Elections have consequences.

If Catherine Cortez Masto wins in Nevada – and it appears increasingly likely that she will with most of the uncounted votes coming from Democratic strongholds – then Herschel Walker will lose BIGLY on December 6th in Georgia. With control of the Senate no longer at stake, there is no earthly reason for any sentient person who cares about our country to vote for maybe the least qualified and most unworthy candidate ever nominated for high office.

And, when all the dust settles and the Democrats have increased their control of the Senate by one more vote, the oversized role of Senator Manchin will come to an end. And that, IMHO, is a good thing.

Meanwhile, one of the Democrats the Right most loves to hate, Governor Gavin Newsom, won reelection in our largest, most dynamic and least violent states with 58% of the vote. And on the East Coast (not on the ocean) Josh Shapiro beat his MAGA opponent for Governor of former-swing-state Pennsylvania with 56% of the vote.

I wonder if these developments and others spell the end of the Rupert Murdoch empire propping up Dear Leader. The front page of the New York Post may offer a clue . . .

27 thoughts on “Elections have consequences.

  1. If the projected Republican majority in the House holds, the margin will be just a few legislators. That could put a damper on the promised “investigations of everything” on shaky legs.

    Hard to believe, but there are actually some Republicans with integrity and principle who now do not have to fear the Mar a Lago effect. If so, then McCarthy might have to swallow his pride and look across the aisle to work on real issues instead.

    Imagine that.

    Liked by 3 people

          1. I was thinking more the weaponization of the FBI and DOJ

            Again LOL!

            Isn’t that what Mr. Durham has been investigating for three years now?

            Here is something you seem not to know – people who commit crimes run afoul of the justice system. It seems to me that the DOJ has held back on the prosecution of Mr. Trump because of their policy of trying to avoid influencing elections. The election is now over. Mr. Trump will now have to answer for his crimes. He will not be getting a free pass from partisans as he did with his proven criminal extortion of Ukraine and his incitement of violent sedition. He will be lucky to stay out of prison.

            Liked by 1 person

          1. “BTW, if as seems likely. . . ”

            You are on a roll today with silly hopes and baseless slanders. There nothing to support your “seems likely” assessment that there is compromising corruption involving China or anyone else. Nothing at all. If you have ANY evidence that you did not pull out of your ass to support that assessment, then why not share it?

            Liked by 2 people

          2. The Democrats have investigated Trump continuously since he came down the escalator. If there was something they would have found it.

            Biden, on the other hand, has been shielded by the very agencies that should have been investigating him. Who knows what an honest investigation will turn up.


          3. Now that we are familiar with all the crimes Trump committed, investigations were certainly warranted. Remember, while he was president, he, and by instruction, his loyal staffers, ignored subpoenas. Hard to find out anything if no one cooperates.

            After he was defeated, well now that is a different basket of crawdaddies. Bank fraud, tax fraud, extortion in at least 3 states and a foreign country, slander, insurrection, absconding with national defense secrets…all there before, but immunity isn’t.

            Why do you think he is pushing to get the GOP nomination?

            Hard to swing a golf club in an orange jumpsuit on a concrete floor.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. “If there was something they would have found it.”

            They DID find and it is in the public record. It is far more egregious corruption than ANYTHING even you can imagine with respect to Biden. You just don’t care because you want to see the government sabotaged at any cost to decency or the Rule of Law.

            Your breathless panting over imaginary Biden crimes that you cannot even name is laughable.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Do elections really have consequences?

    Neither major party in the midterms put forward an agenda that would change the course of events. Joe Biden himself has said, “I’m not going to change direction.”

    I suppose you could say that the consequence of the midterms will be that things will remain the same, but that defeats the logic of the proposition.

    The question on my mind is: How did it happen that elections became inconsequential?


    1. The agenda of the incumbent party doesn’t necessarily change. It is what they were elected to do in the first place.

      This election was very consequential. It marginalized the extremes of the GOP. And, IMO, will go a long ways to establishing better trust in elections.

      This election was run by new GOP rules. Poll watchers from both sides were practically sitting in election worker laps. Every vote in AZ, for example, is being scrutinized for signature verifications. And so on.

      Yet, Lake and her minions are crying foul because it is taking so long to do what they wanted.

      No, I think this election was very consequential and may put us back on track to maintain the success of 240 years of peaceful transitions of power.

      Or to put it bluntly, the political turd in the punchbowl has been isolated and plucked.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. RE: “The agenda of the incumbent party doesn’t necessarily change.”

        Yes, I mentioned that. The problem is, circumstances change. For example, inflation and the war in Ukraine are two circumstances that didn’t exist two years ago; the pandemic is a circumstance that doesn’t exist, but did.

        One should expect every election to be consequential in the sense of addressing conditions that exist at the time the vote is taken. The midterms failed to be consequential in that sense, as your own criticisms of the GOP attest.


  3. Because of the unusually low number of vulnerable Democrats coming up this time around, the Senate was always a long shot, and poor candidate choice didn’t help.

    One factor in PA that hasn’t gotten much press is that Oz is strongly anti-gun, and that dampened GOP voter enthusiasm a lot. Not that they would vote for Fetterman, but that they would sit out the election.

    Even if NV goes blue, there is still reason to push for GA. Simena and Manchin will cross lines on some issues, and getting Walker in preserves their independence. If the Dems no longer need them there will be no brakes on Biden.


    1. The GOP Senate victories in 2018 were the result of a huge advantage by Republicans. They only defended 9 seats to the Democrats’ 26, 10 of which were in Trump country.

      But they still only gained 2 seats.

      PS: When NV goes blue, the enthusiam will surge for Democrats and fizzle for Republicans. Hard to fit the nuance of Sinema and Manchin voting on a bumper sticker.

      Unless: “Remember S&M, Vote Walker”😇

      Liked by 2 people

    1. Fetterman said it best. In January, he will have recovered more, but Oz would still have been the elitist carpetbagger from NJ.

      Crudités to the Bastille!!

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s