web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Kirsten Gillibrand (Page 4)

Gillibrand has new excuse for polling below one percent

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand Gillibrand has new excuse for polling below one percent Women The Blog Polling misogynists Kirsten Gillibrand 2020 Democrat primaries

There’s a new Morning Consult poll of the Democratic primary race out today and it’s probably come to the attention of New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand that she’s not exactly burning up the charts. In fact, she managed to ring up one percent. (And they round up if you have more than 0.5.) She’s been stuck down in the basement virtually since the day she announced and hasn’t shown any signs of building momentum.

So what is it that’s keeping the “brave” candidate down? Not to worry. She’s got an explanation for it and she shared it with CNN recently. If you guessed “endemic misogyny,” give yourself a cookie. (Free Beacon)

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) said she’s being underestimated in the crowded race for the 2020 Democratic nomination, blaming “gender bias” and the fact people are “generally biased against women.”

In a CNN profile about how Gillibrand is “living her best life” by having fun on the campaign trail, the low-polling senator gave a “hearty ‘yeah’” when asked if she’s not being taken seriously enough on the trail.

“I think it’s just gender bias. I think people are generally biased against women. I think also biased against young women,” she said. “There’s just bias and it’s real and it exists, but you have to overcome it.”

So the country is particularly biased against “young women” as well as just women in general. I’m not entirely sure where the cutoff is for being considered a “young woman” these days, but at 52, I’m not sure if she qualifies. Granted, she’s certainly not “old” and she’s younger than me and considerably younger than Biden or Sanders. But once you hit the half-century mark that ship has pretty much sailed.

How much weight should we be giving to the claim that she’s polling near zero because America won’t give women a chance? And mind you, this polling is being done among voters from her own party for the most part. So she’s basically saying that Democrats are largely a bunch of misogynists.

The fact is that two candidates came into this primary with massive, built-in advantages in terms of name recognition and a national fundraising and staffing network. They happen to be two elderly white men. (Biden and Sanders) They were always going to get out to an early lead. But at the top of the second tier in this morning’s poll, there are two women (Warren and Harris). Having ovaries hasn’t kept them out of the mix, though they still have a long way to go to catch up to the leaders. And Harris is only two years older than Gillibrand for whatever that’s worth.

If other women can manage to rack up 8% support, it’s hard to imagine some festering hatred of women keeping Gillibrand down. In reality, as soon as she formed her exploratory committee, her potential opponents and much of the press got busy defining her as a flip-flopper who used to hold views that made her look more like Sarah Palin than a liberal Democrat. That’s probably what strangled her candidacy before she could get her head above water.

On the plus side, the senator claims that she’s probably the candidate who is “having the most fun” out on the campaign trail. She should probably enjoy it while she can because I predict she’ll be gone after the Iowa straw poll this summer.

The post Gillibrand has new excuse for polling below one percent appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand-300x159 Gillibrand has new excuse for polling below one percent Women The Blog Polling misogynists Kirsten Gillibrand 2020 Democrat primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gillbrand’s gun control plan is kind of different (but not much)

Westlake Legal Group GillibrandJustice Gillbrand’s gun control plan is kind of different (but not much) The Blog Magazines Kirsten Gillibrand Guns gun registration gun control Cory Booker bump stocks ban assault weapons

One by one, the Democratic 2020 candidates have been submitting their various policy proposals to their primary voters for consideration. This includes their plans for how they intend to infringe on the rights of gun owners. Oh, I’m sorry… we’re supposed to say “gun violence prevention and common sense gun safety regulations.” The latest entry in this derby is New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. During a stop in New Hampshire, she was asked by a reporter if she supported Cory Booker’s proposal to create a national gun registry. (He calls it “a federal firearm licensing system,” but let’s face it… it’s a gun registry.)

Somewhat surprisingly, Gillibrand passed on the gun registry. But before anyone could accuse her of going back to her younger days when she had an A rating from the NRA, she unleashed a batch of other gun control proposals to maintain her far left credibility. (Washington Examiner)

“No, I think there is a better approach,” Gillibrand told the Washington Examiner at a campaign stop in Warner, N.H., on Saturday, when asked about a plan proposed by primary rival Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J.

“To end gun violence, I would do three things,” she said. “I would, No. 1, pass universal background checks, which are common sense and supported by 70% of America.”

Her second move would be a federal law against trafficking guns. “Because for cities like Newark, N.J., and cities like New York City, the guns are trafficked from out of state into the hands of criminals. And those networks aren’t even a federal crime,” she said.

“And third, I would ban the bump stocks, the large magazines, and the military-style assault weapons.”

Is she disagreeing with Booker because she recognizes that a federal gun registry is a bridge too far for most anyone or just because she doesn’t want to be seen as copying Booker’s platform? Tough call, but aside from that her plans do sound like pretty much the rest of the field. Ban scary looking rifles, shrink the capacity of magazines and make background checks more tedious. Like the rest of her competitors, she ignores the fact that the vast majority of criminals don’t buy their guns legally and don’t submit to background checks. And AR-15s are only used in a comparative handful of violent crimes every year.

Her gun trafficking suggestion is an interesting one. I’m pretty sure even the majority of Second Amendment supporters don’t want to see people illegally trafficking in firearms. But is that actually legal in any state of the nation? I can’t find an example. So if she wants a federal law against it, I suppose she’s trying to make gun trafficking even more illegal. You go, girl.

Getting off the subject of gun control, Gillibrand went on to continue bragging about her ability to “win in a red district.” (Her old upstate New York district was and still remains pretty much on the purple to red side.) I don’t understand how she sees this as a selling point in a liberal primary. As we’ve pointed out here before, she didn’t win that seat by persuading conservative voters to agree to liberal policies. She won by being even more conservative than the Republican she was running against.

None of this sounds like it’s going to suddenly boost her prospects in the primary. Perhaps that’s why the most recent polling average has her at 0.6 percent. Holy smokes… that’s not even above the background noise level.

The post Gillbrand’s gun control plan is kind of different (but not much) appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group GillibrandJustice-300x153 Gillbrand’s gun control plan is kind of different (but not much) The Blog Magazines Kirsten Gillibrand Guns gun registration gun control Cory Booker bump stocks ban assault weapons   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

BUT HOW? New 2020 Report Shows Trump Kicking Democrats’ Butts in a Sacred Area They Claim to Own

Westlake Legal Group donald-trump-rally-lgbtq-women-SCREENSHOT BUT HOW? New 2020 Report Shows Trump Kicking Democrats’ Butts in a Sacred Area They Claim to Own Women white house washington D.C. Uncategorized The Sexes Presidency Politics Pennsylvania Minorities Kirsten Gillibrand kamala harris intolerance Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Campaigns brian sims bigotry Allow Media Exception 2020

[SCREENSHOT FROM URL]

 

Democrats have a very strange strategy for duping the daft: They take certain issues and refer to the left-wing side as representing all women. Or minorities. Or gays. Or the poor. And, I assume, they just hope their pitched notion will enter the ears of America, bypass the critical thinking part of the brain, and store itself right in the ol’ cranial hard drive.

Voilà.

Haven’t you heard? All women are liberal Democrats.

Example: Seemingly mentally disturbed Pennsylvania state Rep. Brian Sims harassed a pro-life senior citizen and three pro-life teenagers in front of a Planned Parenthood (here and here). After a buttload of condemnation, he made a sorta non-apologetic apology (see the article by RedState’s Brandon Morse) promising he “will do better, for the women of Pennsylvania” by protecting abortion.

Cerebral problemo: The elderly person and three teenagers were women, too.

Also intellectually unworkable, incidentally: He called them bigots:

Definition of bigot: Someone intolerant of an opposing view.

#FAIL.

Here’s a fresh shock to those who believe the gaggle of goobs slingin’ the girl-power goofiness: According to FEC data, in the first quarter of 2019, more women donated to Donald Trump’s re-election campaign than to any Democratic 2020 candidate.

But…how is that possible?

Oh, yeah — ’cause o’ brains.

In Q1, 10,375 chicks donated to, I guess, non-women’s issues. That’s more than double the sassy ladies who coughed it up for Kamala Harris — the leading Dem for female financiers.

She received dough from a wimpy 3,850.

To be fair, Trump per-lass average was lower than Kamala’s and Kirsten Gillibrand’s. I’m sure that can be spun any way you please.

Here’re the numbers for benefacting babes:

Big DT: 10,375
Kamala Harris: 3,850
Bernie Sanders: 3,271
Beto O’Rourke: 2,289
Cory Booker: 2,020
Pete Buttigieg: 1,335
Elizabeth Warren: 1,330
Amy Klobuchar: 1,321
Andrew Yang: 964
Kirsten Gillibrand: 960
Julian Castro: 563
Jay Inslee: 473
John Delaney: 451
John Hickenlooper: 362
Tulsi Gabbard: 164

So there ya go — despite the constant drone of pro-woman maneuvers, a whole lot of women haven’t bought it. What they’ve bought — literally — instead is an increased likelihood that the 2020 POTUS will be none other than ladies’ man Donald J. Trump.

-Alex

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here and here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

It Takes Balls: Man Competes In Women’s Powerlifting, Sets Four World Records

WATCH: A Man Tries To Beat Up A Woman On A Public Sidewalk. The Easter Bunny Comes To Her Rescue & Kicks His A**!

WATCH: 8-Year-Old Girl Ava Martinez Does Her Best Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, & The Dead-On Video Goes Viral

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. For iPhone instructions, see the bottom of this page.



 

 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post BUT HOW? New 2020 Report Shows Trump Kicking Democrats’ Butts in a Sacred Area They Claim to Own appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group donald-trump-rally-lgbtq-women-SCREENSHOT-300x160 BUT HOW? New 2020 Report Shows Trump Kicking Democrats’ Butts in a Sacred Area They Claim to Own Women white house washington D.C. Uncategorized The Sexes Presidency Politics Pennsylvania Minorities Kirsten Gillibrand kamala harris intolerance Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Campaigns brian sims bigotry Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding

Westlake Legal Group the-bernie-sanders-campaign-is-imploding The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding realclearpolitics polls Politics Pete Buttigieg Kirsten Gillibrand Imploding Campaign Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Bernie Sanders 2020 Primary

Westlake Legal Group bernie-sanders-grimace-skateboard-brighter-620x348 The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding realclearpolitics polls Politics Pete Buttigieg Kirsten Gillibrand Imploding Campaign Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Bernie Sanders 2020 Primary

Remember when Sanders was the front runner in the 2020 Democratic primary about five minutes ago? That ride appears to be not just over, but the car is being driven off a cliff. While it was always assumed that Biden would take 1st place once he entered the race, most pundits felt Sanders had the staying power to bounce around just a few points below him.

Well, so much for that. I took a look at the latest polling and it’s absolutely brutal for the resident communist.

Here’s the five polls taken since Biden entered the race per RealClearPolitics.

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-1-620x129 The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding realclearpolitics polls Politics Pete Buttigieg Kirsten Gillibrand Imploding Campaign Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Bernie Sanders 2020 Primary

Here’s a live look at Bernie Sanders after seeing these numbers.

Westlake Legal Group boy-facepalm-620x412 The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding realclearpolitics polls Politics Pete Buttigieg Kirsten Gillibrand Imploding Campaign Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Bernie Sanders 2020 Primary

Not only is Bernie getting blistered by 20+ points in every single poll, his baseline numbers are sinking to the point where Elizabeth Warren is leading him in one sample.

Elizabeth freaking Warren.

I’m not sure what Bernie’s path is from here. He hasn’t shown any ability to grow his vote share, as it appears a majority of the Democrat party have no interest in the self-avowed socialist. His base is strong, but it has peaked at a number too low to bring him to victory. Does he try to play the long game and hope the rest of the field splinters? That seemed like a good idea a few weeks ago but the way things are falling now shows Democrats want the most electable candidate and Biden (at least in their minds) appears to be that person.

While the “fresh faces” of the Democrat party, such as AOC and Ilhan Omar, keep pushing socialism as the wave of the future, it seems the actual voters in their party aren’t too keen on it. Not yet at least. That’s actually good news for the country. If the race comes down to Biden and Trump, they’ll still be real downsides if Biden wins, certainly for the conservatives among us who actually care about accomplishing things and not just virtue signaling. But, as a worst case scenario, Biden is far less worrying than Sanders.

That’s really the issue for Donald Trump though. While he’s playing up the idea that he’d love to run against Biden, it’s the worst possible match-up precisely because Biden is such a goofball. To a lot of Americans, including some who disagree with his politics, he comes across as harmless. I suspect even many Republicans see him as someone who’ll simply propagate the status quo. Without a great foil across from Trump, i.e. Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, his path does get more difficult in the mid-west, where he absolutely has to do well to have a chance.

With that said, it’s really, really early. Biden could implode in the primary, although it’s highly unlikely. He could have some scandal take him down during the general. The American people could smartly decide that a booming economy is worth putting up with Trump’s rougher edges. No one really knows how it’ll fall if that’s the match-up.

What I do know is that Bernie Sanders is in big trouble and it’s way too early in the game to get floundering already. I expect the politics of all of this to get really dirty as we head into the first debates. Sanders isn’t going to roll over this time. It’s going to be great entertainment.

BTW, given that Kirsten Gillibrand is now polling below someone named Inslee (seriously, I have no idea who that is), perhaps somebody should pull her aside and let her down easy.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

 

The post The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group bernie-300x158 The Bernie Sanders Campaign is Imploding realclearpolitics polls Politics Pete Buttigieg Kirsten Gillibrand Imploding Campaign Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Bernie Sanders 2020 Primary   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gillibrand attempts beer pong to appear more human

Westlake Legal Group gillibrand-attempts-beer-pong-to-appear-more-human Gillibrand attempts beer pong to appear more human The Blog retail politics New Hampshire Kirsten Gillibrand beer

Westlake Legal Group GillibrandHands Gillibrand attempts beer pong to appear more human The Blog retail politics New Hampshire Kirsten Gillibrand beer

It’s been a little while since we checked in on New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s presidential campaign, probably because she’s been stuck in the trenches and polling in the vicinity of zero. But she’s still out there beating the bushes and trying to round up votes and campaign contributions. One of her latest campaign gimmicks involved getting out there with the regular people and playing some beer pong. No… seriously. This is a thing that actually happened. (Associated Press)

Her first shot landed short and her teammate’s bounced away. But Kirsten Gillibrand’s second ping pong ball splashed home and she threw both arms skyward while her opponents chugged, celebrating a beer pong victory in the most presidential way possible.

The scene on a rainy Friday night in a bar in Nashua, New Hampshire’s second-largest city, follows a pattern for the 52-year-old New York senator. She’s trailed better-known rivals in the packed Democratic 2020 presidential field in polling and fundraising, but she’s making a case for being the coolest candidate in the race.

Driving between New Hampshire events in February, she stopped to go sledding. She’s played foosball and baked cookies, arm wrestled and hung out with drag queens at an Iowa bar some call “Gay Cheers.”

It appears that her team thought it was such a good idea that they decided to fundraise off of it. This endearing little video shows her taking a shot, but pausing the action in midair to ask if you might be willing to contribute a dollar to her campaign if she makes it. (Spoiler alert: She does.)

This wasn’t the first time she’s done this. (Allahpundit touched on the subject a week ago.) But she must think it works because she’s been hitting bars all over New Hampshire, looking for opportunities to chat up the locals.

This isn’t crazy in any way, honestly. It’s just retail politics at the most local of levels. If you can “run into” some voters who may have been leaning toward one of the frontrunners and spend some time hanging out with them, perhaps they’ll buy into your message and remember you as someone they spent time with on a personal level. Of course, it only really works in a national campaign in the smallest, lowest population states like Iowa and New Hampshire.

But at the same time, you have to come off as authentic. When it’s just an obvious gimmick, the majority of voters will simply tune it out. Foosball, arm wrestling and swapping outfits with drag queens all make for a quick headline targeting political junkies, but it has to translate to some actual support. At this point, there’s still some question as to whether or not Gillibrand will even qualify for the debates in June. She’s managed to reach 1% in four polls (barely) but we don’t know if she’s hit the 65,000 unique donor mark.

Odds are they’ll have her on the stage anyway because the optics of leaving one of the female candidates out in the cold in the #MeToo era would look toxic. But what answers will she be able to give by then that the nearly two dozen other hopefuls haven’t already proposed? Maybe they’ll leave some plastic cups of water on the lecterns for all the contenders and Gillibrand can wow them with some ping pong balls hidden in her pockets.

The post Gillibrand attempts beer pong to appear more human appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group GillibrandHands-300x153 Gillibrand attempts beer pong to appear more human The Blog retail politics New Hampshire Kirsten Gillibrand beer   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gillibrand’s “Democracy Dollars”: Make politicians’ pockets great again!

Westlake Legal Group gillibrands-democracy-dollars-make-politicians-pockets-great-again Gillibrand’s “Democracy Dollars”: Make politicians’ pockets great again! The Blog Money Laundering Kirsten Gillibrand Democracy Dollars campaign finance reform 2020 Democrat primaries

Westlake Legal Group gillibrand-hands Gillibrand’s “Democracy Dollars”: Make politicians’ pockets great again! The Blog Money Laundering Kirsten Gillibrand Democracy Dollars campaign finance reform 2020 Democrat primaries

Kirsten Gillibrand finally has her One Big Idea to feature on her presidential campaign — and it’s all about getting money back to the, er, politicians. In an interview on NBC News, Gillibrand unveiled her “Clean Elections Plan” to reduce the influence of wealth on politics. The key feature of this will be “Democracy Dollars” — vouchers from the government to spend on political candidates:

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., unveiled a plan on Wednesday to give every voter up to $600 in what she calls “Democracy Dollars” that they can donate to federal candidates for office. …

Under Gillibrand’s plan, every eligible voter could register for vouchers to donate up to $100 in a primary election and $100 in a general election each cycle, either all at once or in $10 increments to one or more candidates over time. Each participant would get a separate $200 pool for House, Senate and presidential contests for a total maximum donation of $600 for those federal offices.

What a great idea! Taxpayers overwhelmingly worry about whether politicians have enough access to their tax dollars. They have no desire to get $600 of those tax dollars back into their own pockets to spend on themselves. For all the moaning over money in politics that comes from people forced to do fundraisers, voters rarely if ever list it among their policy priorities. Usually, their top concern is the economy, by which they mean their economy and not the economy of politicians.

It’s tough to see what this does other than subsidize the first $600 of political donations from people inclined to make them. Considering the rules that Gillibrand proposes, it might not even do that much:

There would be strings attached for both donors and candidates. The money could go only to elections in the donor’s state, although they could be used for House candidates outside the voter’s district.

Politicians would face much tighter limits on donations. To be eligible to receive “Democracy Dollars,” a candidate would have to voluntarily agree to forgo any contributions larger than $200 per donor. That’s a big drop from the current maximum of $2,800 per primary cycle and $2,800 for the general election.

What would stop Warren Buffet from spending $600 in “Democracy Dollars,” and then $6 million on other politicos, PACs, and thieves, if readers will pardon a Cher reference? Nothing, apparently, which means we’re not getting wealth out of politics. It means we’re converting some wealth into public campaign subsidies by laundering it through taxpayers who are otherwise disinclined to contribute.

Even apart from that, though, why would any candidate agree to these conditions?Gillibrand laughably claims in her interview that the limits on this system mean candidates could raise “exponentially higher” sums of money, but that’s nonsensical on its face. They’re far more restrictive than the donor limits imposed on presidential candidates that Barack Obama infamously eschewed when he realized he could raise many times those limits in 2008. You’d have to get fourteen times as many donors as those who would otherwise max out to your campaigns, let alone all the other levels between $200 and $2800.

So where will the money come from to fund “Democracy Dollars”? Gillibrand plans to pay for this scheme by getting rid of a corporate deduction for executive compensation, meaning that corporate money will still be getting used indirectly in elections. Gillibrand estimates that this will raise about the same amount of money per year as we spend on national elections — roughly $6 billion, or less than we spend on Halloween in an average year. That’s only going to be true until corporations rethink executive compensation to deal with the tax change, though, much like they did with Bill Clinton’s tax plan that allowed Amazon to pay zero federal income tax last year.

“Democracy dollars” are a laughably self-absorbed money-laundering mechanism to raid the federal treasury for political campaigning. It imposes more artificial limits and complexity to a system that’s getting corrupted because of those artificial limits and complexities, not in spite of them. If we want corruption out of the system, make all donations to candidates and PACs above $200 instantly transparent and searchable, and evaluate candidates on the money they raise.

This wasn’t even the most pathetic product from Team Gillibrand this week on campaign fundraising. Enjoy the Beer Water Pong Challenge.

The post Gillibrand’s “Democracy Dollars”: Make politicians’ pockets great again! appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group gillibrand-hands-300x173 Gillibrand’s “Democracy Dollars”: Make politicians’ pockets great again! The Blog Money Laundering Kirsten Gillibrand Democracy Dollars campaign finance reform 2020 Democrat primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gillibrand begs donors: I still haven’t hit the threshold to qualify for the Democratic debates yet

Westlake Legal Group gillibrand-begs-donors-i-still-havent-hit-the-threshold-to-qualify-for-the-democratic-debates-yet Gillibrand begs donors: I still haven’t hit the threshold to qualify for the Democratic debates yet tulsi gabbard The Blog senator New York Kirsten Gillibrand Cuomo Andrew Yang

Westlake Legal Group g-5 Gillibrand begs donors: I still haven’t hit the threshold to qualify for the Democratic debates yet tulsi gabbard The Blog senator New York Kirsten Gillibrand Cuomo Andrew Yang

I have no “take” per se about this. I just feel like when a character as conniving as Gillibrand meets with embarrassing political failure, it’s good for the soul to pause a moment and revel in it.

It’s the 2020 equivalent of stopping to smell the flowers. Ahhhhhh.

She’s got to be thinking hard about abandoning ship at this point.

It’s a truism among election junkies that there’s no downside in running for president. If you’re a serious contender, like Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders, it’s your chance at the brass ring. If you’re an ideologue, like Andrew Yang or Tulsi Gabbard, it’s an unparalleled opportunity to get a national public hearing. If you’re a nobody, like Pete Buttigieg or Eric “Who?” Swalwell, it’s a brand-building exercise that can raise your name recognition in anticipation of your next real race for office. There’s no reason not to run.

…unless, I guess, you’re an already pretty prominent politician and you end up grossly underperforming, turning yourself into a laughingstock. Like, for instance, if you’re a U.S. senator from New York with a Wall Street donor base who somehow raised less in the entire first quarter than Beto O’Rourke did in a day.

That might be a reason not to run.

At least Gillibrand can count on the support of influential politicians in her home st— [record scratch]

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has raised millions of dollars during his campaigns over the years, has indicated to associates in recent days that he will be opening his vast and powerful fundraising network exclusively to Joe Biden, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter…

“Andrew is all in for Joe. He is pushing his entire network that way – political and funding,” said a person who has spoken to Cuomo recently.

No big deal, said Gillibrand nonchalantly in response, before returning to a game of beer pong. Even if this campaign began for her as a brand-building candidacy with an eye to running for president more credibly in 2024 or 2028, the brand she’s building right now reeks of loserdom. She might have been a semi-plausible VP candidate for Biden or some other nominee had she sat the race out and sought to present herself in public appearances, however unpersuasively, as the voice of liberal women. As it is, putting her on the ticket now would raise a confused outcry among rank-and file Dems. “Why is the lamest candidate in the field being elevated above contenders who got many more votes than she did?”

If she ends up failing to qualify for the debates, I’m guessing that’s her cue to take the Scott Walker path and bow out early. End the embarrassment and offer yourself as a campaign surrogate to Biden in the hope/expectation that he’ll be elected president and reward you with a job. (I’m assuming Bernie wants no part of Gillibrand given her ties to Wall Street.) She could conceivably be useful to Uncle Joe given the niche she’s carved for herself as the “girl power” candidate: Although her campaign writ large has been dismal, she has the distinction of being the only person in the field with a majority of women among her large donors. She could use the #MeToo cred she earned from the Al Franken episode to offer Biden public absolution for his grabbiness and for how he handled the Clarence Thomas hearing. That’s worth something to him.

I think that’s what she’ll do. Her defining characteristic, remember, is opportunism in the name of career advancement. If she concludes that Kirsten Gillibrand’s access to power will be improved by signing over her feminist agenda to Team Biden to exploit however they like, she’ll do it in the blink of an eye. With no regrets.

But she’ll have to decide soon. Biden’s in the race now and she’s already been asked about his sins against wokeness. If she slams him hard as a splashy longshot attempt to try to revive her campaign, she’ll ruin her utility to him as a potential surrogate on women’s issues and almost certainly do nothing to improve her own chances. The smart play until she officially pulls the plug is to go easy on him — which is what she’s done, as you’ll see below. In the meantime, the Franken matter has turned into a nifty excuse for her own poor performance: It’s hard to believe she’d be faring much better in a field this crowded, with a campaign as pointless as the one she’s running, had she not alienated the Al Franken fans in the donor class, but pretending otherwise is a convenient excuse for her meager fundraising.

The post Gillibrand begs donors: I still haven’t hit the threshold to qualify for the Democratic debates yet appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group g-5-300x153 Gillibrand begs donors: I still haven’t hit the threshold to qualify for the Democratic debates yet tulsi gabbard The Blog senator New York Kirsten Gillibrand Cuomo Andrew Yang   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kushner: You know what did more harm than 2016’s Russian interference?

Westlake Legal Group kushner-muellerrpt Kushner: You know what did more harm than 2016’s Russian interference? The Blog special counsel report Russian collusion russiagate Mueller report Kirsten Gillibrand Jared Kushner

Three guesses, and the first two don’t count. Jared Kushner made a rare appearance at a Q&A forum earlier today sponsored by Time Magazine, and talk turned quickly to the outcome of the special counsel investigation. Kushner called the probe and the Mueller report “a big distraction,” and told the moderator that the investigation itself did a lot more harm to the US than the pinprick Russian interference operations:

Count Politico’s Katie Galioto among the unimpressed:

“You look at what Russia did, buying some Facebook ads and trying to sow dissent. It’s a terrible thing,” Kushner, who is also the president’s son-in-law, said in an on-stage interview at the TIME 100 Summit. “But I think the investigations and all of the speculation that’s happened for the last two years has a much harsher impact on our democracy than a couple Facebook ads.”

Despite Kushner’s claims that the Kremlin’s election interference efforts were little more than a handful of paid Facebook posts, the report submitted by Mueller detailed a multi-faceted operation that included social media posts written and targeted to sow division, as well as cyberattack efforts targeting 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as well as her campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The Russian government, which Mueller concluded acted because it felt it would benefit from a Trump presidency, later distributed hacked emails stolen from Clinton and others via the online publisher WikiLeaks and other outlets.

Kushner, though, downplayed the scope of Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election, in part because of the relatively light financial investment in Facebook ads.

“I think they said they spent $160,000. I spent $160,000 on Facebook every three hours during the campaign,” he said. “If you look at the magnitude of what they did, the ensuing investigations have been way more harmful.”

Galioto does have a point, albeit a limited one. Russia went to more trouble than just dropping $160,000 on Facebook ads, and Kushner knows it. They ran a sizable propaganda campaign through the Internet Research Agency (IRA), and they also hacked into the DNC and the Center for American Progress and disseminated the materials through Wikileaks. Those are aggressive actions that went far beyond some Facebook ad buys.

However, they didn’t really go all that far beyond them. Estimates of Russia’s costs for conducting their propaganda efforts through the IRA run to about $25 million or so. Put that in the context of an election cycle where both candidates and their supporting PACS spent around $2 billion, and one can understand Kushner’s dismissive attitude a little bit better. (It comes to 1.25% of all spending, for those keeping score.) Kushner’s larger point argues that it had no impact because Russia’s efforts were made with ineffective techniques anyway, plus they ended up being a drop in the bucket in the overall context of election messaging. As for the DNC and Podesta hacks, that mainly aimed at impacting the Democratic primary rather than the general election — and didn’t succeed at derailing Hillary Clinton’s nomination.

To Kushner’s larger point, even Robert Mueller found that the IRA’s purpose was to “sow discord in the US political system.” There is nothing in the Mueller report that measures the success of that mission during its 2014-16 operational phase, which tells us volumes about its actual impact during the campaign. Without the investigation, it’s almost certain that it would have been negligible at most. However, the two-plus years of the investigation, the public accusations in both directions, and the anger those have generated are far out of proportion to the IRA’s efforts and effectiveness.

That seems so obvious a point that it’s hardly worth contesting it. One can argue that it became necessary because of the discovery of Russia’s attempts at sabotaging the election, and certainly one can argue that the failures of the Obama administration to address them in real time made it necessary too. On its face, though, Kushner’s point is absolutely correct: the very public investigation into what turned out to be a nothingburger on Russia-collusion did far more damage and inadvertently advanced Russia’s intentions to sow discord than their $25 million operation would have done otherwise.

Nevertheless, Kirsten Gillibrand declared Kushner’s remarks “an outrage”:

MITCHELL: I mean he basically said that this is a distraction and that what Russia did was just a couple of Facebook ads.

GILLIBRAND: Oh my God. He clearly hasn’t read the report himself, but what he said is an outrage. For him to make light of a foreign adversary purposely trying to undermine our election is untenable. And I am gravely concerned that this administration continues to not take this seriously. And those statements are highly inappropriate.

Outrage? Inappropriate? YMMV, but like much of the Democratic responses over the past two years, that’s more hyperbolic than Kushner was dismissive. Kushner might have made a more comprehensive argument here and pre-empted this kind of criticism, but the odds of that satisfying Gillibrand would have approached zero anyway.

Besides, Kushner scored a home run with the audience that matters most to him:

The post Kushner: You know what did more harm than 2016’s Russian interference? appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group kushner-muellerrpt-300x163 Kushner: You know what did more harm than 2016’s Russian interference? The Blog special counsel report Russian collusion russiagate Mueller report Kirsten Gillibrand Jared Kushner   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Now Kirsten Gillibrand is backing Dem primary challengers

Westlake Legal Group now-kirsten-gillibrand-is-backing-dem-primary-challengers Now Kirsten Gillibrand is backing Dem primary challengers The Blog primary Kirsten Gillibrand Illinois Dan Lipinski 2020 election

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand Now Kirsten Gillibrand is backing Dem primary challengers The Blog primary Kirsten Gillibrand Illinois Dan Lipinski 2020 election

Hey, it worked for AOC, right? And Kirsten Gillibrand needs to capture some lightning in a bottle soon if she’s going to move up from her current support level of zero in the Democratic primary race. What better way than to toss your support to a hard left primary challenger even after the DCCC said they would blacklist anyone trying to knock off the current incumbents?

For better or worse, that’s what the New York Senator seems to be doing this week. She’s pushed herself into the primary for the Illinois Third District seat currently held by pro-life Democrat Dan Lipinski. Gillibrand has endorsed his primary challenger (and previous opponent) Marie Newman. (WaPo)

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York is endorsing a Democratic challenger to Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), making her the first presidential contender to wade into a down-ballot Democratic primary.

At a Democratic Party event in Chicago, Gillibrand endorsed Marie Newman, a liberal activist who narrowly lost to Lipinski in 2018. At the same event, Newman endorsed Gillibrand’s presidential campaign.

“She’s got a tough race in front of her, but I promise you, Marie will represent her district better and she will represent all of us better,” said Gillibrand. Moments earlier, Newman had endorsed Gillibrand’s presidential campaign.

We’ve covered Lipinski here in the past, mostly because he drives the rest of the Democrats crazy. He’s already drawn primary challenges from his left on multiple occasions, but he keeps hanging in there somehow. Illinois-3 is a rather strange district, as we’ve noted here before. Located in a more rural part of the state outside of Chicago, it’s definitely still a blue district, clocking in at around D+15. (Hillary Clinton carried it by a wide margin.) But it’s also not a pro-abortion area either. It’s tailor-made for a more moderate Democrat like Lipinski.

So Gillibrand’s play may not wind up having any impact on that race, but that’s not the audience she’s speaking to. She wants to show the national primary voters that she’s “brave” enough to stand up to the party establishment and push a far more progressive/socialist female candidate. And since plenty of progressives are making a game of kicking Nancy Pelosi and the DCCC around these days (and reaping a ton of earned media for doing so), it might not be the craziest idea she’s had.

But will it do any good? Despite getting an early start, Gillibrand’s national campaign has gone absolutely nowhere. Her opponents were all more than happy to remind everyone of her conservative roots in Congress before she’d even gotten out of the gates. She hasn’t made too many major gaffes in the campaign since then, but with so many more liberal choices on the menu, people simply aren’t flocking to her banner. And if she can’t push her campaign into a higher gear by summer, I’m going to predict that she’ll probably be one of the first to drop out, possibly as soon as the results from the Iowa straw poll come in.

The post Now Kirsten Gillibrand is backing Dem primary challengers appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand-300x159 Now Kirsten Gillibrand is backing Dem primary challengers The Blog primary Kirsten Gillibrand Illinois Dan Lipinski 2020 election   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gillbrand blames garbage fundraising numbers on Al Franken

Westlake Legal Group gillbrand-blames-garbage-fundraising-numbers-on-al-franken Gillbrand blames garbage fundraising numbers on Al Franken The Blog Kirsten Gillibrand Fundraising Al Franken 2020 Democrat primaries

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand Gillbrand blames garbage fundraising numbers on Al Franken The Blog Kirsten Gillibrand Fundraising Al Franken 2020 Democrat primaries

To say that New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s polling performance in the Democratic primary race has been disappointing would be putting it mildly. (The latest Emerson poll has her literally at zero.) That lack of public support seems to have been reflected in her fundraising efforts. While some of her opponents have been posting eye-popping numbers, Gillibrand barely raised three million for the entire first quarter and she was one of the earlier entrants to form an exploratory committee and start tapping donors. So what does the team blame this on? It must have been her “bravery” in calling for Al Franken to resign.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-N.Y.) presidential campaign suggested Sunday that the campaign’s low first-quarter fundraising totals could be partly attributed to backlash over Gillibrand’s decision in 2017 to call for the resignation of Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.).

In a memo obtained by The New York Times, the campaign reportedly said there’s “no question” that donors are retaliating in response to Gillibrand calling on Franken, who had been accused of sexual harassment, to step aside.

“There’s no question that the first quarter was adversely impacted by certain establishment donors — and many online — who continue to punish Kirsten for standing up for her values and for women,” the memo reads.

So this is the line the Gillibrand team is taking? The voters are “punishing” her for “standing up for women” when she called out Al Franken? Pardon my throwing a bit of cold water into the spin cycle here, but we’re now well into 2019. We’re in the Trump era. How many Democratic voters do you think are still hung up on Al “grab her boobs while she’s sleeping” Franken at this point? I can’t speak for the Democrats, but somehow that doesn’t seem like one of the bigger drivers.

Gillibrand’s major problem is that the internet has a long memory. Well before she had a chance to define herself in this race, the media was dredging up stories about her time in the House representing a mildly conservative upstate New York district. She had a prime rating with the NRA, wanted tougher treatment of illegal aliens, backed restrictions on abortions and all the other things you need to do if you want to be elected in a purple/red district. Her values were situational and many people who had never heard of her before she ran for president got their first impression of Kirsten Gillibrand from those stories.

She was quickly discounted by many primary voters on that basis when they had so many more exciting (socialist) options like Bernie Sanders or “safe” potential options like Joe Biden. And you don’t send your money to the dark horse candidate under those circumstances. Blaming Al Franken at this stage seems like very weak tea.

The post Gillbrand blames garbage fundraising numbers on Al Franken appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand-300x159 Gillbrand blames garbage fundraising numbers on Al Franken The Blog Kirsten Gillibrand Fundraising Al Franken 2020 Democrat primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com