Delusional Democrats help Trump re-election by chasing phantoms

By David McElroy · March 25, 2019

Many Democrats are still absolutely certain today that Donald Trump conspired with the Russian government to win the 2016 election. For two years, they’ve been in denial that this uncouth narcissist could possibly have defeated the Anointed One — Hillary Rodham Clinton — on his own.

After the Barr summary of Robert Mueller’s report was released Sunday, I watched online video of CNN talking heads and Democratic politicians to see whether they were willing to admit they might have been wrong for the last couple of years.

Their tone was that of children who have been told that Santa Claus doesn’t exist, but they cling to the hope that he exists even though nobody has seen him yet. They’re still in denial.

All over social media for the last couple of days, Democrats sound just as insane as conservatives did when they used to scream “Benghazi!” and chant “Lock her up!” all the time.

Many partisans — of all stripes — need serious mental help.

For two years, media personalities and Democratic politicians have been assuring us that the end was coming quickly for Donald Trump. They kept touting “bombshells” and telling us it was “the beginning of the end” for Trump.

I don’t know who compiled this two-minute video, but it’s a great collection of snippets of media talking heads breathlessly telling us for two years that Trump was going to resign or be impeached. Watch it. They kept saying that whatever “bombshell” they’ve just announced is “the beginning of the end” for Trump.

When Trump is re-elected next year — as I believe is increasingly likely — these people should get a lot of the blame or credit, depending on your point of view.

Trump is a dangerous buffoon. When the idea of him running for president came up seven years ago, I wrote something suggesting that we had arrived at “Idiocracy” if he were taken seriously as a candidate. When it became clear that he was a serious candidate three and a half years ago, I wrote something else comparing his political trajectory to that of Adolph Hitler in 1932 Germany and calling him a con man. (I still didn’t think he had a chance to win.)

I say this to make sure you know what I think of this lying narcissist. I was obviously wrong in thinking he didn’t have a chance of winning. I didn’t think he could con enough people into supporting him, but I misjudged his ability to fool people and I misjudged the capacity of voters to be conned.

I also misjudged Democrats’ ability to respond to this dangerous man. I thought all it would take to defeat him in 2020 was for Democrats to act sane and responsible for four years and then to nominate a responsible centrist.

Instead, Democrats have spent two years chasing phantoms that never existed and promoting a new generation of candidates who would have been right at home in the Soviet Kremlin.

They’ve screamed constantly about impeaching Trump, but nobody has ever been able to tell me which “high crimes and misdemeanors” would make him eligible for impeachment, much less for conviction and removal from office. They’ve made up fantasies about Trump being controlled by the Russian government — and they’ve ended up convincing themselves that their fantasies must be true.

They have counted on Mueller’s report giving them the proof that their shared fantasies were true, but now that Mueller has found nothing of the sort, they’re left to speculate about whether the Russians bought off Mueller or if there are treasonous secrets still hidden in the report.

In other words, they don’t want to give up their fantasies. They don’t want to accept that Trump won in 2016 through a rough and nasty campaign primarily because they nominated a monumentally bad candidate.

After conservatives wanted to keep chasing the fantasy of removing Bill Clinton from office, some progressives started an organization called MoveOn, which tried to press the case that everybody needed to “move on” from the anti-Clinton conspiratorial fantasies of those on the right.

If that name weren’t already taken, Trump supporters could start an organization called MoveOn right now, because the positions have completely switched.

It’s always been insane to attack Donald Trump on these completely unsubstantiated grounds. There were plenty of legitimate and responsible reasons for opposing Trump, but Democrats chose the most outrageous and irrational grounds to stake their claims on.

For two years, Democrats have been setting themselves up to be bitterly disappointed. They wasted half of his first term chasing phantoms.

It seems to me that the original vague charges that started this were nonsense, but Trump and Co. had so many other things to hide that they lied through this investigation to protect entirely unrelated secrets. Nothing about this is surprising. It’s also not surprising that Trump and Co. will claim this as an exoneration and Democrats will scream for more investigation of the “Russia conspiracy.”

If you oppose Trump — as I think reasonable and ethical people should — the correct response isn’t choosing another politician to rule over us. The reasonable response is to question the system which can put a lying and dangerous narcissist in a position to destroy all of us. You should be questioning why any man or woman should have this power — not just whether Trump should have it.

Unless something completely unexpected happens, Trump will not be impeached. The fact that I believe (and many of you believe) he’s a dishonest and narcissistic kook doesn’t pass legal muster for impeachment. You’re stuck with him for now.

I think the odds are very strong that you’re going to be stuck with him for an additional four years after the 2020 election. If that happens, you can thank delusional Democrats and their media friends for wasting years chasing phantoms that don’t exist.

Don’t impeach Trump. Instead, “impeach” and replace the whole immoral political system which gives power-hungry narcissists the power to rule over us.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts