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/who-will-win-democratic-primary-latest-2020-josh-hammer">Who Will Win The Democratic Primary? The Latest On 2020 Presidential Primary Polling.</a>

New Hampshire Democratic debate

HAMMER: What To Watch For During Tonight’s New Hampshire Primary

New Hampshire

Tom Steyer

It took a solid week for Iowa to figure out who won its first-in-the-nation vote to pick the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.
Not good.
After the smoke cleared, former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg received 14 delegates in the error-marred caucuses, Sen. Bernie Sanders took 12, Sen. Elizabeth Warren pulled in eight, former Vice President Joe Biden received six and Sen. Amy Klobuchar got one.
On Tuesday, New Hampshire will hold its primary. The candidates stack up differently in the latest polls, with Sanders holding nearly a double digit lead over Buttigieg (27-19), followed by Klobuchar at 14 and Warren and Biden tied at 12, according to the latest <a href="https://www.suffolk.edu/academics/research-at-suffolk/political-research-center/polls/new-hampshire">Boston Globe/Suffolk</a> University poll.
After the debacle in Iowa, and with no candidate pulling out of the pack, Democrats are starting to worry that the battle for the nomination could wind up being decided in the Democratic National Committee convention in July.
Candidates are striving to win 1,990 delegates to win the party’s presidential nomination. But most states along the path distribute delegates proportionally, which means with 11 candidates still in the race and at least four or five vying for the top, it&#8217;s possible no candidate wins a majority, which would send the decision to the DNC.
“It’s possible, it’s quite possible,” Chris Spirou, the former New Hampshire Democratic Party chairman, told <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/482245-democrats-see-chances-rising-for-brokered-convention">The Hill</a>. “I think Bloomberg entering into this thing provides a much greater possibility of a brokered convention.”
But Spirou warned that a candidate picked in a brokered convention might be weak. “It would be much better if we had a candidate win a sufficient number of delegates going into the convention,” Spirou said, “but I’m confident we’ll have a candidate coming out of it who can defeat Trump.”
The latest forecast model from election site <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/">FiveThirtyEight</a> shows that the chances of &#8220;no one&#8221; winning the nomination stands at 25%. Sanders has a 46% chance of winning half the pledged delegates, Biden 20% and both Buttigeig and Warren just 4%.
In past contests, candidates have dropped out after Iowa, and the results in New Hampshire have further winnowed the field. Some candidates may drop out after Tuesday&#8217;s primary, but a full slate is expected to move on to Nevada, South Carolina, and Super Tuesday. What&#8217;s more, some of the candidates have plenty of cash to last through New Hampshire, and two candidates, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and businessman Tom Steyer, are billionaires. Bloomberg has been spending millions blanketing the airwaves and could easily stay in the race for months.
“There’s a real possibility of a brokered convention and that in itself may be enough to serve as motivation for some who might have otherwise dropped out, to hang around longer to see if they can’t have a place in this thing and play a part in determining the nominee,” Jim Demers, a veteran Democratic strategist in New Hampshire, told The Hill. “Resources will be key.”
The growing Democratic mess has sparked both internal battles among Democrats and viral conspiracy theories online. On Friday, actor James Woods offered up one theory about the debacle in Iowa. “Just for giggles, imagine this: the #IowaCauscuses were not a snafu, but an engineered ‘cluster muck’ to keep the #Democrat field wide open. The #ImpeachmentSham was a way to air Biden’s corruption. The chaos leads to a brokered convention. Guess which drunken hag saves the day?” Woods wrote on Twitter. Woods answered his own question. &#8220;The #Clintons are like nuclear cockroaches. They can survive anything. Remember you read it here: #HillaryClinton has a solid chance at being the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee in a brokered convention. She’s the Terminator of American politics.&#8221;
&nbsp;

Democratic Debate

Democrats See Odds For Brokered Convention Rising As Chaos In Party Reigns

After nearly a week of what proved to one of the more embarrassing primary debacles in recent history, the Iowa Democratic Party has finally released what it says is are official, truly final results and has awarded its delegates accordingly. The winner, by an extremely narrow margin, was South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who edged out Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and has now officially gained a 2-delegate lead.
Iowa&#8217;s impact in terms of delegates on the Democratic primary is extremely small, the state sending only 41 pledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention, which ultimately receives nearly 4,000. However, as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nate-silver-why-democrats-iowa-debacle-mightve-just-screwed-up-entire-nomination-process">explained</a> by analyst Nate Silver, the state&#8217;s caucuses have a disproportionate impact on the race, as it goes a long way to helping candidates build momentum, as is the case for both Buttigieg and Sanders. Longtime frontrunner Joe Biden&#8217;s campaign, on the other hand, has been badly damaged after the former vice president came in a distant fourth.
As reported by <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-primary-elections/delegate-count?icid=election_results">NBC News</a> Sunday, the Iowa Democratic Party is now officially awarding Buttigieg 14 of its 41 delegates and Sanders 12. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who came in third, is getting 8 delegates. Biden is receiving 6 delegates for his surprisingly low fourth place finish. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) managed to get one delegate, while no other candidates received a single delegate.
While the Iowa Democratic Party says it now feels confident in the proportioning of the votes, many are still viewing the results with skepticism, including NBC, which, like the Associated Press last Thursday, announced that the network &#8220;is not calling a winner in the first-in-the-nation contest, and the NBC News Decision Desk is not making any independent delegate allocations at this time.&#8221;
The Associated Press announced last Thursday that, as a result of &#8220;irregularities,&#8221; it was &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ap-declares-no-official-democrat-winner-in-iowa-trump-has-advice-on-who-to-blame">unable to declare a winner in Iowa</a>.&#8221;
&#8220;Following the Iowa Democratic Party’s release of new results late Thursday night, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg leads Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders by two state delegate equivalents out of 2,152 counted. That is a margin of 0.09 percentage points,&#8221; AP reported. &#8220;However, there is evidence the party has not accurately tabulated some of its results, including those released late Thursday that the party reported as complete. The AP’s tabulation of the party’s results are at 99% of precincts reporting, with data missing from one of 1,765 precincts, among other issues.&#8221;
On Thursday, DNC Chairman Tom Perez publicly shamed the Iowa Democratic Party, demanding that it begin a complete recount and recalculation of the vote.
&#8220;Enough is enough,&#8221; Perez tweeted Thursday. &#8220;In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Enough is enough. In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.
&mdash; Tom Perez (@TomPerez) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomPerez/status/1225468833458245632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While the Iowa Democratic Party has declared Buttigieg the winner, Sanders appears to have gained the most from his strong performance in the state, appearing to overtake Biden as the party&#8217;s true frontrunner. The Biden campaign, meanwhile, has been scrambling to reset, shaking up the leadership and redirecting campaign funds in a &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/post-iowa-meltdown-biden-goes-missing-campaign-plans-last-ditch-effort-to-save-candidacy">last-ditch effort</a>&#8221; to save his candidacy, as The Washington Post put it Friday.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-makes-series-of-election-predictions-for-democrats-ocasio-cortez-schumer-nadler">Trump Makes Series Of Election Predictions For Democrats: Ocasio-Cortez, Schumer, Nadler</a>

Democratic Candidates

UPDATE: The Final Official Iowa Democrat Delegate Count, And What It Means

Iowa

It just continues to get worse and worse for the Iowa Democratic Party — and, by extension, for both the Democratic National Committee and grassroots Democrats across the country alike. The already-infamous app crashing that has resulted in politicos still not knowing the full and final results of Monday night&#8217;s first-in-the-nation caucuses was compounded by the fact, as The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dhs-acting-secretary-iowa-democratic-party-refused-help-testing-failed-caucus-app">noted</a>, that the Iowa Democratic Party turned down express overtures from the Department of Homeland Security to help with vetting the technology.
As of Thursday morning, The New York Times&#8217; &#8220;live&#8221; caucus <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html?action=click&amp;module=Top%20Stories&amp;pgtype=Homepage">results tabulator</a> showed former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg with a remarkably narrow lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Buttigieg currently leads Sanders 26.2% to 26.1% in the total statewide popular vote, and by 550 to 547 in terms of state delegate equivalents. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is in third place, with 18.2% and 381 state delegate equivalents, whereas bumbling former Vice President Joe Biden is in fourth place with 15.8% and 331 state delegate equivalents. Overall, then, with 97% of Iowa precincts reporting, Buttigieg leads in 59 of Iowa&#8217;s 99 counties, Sanders leads in 19, and politicos everywhere eagerly anticipate the results of the final 28. Despite his minuscule deficit in statewide popular vote and state delegate equivalents, however, the Times&#8217; current &#8220;live estimate&#8221; of who will ultimately prevail shows Sanders as a narrow favorite over Buttigieg.
In short, this is total chaos and a dumpster fire of catastrophic proportions.
But now, the Times is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/upshot/iowa-caucuses-errors-results.html?emc=edit_na_20200206&amp;ref=headline&amp;nl=breaking-news&amp;campaign_id=60&amp;instance_id=0&amp;segment_id=21030&amp;user_id=b715e556383ae49550d07cacec388fa8&amp;regi_id=74074015&amp;fbclid=IwAR1YBbD9XtncQ9h-ewnL6kg3WQsQ6Jf4rekz3cDas72ynCHODBKdenZzTvs">separately reporting</a> that the results finally reported by the Iowa Democratic Party on Wednesday are &#8220;riddled with errors and inconsistencies.&#8221;
&#8220;The results released by the Iowa Democratic Party on Wednesday were riddled with inconsistencies and other flaws,&#8221; the Gray Lady wrote. &#8220;According to a New York Times analysis, more than 100 precincts reported results that were internally inconsistent, that were missing data or that were not possible under the complex rules of the Iowa caucuses.&#8221;
&#8220;In some cases, vote tallies do not add up,&#8221; the Times continued. &#8220;In others, precincts are shown allotting the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates. And in at least a few cases, the Iowa Democratic Party’s reported results do not match those reported by the precincts.&#8221;
&#8220;Some of these inconsistencies may prove to be innocuous, and the irregularities do not indicate an intentional effort to compromise or rig the result,&#8221; the newspaper reported. &#8220;But not all of the errors are minor, and they raise questions about whether the public will ever get a completely precise account of the Iowa results. With Mr. Sanders closing to within 0.1% with 97% of 1,765 precincts reporting, the race could easily grow close enough for even the most minor errors to delay a final projection or raise doubts about a declared winner.&#8221;
This is not exactly the way a political party ostensibly preoccupied with repelling election interference and preserving the integrity of the franchise would prefer that a leading left-wing newspaper cover its first-in-the-nation caucuses.
Separately this week, guru Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/iowa-might-have-screwed-up-the-whole-nomination-process/">weighed in with insights</a> on how &#8220;Iowa might have screwed up the whole nomination process.&#8221;
&#8220;To be &#8230; blunt: The Iowa Democratic Party’s colossal screw-up in reporting results will potentially have direct effects on the outcome of the nomination process,&#8221; Silver wrote. &#8220;The failure to report results will almost certainly help Biden, assuming that indications that he performed poorly in Iowa are correct, as they won’t get nearly as much media coverage. And they’ll hurt whichever candidate wins the state — most likely Sanders or Buttigieg.&#8221;
&#8220;It’s not a good situation for the Democratic Party,&#8221; he concluded. &#8220;And it’s already too late for the damage to be entirely undone, even if Iowa eventually gets its act together.&#8221;

Pete Buttigieg continues to hold lead over Bernie Sanders in Iowa

Iowa Results Reported Wednesday Apparently ‘Riddled With Errors’

Democratic National Committee

Department of Homeland Security

Political nerds, rejoice! We here at The Daily Wire have been looking forward to this day for seemingly forever. We have been tracking presidential primary <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/who-will-win-democratic-primary-latest-2020-josh-hammer">polling and analytical trends</a>. We started a weekly election/impeachment-themed newsletter for our subscribers (<a href="http://lp.dailywire.com/getelectionwire/">sign up here!</a>). We prepared <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-joe-biden-stand-issues-heres-everything-josh-hammer">detailed</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-bernie-sanders-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">profiles</a> for all the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-elizabeth-warren-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">leading</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-pete-buttigieg-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">candidates</a> in the Democratic Party&#8217;s 2020 <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-andrew-yang-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">presidential</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-michael-bloomberg-stand-on-the-issues-heres-everything-you-need-to-know">primary</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/where-does-amy-klobuchar-stand-issues-heres-josh-hammer">field</a>.
And now we are finally here. The <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2020/02/03/iowa-caucus-election-2020-live-coverage-democratic-candidates-results-photos-video/4618248002/">Iowa caucuses tonight</a> will provide politicos across the country with the first tangible results of this already-chaotic process. We will finally move beyond the realm of mere armchair quarterback punditry and enter the realm of numbers, percentages, and statistics.
Here is what I will personally be watching for tonight.
1. Will Bernie Sanders position himself to win Iowa and New Hampshire back-to-back? The Soviet Union-honeymooning socialist leads by 4% over Joe Biden in the RealClearPolitics statewide <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html">polling average</a>, as we enter caucus day. Sanders is now also the <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-6276.html">firm and unequivocal favorite</a> for next week&#8217;s first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary, and all eyes will be attuned tonight to see if he can position himself well to open this primary season by wining the first two states in back-to-back fashion. Since the advent of the modern presidential primary process in 1972, no candidate who has won both Iowa and New Hampshire in back-to-back fashion has gone on to lose his/her party&#8217;s presidential nomination. If Sanders can pull off the feat, then we can bet on the more &#8220;moderate&#8221;/Clintonian forces of the Democratic National Committee establishment entering something closely akin to a state of depression.
2. Can Joe Biden pull it out and re-emerge as the field&#8217;s clear frontrunner? Ever since the unofficial start of the primary process, and certainly since the first Democratic presidential debate last summer, Biden has been viewed (with the perhaps brief exception of a September/October 2019 surge from Elizabeth Warren) as the frontrunner for his party&#8217;s 2020 presidential nomination. It is no longer clear if that is the case — Sanders leads in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Biden&#8217;s South Carolina &#8220;firewall&#8221; seems like an increasingly risky wager (harkening us all back to Rudy Giuliani in Florida in 2008), and election betting market PredictIt now features Sanders as an <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination">increasingly clear favorite</a> over Biden. Biden could really use a victory tonight to stanch the bleeding, and anything worse than a runner-up finish to Sanders would surely be viewed as a disaster at Biden campaign headquarters.
3. Will Elizabeth Warren resuscitate her ailing campaign? Warren emerged over the latter parts of the summer and early fall as a frontrunner in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and many pundits accordingly pegged her as the de facto favorite to ultimately secure the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. Suffice it to say those predictions have not aged well. Warren&#8217;s campaign has been in something of a prolonged free fall since October, and she enters caucus night in a disappointing fourth place in the RealClearPolitics statewide <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html">polling average</a>. A surprising victory is not out of the realm of possibility, but merely beating Biden or Sanders, at this point, would surely be seen as a moral victory for Warren that would buttress her chances in New Hampshire.
4. Will Pete Buttigieg beat one of the &#8220;big three?&#8221; Buttigieg has surpassed Warren in the statewide polling average in Iowa, but in many respects, his national momentum is lagging and it seems that his moment has passed. The former South Bend, Indiana mayor is a native Midwesterner, and over-performing tonight in Iowa is something that Buttigieg likely would need to feel even remotely confident about his languishing chances for the nomination.
5. Can Amy Klobuchar crack the top four? Klobuchar, from Iowa&#8217;s neighboring state Minnesota, has staked much of her long-shot bid on a strong Iowa finish. She consistently over-performs in televised debate formats and is a favorite of her party&#8217;s intellectual chattering class — as perhaps best embodied by her recent co-endorsement from The New York Times&#8217; influential editorial board. If Klobuchar can beat at least Buttigieg or Warren tonight, that will amount to a big victory for her.
&nbsp;
RELATED: <a href="http://lp.dailywire.com/getelectionwire/">Sign up here for Daily Wire Editor-at-Large Josh Hammer’s weekly newsletter on election news, polling data, and analysis: “Election Wire.”</a>
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/who-will-win-democratic-primary-latest-2020-josh-hammer">Who Will Win The Democratic Primary? The Latest On 2020 Presidential Primary Polling.</a>

Iowa caucuses day

What To Watch For During Tonight’s Iowa Caucuses

Andrew Yang

The following is satirical.
It’s time for the Iowa caucuses. All across the great Hawkeye State, corn-fed Americans will be leaving their farms and small towns in order to decide which Democrat candidate will best serve the interests of New York and Los Angeles.
These are down home Heartlanders who are tired of Donald Trump and his shenanigans and want to return to the good old days when Maw and Paw and Aunt Mathilda could sit out on the front porch and watch the factory close while smoking methamphetamines until they died.
To bring back those fine times, Iowa Democrats have assembled a choice slate of white people who have promised to return this country to solid American values like socialism and sexual perversion.
There’s Joe Biden, who could become the first candidate ever to win in Iowa while believing himself to be in Ohio. There’s Bernie Sanders who says Iowans need to taste the joys of socialism because they taste almost exactly like a pet cat roasted over a trash fire. There’s Elizabeth Warren, who traces her heritage back to the state’s Ioway tribe.
There’s also Pete Buttigieig, who is touting his record as mayor of a city of a hundred thousand people, all of whom hate him. And there’s Amy Klobuchar, who is thought to have a chance to pull off a surprise victory once voters find out whom she’s running against.
During the complex caucus process, voters will gather with their neighbors in living rooms across the state and watch on TV as less intelligent voters brave the freezing weather to gather in schools and meeting halls where they will support their favorite candidate by standing in a group, hoping no one recognizes them and realizes they’re backing such a loser.
Those Iowans who enjoy having jobs, of course, will stay home till November when they vote for Donald Trump.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/michael-moore-trump-both-blast-democratic-national-committee-for-latest-move-rigging-game-against-bernie">Michael Moore, Trump Both Blast Democratic National Committee For Latest Move ‘Rigging’ Game Against Bernie</a>

Bernie Sanders Supporter

Iowa Democrats Hope To Bring Back The Good Old Days Of Joblessness And Suicide [Satire]

Donald Trump

Satire

Following the Senate vote to block witnesses in the partisan impeachment of President Donald Trump, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) signaled that Democrats have not been deterred by the vote, but will continue to prolong the process for new witnesses.
&#8220;The caucuses are meeting right now,&#8221; Klobuchar told CNN&#8217;s Dana Bash following the vote.
&#8220;Right now we&#8217;re looking at amendments that we could do to maybe be more specific about witnesses, or getting more time. &#8230; Maybe with each and every day it will change their mind on allowing witnesses,&#8221; the presidential candidate continued.
&#8220;So, that&#8217;s what we&#8217;re working on right now,&#8221; she added.
The senator made similar comments during an appearance on Fox News, Friday evening.
&#8220;If you don&#8217;t have witnesses, you do not have a fair trial,&#8221; Klobuchar also posted to her Twitter account after the vote. &#8220;The truth will come out.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If you don&#39;t have witnesses, you do not have a fair trial. 
The truth will come out.
&mdash; Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) <a href="https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1223384589256753152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 31, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Senate voted 51-49 to block witnesses, seemingly paving the way for President Trump’s acquittal. Republican Senators Mitt Romney (UT) and Susan Collins (ME) both defected, joining the Democrats to vote in favor of new witnesses.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-fuming-chuck-schumer-says-its-a-grand-tragedy-no-impeachment-witnesses-to-be-heard-in-senate">fuming</a> after the vote, calling the moment a “grand tragedy.”
“To not allow a witness, a document, no witnesses, no documents, in an impeachment trial is a perfidy,” Schumer told reporters.
“It’s a grand tragedy, one of the worst tragedies that the Senate has ever overcome,” he added.
Before the vote, Schumer saw the writing on the wall and likened a vote to stop new witnesses to Watergate.
“If my Republican colleagues refuse to even consider witnesses and documents in this trial, this country is headed towards the greatest cover-up since Watergate,” the leading Democrat railed, according to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480941-senate-rejects-impeachment-witnesses-setting-up-trump-acquittal">The Hill</a>.
“If my Republican colleagues refuse to even consider witnesses and documents in the trial, what will the president conclude?” he added. “We all know: he’ll conclude he can do it again, and congress can do nothing about it. He can try to cheat in his election again, something that eats at the roots of our democracy.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), a moderate Republican swing vote, said she voted to stop the partisan impeachment process after she determined that there would not be a &#8220;fair trial,&#8221; noting that &#8220;Congress has failed.&#8221;
“I worked for a fair, honest, and transparent process, modeled after the Clinton trial, to provide ample time for both sides to present their cases, ask thoughtful questions, and determine whether we need more. The House chose to send articles of impeachment that are rushed and flawed. I carefully considered the need for additional witnesses and documents, to cure the shortcoming, but ultimately decided that I will vote against considering motions to subpoena,&#8221; a statement from Murkowski said.
“Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything,” the senator added. “It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed.”
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;It’s not going to be five months from now, or five weeks from now, where the truth comes out. It&#39;s probably going to be five days from now.”
Dem. Sen. <a href="https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@amyklobuchar</a> says Senate Democrats plan to attempt to use amendments to extend the impeachment trial.<a href="https://t.co/qmEPGNqYPX">https://t.co/qmEPGNqYPX</a> <a href="https://t.co/WbErYSQJdU">pic.twitter.com/WbErYSQJdU</a>
&mdash; CNN Newsroom (@CNNnewsroom) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNnewsroom/status/1223396897328697345?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

NOT OVER? Klobuchar Says Democrats Won’t Stop Fighting For Witnesses, Look To Extend Trial

Impeachment

After the unveiling of President Donald Trump’s proposed peace plan in the Middle East, numerous Senate Democrats took time out of their busy schedule to lecture him about Middle East politics. <a href="https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Van%20Hollen%20Letter%20MidEast%20Peace%20Plan.pdf">The letter they wrote</a> is historically ignorant and dangerous, which is compounded by the fact that it was signed by three leading current presidential candidates; Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).
“Dear President Trump,” the letter begins, “We write to express our profound concern regarding your decision to release a one-sided Israeli-Palestinian plan forged without any Palestinian involvement or support.”
Right off the bat, Senate Democrats ignore the fact that the Palestinians have been invited to the negotiations on numerous occasions. The most prominent one was June 2019, when there was a U.S.-led peace conference in Bahrain that was boycotted by the Palestinians. They thought that a boycott would stop the conference, but Jared Kushner, the point-man for the Trump administration in this process, pushed forward.
Trump&#8217;s peace plan would ultimately give the Palestinians a state, as well as funds to help get that state up and running. The 1947 U.N. partition plan, which the Arab world outright rejected in choosing instead to declare all-out war on the nascent Jewish state, did not include $50 billion. In fact, the world mostly stood by and watched while the Jewish state was attacked from every direction.
Senate Democrats&#8217; letter espouses significant falsehoods, claiming that this plan “paves the way for full or partial Israeli annexation of the West Bank.” But there has never been much support for a call to fully annex Judea and Samaria, as that would include giving citizenship to millions of Palestinian-Arabs — many of whom call for the destruction of the state of Israel.
Senate Democrats also, un-ironically, claim that this plan “undermine[s] existing U.S. policy regarding the unilateral annexation of Crimea, eastern Ukraine.” In case the Democrats forgot, Russia invaded Crimea when the Obama administration withheld crucial military aid to the Ukranians. That was not a defensive war; it was an attack by Russia. Comparing that act with Israel winning territory in the 1967 Six-Day War, which was a defensive war, is patently insane. Additionally, Russia immediately annexed Crimea, whereas Israel limited its annexation to the city of Jerusalem — the eternal capital of the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hill-the-jewish-nation">Jewish nation</a>. Contrast that to 1948, when Jordan took over that same territory, annexed it, and left the Palestinian people in refugee camps to linger and suffer until Israel militarily defeated Jordan in 1967&#8217;s defensive conflict.
Senate Democrats also conveniently ignore the last 73 years of history when they claim that “this proposal violates the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.” The Palestinians could have asserted their right to self-determination any time from 1947 through today. They can declare a state and nobody will mind. In fact, many Israelis would welcome it. In 2000, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to Yasser Arafat the Gaza Strip, 95% of the West Bank, 5% of Israel, half of Jerusalem (including the Temple Mount), and Israeli citizenship for 50,000 Palestinians. Arafat walked away without a counteroffer and instead <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-vox-lies-about-israel-again">launched the Second Intifada</a>. Democrats ignore that the Palestinians could have exercised their “right to self-determination.” Instead, they are choosing to stay as they are.
The Democrats complain about the proposed borders, referring to it as a “disconnected series of Palestinian islets.&#8221; They claim that this “would betray the vision of a sovereign Palestinian state.” Again, Palestinians could have had a say in this process. They chose not to. Additionally, the only “vision” that the Palestinians have of a Palestinian state is one that encompasses all of Israel and does not include any Jews.
The Democrats then have the audacity to accuse President Trump of interfering in the upcoming Israeli election, claiming that the timing “raises disturbing questions about [Trump&#8217;s] intention to intervene in the Israeli election process.” This accusation is audacious for multiple reasons. First, the Democratic Party at-large is currently in the middle of an impeachment of President Trump that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-impeachment-manager-admits-that-impeachment-is-about-2020-election">Democrats themselves claim</a> is intended to prevent him from winning re-election. Second, this is the third Israeli election in the last year, so this wouldn’t affect much of anything. Third, Benny Gantz, Netanyahu’s chief political rival, endorsed this plan and <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/gantz-says-hell-bring-trump-peace-plan-before-knesset-for-vote-next-week/">is bringing it up for a parliamentary vote</a>. Finally, it is ironic that Senate Democrats are accusing Trump of interfering with Israeli elections when <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/international/236565-netanyahu-pollster-obama-role-in-election-larger-than-reported">Obama did that</a> in 2015 — and nobody cared.
Democrats continue their letter with their old and tiresome “President Trump isn’t a normal president” routine. “Your administration has already reversed decades of bipartisan U.S. policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” it reads. “Previous presidents of both parties successfully maintained the respect of both Israelis and Palestinians for the United States’ role as a credible player in difficult negotiations.” But policies that haven’t worked for 50 years should be changed. Democrats think that if they try the same thing over and over — that &#8220;thing&#8221; being caving to terrorists — there will be different results. That is the definition of insanity. Trump’s only change from the standard “two-state solution” is that it recognizes the fact that Israel is the only actor that actually wants peace.
The Democrats are making the same mistakes with the Palestinians that they did with the Iranians: The assumption that everyone wants the same thing. They do not. Palestinian leadership wants to destroy Israel. Democrats either don’t know that, or simply don’t care.
 
Moshe Hill is a political analyst and a Chovevei Zion Fellow. His work can be found on <a href="https://www.ahillwithaview.com">aHillwithaView.com</a>, <a href="https://facebook.com/aHillwithaView">facebook.com/aHillwithaView</a>, and on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/TheMoHill">@TheMoHill</a>.

President Trump Meets With Israeli PM Netanyahu At The White House

HILL: Senate Democrats’ Response To Trump’s Peace Plan Is Historically Ignorant

Benjamin Netanyahu

Foreign Policy

Israel

Jared Kushner

Middle East

The following is satirical.
The New York Times, a former newspaper, has endorsed two female Democrats for president. In an endorsement entitled, “Deedlee-dee- dee-dee Two Ladies,” the Times endorsed both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, saying it was simply too much newspaper for one woman and didn’t want to restrict its passions to conform to outmoded ideas of fidelity.
The endorsement, written by Times Editor-in-Chief Blithering Prevarication the Third, says in part, “It’s not that we don’t love you, Amy, but a newspaper has needs, and there are times when it’s just natural for us to yearn for a certain amount of variety.  Sometimes, even when we’re with you, the thought of Elizabeth comes into our heads all unbidden and we ask ourselves: Why should we fight our desires like some uptight backwoods yokel when we’re all sophisticated adults who understand that these sorts of things happen even among the happiest couples?”
Mr. Third continued, “In the end, we found it impossible to decide between Amy’s Mean Mommy appeal that always makes us wish she would send us to our room, and Elizabeth’s Naughty Native American Librarian come-on that makes it hard to tell the difference between Cupid’s arrow and an Apache weapon of war.”
The Times conjectured that the two women probably had political differences as well. They called Klobuchar the realist model and Warren the radical model and wrote, “We just can’t decide whether we want to be seduced into socialist slavery like someone following the scent of an enticing perfume and the mesmerizing clockwork of a lady’s walk, or whether we want to be dragged off to pure Communism like that time we visited a dungeon and were hung upside down by leather straps and thrashed deliciously — but perhaps that’s too much information.”
Though some journalistic observers scorned the historic double endorsement, the Times editorial board defended their decision in a statement saying, “We’re dithering idiots who know even less about policy than we do about American history, so that explains it.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/warren-refuses-to-answer-any-more-questions-about-sanders-being-sexist-after-earlier-claim-backfires">Warren Refuses To Answer Any More Questions About Sanders Being Sexist After Earlier Claim Backfires</a>

Heart Shape

New York Times Says It’s Too Much Newspaper For Just One Woman [Satire]

New York Times

Late Sunday night, the New York Times editorial board <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-elizabeth-warren-nytimes-endorsement.html">announced that they were endorsing both</a> Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination (and, by default, for president).
The split endorsement made sense to The New York Times, it seems. In these trying times, they claimed, solid leadership is necessary, even if neither endorsed candidate has a radical leadership vision or demonstrated leadership skills (Klobuchar does rule her staff with an iron fist, though &#8230; reportedly).
&#8220;On the Democratic side, an essential debate is underway between two visions that may define the future of the party and perhaps the nation,&#8221; the editorial board wrote. &#8220;Some in the party view President Trump as an aberration and believe that a return to a more sensible America is possible. Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced.&#8221;
&#8220;Both the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration. If there were ever a time to be open to new ideas, it is now. If there were ever a time to seek stability, now is it,&#8221; they said. &#8220;That’s why we’re endorsing the most effective advocates for each approach. They are Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.&#8221;
Klobuchar has only barely managed to clear 5% in enough polls to end up on the debate stage. Warren has been on a steady trajectory downward since November, after her &#8220;vision&#8221; for Medicare for All faltered because she was asked to provide details of the plan. Neither seem to fit into either the &#8220;radical&#8221; or &#8220;realist&#8221; models &#8212; Warren certainly isn&#8217;t dynamic and legitimately progressive like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and neither is considered a real threat to President Donald Trump in battleground states like former Vice President Joe Biden &#8212; but the Times seemed pleased, if only because they managed to endorse two women for the nation&#8217;s highest office.
&#8220;May the best woman win,&#8221; one member of the team wrote on Twitter.
If the Times was self-satisfied with their decision, though, they were the only ones. The decision was thrashed on social media by conservatives and stalwart leftists alike.
&#8220;What incredible cowardice,&#8221; wrote conservative commentator Noah Rothman.
&#8220;Gonna be hilarious when Warren leaks to CNN tomorrow that Amy Klobuchar told her a woman couldn’t beat Trump,&#8221; joked Stephen Miller.
Politico&#8217;s chief political correspondent, Tim Alberta, wasn&#8217;t as nice. &#8220;I mean, newspaper endorsements are silly and self-important to begin with,&#8221; he said. &#8220;But this Times bit&#8230; good grief. Have these people zero self-awareness?&#8221;
&#8220;So&#8230;the NY Times has endorsed Amy Klobuchar AND Elizabeth Warren for the Democratic presidential primary? They do know only one them can win, right?&#8221; noted NPR&#8217;s Eric Deddens.
Even progressives took issue with the endorsement, blaming the Times for stepping on its own foot.
&#8220;I had heard a rumor about three hours ago that NYT was planning to endorse both Warren and Klobuchar, and the agreement between my friend and me was: That sounds exactly on-brand for NYT. Not wanting to be offensive and yet likely offending everyone,&#8221; said Human Rights Coaliton communications director and trans-rights activist Charlotte Clymer &#8212; certainly not one known to have any conservative opinions.
Warren, at least was happy, tweeting that, &#8216;I guess <a class="PrettyLink profile customisable h-card" dir="ltr" href="https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar" data-mentioned-user-id="33537967" data-scribe="element:mention">@AmyKlobuchar</a> and I are now both undefeated in elections and undefeated in New York Times endorsements!&#8221;
Not to be the bearer of bad news, but The New York Times routinely endorses Democrats for the presidential election. They don&#8217;t always win.
<div class="TweetInfo">
<div class="TweetInfo-like"></div>
</div>

Warren.

‘Incredible Cowardice:’ New York Times Thrashed For Endorsing Both Warren And Klobuchar For President

The New York Times editorial board announced on Sunday that it was endorsing two Democratic presidential candidates for the party&#8217;s nomination – Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) – a decision that was quickly mocked online by critics.
&#8220;In a break with convention, the editorial board has chosen to endorse two separate Democratic candidates for president,&#8221; the Times leftist editorial board wrote. &#8220;American voters must choose between three sharply divergent visions of the future.&#8221;
The Times immediately demonized everything that President Donald Trump has accomplished as racist and done out of &#8220;the veneration of a mythological past.&#8221;
The Times correctly noted that almost any one of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates would be &#8220;the most&#8221; far-left &#8220;president in decades on issues like health care, the economy, and government’s allocations of resources.&#8221;
The Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-elizabeth-warren-nytimes-endorsement.html">wrote</a>:
<blockquote>There are legitimate questions about whether our democratic system is fundamentally broken. Our elections are getting less free and fair, Congress and the courts are increasingly partisan, foreign nations are flooding society with misinformation, a deluge of money flows through our politics. And the economic mobility that made the American dream possible is vanishing.
Both the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration. If there were ever a time to be open to new ideas, it is now. If there were ever a time to seek stability, now is it.
That’s why we’re endorsing the most effective advocates for each approach. They are Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.</blockquote>
The Times joined the rest of the media in trying to put an end to Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders&#8217; campaign, highlighting problems with his age, health, and style of politics. The Times wrote:
<blockquote>Mr. Sanders would be 79 when he assumed office, and after an October heart attack, his health is a serious concern. Then, there’s how Mr. Sanders approaches politics. He boasts that compromise is anathema to him. Only his prescriptions can be the right ones, even though most are overly rigid, untested and divisive. He promises that once in office, a groundswell of support will emerge to push through his agenda. Three years into the Trump administration, we see little advantage to exchanging one over-promising, divisive figure in Washington for another.
Good news, then, that Elizabeth Warren has emerged as a standard-bearer for the Democratic left.
Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller. &#8230;</blockquote>
The reaction to the Times endorsements appeared to be most negative, including from those on the political Left.
Varshini Prakash, executive director of the far-left Sunrise Movement, responded mockingly: &#8220;oh ya totally this makes sense&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
oh ya totally this makes sense <a href="https://t.co/HYGIk8TbRY">https://t.co/HYGIk8TbRY</a>
— Varshini Prakash (@VarshPrakash) <a href="https://twitter.com/VarshPrakash/status/1219110233303330817?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
Left-wing activist Cameron Kasky wrote: &#8220;Which demographic is smaller: The amount of people who care about the NYT editorial board’s endorsement or the amount of people who saw &#8216;Dolittle&#8217; this weekend?&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Which demographic is smaller:
The amount of people who care about the NYT editorial board’s endorsement or the amount of people who saw “Dolittle” this weekend? <a href="https://t.co/nP0cwEJnvi">https://t.co/nP0cwEJnvi</a>
&mdash; Cam Kasky (@cameron_kasky) <a href="https://twitter.com/cameron_kasky/status/1219109110504984577?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Commentary Editor Abe Greenwald wrote: &#8220;The fear of being definitive, of saying no to one thing and yes to another, is one of the defining pathologies of the age.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The fear of being definitive, of saying no to one thing and yes to another, is one of the defining pathologies of the age. <a href="https://t.co/nrpNZTPJWb">https://t.co/nrpNZTPJWb</a>
&mdash; Abe Greenwald (@AbeGreenwald) <a href="https://twitter.com/AbeGreenwald/status/1219112621565259776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Radio host John Batchelor wrote: &#8220;&#8216;Why, sometimes I&#8217;ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.&#8217; Lewis Carroll&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
“Why, sometimes I&#39;ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” Lewis Carroll <a href="https://t.co/QHOAqJYQlV">https://t.co/QHOAqJYQlV</a>
&mdash; John Batchelor (@batchelorshow) <a href="https://twitter.com/batchelorshow/status/1219108412061077512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Chris Martin Palmer wrote: &#8220;Literally seconds from cancelling my subscription.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Literally seconds from cancelling my subscription. <a href="https://t.co/rgrEnruAFr">https://t.co/rgrEnruAFr</a>
&mdash; Chris Martin Palmer (@ChrisPalmerNBA) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChrisPalmerNBA/status/1219116155865948162?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Carol Roth wrote: &#8220;This is so patronizing and cringey&#8230; they can’t even pick one. &#8216;Oh, let’s be progressive and pick a woman! Well, we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. Let’s pick both, they won’t mind&#8230;'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is so patronizing and cringey&#8230; they can’t even pick one. “Oh, let’s be progressive and pick a woman! Well, we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. Let’s pick both, they won’t mind&#8230;” <a href="https://t.co/l6xxtPUCmD">https://t.co/l6xxtPUCmD</a>
&mdash; Carol Roth (@caroljsroth) <a href="https://twitter.com/caroljsroth/status/1219111096466001920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This is a breaking news story, refresh the page for updates.

Democrats

New York Times Makes Odd Endorsement In Democratic Presidential Primary, Gets Mocked

During last night&#8217;s Democratic Party presidential primary debate, the <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html">surging</a> Pete Buttigieg delivered a snide aside that would be headline-grabbing were it not merely part of a continuous line of attack. Discussing electability concerns in a back-and-forth with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Buttigieg, the rather <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/22/south-bend-poor-say-democrat-pete-buttigieg-left-them-behind.html">neglectful</a> mayor of <a href="https://patch.com/indiana/south-bend/south-bend-one-worst-cities-live-study-finds">shoddily managed</a> South Bend, Indiana, <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/20/buttigieg-i-can-win-the-presidency-because-im-a-gay-man-in-mike-pences-indiana/">quipped</a>: &#8220;If you want to talk about the capacity to win, try putting together a coalition to bring you back to office with 80% of the vote, as a gay dude in Mike Pence’s Indiana.&#8221;
The implication, of course, is that the vice president of the United States — a Christian who takes his faith seriously — is somehow openly hostile to homosexuals. Even worse, it seems Buttigieg believes Pence, a former Indiana governor, was able to inculcate and disseminate such a viciously homophobic atmosphere throughout the Hoosier State during his gubernatorial tenure such that Buttigieg&#8217;s political rise was made much more difficult as a result.
These allegations, as Buttigieg&#8217;s Democratic presidential primary rival Joe Biden <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/democrat-voters-biden-malarkey-campaign-slogan-074727">might put it</a>, are malarkey. But the notion that Mike Pence is a homosexual-loathing troglodyte is more pernicious than that, too. Buttigieg&#8217;s nonstop bashing of Pence evinces a serious character flaw in the mayor. And it is shameful, to boot.
Buttigieg&#8217;s jihad against Pence is nothing new. Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro dedicated a <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/pete-buttigieg-attacks-mike-pence-bad-faith/">National Review column</a> over eight months ago to decrying Buttigieg&#8217;s &#8220;bad-faith attack&#8221; on Pence. At the time, Buttigieg&#8217;s verbal fusillade against the sitting vice president &#8220;betray[ed] a fundamental misunderstanding of religious people [in] suggest[ing] that their belief in the immorality of certain sexual behavior reflects animus for those who engage in that sexual behavior,&#8221; Ben wrote. And as Erick Erickson and many other conservative Christian commentators have argued, Buttigieg&#8217;s cloaking himself <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-pete-buttigieg-tried-use-bible-argue-matt-walsh">under the veneer of Scripture</a> to try to justify his invariably <a href="https://theresurgent.com/2019/04/08/on-meet-the-press-pete-buttigieg-shows-why-progressive-christianity-is-a-hypocritical-farce/">non-justifiable policy stances</a> is intellectually disingenuous.
Buttigieg&#8217;s self-serving distortions of biblical verses to defend his progressive social crusades — chiefly, abortion-on demand <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-pete-buttigieg-tried-use-bible-argue-matt-walsh">until birth</a> and the civilizational <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-remember-those-who-told-us-gay-marriage-would-not-lead-to-polyamory-they-were-wrong">redefinition of marriage</a> so as to delink sexual complementary — is itself malicious toward those religious Christians and Jews who (properly) read the Bible as supporting contrary policy positions. But the deeply personal nature of his ceaseless singling out of Pence, in particular, is uniquely off-putting. There is no rational reason whatsoever for Buttigieg to care this much about Pence, who has never publicly spoken of Buttigieg with anything other than dignity and charity.
At its core, Buttigieg&#8217;s insatiable desire to invoke Pence as a bogeyman for all his woes reveals a proclivity for dishonesty and profound cynicism. Mike Pence is simply not an individual who should occupy such an outsized space in Pete Buttigieg&#8217;s head; on the contrary, there are many of us social conservatives with <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-vp-pick-mike-pence-evangelicals-225623">long enough memories to remember</a> how poorly then-Governor Pence handled Indiana&#8217;s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) &#8220;controversy&#8221; back in 2015. Pence&#8217;s dithering on Indiana&#8217;s RFRA and seeming willingness to appease the left-wing secularist mob by conceding the premise that portions of RFRA might somehow be &#8220;anti-gay&#8221; was not exactly an impressive demonstration of conservative mettle.
But Buttigieg has no use for any facts about Mike Pence. The South Bend mayor is happy to straw man to his heart&#8217;s content in order to make his political rise look more impressive than it actually is — and for what we can only assume is the inherent &#8220;joy&#8221; of smearing an upstanding man, to boot. It is a sad, petty, and bitter exercise.
Buttigieg may get a sick and twisted pleasure from all of this. But rational Americans can, and will, see it for what it is: Shameful.

HAMMER: Pete Buttigieg’s War On Mike Pence Is Shameful

Christianity

Homosexuality

Indiana

LGBT

Mike Pence

Religion

When the Democrats made their first steps toward going all in on impeachment, political analysts began pointing to a potential problem the process may pose for several Democratic presidential hopefuls: If impeachment makes it to the Senate, what does that mean for the six Democratic Senators vying for the nomination?
According to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republicans-discuss-a-longer-senate-impeachment-trial-to-scramble-democratic-primaries/2019/11/13/d7e46d24-064c-11ea-b17d-8b867891d39d_story.html">The Washington Post</a>&#8216;s sources, Republicans are well aware of the potential stumbling block an impeachment trial in the Senate could end up being for their Democratic peers contending for the 2020 nomination — and some are considering drawing out the proceeding to make sure the Democrats&#8217; pay for their ill-advised impeachment campaign.
<div class="teaser-content">
<section>
<div>
&#8220;Some Republican senators and their advisers are privately discussing whether to pressure GOP leaders to stage a lengthy impeachment trial beginning in January to scramble the Democratic presidential race — potentially keeping six contenders in Washington until the eve of the Iowa caucuses or longer,&#8221; the Post reports.
</div>
<div>
&#8220;Those conversations about the timing and framework for a trial remain fluid and closely held, according to more than a dozen participants in the discussions,&#8221; the paper reports. &#8220;But the deliberations come as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) faces pressure from conservative activists to swat back at Democrats as public impeachment hearings began this week in the House.&#8221;
The Post acknowledges that the &#8220;potential hazard&#8221; that the impeachment campaign poses to Democratic senators is very real, as the six Democratic senators still in contention have &#8220;previously planned on a final sprint out of Washington before the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses and the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary.&#8221;
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div class="remainder-content">
<section>
<div>
Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson teased the press about the potential plot to make life hard on the Democrats. &#8220;That might be a strategy,&#8221; he said with &#8220;a coy smile.&#8221; &#8220;I’m just a lowly worker.&#8221;
Texas Sen. John Corynyn said the Senate would make sure to conduct the trial the &#8220;right&#8221; way, which would likely take five to six weeks. &#8220;Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden might like that,&#8221; he added, naming two of the leading candidates who are not senators.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) said that while Bill Clinton&#8217;s trial took five weeks, he could see Trump&#8217;s going longer because he has denied any wrongdoing. While Clinton &#8220;admitted that he had lied to the FBI,&#8221; said Burr, as reported by the Post, &#8220;I figured it’s going to take longer for [the Democrats] to make a case, because they don’t have that.&#8221;
</div>
While the Post warns that Republicans may be scheming to hurt the Democratic senators, the outlet notes that some Republicans are pushing for a &#8220;swift dismissal or final vote.&#8221;
The six senators still in the mix are, in order of their poll numbers: Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Michael Bennet (D-CO).
<div>
<div>
Both Sanders and Warren have publicly weighed in on the potential trial, saying they will do their best to be there if and when it is necessary.
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-ratcliffe-to-impeachment-witness-here-are-all-the-times-ukraines-president-said-there-was-no-quid-pro-quo">WATCH: Ratcliffe To Impeachment Witness: Here Are All The Times Ukraine’s President Said There Was ‘No Quid Pro Quo’</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>
</div>

Menu