Politico reports that there are too many Democrat candidates running for president in the 2020 race….according to “Science.” Voters can’t possibly choose among them. Bill Whittle, Stephen Green and Scott Ott have a grown-up conversation with Science about this assertion.
Member Guest Pass: Right click this link, then clip and paste to share the full-length YouTube video with a friend.
15 replies on “Science Speaks: Too Many Democrats Running for President”
Everyone is missing the real point. Science also says that Gore Bull Warming will kill the earth in 12 years so if you want to be president, there is no time to lose. I think you guys are right, there should be at least 18,000 Democrat candidates for president with every Democrat voter in the country required to send 80% of their income to support each and every Democrat’s race.
“You don’t necessarily need a choice of 17 Democratic Party candidates when children are hungry in this country,”
If Bernie becomes President I want to be his Secretary of Deodorant Rationing
Callning Democrats “people” is a little strong, dontchya think Bill?
One brand of deodorant for the unwashed masses
Patchouli….
Scott: I think churro is more appropriate than Charo to describe Beto.
Democracy: choose to vote for whoever you want.
Republic: choose from among those who have won their political party’s nominations.
Socialism: vote for whoever you want, but they must be a socialist.
Communism: there is only candidate and you will vote for them.
If I recall correctly, one thing that made Carter very well received by Americans was his “fireside chats,” where he wore sweaters and sat beside the fire like an average guy and talked to America on TV in the evenings. Of course, he was not simple in reality: naval officer, nuclear submarine officer, and far more than a peanut farmer. His brother Billy was entertaining, however. 😀 Of course, as soon as he won the job, the sweaters were gone and suit and tie replaced the “average” guy. But that image of simplicity was effective in getting elected. Americans are far more wowed by illusion than by reality. Carter was almost too nice of a guy to be president; he never had the hard edge required. He was a nice person, but not a good president. Reagan contrasted him nicely, and Iran knew it, which is why the political prisoners were released when Reagan took office. But seriously, how can they use science and the Democrat party in the same sentence? Any science they use will only be stated to reinforce their political narrative. And based on some of the “climate” science they’ve used, much of what they put forth will be wrong.
He was a Dove when what they really needed was a Hawk (Reagan).
I went to a cool restaurant/bar in Grand Rapids a couple months back called “One Bourbon”, but much to my surprise, they had 130ish different bourbons, scotchs (scotches? whatever), ryes and others in stock. Good Marxist name I guess, but what a bait and switch. I bet lefties really struggle to make choices there.
Personally, when it comes to choices, I prefer the Russian way: “Do you want this or do you want this?”….same product….too many choices…
Day wear…
Evening wear…
I remember those videos. Funny as hell
Natasha Whittle commented on this in the last TSL episode. She was a child in Soviet Era Russia and remembers everyone having the same couch, same TV, same radio, etc. It was paradise!
I thought all the Democrats were pro-choice. Who knew.