With No Hillary To Kick Around, The New York Times Decides To Go After Chelsea

Hillary Clinton’s not around anymore to act as an everyday punching bag, so how will New York Times politics writers stay in fighting trim? Well, it looks as if they’re found someone new to pound on: The Democratic Party today: Spends $8 million to elect an unelectable candidate who doesn’t live in district & there’s talk…

Did you like this? Share it:
Posted by on April 21, 2017. Filed under NEWS I FIND INTERESTING. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Back to Main Page

2 Responses to With No Hillary To Kick Around, The New York Times Decides To Go After Chelsea

  1. Dr. Mark Bear Reply

    April 22, 2017 at 2:52 pm

    Personally, I found Peter’s commentary to be pathetic. You are correct: Ossof did just fine, and will do fine in the runoff for one particular reason: time! Each and every day that passes sheds new light on the corrupt occupant in the White House. There are cries already about his lack of legislative achievement, and one must wonder, what exactly will occur should he not have anything accomplished by June, a likely scenario predicted by many!

    The problem with Peters is him being part of a media which wants to create history versus recording it accurately! I have heard that critique about Ossof already and oddly it is being repeated by conservative talking heads like Scarbourgh and gang. Peters’ desire for Ossof to be “electric” while a subjective term at best, distorts what is needed to win that particular district: a sober minded, level headed Democrat who appeals also to Republicans!

    Further, I am tired of Saint Bernard and his folks telling our Party who is and who is not a progressive. I am also tired of hearing those same people tell me and others who have been Democratic for years, how Saint Bernard is putting our party in order. I’ve got news for those people: when Bernard changes his party affiliation permanently to Democrat, and does do before it becomes convenient due to electoral politics, then I just might listen. Until then, I find him to be static electric!

    As much as I hate to admit it, Starnes is correct in his analysis, not to mention Ossof beat their leading candidate by twenty points. THAT should have been the news, Also, the news should have been how his opponent literally tried to bring the Komen foundation to its knees as a result of her flawed ideology and failed several attempts to win an election. But don’t let Peters know this, huh?

  2. Jay Reply

    April 22, 2017 at 10:28 pm

    Agreed on both. Peters and St Bernard.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *