Quick Hits

The National Association of Hispanic Journalists tells "Doctor" Jill Biden: No somos tacos.

By the way, the Hill did not report that Jill Biden called Mexicans tacos.

No, they thought the real story was: Republicans pounce.

Right rips Jill Biden for saying Hispanic community as unique as 'breakfast tacos'

The rule that when Republicans screw up, the story is Republicans screwing up, but when Democrats screw up, the story is Republicans underhandedly scoring cheap political points over it, is literally never violated. The media follows this rule every single time, with a 100% compliance rate.

I love Japanese people. They are unique like Bento Boxes.
Posted by: Jill Biden

Hard to believe, but huge if true:

John Glen says, "A rumor is that Texas Senator John Cornyn will be resigning and Governor Abbott will appoint Cat Parks to the seat.

Link

Posted by: bonhomme

CNN's poll analyst Harry Enten says the January 6th hearings have not changed Democrats' prospects and the public still mostly cares about, get this, inflation.

Tapper noted Democrats are polling "poorly" in a generic House ballot, and asked Enten, "Have these hearings changed that outlook at all?"

"Not really, no," Enten said....

Enten concluded the hearings are not a "top issue for Americans at this point," and said polling shows voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on the economy.

"The top issue for Americans at this point is not the Jan. 6 committee hearings, it is not Donald Trump," Enten said. "It's inflation!"

Sounds like AllahPundit's favorite TV show won't be renewed past January. Sad!

I wonder what new obsession he'll spend all of his time and emotion on?

The New York Times found that there has never been a president whose party was so determined to abandon as their standard-bearer:

Via John Sexton, the Times finds the only president who the party was almost as sour on was (wait for it...) Jimmy Carter, and Jimmy Carter had a live, announced challenger (Ted Kennedy, tanned, rested, and towel-dried from Chappaquiddick).

About the closest we've come to significant numbers of a president's base wanting to turn the page came in early 1995, shortly after President Bill Clinton's Democratic Party got drubbed in the 1994 midterm elections. A CBS News poll in January 1995 showed 37 percent of Democrats preferred "someone else," but 56 percent still wanted to renominate Clinton. But that's still nowhere near Biden's numbers...

About the closest analog to where Biden is right now is a June 1979 CBS News/New York Times poll that showed Democrats favored Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) over President Jimmy Carter 52-23. Another candidate got 8 percent. Carter went on to win renomination over Kennedy, anyway.

Commenters point out "But they have no one else!" and I agree, which is why I believe we'll have a billionaire ride in -- Mark Cuban, Howard Shorr, or even Michael Bloomberg again. I realize that the Democrat Party doesn't like these people, but they didn't like Biden much either, but rallied around him because they needed someone who could plausibly win.

There's also the possibility that I don't even like talking about that Duane Johnson will run.

People talk about Michelle Obama, but I think the Obamas just want to grift money from leftwing media companies and have brunch with celebrities and enjoy same-sex affairs without much scrutiny.

Speaking of useless wannabe royals:

Via Brad Slager.

I should have included this in the last post:

Omni Cerem responds, using a term I started using some time back, and which I think needs to be used much, much more: "Legitimacy crisis."

Legitimacy is created by professionalism, objectivity, sobriety, accuracy, and competence.

The professional classes have almost entirely abandoned these five necessary prerequisites for legitimacy -- but then still demand the legitimacy that flow only when those five prerequisites are present, and begin suggesting fascist controls on the population in order to require the public act as if the professional classes still possessed legitimacy.

This will lead, obviously, to... very bad things.

Elon Musk has damaged Twitter and I'm sure he's all busted up about that.

"His engagement with Twitter took a severe toll on the company," said Jason Goldman, a member of Twitter's founding team who has also served on its board of directors. "Employees, advertisers and the market at large cannot have conviction in a company whose path is unknowable and which will now go to court to complete a transaction with a bad-faith actor."

The precarious situation underscores why Twitter is set to sue Mr. Musk as soon as this week to force a completion of the deal. The court battle is likely to be protracted and immense, involving months of expensive litigation and high-stakes negotiations by elite lawyers. A resolution is far from certain -- Twitter might win, but, if it loses, Mr. Musk could walk away by paying a breakup fee. Or the two sides could renegotiate or settle.

On Monday, the damage that Mr. Musk, 51, has inflicted was evident. Twitter's stock plunged more than 11 percent to one of its lowest points since 2020 as investors anticipated the coming legal battle. Since Twitter accepted Mr. Musk's acquisition offer, on April 25, its stock has lost over a third of its value as investors have grown increasingly skeptical that the deal would get done on the agreed terms. (In contrast, the tech-heavy Nasdaq index was down about 12.5 percent in the same period.)

OUT: "Women Hardest Hit"

IN: "Trans Women Hardest Hit"

It's terrific that we've shifted our military's priority from waging war to waging wokeness.

"How am I supposed to wake up every day and put on a freaking uniform that says United States army when the United States doesn't even give a rat's a** about me? It gives more of a rat's a** about the guns they're allowed to buy that kill the children that I’m forced to give birth to."

The neocons are culpable in building this Woke Non-Military, and yet they still want to pretend its fit to fight all the wars they're determined to fight.

How about the neocons first gain the courage to stand up to their wives and girlfriends and fight the non-war in the bureaucracy and in public policy and push back firmly against wokeness and trans surgeries and gender equality mania and the rest of it? Here's the problem, neocons: This might make you a little unpopular with the urban liberal crowds you consider your kith and kin.

But before we talk about any of the endless wars you're rarin' to send other people to fight again, we're going to insist you enlist to fight this non-war pencil-pusher action first.

But you won't even do that.

Chickenhawk cowards.

posted by Ace at 05:12 PM

| Access Comments