During a televised interview on Wednesday morning,\nSeptember 11, former DNC Chairwoman and current Fox News Contributor Donna\nBrazile referred to the top ten Democratic candidates as \u201cten outstanding\npeople.\u201d At this stage of the 2020\npresidential campaign it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about which\nof those \u201cten outstanding people\u201d will come out on top. Evaluating that small\narmy of pretenders who see themselves as potential leaders of the Free World is\na truly frightening exercise\u2026 much like tiptoeing through the malodorous \u201chazards\u201d\non the streets of San Francisco. However,\ngiven the eclectic nature of the Democratic field there are some rather\nsignificant underlying factors that are certain to affect the outcome. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
As matters now stand, the RealClearPolitics average of\npolls taken between August 23 and September 3, shows the top five contenders as\nfollows: Former Vice President Biden, 30.1%: Sen. Elizabeth Warren, 17.6%; Sen.\nBernie Sanders, 16.9%; Sen. Kamala Harris, 6.7%; and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 4.4%. The second tier of candidates\u2026 businessman\nAndrew Yang, Cong. Tulsi Gabbard, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, Sen. Amy\nKlobuchar, and Sen. Michael Bennet\u2026 are all polling at less than 2.0%. So, what can we say about each of the top five\nthat may cause them to either rise or fall in the polls between now and the\nIowa caucuses? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
First, former VP Joe Biden. Although Biden was \u201cjoined at the hip\u201d to\nBarack Obama during their eight years in the White House, that relationship is\ntruly a double-edged sword. Since Obama\nremains a beloved figure in the black community, Biden would be quite happy to\nhave African Americans see his smiling face when they think of Barack Obama. But will the Biden candidacy be a plus or a\nminus for the Obama legacy? As the worst\npresident in US history, Obama finds himself sitting on the edge of his chair,\nholding his breath and biting his nails, while the gaffe-prone Biden struggles\nto identify himself with Obama\u2019s indefensible record. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The New York Times<\/em> reports that, in an April meeting,\njust before Biden announced his candidacy, Obama advised, \u201cYou don\u2019t have to do this, Joe,\nyou really don\u2019t,\u201d The Times<\/em>\nwent on to explain that Biden, who thinks he could have defeated Trump in 2016,\nresponded by telling Obama that he could \u201cnever forgive himself if he turned\ndown a second shot at Mr. Trump.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Watching\nBiden carrying out his very limited campaign schedule, it has been clear from\nthe beginning that he is not physically or mentally capable of competing\nagainst a strong and vital Donald Trump, a man who is capable of holding campaign\nrallies in San Diego, St. Louis, and Philadelphia, all in a single day,\nspending the night at the White House, and doing it all over again, five days\nout of every week. Joe Biden will no\nlonger be a candidate when the Iowa caucuses convene in February. In fact, the odds are that he will withdraw\nprior to Christmas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With\nBiden out of the race, media attention will focus on the contest between Elizabeth\nWarren and Bernie Sanders. Warren is\nsaid to have an excellent ground organization in Iowa, which could easily give\nher an edge over Sanders in that first-in-the-nation contest. But it\u2019s hard to see Iowans getting excited\nabout either candidate, both of whom support the gradual phasing out of fossil\nfuels. Even the most wild-eyed liberals\nin Iowa understand that tractors require either gasoline or diesel fuel to\nplant and harvest crops. And since the\nphasing out of fossil fuels would necessarily eliminate the need for ethanol fuel\nadditives, distilled from corn, it is highly unlikely that any of the ten Democratic\ncandidates will be popular in any of the Corn Belt states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From\na national standpoint, both Warren and Sanders have expressed support for full\nterm abortions, free college educations, student loan forgiveness, a national\n$15.00 minimum wage, guaranteed healthcare for all, and legalized marijuana\u2026\nall of which are losing positions across the country. Sanders has even gone so far as to endorse a\npopulation control scheme that can only be described as infantile\ngenocide. He has said, \u201cSo I think, especially in poor countries\naround the world where women do not necessarily want to have large numbers of\nbabies, and where they can have the opportunity through birth control to\ncontrol the number of kids they have, it\u2019s something I very, very strongly\nsupport.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Worst\nof all, both Warren and Sanders have endorsed the most harebrained scheme in\nthe history of representative government: Alexandria Ocasio Cortez\u2019s Green New\nDeal. How any candidate for the presidency\ncould campaign on those proposals is beyond human understanding. In their entire platform of shared policy proposals,\nthere is not a single winning issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some\nten points behind Bernie Sanders we have Sen. Kamala Harris, the former\nattorney general of the State of California, who takes great pride in the\nnumber of black and Hispanic criminals she\u2019s sent to prison\u2026 a dubious\ndistinction that she will regret once blacks and Hispanics have a chance to \u201cevaluate\u201d\nher in the voting booths.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However,\nHarris\u2019s greatest shortcoming is the fact that she is not eligible to serve as\npresident or vice president. Although\nher lack of eligibility has not been an issue in the campaign, as yet, it is\nonly a matter of time before one of her desperate competitors will use that\nfact against her. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Harris\u2019s mother, Shyamala Gopalan, emigrated to the\nU.S. from India in 1960 and her father, Donald Harris, emigrated to the U.S.\nfrom Jamaica in 1961. Under U.S. law, an individual cannot apply for U.S.\ncitizenship until they\u2019ve held a \u201cgreen card\u201d for a minimum of five\nyears. Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964. At best, her\nmother was a legal non-citizen resident of the U.S. for just 4 years, 9 months,\nand 20 days when Sen. Harris was born. \nHer father was, at best, a legal non-citizen resident for just 3 years,\n9 months, and 20 days when she was born. \nNeither parent could possibly have been a U.S. citizen when Sen. Harris\nwas born. <\/p>\n\n\n\n What few Americans recognize is that there are only\ntwo (2) jobs in the entire United States\u2026 public sector and private sector\ncombined\u2026 that require the incumbents to be \u201cnatural born\u201d citizens. \nThose two jobs are president and vice president of the United States. The term \u201cnatural born,\u201d by its very nature,\nimplies that the \u201cquality\u201d of an individual\u2019s citizenship must be pure\u2026 totally\nauthentic, totally American, unencumbered by any modifying adjectives such as\n\u201cdual,\u201d \u201cnaturalized,\u201d or \u201cbirthright.\u201d Senator\nHarris can be Mayor of San Francisco, she can be Governor of California, she\ncan be a federal judge, she can even be Chief Justice of the United States\nSupreme Court. None of those jobs require status as a \u201cnatural born\u201d\ncitizen. But unless her parents were\nboth U.S. citizens when she was born, she is not a \u201cnatural born\u201d citizen and cannot\nserve as either president or vice president. \n<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just over two points behind Senator Harris, at 4.4% popularity,\nis the current mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg. Unfortunately, Buttigieg has a major factor in\nhis personal life that could easily short circuit any presidential ambitions he\nmight have. Buttigieg is openly gay and the\nperson he refers to as his \u201chusband\u201d is a man named Chasten Buttigieg, nee\nGlezman.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The American people have proven time and time again\nthat they are willing to cut a president a bit of slack when it comes to his\npersonal life. Were that not the case,\nJohn Kennedy would have been forced out of the White House long before he\nplanned a trip to Dallas, and Bill Clinton would have been sacked long before\nhe ever left Arkansas. JFK is thought to\nhave had more than 50 mistresses, including one he shared with Chicago organized\ncrime boss Sam Giancana (a woman who also served as a courier between the two\nmen), a bevy of some of our most beautiful movie stars, and two others who were\nthought to be Soviet spies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The mainstream media were fully aware of the Kennedy\nand Clinton sexual dalliances, but they refused to report on them; they simply responded\nwith a wink and a nod. But the question\narises [Ahem! How to phrase this delicately?], while the American people have\nalways been willing to accept what consenting adults do behind closed doors, and\nhave generally accepted the notion of same-sex marriage, when it comes to the\nsexual practices of gays and lesbians, have we become so inured to the idea of\nsodomy that we are willing to overlook its practice in the hallowed halls of\nthe White House? In the Lincoln bedroom? Is that what political correctness demands of\nus?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Have the American people really come that far? Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky introduced\nour children and grandchildren to the concept of oral sex, but sodomy? Having that obligatory \u201cbirds and Bees\u201d\nconversation with our children and grandchildren is difficult enough, but how\nwould we ever explain sodomy to them\u2026 especially when the subject of our conversation\nis the president of the United States? <\/p>\n\n\n\n From the beginning of the Trump candidacy, there have\nbeen three kinds of Republicans: 1) The \u201cNever-Trumpers\u201d\u2026\nBill Kristol et al\u2026 who despised Trump from the beginning and have not begun to\nchange their minds, 2) Those who turned up their noses at Trump until at least\nthe end of his first year in office\u2026 this\nwriter included\u2026 but who have finally concluded that he is exactly the kind of\nno-holds-barred leader that the country has needed for many decades, and 3)\nThose who were dedicated \u201cTrumpsters\u201d from the very beginning\u2026 my lovely wife\nincluded\u2026 whose respect and admiration have\nonly grown with time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Considering all of Trump\u2019s significant accomplishments\nand comparing what he could accomplish in two full terms with the irreparable\ndamage that would be caused by any one of the current Democratic candidates,\nthere is only one choice. We must\nreelect Donald Trump in a landslide, and we must return governing Republican\nmajorities in both houses of Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As for the ten \u201coutstanding people\u201d now seeking the\nDemocratic nomination, there is not a single person on the first page of the\nWashington, DC telephone directory who would not make a better president. They are not what Ms. Brazile judges to be\n\u201cten outstanding people.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Paul\nR. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of\nthe U.S. Electoral College. He currently\nlives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma\u2019s Green\nCountry.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" During a televised interview on Wednesday morning, September 11, former DNC Chairwoman and current Fox News Contributor Donna Brazile referred to the top ten Democratic candidates as \u201cten outstanding people.\u201d At this stage of the 2020 presidential campaign it is … Continue reading