Laura Loomer, MAGA megaphone and friend of Donald Trump, called Angie Nixon, the Democratic candidate for the US Senate in Florida, a ghetto bitch. This is, of course, wrong and way out of bounds. It is also an irritating diversion from what the media and the rest of world should be focused.

Loomer, an attention seeking asshole, knows that if she says something outrageous, the press will print her bull shit in big bold letters for the whole world to see. So she says something horrible about Nixon. The press, then, asks Nixon for a response to Loomer’s put down which puts her in an awkward position. She can return fire or keep her mouth shut.

What self respecting person wouldn’t respond what Loomer said. So now Loomer gets to respond to what Nixon said and the whole news cycle gets consumed by this attention seeking idiot. This continues until another nut job, perhaps even Loomer herself or the ever talkative Donald Trump beats her to it, says something outrageous for journalists to stir their every growing pot of irrelevance.

So, it gets better. Trump renames Lake Ontario Lake America, right. Now we have the Lake America controversy and the press is lapping it up. What important subjects are not being talked about while Doug Ford, the Ontario premier, grabs headline with his giant sign saying Lake Ontario. Take that Donald Trump. You aren’t the boss of us.

The problem here is that Trump and Loomer don’t care if they look like idiots as long as they are getting headlines and, more seriously, they are driving the media to cover their drivel instead of, for example, say the war in the Ukraine or Gaza or Iran or inflation or the elections or, how should I put this, oh I know, real problems.

Don’t get me wrong, I get why Nixon and Ford responded to these idiots. They are infuriating people. But it is depressing to see so much attention given to these narcissistic assholes and their faux controversies. This is exactly what they want and we are giving it to them every single time their craving for attention strikes them.

Mike Lindell lost the Minnesota Republican governor nomination by about 45,000 votes. Because this doesn’t even come close to Minnesota’s threshold for a state funded recount, the losing candidate has to pay for the recount. Lindell want that recount so he must pay close to a million dollars for this recount. A recount that he will surely lose. Throwing one million dollars down the drain to learn something that you already knew for free.

Now I am only too glad that he is spending money on this losing cause since this means this million bucks can’t be used to defeat Democratic candidates later. It still sticks in my craw though. It is an insult to anyone who a million dollars actually means something.

It is also depressing because his hidden motive is to discredit American elections. He doesn’t care that he will lose a million because he is publicizing his belief that the American election system is a fraud and it isn’t to be trusted. Any speculation about fraud just adds fuel to the fire. But, hey, it is his million dollars, right?

This is precisely the problem. This isn’t money to reinvest in his business or to buy a home or even to keep his mistress in jewels and chocolates. It is to discover that he has lost an election. Something he already knows.

Anyone making so much money that they can throw it away in such a careless manner simply has too much money. The money would be better spent giving every derelict in Los Angeles a steak dinners and a bottle of whiskey — at least someone would be happy in the end. But no Lindell wants a recount just for the thrill of undermining the integrity of American Elections. That is it.

Bernie Sanders and James Carville are having a disagreement about the rising power of the Democratic Socialists. Sanders even suggested that Carville should think about starting a different party which is, with all due respect to Bernie here, the worst possible suggestion he could make.

It is important to remember that the Democratic Socialists may be winning some of these close primary races but they are close races. El-Sayed beat Stevens by less than 16,000 votes out of 1,500,000 votes cast. He needs the Stevens’ votes to win the seat in November. When your win is narrow, and you need the votes of the person you just defeated to win the next contest, a moment of humility and grace might be the better approach than gloating and rubbing the defeated’s nose in their loss.

Carville, who, after all, worked on the Bill Clinton’s winning team, has a lot to offer in the way of political advice. He is not a part of the Republican disinformation machine. He is a loyal Democrat. That he is concerned about how the Democratic Socialist’s are behaving should give one pause.

Perhaps what appeals to left wing Democrats isn’t particularly appealing to more moderate Democrats, so say nothing of Independents and unhappy Republicans. Millions of Americans choose Donald Trump as the lesser of two evils in three very close elections. This should disturb every Democrat. People knowingly picked an incompetent asshole because they were more afraid of the Democratic Party than they were of Donald Trump. This is a big problem.

American political parties are umbrellas that cover large groups of various interests. These groups don’t always agree. That is OK. In order to win elections, you do, however, have to keep everyone under the same umbrella. This is a difficult task. Telling someone to leave is political suicide if you can’t replace them with someone who can bring in the same number of votes. This makes moderate Democrats essential if we are going to win in November.

I would be more impressed with the Democratic Socialists if they were now spending some time trying to win over people like Carville instead of alienating them. I am hoping this is the temporary flush of victory and they will come to their senses soon, but so far they look like a bunch of assholes who think they are unbeatable. I am afraid they are beatable.

The goal here is to get remove as many Republicans from office as possible. Keep your eyes on the ball.

Winning primaries is a much easier task for Democratic Socialists because the Democratic Party is the left wing party in the American two party system. There is a disproportionate number of left wingers. It makes sense but it doesn’t answer the question about can these left leaning people win general elections.

Winning the general election should be on every Democrat’s mind because Donald Trump is a menace and the only thing that can stop him now is vigorous opposition coming from the legislative branch of government. Democrats need to win elections in order to tame Trump.

Now if we were talking about your garden variety Republican, someone like George Bush, I might be more willing to gamble on Democratic Socialists. Their thinking happen to align more with my own thinking.

On the other hand, it is more important for the Republicans to be defeated. Much more important. A half of a loaf of bread is better than no loaf at all.

That Democratic Socialists can win in a place like New York City is great news but unsurprising. New York City is much more liberal than the rest of the country. Can these Democratic Socialists win in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, states that even more moderate Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris barely and painfully lost — leaving us with Donald Trump as president.

I have been told many times that all the American people need is to hear a true candidate of the left and they will magically cast their votes for the left wing candidate. Well, tell that to President George McGovern, President Jesse Jackson, President Howard Dean, President Bernie Sanders. I have supported an array of left wing candidates who never held power.

Americans are suspicious of big government. I happen to disagree with them but then that doesn’t change any minds, does it? The polling for James Talarico in Texas and Jon Ossoff in Georgia shows a more plausible way forward the Democrats. Are they perfect? Of course not. But can they win in states where Democrats have difficult time getting elected. Absolutely.

My fear is that very winnable races will be lost by candidates who are wasting their time on having to define what a biological woman is or what personal pronouns to use because these are the issues the Republican party will raise in these close races.

In the 1990’s most Democrats opposed Gay Marriage — not because they actually opposed it but because they knew it would sink their potential election. Gay people largely understood this and bided their time until the public perception (with a grand assist from the Supreme Court) of Gay Marriage changed.

The same thing can be said for Capital Punishment. I don’t think very many Democrats actually support Capital Punishment but the American public do. Until minds are changed, it is irresponsible for Democrats to lose elections on an issue where the public has a firm commitment.

The world is imperfect. This will always be the case. This means that we will elect imperfect people who hold imperfect positions in an imperfect government. In order to get things done, we have to accept reality and imperfection.

I hope that the Democratic Socialists do well however my bigger concern is that they don’t torpedo potential Democratic victories in the election. Ideological perfection is all well and good but if we have learned anything during the Trump years is that the people who hold the power make the rules. This means winning elections.

Apparently Troy Jackson, the Democrat’s new candidate for the Maine seat in the U.S, Senate, had sexual relations with his second cousin. This is news for some reason. There is nothing illegal or wrong about it. Maybe a little weird for some people but nothing that would stop me from voting for someone.

What I object to is the waste of space in the media to pursue this non-story. There is a better use of this space given the state of the world than investigating second cousin sexual relationships. Give me a break.

I have mixed feelings about the successes of Democratic Socialists in New York and Colorado.

Personally, my views are close to these candidates, although I do have some disagreements which, while concerning, are insufficient for me to vote Republican or skip voting altogether. But, and this is the important point, I am not the typical general election voter. which is why I am concerned about this more leftward move of the Democratic Party.

What matters, above all else, is winning the general election and not ideological purity.

To start with, the Democratic primaries are different from a general election. Liberals should do better in Democratic primary elections because the Democrats are the more liberal party. It shouldn’t really surprise anyone. Will they be able to win in November is a much different story.

New York City is both more Democratic and Liberal than the rest of the country. Colorado is less so but still comfortably Democratic. These Democratic Socialist winners will all probably coast to election in their districts. Is this the case elsewhere? I would like to see how Democratic Socialists fare outside of Blue States — say Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Michigan — three states that are vital to any Democratic victory.

This is yet to be seen and this is why I am concerned. I have heard the siren call of imminent Left Wing victories (see George McGovern, Jesse Jackson, Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders) too many times for these victories to signify a leftward movement in the country. Keep in mind, Hillary Clinton, hardly a Democratic Socialist, crashed and burned.

The overarching goal of this election is winning seats in the House and the Senate. Candidates need to be focused on putting a muzzle on Donald Trump and the economic issues affecting all Americans. If, in October, the Democrats are discussing which pronouns people should use then I am afraid this diversion will doom any success for the leftward trend in the country as a whole.

Let’s keep everyone can on board. Candidates don’t have to be perfect. They just need to be better than the Republican. Given the Trump take over the Republican party, this should be a piece of cake.

Ken Paxton, notoriously bad Christian and Republican candidate for the US Senate, caught again breaking one of the Ten Commandments.

I know he was a keen advocate for having them posted in Texas schools so that children know their importance as a basis for American Law. They are also a good guide in regulating personal behavior. Perhaps he should post them in his bedroom. He clearly needs a reminder.

You don’t press unpopular issues if there is little chance of winning. For example, Barack Obama did not support gay marriage when he first ran for president. Now, in my mind, a gay man, I realized that Obama could give a rats’ ass about gay marriage and was opposing it in order to win an election where a significant portion of the American public opposed gay marriage. It doesn’t make sense to lose an election for an issue, gay marriage, that would surely go down to defeat in most state legislatures. Gay marriage had to wait for another time because Obama could do other things that help me and, more importantly, every other non-gay citizen who, by the way, make up 90 percent of the population.

One of the great lessons of age is you realize that you don’t get everything you want. It is better to get some of what you want than to get nothing. You have to win elections in order to govern, this means compromise. This is how democracies work. Some changes have to wait. You have to deal with the reality you are in.

Which brings me to the New York legislature’s recent passage of a law that replaces mother and father with gestating parent and non-gestating parent in the law books. This change was necessary to make sure that the very few women who are transitioning into men (and vice versa) know that New York law is aware of their non-binary status and included in New York law.

I have numerous problems with this fishing expedition in an empty lake.

  1. 1.The binary division of man and woman has dominated Western Culture. It is still to be determined how this view might change but Trans activists are under the impression that they have won the battle. The vast majority of people, even in the liberal circles, still fall back on the terms like man, father,woman and mother. More to the point, nobody I know uses the terms gestating parent and non-gestating parent. None. So, why is this piece of legislation even necessary when no one uses the terms or even knows what these terms mean. But OK, I guess, gestating parent.
  2. Because no one uses gestating parent and non-gestating parent, it seems like a bad idea to incorporate such words into the law books when the more popular terms — mother and father are working without complaint. Why change them? Who requires this change? Oh, trans activists want this.
  3. Well, if Trans activists could deliver votes, I might be inclined to give them this change without complaint but they can’t. In fact, Republicans are using this issue as a cudgel to defeat Democrats. So, then, it might be bad idea to be pressing the issue. If they are demanding it, they don’t seem to have a grasp on reality. I would never have expected any Democratic body to push for gay marriage during the 1990’s. It would be political suicide. Are Trans activists so short sighted to see this an unhelpful in the struggle to defeat Trump and the Republicans.
  4. The Democrats control New York. How did this pointless and damaging piece of legislation get through these bodies when someone with power should have killed it long before it ever reached the governor’s desk? It is both shocking and depressing that Democratic power brokers were more interested in distributing symbolic prizes to loyal constituencies instead of winning elections. It is almost as if there is some Trump mole working at a high level in the New York Democratic Party.

I don’t want to lose this election but if it were to happen, I want the defeat to be about something big — something like Medical Care or the War in Iran and not whether to rename Mother’s Day to Gestating Parent’s Day.