Posts Tagged → republican
Anatomy of a primary election
On May 20th, Pennsylvania held its primary election. Mostly local seats and judgeships were on the ballot, which are definitely important, but the real prizes were the PA Commonwealth Court and the PA Superior Court. As has come to be usual here and in many other states, the conservative/ independent-minded grass roots fielded their candidates and the state Republican Party fielded its candidates.
And as usual, the PA Republican Party was directly involved in the selection of the primary election candidates, their endorsements, their negative attacks, funding, etc. When a political party gets in between The People and their choice of candidate, the party always loses in the long run. When The People believe the party does not share their views or values, and is only pursuing the selection of certain candidates who will be malleable and loyal to the party, then The People lose faith in the party.
Here in PA there is real animosity between grass roots conservatives and the PA GOP establishment.
This election we had grass roots candidate Maria Battista vs. PAGOP candidate political establishment-endorsed Ann Marie Wheatcraft for Superior Court judge. Battista had run before as the GOP endorsed candidate, and had lost to the grass roots candidate. This time around, for whatever reason, she was on the outs with the PAGOP and on the in with the grass roots groups, like Lycoming Patriots. Wheatcraft had the PAGOP endorsement and money.
For the Commonwealth Court we had well known Second Amendment attorney Josh Prince vs. unknown state bureaucrat attorney Matt Wolford. Bureaucrat Wolford was mysteriously endorsed by the PAGOP, even though he has worked most of his career at the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection, an agency that no matter which incarnation it embodies, and regardless of which political party is running it, nonetheless is associated with heavy-handed regulations and lawless bureaucrats who routinely beat up on private landowners and businesses. Not exactly a likely place to give birth to a solid Republican candidate for any office, much less a judgeship.
The long and short of these two races is that Battista the outsider defeated Wheatcraft the moneyed insider, and Wolford the party endorsed yet unknown bureaucrat and mystery “Republican” defeated grass roots favorite Prince. Moreover, Prince was endorsed by numerous organizations, like Gun Owners of America, Firearms Owners Against Crime, etc.
These are strange results.
Normally voters align with outsiders or insiders, but not with one candidate here and not that one over there. And yet that is what happened in this election. Normally, big endorsements gain big traction for candidates, but we saw no evidence of that in the Prince vs Wolford race. Despite his many big endorsements, Prince was utterly crushed even in very conservative rural counties, like Lycoming and Elk, where he was known, liked, and should have won handily. And yet, in these same counties, Battista blew off Wheatcraft’s doors.
Aside from a crooked vote tallying scheme, I have no explanation for this odd outcome that defies all odds and conventional thinking. Except for one possible variable that tends to get overlooked these days, and that is ballot position. That is, where does the candidate’s name fall on the ballot – top, middle, or last.
Studies have shown that ballot position does matter, or it can matter, but much less so when voters feel compelled to look up candidates on the internet. With its easy information access, the internet has been the great leveler of campaigns everywhere. Big campaign money cannot always defend a candidate’s bad record, which will be all over the internet, visible to the voters who but follow a few clicks on a search engine.
Battista had top and Prince had bottom on their respective ballots. Meaning that the 3/4-4/4 super voters who make up the primary election electorate, were unsure of who to vote for and simply and superficially chose the first name they saw for each position. That could explain the opposite results we got for both candidates, Battista and Prince.
As we see here, the voters have to want to know something about the people they are voting for in order to defeat the ballot position factor, as well as overcome often superficial campaign advertising. And so we learned a hard lesson here: The vaunted and lauded super voters did not necessarily do super research into the candidates. They apparently did not bother to look up the candidates before walking into the voting booth. They simply saw a name at the top and made their choice.
And that is the gory anatomy of Pennsylvania’s 2025 primary election, God help us all.
Does ballot position really determine who a lot of primary election super voters choose? From this election, it would seem so.
Elk County is a very conservative rural place where DEP bureaucrats are hated like poison ivy. The 2025 results there make no sense, unless ballot position is the primary factor.
Doesn’t it seem mean spirited to not even mention candidate Josh Prince? Doesn’t it further alienate his supporters? What is that all about?
I have never seen election results like this. If conservative rural Lycoming County super voters feel so strongly about conservative candidate Battista, they for sure would have felt just as strongly about conservative candidate Prince. And yet…the results seem to prove that ballot position is the most important determinant
Dauphin County
Dauphin County
John Fetterman, canary in a coal mine
If a healthy body politic is measured by the amount of middle-ground, America is in trouble. If the health of the body politic is assessed by polarization, America is in trouble. If the body politic’s veins are full of founding principles, great, and of the veins are full of foreign bodies and alien ideas, then the very bloodstream is being poisoned and is not healthy. A poisoned blood stream means the body has not long to live.
It might be popular in the Democrat Party’s mainstream media to accuse Republicans of being racist, or extreme, but the fact is that the GOP is filled to the brim with mealy mouthed “moderates” incapable of taking a policy stand of any sort or substance. Note how US Attorney nominee for Washington DC, Ed Martin, was blocked by old guard RINO Sen. Tom Tillis and at least a half dozen other similar minded Republican senators hiding in the shadows.
And it is the Democrat Party that is increasingly radical, extreme, anti-America, and unwilling to brook any kind of moderation in its own ranks. Note how US Senator John Fetterman is now hostilely surrounded by his own party, the constellation of far-Left Marxist interest groups, and their media apparatus, for the simple crime of being too moderate.
And John Fetterman is no moderate! He has simply broken with far-left woke orthodoxy on American jobs, border security, and supporting key American ally, Israel.
This slight amount of independent thinking alone has made him unacceptable to the Democrat Party…then again, RFK Jr and Tulsi Gabbard were also almost destroyed by a Democrat Party enraged that any of theirs could possibly find ways to work with the other side. His own party is trying to drive him from office with fake MSM reports about him.
All the time I get these ridiculous emails from the Pennsylvania Democrats decrying “extremism,” and yet it is they who are openly extreme. I have no idea how anyone normal supports the Democrat Party today, because their actions and words left all normalcy behind a very long time ago.
Way back when I was a Democrat, over three decades ago, it was a JFK political party that loved America and Americans. I will also say that the NRA member pro-gun and pro-Life Central Pennsylvania Democrat Josh was more conservative than at least half of the elected Republican Party today. This is how far far far Left the Democrat Party has moved.
Who would have guessed it, but Senator John Fetterman is now the main canary in the American coal mine. His political health is the indicator of how healthy and safe America is overall, how politically balanced we are.
If John Fetterman is driven from office, then the only moderation will be on the political “right,” and it will exist only because corrupt spineless jellyfish career GOPe officials like Tom Tillis are too afraid to take quintessential stands on policy based on First Principles (Constitutional principles from our nation’s Founding in 1776 and 1787-1789). And yet they will fight for re-election like their lives depend upon it, because they are making sooooo much money on insider trading.
Senator John Fetterman, you have this Republican’s admiration, and hope for your physical and political health. Hang in there, buddy. We are all watching your senate tenure as a vital sign of life of America.
UPDATE 5/13/25: Senator Fetterman has friends in unexpected places
Says who, the zero credibility far-Left AP? The far-Left teacher’s unions? Sure appears to be a set-up to get a fake negative headline on Fetterman
New York Magazine is another stalwart far-Left Democrat Party machine outlet. Like a sewer outlet.
Sy Snyder is a devoted Democrat Party 360-degree all-things Pennsylvania Democrat “daily pulse” email that also contains the usual left wing marching orders. PennLive is a super partisan pro-Democrat Party political activism organization posing as a “media” outlet. Ha ha.
Eye for eye, order for order
Unelected over-reaching judges driven by blatant partisan political activism are trying to thwart the will of The People by issuing decisions (“orders”) on Trump Administration activities that are far outside their courts’ constitutionally defined jurisdictions. Something like nearly 100% of these decisions in the past twenty years have been issued against President Trump alone, which shows that Democrat Party judicial tyranny is the same as Democrat Party executive branch tyranny. These people will burn down America’s constitutional norms simply to hold on to power.
Executive branch decisions that are solely the jurisdiction of the executive branch are not up for question or “orders” by the judicial branch. But this elementary separation of powers fact is not stopping these political activists in black robes, and something needs to be done to stop their power grab, to restore balance to the galaxy.
That some people, especially John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, want these outlandish decisions to be adjudicated through the lengthy, time-consumptive appellate process means just one thing: They want to stop President Trump’s agenda from being implemented by any means necessary. No matter how illegal or unconstitutional, they want the judiciary to be the sole arbiter of the judiciary’s own unconstitutional over-reach.
In other words, “We have investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing.” The judiciary is so far mostly siding with itself in hogging more power than the Constitution grants to judges, and is unlikely to stop itself from hogging even more power.
This is not an acceptable way to run the American republic, and some thing or many things must be done to fend it off. Some are talking about impeaching the most rogue, most lawless, most openly partisan of these judges, such as James Boasberg and Beryl Howell. OK, one survey I saw showed a 2:1 margin in favor of impeaching them, so get on with it, US House Speaker Mike Johnson. Impeachment will probably send a good signal, even if conviction and removal in the US Senate is not guaranteed. Impeachment hearings will tie up a judge’s work load and cause it to be re-distributed to other active judges.
Another way to end this radical judiciary’s assault on democracy is to take away their funding, and to then re-organize the courts, and then even more clearly defining their jurisdictions in the reorganization process. All of this is the sole purview of Congress, and while the Republicans have the majority, so should they act. So get on it with it, US House Speaker Mike Johnson, and do your duty.
Another way to respond to these lawless activist judges is to simply ignore their decisions. Issue blunt and stinging rebukes to their overeach, and carry on with executive branch activities as if they had never been involved. This will cause the Democrat Party’s mainstream media outlets to scream that there is a “constitutional crisis,” but again, I think there is sufficient new media firepower to over-ride that dead horse with the response that whatever “crisis” exists is solely due to the judicial branch’s inability to stay in its own constitutional lane.
However, there is a potential hybrid response the Trump Administration can make, that I am advocating here. While I have not seen anyone else write about it, I am certain plenty of politically active people have been thinking it: For every dingbat leftwing anti-America judicial “order”, such as Boasberg demanding that hardened illegal alien criminals – murderers, rapists – be returned to America from where they were legally deported to, the executive branch must issue a commensurate order in response.
For example, President Trump can issue an executive order requiring Judge Boasberg to personally retrieve all the illegal aliens he wants returned to America. With no promise that said wildman judge will be allowed back into America.
Or President Trump can issue an executive order that countermands exactly the precise wording of whatever unconstitutional order Judge Beryl “Howlin Wolf” Howell has issued.
Thus, this whole “crisis” becomes a battle of equal orders, from the rogue judiciary against the executive branch, and from the executive branch back against the power-hogging judiciary. This “eye for an eye” order-for-order response will flesh out the visible constitutional symmetry that President Trump’s administration needs the public to see. No longer will this situation be cast as “The courts have spoken…,” which always goes against the Republican president, but rather, it will be two co-equal branches of government issuing co-equal orders against one another, each order cancelling out the other.
An eye for an eye, an order for an order. And if the judiciary refuses to follow the executive orders, then so shall the executive branch be free to ignore the wild judicial orders, as well. True constitutional parity restored.
Forgive Me for Asking, But I Must
Forgive me, it is not my intention to cast cold water on our collective rejoicing at having President Donald Trump re-elected, again, and thus at having dodged the Democrat Party’s communist anti-democracy bullet aimed at America’s heart. It is true that Trump’s election gives us hope that our constitutional republic is not over. However, I feel like I am watching a repeat of 2016-2017, where highly qualified conservatives and Republicans were mysteriously bypassed, overlooked, left untouched by the then-new Trump Administration.
Well do I recall someone of real stature writing publicly then (2017-2018) about how mystified he was that no one from Team Trump had contacted him about any of the unique policy strengths he had, and how the new Trump Administration seemed disinterested or lost on whatever that policy subject was. Well, here we go again, from where I sit.
Trump supporters have learned to forgive the 2016-2017 lapses, missteps, failures, and missed opportunities as due to Trump’s unfamiliarity with government, his natural reliance upon long established and unreliable DC Beltway insiders, his understandably misplaced trust in deep staters and other bad actors, his misplaced faith in the weight of federal employees’ oaths of office.
We watched as Trump’s first term slowly, painfully, peeled away the mask from the hostile administrative state, generously bankrolled by American taxpayers and yet also so openly at war with us. We grudgingly learned to accept the stolen 2020 election as the cost of doing business within the parameters set for us by the establishment media, the administrative state, and its constellation of hostile non-government organizations, who then worked furiously from outside to undermine the very rules they set.
And so we miraculously prevailed in 2024, and America as founded yet lives again. And now we have earned the right to say openly, can we please not make the same and very avoidable mistakes again, this time around?
While President Trump is indeed appointing strong leaders who are willing to assertively implement his bold vision for a better government that is closely attuned to America’s founding documents and principles, one question has not been addressed: Who exactly is going to carry out these deep reforms?
With few exceptions (the US Dept. of Commerce being one), nearly the entire federal workforce was already openly insubordinate to President Trump the last time around. And there is no reason to believe that these public employees are going to honor their oaths of office this time. And if Trump follows through on the DOGE promise to eliminate entire federal agencies, and greatly streamline those that remain, then which law-abiding civil servants will there be to carry forward in those same agencies the Trump Administration’s policies?
Put another way, if President Trump installs leaders who, for example, change the name of the radicalized US Environmental Protection Agency, then which of the old USEPA staff will there be to then follow through with the systemic change through every artery and vein inside the old institutional body? If the federal government is going to aggressively do compliance checks or reel back in billions of dollars in Biden grants to far-left NGOs, then who exactly is prepared to hit that ground running? The current federal workforce is almost entirely unreliable, and if left in place, each and every federal employee will become a road block of one. The DOGE people had better be collecting lots and lots of names of prospective civil servants who are prepared to take the place of existing staff, who should end up fired from federal service for any number of good reasons.
House cleaning is promised, but who then moves into the house to give it new life?
Ending where this essay began, it is my turn to publicly complain: No one from Team Trump contacted me, way back in 2016-2020, or now, about my unique area of expertise. I am one of a very small handful of truly conservative Republicans nationwide with extensive hands-on experience with public land issues and wildlife habitat/ land conservation policy. No Trump staffer has called to ask my experienced opinion on federal appraisal standards, especially related to eminent domain, or on rights-of-way issues surrounding federal properties. To my knowledge, none of my few colleagues have been contacted, either. I am not looking for a job. I already run a small business that I really enjoy. But I am willing to volunteer my precious time to help shape sound federal policy that is a significant deviation from the longstanding horrible status quo.
President Trump has the loyalty of so many talented and experienced conservatives, any and all of whom will jump at the opportunity to simply help this one man (and his administration) who can save America. This is the big chance to get America back on track.
So why then do I feel like America via President Trump is once again missing easy opportunities to make lasting, good policy? If the right people do not identify and help fix these longstanding horrible policies, the civil servants will keep them in place, and we will miss a once in a lifetime opportunity for good government.
Choices: Principles vs Institutions
Humans create institutions to institutionalize our values, religious practices, hopes and aspirations, cultural identity, etc. Our institutions are created in order to make permanent and carry our values forward, a sort of vehicle. Schools, libraries, government agencies, religious institutions, family foundations, charitable foundations, unions, associations, etc, every single one created with a mission to implement certain principles.
Over time people naturally identify with a particular institution, become a champion of it, and a stakeholder to it. Again, private schools, public school PTAs, library associations, the National Ukrainian Club, various church and synagogue umbrella groups, Democrat Party, Republican Party, etc, you know those particular institutions in your own life, because they reflect your values.
What happens when the institution no longer represents or reflects the founding principles that breathed life and cause into it?
Examples abound: The United Nations works against the western democracies who founded it and currently pay for it. The Democrat Party has become a wild communist orgy of anti-Americanism; the Republican Party has forsworn its abolitionist roots and has become a bunch of establishment do-nothing fuddy-duddies; the National Rifle Association accretes multiple layers of bureaucracy into everything it does, instead of spending its limited money pursuing individual freedom; school teachers unions become outlets for destructive radical politics, far outside the mainstream of American families; a local church or synagogue is poorly run by a small group of self-reinforcing, self selecting, like-minded establishmentarians who cannot and will not respond to changes in their respective demographics…
The one that got me thinking about this subject is the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, a sportsmen’s group I had a long relationship with, which then attempted to take a hard left turn into climate alarmism and gun regulation back in 2020. In one quick weekend of fake votes and heavily manipulated elections, the PFSC leadership torpedoed the institution the leaders said they loved. Their far-left politics alienated their base, and the group has not yet recovered its former standing.
With PFSC, I took a hard and public stand, and while I succeeded in stopping the old group from becoming leftist stooges of the charitable foundation trust fund sector, I also lost a lot of friends. People who were loyal to the PFSC they remembered, and who they wanted it to still be. Some blamed me for damaging PFSC’s public reputation, while I blamed PFSC’s leadership for making unpopular decisions its base rejected. For sure the messenger got shot!
In 2020, PFSC’s leaders jettisoned the principles on which PFSC was originally founded, and a great portion of their natural base stopped believing in the institution.
Recently I stepped back from a formal leadership role in a local house of worship, as the venerable institution begins to crumble onto itself. Leaders there, who fondly remember this house of worship from their childhood, cannot make the tough decisions necessary to keep it alive, and in fact keep making decisions that guarantee few or no young people will join it and keep it going. This particular institution is beginning to greatly deviate from its own founding principles, and its base, its natural adherents and admirers, no longer recognize it.
One last example: The US Environmental Protection Agency was a place I badly wanted to work in while I was in college back in the mid 1980s. When I finally got to work at the USEPA, I realized that a great deal of the basic principle that had undergirded its founding had been long since tossed overboard. In place of the simple principle of a clean environment came a whole regime of anti-capitalism, anti-America regulations. After seven years as a policy staffer at USEPA, I could not wait to get out. I now think the agency needs a whole new name and a very clear mission change.
So should we be loyal to the hollowed out shells of institutions that now exist mostly in facade, gutted of what they once stood for, hopeful that they will somehow regain their former glory, or should we seek to create new institutions that are more representative of the principles that enervated the originals we so dearly loved and identified with?
Change is a constant, evolution is healthy, and institutions that do not change to some degree become stale, immobile, static, and fragile. But those that deviate from their founding principles are destined for a much faster devolution, because most people just simply stop believing in them.
The competitive free market will cause new institutions to spring alive, bringing hope and aspiration anew to old principles, replacing the old institutions as they dry up and wither away. For me, I am of two minds: Stay loyal to the old institution until that is no longer possible, on principle, and then help found a new one, on principle.
Uniparty movie & more Democrat Party lawlessness
The “Uniparty” is quite real. It is an unholy amalgamation of elected Democrats and Republicans-In-Name-Only as well as their assorted financial backers. Both of these groups have more in common with one another than what separates them, because their common interests are Democrat power and Republican money. The RINOs will always sell the Democrats power, and the Democrats will always ensure that the Republicans get lots and lots of money.
This cozy relationship is already on display, as something like 30 “Republican” US senators have lined up to oppose President Donald Trump’s strongest cabinet picks, people who would bring law and order and clean elections back into vogue. E.g. Trump nominated Rep. Matt Gaetz to be his Attorney General, and already the DC Swamp RINOs are lined up to oppose his nomination. Gaetz is among a literal handful of elected Republicans across the entire nation who both could and would make election integrity real, and vote fraud accountable to the law.
Think just how rotten to our core America is with elected “leaders” who actually oppose election integrity. A bunch of them must be making a lot of money from the corrupt status quo, to be so brazen in their opposition to election integrity and accountability to the law.
Witness also the open and defiant voter fraud taking place in Bucks County, PA, and in other Democrat Party strongholds in Pennsylvania. We are watching Democrat county commissioners openly flout the law and two recent PA Supreme Court holdings while they count ballots that are clearly disqualified.
Says Democrat Bucks County commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, “Precedent by a court doesn’t matter any more in this country. And people violate laws any time they want. For me, if I violate this law, it is because I want a court to pay attention to it.”
In other words, elected Democrat Diane wants a different court to have a different holding than the two holdings the PA Supreme Court already had on this very exact subject and question. She wants to help Democrat lawyers seeking out friendly activist Democrat judges to keep ignoring the law and the legal precedents that are standing in her way of getting more power. This is not an act of personal defiance or of some citizen engaging in civil disobedience against some terribly unjust law. No, this is just yet more Democrat Party lawlessness in a long long line of Democrat Party lawlessness going back to 1860.
Nothing has changed there.
What has changed is that the Republican Party, created in 1855 to oppose Democrat Party slavery and in fact throwing down in the Civil War, has long ago capitulated to the Democrats in these apparently boring matters of clean elections and the basic rule of law. The rotten GOPe just doesn’t care, because as far as they are concerned, win or lose, they still have their official positions and they still make lots and lots of money from insider trading with the Democrats.
So US Senator-elect Dave McCormick must watch in disbelief from the sidelines as the GOPe does and says literally nothing to save his already acknowledged two-week-old electoral win over election denier and anti-democracy candidate Bob Casey from the lawlessness out of Bucks County and other Democrat strongholds. Elsewhere in America, Democrat strongholds like California are STILL counting (fake, illegal) ballots to get their Democrat candidates disbelievably over the Win finish line in Republican districts, weeks after Election Day ended with the Republican candidates winning.
And yet neither the Republican Speaker of the House nor the Republican US Senate majority leader have voiced their opposition to seating such clearly fraudulent candidates in their respective houses. Both Speaker Johnson and Leader McConnell are GOPe RINOs. The rule of law is unimportant to them; money is.
Here is a funny thirty-three second Charlie Chaplin silent film that fits the Uniparty situation perfectly. The two supposed opponents face off against one another in a duel, and yet both opponents are reluctant to actually shoot at one another. Each ends up firing his revolver randomly in all directions, taking out birds aflight as well as the bystander people involved in overseeing the duel. When it is apparent that neither opponent is injured, they celebrate together and run off screen hugging one another, uncaringly jumping over the prostrate bodies of their apparently dead seconds and assistants.
This silent film sums up the Uniparty perfectly. America as a nation, our rule of law, clean elections, our democratic norms and American citizens alike are the innocent bystanders gunned down by the corrupt Uniparty. Watch it and cry.
Pictures worth a bazillion words
I had my jab sticker
Janelle Stelson vs Scott Perry for Congress
We have a real contest for the congressional seat here in Southcentral Pennsylvania, currently held by Scott Perry. Former Republican, now-Democrat Janelle Stelson is the Democrat Party nominee to challenge Scott Perry, and how this will end is anyone’s guess.
Years ago, I met Janelle Stelson a few times in social settings, mostly arranged by her then-fiance. We met for dinner or lunch once, in Hershey, I think, and then at a Pennsylvania Environmental Council awards dinner in Harrisburg, where we sat together. Might be a third time, but my memory is hazy about things that happened earlier today, let alone meetings years ago. Point is, I have met Janelle and have a feel for her as a person.
My impression of Janelle Stelson: She is obviously a very attractive woman, poised, and often charismatic, and as a former reporter she has lots of experience in front of the studio news cameras. She is also very smart, very bright, highly articulate.
I do recall her political opinions running Moderate Republican. Like pro business, pro free markets, pro gun rights. She also held some liberal views on abortion and what I used to consider moderate views on environmental quality, but which have now (like so many other political issues) skewed hard to the far Left.
In sum, Janelle Stelson was a really impressive and enjoyable person to meet. Had she remained a moderate Republican, she would have been really attractive as a candidate. However, Janelle decided to toss all that moderate stuff over the side of the boat she was in, and become an arch Leftist Democrat. I do not really understand this choice, nor do I really believe it, or even respect it. Janelle’s decision to become a Democrat, and a very liberal one at that, who is way out of step with Central Pennsylvania voters, reeks of political opportunism.
And that scares me.
By definition, political opportunists are not settled people. They are not being forthright. They are subject to the whims of political tides and political machines, instead of captaining their own ship. And as I have received copious literature from Janelle’s campaign, my impression is that she is simply seeking power. Sorry Janelle, but I have to say Yuck. Had she remained the thoughtful moderate Republican, and challenged Scott Perry in the primary, I would have had total respect for her.
Scott Perry has been in political office a very long time. He and I ran in separate but congruent primaries at the same time in 2012, I for state senate and he for congress, and we shared a stage together several times in that process. At the time he was a state representative in the PA House. Scott has always been ambitious, which I have no real issue with. But I do have an issue with career politicians of either party, and I think this is the one criticism Janelle has leveled at Scott that is real.
However, on balance, I prefer a damned career politician I know, and mostly agree with, to someone like Janelle whose campaign is being run by one of the arch Leftists out of Washington DC, and whose financial support comes from the far Left. If she is elected, Janelle looks like she will be a puppet of the far Left, to which I say No Thank You. America cannot afford more of that, and Central Pennsylvania has never embraced that kind of extremist philosophy.
And no, Janelle, Scott Perry does not advocate for zero abortions, goodness gracious. What a silly allegation. Man, political campaigning really brings out the worst in people, the biggest piles of horse carp…any lie to win, I guess. Yuck.
I hope that Scott Perry wins this race, and then retires from politics. Maybe take a role in the next Trump administration. Hand the baton on to some other citizen who has not yet had an opportunity to serve in elected office. No more stepping stone step ladders for wannabe careerists, this congressional seat should be open to someone new to politics.
Yes, Scott has been a leader of the anti-establishment anti-DC Swamp Congressional Freedom Caucus, which has been refreshing, but in my mind, all congressmen are like milk in the refrigerator…they just need to be drunk up when they are fresh, and poured out when they have been there too long.
I voted for Scott Perry already, but I sat and looked at the ballot a good long time before I colored in his name. Oh, the things that could have been with Janelle, had she remained Republican and not joined the ever-farther-lefter Democrat Party of Lenin and Stalin and Marx.
Who knows, maybe Janelle Stelson will win and happily surprise us with her more moderate personality and high intelligence, but I doubt it. I felt safer betting on and voting for the person I already know and trust, and that was Scott Perry.
I USED to be a Democrat
I used to be a registered Democrat, until 1992, the last time I voted for a Democrat for president, when Bill Clinton became president and immediately went to war against private gun ownership. Guns in civilian hands is a sign of a healthy nation, and when politicians want to disarm the civilians, it is a bad sign, that tyranny is awake and active. The Democrat Party hates private gun ownership and is constantly trying to end it. Kamala Harris is on record that she will come and take our guns, if she is elected. No way.
So I am not a big believer in political parties, because as the Pennsylvania GOP has shown over and over, it is really just about a small handful of wealthy elite people here making most of the decisions. This is not democratic, open, transparent, or good for representative government. Both political parties suck, it is just that one is much worse than the other.
That said, one thing that is really acutely toxic to democracy is a group like today’s Democrat Party. This is the political party of tyranny, of big government, of market intervention, of no gas stoves for you, indoctrinating little girls to cut their breasts off in school, and so on. Today’s Democrat Party is anti freedom, anti choice, anti child, anti education, anti family, anti religion, anti science, and anti America. It is so bad that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. of all people had to leave it. So as bad as the PAGOP is, the Democrat Party is worse, and it must be resisted at all turns.
I have yet to have a meaningful conversation with ardent Democrats. They to a person turn off, tune out, walk away, get really angry and defiant. Not one has been able to have a calm conversation about politics, or to calmly explain what they stand for and why they stand for it. Way too many are waving around signs that have some nonsense about Trump and Project 2025. Trump had nothing to do with the Heritage Foundation’s ultra nerdy conservative wishlist Project 2025.
The #WalkAway movement is really valuable, and anyone feeling like they are uncomfortable with the Democrat Party can simply Walk Away from it like so many others are doing. I am not saying you have to become a registered Republican, although the more independent minded voters that register as Republicans, the greater the likelihood that The People can finally defeat the bad GOPe. If you become an Independent or No Political Party, you will suddenly find yourself…unburdened by what was.
Kamala vs Trump…really?
Kamala Harris has never had a real private sector job, ever. She says she flipped burgers one summer as a teenager, but I do not believe that is true. She comes from a wealthy upper crust family that owned slaves in Jamaica. All of her jobs and roles were within one political party and in public taxpayer-funded jobs. No way does she even hold a candle to President Trump, and yes, she is far worse than he is in every measure.
Do not mistake this criticism as partisan, because Kamala Harris is like the great Republican failure here in Pennsylvania, the former state senator Jake Corman, who I also attacked mercilessly.
Jake Corman is now a “lobbyist” in Harrisburg, PA, after being forced out of his state senate seat BY HIS FELLOW REPUBLICANS and by voters like me who just could not stand his stench in politics any longer. All Jake’s jobs his entire life were in the Republican Party or in taxpayer funded public sector roles. Jake was like Kamala – fake, arrogant, snotty, unaccomplished, undeserving, mean, treated people around him like crap. Like Kamala, Jake Corman was an example of everything wrong in American politics, in both political parties.
I did everything possible to chase Republican Jake Corman out of politics and out of his senate seat. I spent thousands and thousands of my own dollars doing this, dollars that I had to work hard for in my small private sector business, often working in brutal physical conditions while running my sawmill. And believe me, all of the sycophants surrounding Jake and making money off of Jake went after me, as a result. I took a lot of slings and arrows for my efforts to unseat Jake Corman.
I hate career politicians of both parties, though I am more Republican than Democrat, because the Democrat Party is now officially an anti-America political force.
Think about this: I used to be a Democrat. In 1988 I was the central Pennsylvania regional coordinator for the Al Gore for President campaign, back when Al Gore was endorsed by the NRA. Think about that. No, I did not leave the Democrat Party, they left me. The Democrat Party is an evil organization and does not deserve the support of decent people.
So do not try to paint my criticism of Kamala Harris as partisan, no way.
And now I am looking at Kamala Harris, a hugely and justifiably unpopular, unimpressive career politician who is challenging President Donald Trump, and I am thinking whhaaaat?
There is no comparison between these two people. Kamala Harris has zero real world experience, has never really been tested by life or by reality, has taken zero risks and made zero sacrifices; she is totally fake and phony. Trump has earned all of the support he has, by not only working hard his whole life, but by standing up for the America that even partisan Democrats take for granted and enjoy, and which will disappear for good if Kamala Harris is elected.
If you are confused about this, then you are probably addicted to mainstream media bullshit. NPR is totally fake news, complete lies from end to end, and yet all the liberals in my life basically live all day long with NPR on the radio piping in complete bullshit to their ears, without any curiosity about why so many Americans despise NPR’s propaganda.
Are you intellectually curious? You probably tell your friends and family and yourself that you are “open minded” and “intellectual,” but if you are not getting information from diverse sources, you are close-minded, and therefore an uninformed fool.
If you are curious, start out at The Gateway Pundit and Breitbart. Compare and contrast their reporting with that done by NPR, ABC, PBS et al, and then you will make up your own mind with a much better array of information to make a better, more informed decision.
So for anyone with a fair minded attitude about this election, the choice is easy – vote for Trump. He is not a politician, he is not crooked, he has personally taken risks and sacrificed beyond imagination for all us Americans, whether we supported him or not. And he is subject to all kinds of assassination attempts and plots…why? Because he loves the America that you love and that you likely foolishly take for granted, and which our enemies hate and desire to destroy.
America is not too big to fail, and under Kamala Harris, America will fail.
Vote for Trump and thereby vote for the America that you love.
The Democrat Party abuses women, actually hates womanhood and motherhood, and yet some women feel strangely attracted to it