Lion of the Blogosphere

Chuck Schumer for President?

Schumer is seldom talked about as a possible presidential candidate. I think the reasons for this are:

(1) In the past, he never acted like he was interested in the job.

(2) There has been an assumption that New Yorkers don’t play well with voters outside of the Northeast.

I think that point #2 has been disproven. New Yorker Donald Trump is President, and New Yorker Bernie Sanders was the biggest challenger to Hillary Clinton in the primaries. (Bernie has may have moved to Vermont in 1968, but he still gives off a New York vibe.)

Schumer, who will be 69 when running in 2020, is just the right age based on recent history. Once upon a time, we would have thought 69 was too old to run for president, but that seems to have changed. On the other hand, I still think that Biden and Jerry Brown are too old to run for president.

Schumer is the only widely-known white male left in the Democratic Party who is in his 60s and has enough of prole vibe about him that he can appeal to the white proles in the Rustbelt who abandoned the Democratic Party for Trump. (Schumer went to the same high school as Bernie Sanders, Andrew Dice Clay, and my prole Jewish mother.)

As Senate Minority leader, Schumer has a chance to audition for the highest level political job. He needs to show voters that Democrats stand for something and aren’t just the “we hate Trump” party. But it needs to be something along the lines of “it’s the economy stupid” and “jobs, jobs, jobs” and not climate change, trannies, and Black Lives Matters. I think healthcare could also be a winning issue for Democrats and Schumer.

* * *

This post is not about whether you should like Schumer’s liberal politics. I would point out that Schumer is old enough that he’s at heart more of a pro-working-class type of liberal rather than an SJW type of liberal. But like all Democrats, he would open the borders as soon as he becomes president and ruin anything that Trump is able to accomplish on immigration.

This blog post is advice for Democrats, who probably won’t take the advice.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 30, 2017 at 1:48 PM

Posted in Politics

77 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Wow, I assumed he was in his 70s. He is essentially the same age as Michael Keaton but looks far older.

    Schumer obviously cares about his appearance; check out this analysis of his hair plugs.


    July 30, 2017 at 2:02 PM

    • “Schumer obviously cares about his appearance”

      He may care about his appearance but he didn’t get his job based on his appearance. Keaton was blessed with much better bone structure than Schumer. Or spent more on plastic surgery. Or both.


      July 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM

      • Schumer probably got a hair transplant in the 80s or so. Joe Biden also got one around that time and his hair looks weird. The techniques today are much more refined.

        That said, neither of them has anything to worry about when running against Trump. His hair is legendarily bad and it didn’t really affect him in the election. There are rumors he also got a hair transplant (his dad was losing his hair) and it was a botched result too. That probably explains why his hairline is so low, the back of his head often looks pink, and his hair is long enough to fold over his scalp.

        It’s disappointing that the JFK look has become archetypal for presidents and leaders. Eisenhower had a big bald head and he was probably the best president of the 20th century.

        If you have a full head of hair, that’s good, but if you’re losing your hair, it really shouldn’t discredit you that you don’t look like a boy anymore.


        July 30, 2017 at 7:03 PM

      • His hair is legendarily bad and it didn’t really affect him in the election.

        Would Schumer or Biden ever call up a woman from the crowd to inspect his hair to show it’s really his like he did during a speech in SC pre-primaries? Btw, the woman and the crowd loved it.

        Andrew E.

        July 30, 2017 at 8:30 PM

      • “That said, neither of them has anything to worry about when running against Trump. His hair is legendarily bad and it didn’t really affect him in the election.”

        If it were just hair, I would agree. But in terms of overall appearance, demeanor, charisma, etc., Donald Trump is light years ahead of Chuck Schumer.


        July 30, 2017 at 10:20 PM

      • “Would Schumer or Biden ever call up a woman from the crowd to inspect his hair to show it’s really his like he did during a speech in SC pre-primaries? Btw, the woman and the crowd loved it.”

        I doubt it, but while Schumer and Biden both have weird hair, it’s not as bad as Trump’s. Trump’s hair was an old joke by the time he ran, but it was never much of a campaign issue. As such, if they run for president, their hair will comparatively look normal.

        Corey Booker shaves his head, but his facial structure looks more white than black. Virtually any black guy can shave his head and look good, whereas Corey Booker looks more like a white guy with a pudgy face who shaved his head once he lost enough of his hair. It’s not bad, but if Corey Booker beats Biden and Schumer, it won’t be because of their haircuts.

        “But in terms of overall appearance, demeanor, charisma, etc., Donald Trump is light years ahead of Chuck Schumer.”

        Trump definitely has charisma, even if it’s a very polarizing kind (some love him, others despise him, and people who are lukewarm have very strong, conflicting feelings). Schumer is very bland.

        Schumer can’t win on account of his dazzling personality, but he might be able to build a solid, cogent case for why Trump is a failure and Schumer can improve things. We’ll see.

        On another note, well-styled and thick hair can help a candidate, but it’s never the deciding factor. Kerry had much better hair than Bush (though he looked weird for other reasons), and Romney had pitch perfect hair for a man his age, while Obama’s hair was solid but mundane. They still lost.


        July 30, 2017 at 11:36 PM

      • I know someone will criticize my take on Cory Booker. But look at this picture:

        This is an example of where he looks more white than black. His bald, shaved head looks more like what some white men do when they’ve lost enough hair. It doesn’t look like, say, Michael Jordan with a shaved head, where the hair style looks sharp and natural.

        Almost any black guy can shave his head and look good. White men with dolichocephalic skulls can shave their heads and look almost as sharp, but a shaved head on a balding white guy with a brachycephalic skull doesn’t look so sharp. Cory Booker has that kind of look.

        Cory Booker is far from ugly and his shaved head doesn’t look bad per se, but he’s not going to beat Biden, Schumer, or Trump with that haircut.


        July 30, 2017 at 11:54 PM

      • “Trump definitely has charisma, even if it’s a very polarizing kind ”

        It wasn’t his charisma that was polarizing, it was the fact that he made statements outside of the Overton Window. The charisma merely allowed him to get attention.

        “On another note, well-styled and thick hair can help a candidate, but it’s never the deciding factor.”

        I agree, although appearance in general is pretty important, especially for a presidential candidate. Not as important as it is for an actor, but still.


        July 31, 2017 at 3:51 AM

  2. I don’t think Schumer would be the establishment Democrat’s choice, regardless if Schumer wanted to try it. And I don’t think he would. He’s a few GOP screw ups away from Senate Majority Leader, which I think is his real career goal. To the Democrats, he’s more valuable in the Senate; he’s smart and wields a lot of power there.

    The Democrats have to go to what’s worked for them before: Go brown. Corey Booker or Kamela Harris are the closest to an Obama clone that you’re likely to get. The rest of the country may be OK with a New Yorker, but I’m unclear if Southern Blacks who dominate the Democratic primary process are. They didn’t go with Bernie, they went with the old bag.

    Mike Street Station

    July 30, 2017 at 2:40 PM

    • Schumer’s lack of pizzazz and star power leads me to believe he’d rather be Senate majority leader. He’s smart as hell, and people who are smart but aren’t particularly showy in politics understand they can affect more change in Congress than as president.

      Corey Booker or Kamala Harris will probably pull it off. Corey Booker’s public speaking skills are stronger but Kamala Harris is a woman, so it’s hard to forecast who would prevail between the two.


      July 30, 2017 at 7:16 PM

  3. Schumer is categorically not a working class type. He is a Clinton style, neoliberal type: socially left and economically right. Basically the worst combination for appealing to white proles.

    We also need to get off this “the Dems need to win back WWC’s” thing. First of all, it is nonsense. Saying that the Dems need to win more WWC votes is like when the Dems spent years telling the Republicans they needed to win more Latino votes. And then Trump won despite doing about as poorly as Romney did with Latinos.

    2nd of all, it isn’t going to happen. The WWC is lost forever to the Dems.

    What the Dems need to do is merely maintain Hillary’s margins with whites, both college educated and working class. Hillary won college whites while Obama lost them to Romney. If the Dems lose these Romney-Clinton voters, they are fucked for at least the next 2 Presidential cycles.

    Schumer would be able to hold onto Romney-Clinton voters, but so could any other D candidate besides Bernie.

    The Dems should nominate Booker. He is clearly the best choice. But Biden wants it so it will be Biden, probably with Booker as the VP.

    Otis the Sweaty

    July 30, 2017 at 2:44 PM

    • You may be right about Biden, but ultimately even if he runs I think he is too old win. He will be 78 and if you’ve seen any interviews with him recently, he comes off as old and low energy even now compared to 2012.

      Two in the Bush

      July 30, 2017 at 5:30 PM

    • I think the two big advantages Trump will have in 2020 vs. 2016 are:

      1. Trump will look like less of a risky bet. In 2016, the media constantly yapped on about how he was “dangerous,” and that his bellicose, volatile temper was not something you wanted near the nuclear button.

      So far, Trump has shown that his administration will be chaotic, but if we’re not at war someplace in 2019, his temperament will still be annoying but not worrying.

      2. Generation Z whites worship Trump, and more of them will be voting in 2020:

      Yes, the demographics in America are far from great, but that also entails young whites nationwide voting like they’re in Mississippi or Alabama.

      Those two factors will put Minnesota and New Hampshire within striking range. In Minnesota, 43,000 people voted for Hillary over Trump, and 53,000 people there voted for McMullen in 2016.

      Trump ran a tight game in Nevada, and he might be able to snatch it if turns out illegals voted there in high numbers and Kobach (or someone like him) succeeds in cracking down on it. Sessions’ anti-marijuana policies won’t be popular there, however.


      July 30, 2017 at 8:29 PM

      • Right now Trump is prob the slight favorite in 2020.

        As crazy as the 2016 election was, it only ended up being slightly the the Left of what the fundamentals suggested would happen. Assuming the economy is strong, the fundamentals favor Trump in 2020. Not having a black guy at the top of the ticket will hurt black turnout and I don’t think Booker as VP will be enough to goose the blacks into showing up any more than they did for Hil. In fact, I suspect turnout amongst all minority groups to be down slightly in comparison to 2016.

        Trump should also get more popular when he has a Democratic foil to go against, similarly to how Obama would suddenly get more popular when the public started comparing him either to Romney or to Trump and Hillary.

        The big question about 2020 is how the Romney-Clinton voters break. If Trump wins back ~90% of them, he will win re-election for sure.

        Otis the Sweaty

        July 30, 2017 at 11:02 PM

      • So far the business community has been warming up to Trump. He barters with companies to establish jobs in the US and is pushing out the cheap labor, but in return he’s cutting regulations, staffs his administration with businessmen, and has no love for austerity measures the way that trucons do.

        During the election and at the start of the Trump presidency, the Bezos-led Washington Post was nearly as bad as CNN. But it’s gradually becoming ever less hostile to Trump, and I think a lot of it has to do with Bezos being in on a number of meetings with Trump. Granted, Washington Post is not a pro-Trump publication, but it’s becoming less ludicrous.

        The MSM will still be vehemently anti-Trump, but the business community will probably be less inclined to back a Democrat than they were with Hillary.

        If the economy continues to do well, I think the Romney-Hillary upper middle class whites will be less averse to Trump than last time, and that’ll be a boon for his electoral chances.

        At the end of the day, the only area where Trump’s policies are an outlier compared to past administrations has been his anti-illegal immigration stances. Truthfully, most Americans reflexively feel sorry for illegals who get deported, but ultimately aren’t all that bothered by their exit. If everything else in America is getting better or staying the same, and illegals are being deported, then upper middle class Americans won’t care so much. It’s not a fundamental issue for them.

        Ultimately, Trump was painted in such a negative light in 2015 and 2016 that if he does well or even just OK, a lot of the opposition he faced last time won’t be so stark.


        July 31, 2017 at 1:46 AM

      • Whites voting as a racial block by necessity sucks for the country long term (even if they consistently win).

        It means sclerotic, corrupt, one-party governance. Like the 2016 DNC…

        And a preemptive response to the rebuttal “One-party states haven’t fared all that bad” : That is (a) debatable and (b) state government is basically nothing more than regulation and administration. The real power to screw-up lies only with the federal government. State gov’t is the kiddie pool. There’s also market mechanism in effect that prevents or reverses overshoots– mess up too bad and you’ll lose out to other states (eg. on taxes or being burdensome on businesses).


        July 31, 2017 at 2:45 AM

      • “Whites voting as a racial block by necessity sucks for the country long term (even if they consistently win).

        It means sclerotic, corrupt, one-party governance. Like the 2016 DNC…”

        Well there really isn’t any choice to that. More diversity means more ethnic and racial block voting. Issues will go out the window and elections will simply be my side against the other side.

        Mike Street Station

        July 31, 2017 at 10:42 PM

      • As Lee Kuan Yew said, people in multiethnic democracies vote on the basis of race or religion. Christianity is currently waning so white identitarianism it will have to be.


        August 1, 2017 at 5:32 AM

    • The WWC is shrinking, so while I agree that it’s still the core GOP constituency, they need to make up the shrinkage somewhere else.

      However, what no one notices is that college whites are destined to shrink in the years to come as well, the result of the synergistic combination of three factors: 1) white feminist “career” women eschewing kids and marriage for the sake of “career” and acquisition of political power, and 2) declining college enrollments due to costs and perception of very high risk and cost for questionable return of a good yuppie jobs. 3) Such perception is quite correct as the market for cognitive skills peaked around 2000 or so. Today you can go for an interview in a distant city at the employer’s expense and they won’t even bother to tell you whether or not you got the job.

      Trump would cream Booker (or Harris). I thought highly of Booker when I saw the PBS documentary “Street Fight” about his first (losing) race for mayor of Newark and saw that he had a huge American flag displayed in his campaign HQ (and not the 90s equivalent of BLM propaganda), and when he came to Mitt Romney’s defense in the 2012 campaign. But he lost me by betraying Jeff Sessions in the latter’s confirmation hearing, even those the two were reputedly best friends in the Senate.

      More importantly, the future portends a far more racially-conscious white population that had already expiated its sins by voting for The Magic Negro, and won’t make that mistake again. Zach Galifaniakis was right to ask Barack Obama “How does it feel to be the last black president?” even if Obama didn’t like the question.


      July 30, 2017 at 11:10 PM

      • Once you go black, you never go back. (Not that there’s anything wrong with going black). ((Oh, wait…))


        July 31, 2017 at 11:05 AM

  4. I dont see it. Schumer comes off as oily and whiny, not attractive qualities for the general non-NYC public. Add to that how absolutely beholden he is to Wall Street and especially G-S, that is going to be a non-starter for the Lunatic Left.

    Really the Democrats need to unit early behind a white Southern or Midwestern (not IL) governor. The Lunatic Left is going to have a very wide field, maybe as much as the Republicans in 2016 and that is going to drive the context of the debates quickly to who can give the most OPM away. The only hope for a “mainstream” candidate in that kind of scrum is to have strong polling support; not a split vote.

    Really Hillary suffered from turnout. Is there someone who can get the blacks to turnout at Obama’s rate? Kamal Harris is a Indian American Hindu who barely saw her Jamaican father. Cory Booker “cant find the time to date” someone of the opposite sex. I dont know that those two will put many states into play.

    Lion o' the Turambar

    July 30, 2017 at 3:08 PM

    • In Agreement with Mike Street Station above and also with Mark Caplan below.

      For Democrats and their obsession with identity politics, complexion trumps competence, experience and charm. If they can make that aloof prickly former “community organizer” from cosmopolitan wherever cum Junior Senator from Illinois with no significant achievements into a genuine Black Brother with whom descendants of slaves can identify, PR image factories might also succeed in fooling them in the same way with the brown phonies representing NJ & CA in the US Senate.

      As an alternative… “not so dark” horse candidate… there’s always Julian Castro. The real question is whether the Dems balance the ticket with somebody white and square as a sop to the white working class of the states that decided 2016. Finally I predict internecine conflict within Democrats especially from the extreme left becomes so pitched by 2020, perhaps as bad or worse than 1968, giving the GOP a real chance to recover from an otherwise very disappointing Trump Administration.

      Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

      July 30, 2017 at 4:04 PM

      • Look, the Democrats need to nominate a black candidate because only a black candidate, preferably a man, can get you the 65% black turnout the Dems need.

        Also, you need somebody who won’t scare off moderate suburban whites. Bernie or anybody like him would alienate centrist whites.

        So what the Dems need is a neoliberal shill in an attractive black package. See Obama, Barrack.

        Well Obama isn’t an option but Cory Booker is the closest thing there is and he is available. The Dems should go with him.

        As for the lunatic Left: they don’t matter. They dutifully showed up to vote for Hillary and would have shown up in even greater numbers for a less unattractive candidate. They will show up in big numbers in 2020 just to get rid of Trump.

        Hillary already won the popular vote. The Dems need to do 3 things to translate Hillary’s close 2016 loss into a 2020 win: 1. get black turnout up to Obama levels and 2. Hold on to all the Romney voters that Hillary won over 3. Not hemorrhage any additional white support. Booker gives them the best chance to get them where they need to be. An open borders, “centrist” white guy isn’t going to help them any.

        Otis the Sweaty

        July 30, 2017 at 4:50 PM

      • Trump’s presidency has been a smashing success thus far and it’s only going to get better. His biggest mistake 6 months in was making Sessions AG but he will recover.

        Andrew E.

        July 30, 2017 at 6:34 PM

    • “I dont see it. Schumer comes off as oily and whiny, not attractive qualities for the general non-NYC public. Add to that how absolutely beholden he is to Wall Street and especially G-S, that is going to be a non-starter for the Lunatic Left. ”

      The level of anti-semitism in this comment is shocking.

      Steve Johnson

      July 30, 2017 at 4:07 PM

      • Lol. Yeah, keep clutching those pearls Mary.


        July 30, 2017 at 8:01 PM

      • If that was “shocking” don’t go to opensecrets because you will be gobsmacked that the anti Semites running that site have him receiving more money from Wall Street than anyone else.

        Lion of the Turambar

        July 30, 2017 at 8:37 PM

      • Absurd and outrageous.

        Chris Christie, Chuck Schumer, Anthony Weiner, Anthony (the Mooch) Scaramucci, Rudy Giuliani… even Donald Trump have something abrasive “New York” in common about them that turns off many outside that culture. Meanwhile most Americans are indifferent to unimpressed or unenthusiastic about success in global finance and capitalism. Having lived in that area and culture long enough, I observed a certain indistinguishable competitive rudeness & pushiness that transcended any particular ethnicity… whether white ethnic proles, Italians, Jews, Irish, Slavs, etc… and I have to admit this even having blood of several of these categories. Contrast this to a more taciturn, passive, deferential style of culture more common to Germanics, Scandies, protestants and wasps of New England, the Upper Midwest and Far West. In some ways, the direct confrontational style of the Catholics, Jews and other ethnics might be a more effective way than “polite and diplomatic one.” However would Americans “choose” to impose that abrasiveness on themselves? In the case of 2016 they did… preferring Trump’s often shocking abrasiveness to the smooth phony focus-group tested diplomatic politics as usual.

        Mitt Romney’s modest personal style is of course more similar to Michael Bloomberg or Warren Buffet than Donald Trump or Mark Cuban and even if his success in business didn’t exactly dazzle voters, his role in global capitalism wasn’t necessarily an insurmountable handicap. If most citizens were familiar with Lloyd Blankfein’s inspiring story of his humble background growing up in the projects in the ‘hood, I have little doubt they couldn’t help finding that biography pretty impressive.

        People are growing weary of knee jerk accusations of anti-semitism. Even if they are still quite effective at shutting down debate and discrediting (and muzzling) voices with a mere assertion, they are losing their power by the mere inflationary effect of their excessive frequency.

        I used to bristle at the cultural marxist assertions that Whites are by nature contaminated by the nation’s original sin and by nature, delivered from the factory with the preexisting condition, as racists. With time I’ve come to appreciate that everybody has an affinity to “his own people” and that can’t be helped. The best we can do as keep an open mind and take a chance to get to know people and their stories from outside our own kind. If diversity in America can succeed, it will only do so in this modest respect.

        I have little doubt that American voters can choose a Jew for its leaders, but it won’t be easy. Most likely it’ll be some kind of a hybrid specimen like Barry O was, who wasn’t exactly stereotypical of Black culture. Remember when Biden said, “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,… I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

        Eventually there will be a Jewish doctor, entrepreneur, military veteran from someplace outside NY who mirrors much better the median American voter than any New Yorker could. I very much disagree with the Lion on the notion of the increased “electability” of a New Yorker to national office. Trump did succeed much more in spite of that handicap thanks to his notoriety from tabloid news and reality television. Somebody like a Bloomberg lacks the abrasiveness that makes the New Yorker “bulldog” culture such a turn-off to the rest of the nation, but he’s also probably “too elite” and posh for ordinary Americans who demand at least a streak of character a la “Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho” or “Kid Rock” that reflects their own idiocy.

        Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

        July 30, 2017 at 8:55 PM

      • “Mitt Romney’s modest personal style is of course”

        The proles found his modest style to be something sinister. If he was too ashamed of his wealth tho show it off the way Donald Trump does, there most be something evil in there.

      • I’m part Jewish and I agree with his comment.


        July 30, 2017 at 10:49 PM

      • The proles found [Mitt’s] modest style to be something sinister. If he was too ashamed of his wealth tho show it off the way Donald Trump does, there most be something evil in there.

        Proles hate Mitt because he reminds them of their boss; they love Trump because he reminds them of themselves. No need to overcomplicate the psychoanalysis.


        July 31, 2017 at 2:56 AM

  5. This post is certainly contrarian. The received wisdom is the Democrats will nominate anything but a straight white non-Muslim man to run for president.

    Mark Caplan

    July 30, 2017 at 3:12 PM

  6. “But it needs to be something along the lines of “it’s the economy stupid” and “jobs, jobs, jobs” and not climate change, trannies, and Black Lives Matters.”

    Don’t be naive. Such a move would be seen as reaching out to middle and working class whites, which would anger the Party’s non-white voters. It won’t happen.


    July 30, 2017 at 3:34 PM

    • A black candidate gives you the ability to ignore BLM because blacks will turn out for you anyway. This allows the black candidate to spend all of his energy pandering to white voters.

      A black guy is the way to go and one lesson that I am sure the Dems will take from 2016 is that they need to always have a black guy on the ticket.

      Otis the Sweaty

      July 30, 2017 at 4:52 PM

  7. People act as if Trump’s victory was some sort of wake-up call for the Democrats. It wasn’t. It was the old America’s last attempt to save itself. Hil still won the popular vote by two million. All the Democrats have to do is wait. No change on their part is required.


    July 30, 2017 at 3:39 PM

  8. I agree with the other posters. Chuck Schumer is physically unattractive and oily in his demeanor. He gets by not on charisma but by being a shrewd deal-maker. I think the country is ready to elect a Jewish president but I don’t think it will be Chuck Schumer.


    July 30, 2017 at 3:43 PM

    • A “shrewd deal-maker”? The anti-semitism in this comment is shocking!


      July 30, 2017 at 8:06 PM

      • Lol, like someone else said, Schumer really is a stereotypical New York Jew. Probably he should have been a movie executive instead of a politician. So as to better enjoy all that sweet young trim.


        July 31, 2017 at 3:54 AM

    • Just like Sheldon Silver, you know there is some ugly deal cutting there.

      Lion of the Turambar

      July 31, 2017 at 8:03 AM

  9. Trump is sui generis. His success doesn’t really apply to other New York pols.

    Schumer is too liberal and too establishment to run a pure economics based campaign.


    July 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM

  10. Party hatchet men/scolds rarely make for attractive national leaders. Warren will discover this as well.


    July 30, 2017 at 4:14 PM

  11. You must be joking. His opponent wouldn’t even have to do any Oppo on him. All you’d have to do is trumpet his perfect SAT score, as well as subtly remind that he’s Jewish, and white proles will run the other way.

    Department 11

    July 30, 2017 at 4:29 PM

    • Bernie is Jewish. Trump is almost Jewish.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      July 30, 2017 at 5:52 PM

      • Trump is reactionary. Is there any high profile Jewish person who is reactionary other than Mencius? Yakov doesn’t count.


        July 30, 2017 at 6:38 PM

      • And Bernie got no proles. Surely you noticed that all the white Bernie bots drove Subes and Volvos.

        Department 11

        July 30, 2017 at 7:37 PM

      • Netanyahu? Stephen Miller? Joel Pollak?


        July 30, 2017 at 8:07 PM

      • Ex. New Yorker, Mikey Weiner of the Sausage Frisco Nation — high profile, reactionary and Jewish, based out in SF.

        I find the heavy metal riffs on the show to be highly annoying and prole.


        July 30, 2017 at 8:40 PM

      • Bernie’s being Jewish kept him from winning the Dem nomination. You think black Democrats are going to vote for Chuck Schumer in the primary?

        Dave Pinsen

        July 30, 2017 at 10:46 PM

      • Blacks vote for whomever the black leaders tell them to vote for. If Schumer does run, it would be as the establishment candidate, and he’d be in the same place as Hillary as far as getting the support of black leaders.

      • IIRC black leaders were pretty united in backing Hillary in ’08 until Obama won Iowa. So they don’t have the power to get blacks to vote for a non-black over a black who looks to have a good shot at winning.


        July 31, 2017 at 2:51 AM

      • “Is there any high profile Jewish person who is reactionary other than Mencius?”

        Prof. Paul Gottfried fits the bill. Not exactly high profile, but he’s more well-known than Mencius.

        Lewis Medlock

        July 31, 2017 at 10:02 AM

    • Former professional wrestler and college football player Bill Goldberg is a Jew who could definitely appeal to white proles. However, I have no idea where he stands politically.

      Lewis Medlock

      July 30, 2017 at 7:54 PM

  12. “Schumer is the only widely-known white male left in the Democratic Party who is in his 60s and has enough of prole vibe about him that he can appeal to the white proles in the Rustbelt who abandoned the Democratic Party for Trump.”

    Chuck Schumer is also Jewish. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible for straight white men to win the Democratic nomination in the current political climate, but I think Jewish men are exempt from that.

    In terms of Intersectional Pokemon points, being a straight white man is a huge negative. Being a woman, gay, or a minority gives you a positive score. So a Hispanic lesbian woman has more Pokemon points than a straight black man.

    Jewish men don’t have positive points anymore, but they’re more or less exempt from being criticized as straight white men.

    Basically, if straight white men are -1 in points, a black man is a 1, and a Hispanic lesbian woman is a 3, then a straight Jewish man is a 0, a straight Jewish woman is a 1, and so forth.

    I think Chuck Schumer has more than enough prerequisite experience and Establishment backing to run for president, but he hasn’t ever really shown much pizzazz or star power to me. I think he could win if he faced a weak field and the DNC gathered around him the way they did with Hillary.


    July 30, 2017 at 5:07 PM

    • “… Intersectional Pokemon points …”

      Um, did we forget to give proper attribution?

      Department 11

      July 30, 2017 at 10:26 PM

  13. Gillibrand is more likely than Schumer.


    July 30, 2017 at 5:27 PM

    • Good point- if you are going to put some one forward with ties to Wall Street insiders, Gillibrand would be a far more attractive face to that.

      I am sure she has crazy leftist positions but this could be the idea “mainstream” Dem candidate to stop the socialist wing.

      Lion of the Turambar

      July 31, 2017 at 8:00 AM

  14. He will never be president. He is seen as an obnoxious New York Jew. He embodies the worst stereotype of the pushy Jew.

    Sanders could be elected President, and he would have been if he were nominated because he comes across as a likable, slightly flawed, essentially competent and decent who would look out for the American people. He connected with the American people in a genuine way. Another Jewish politician who should have given serious thought to running for President was Russ Feingold. Feingold was a level-headed liberal, who assiduously avoided big money. He never ran fund-raisers, his campaign money came from constituent donors. Of course, that would have had to change if he ran for President, but he came across as genuine, honest, sincere and competent.

    Nobody likes Schumer. Not even his colleagues.


    July 30, 2017 at 6:36 PM

    • Furthermore, no politician in recent American history has been pushing more for maximum, unrestrained third-world immigration than Schumer. Let’s see him take that to the American people.


      July 30, 2017 at 6:37 PM

      • The problem is that there is no “the American people.” Americans have always been divided and diverse. The potential was there: the various strains of Europeans were finally beginning to digest each other after 1924, but… 1965.


        July 30, 2017 at 9:36 PM

    • Schumer is extremely calculating and a shameless demagogue. Everything he says and does is scripted. He will also say or do anything that is politically expedient, and he’s often not very subtle about it. He’s more pragmatic than ideological.

      Lewis Medlock

      July 30, 2017 at 8:03 PM

      • “Schumer is extremely calculating and a shameless demagogue. … He will also say or do anything that is politically expedient”

        And that’s why he shouldn’t be written off.

      • Yes, Schumer makes things happen, but he has absolutely no redeeming qualities when it comes to charisma and persona, required to gain popularity among the liberal camp.

        Trump was able to gain support from moderate proles, and so does Schumer, but he really needs the liberal crowd to make any headway.

        The likelihood of him of running for president is close to nil. And he knows it!


        July 31, 2017 at 11:10 AM

    • Schumer shops at Fairway Supermarket, if that’s of any relevance.


      July 30, 2017 at 8:43 PM

  15. What is Schumer going to run on in 2020? We hate white people even more? The Democrats are incapable of fielding any candidate that would attract the white working class that went for Trump. And if they tried, then they would alienate their own base.

    Are they going to run an anti-immigration platform? Anti-free trade? How?

    Worse for them, Generation Z will come online by then, ready to vote. What is a Bernie Sanders or a Schumer going to offer them? Are the Democrats going to attack him like the Repubs attacked Trump? Or, is Bernie just going to perform lies in front of the public while business as usual resumes in the background?

    The Democrats only real strategy is to pursue Federalism, so that local control and re-redistricting undermines Trumpian government control.


    July 30, 2017 at 8:52 PM

    • I don’t know if I buy into the Generation Z theory.

      • I’m in Mass so YMMV, but in my experience Gen Z and younger Millennials (of all races) are fanatical Red Guards following the most extreme forms of SJWism, prone to making loud scenes in front of or even involving guests or strangers, where they harangue their elders for ludicrous violations of PC (e.g. calling someone “he” or “she” without first asking what their pronouns are, or “cultural appropriation” of ethnic food).

        Older Millennials (my cohort) look like yuppified Boomer Reaganites by comparison.

        It could be a function of my geographic location and SWPL peer group, but I think it holds true (maybe to a lesser extent) elsewhere. Last year I saw a news report (on CBS, so again YMMV) that the nation’s most popular game among the tykes at recess had become a variation on “tag” with “Donald Trump” in place of “it.” The clip they showed of kids running in all directions from “Trump” was, IIRC, from a school in Indiana which appeared about 75% white.

        Speaking of, Gen Z is only 50% non-Hispanic white and dropping, so, even if the whites were relatively sensible, the net impact of the generation as a whole can only be strongly negative.


        July 31, 2017 at 5:58 PM

  16. If the Democrats were going to go with a white male then Steve Bullock from Montana seems like the best choice to appeal to white rust belt voters. But with their identity politics obsession, Kamala Harris is the perfect candidate that hits multiple check boxes.


    July 30, 2017 at 10:05 PM

    • Angry, annoying, haranguing black female. Everybody loves those, right? Don’t think your typical black male is going to turn out for that, and I wonder whether she pulls ANY middle-class white voters at all.


      July 31, 2017 at 11:15 AM

  17. Lion, Jews don’t have enough problems? We need Shummer running for president now? He is a revolting NY establishment type.

    Anyway, I think a Jew should not run for US president. This is not good for the Jews. We don’t need to be in spotlight more then we already are, if you know what I mean.


    July 30, 2017 at 10:24 PM

    • There it is. Someone said it. Low profile.

      Andrew E.

      July 30, 2017 at 10:57 PM

  18. Schumer is too much of an evil genius type, more so than a retail politician type. I think his New York vibe is too strong. The New Yorker to watch out for is Kirsten Gillibrand. Hillary without the baggage.


    July 30, 2017 at 10:53 PM

    • Schumer is an old school obnoxious New Yorker, typical of many Jewish and Italian proles, who once roamed the city, before the SWPL invaders.


      July 31, 2017 at 2:59 PM

  19. The Democrats are losing the attention of black voters with all of the “Russia!!” obsession.

    They could care less.


    July 31, 2017 at 5:33 AM

  20. Well since he’s related to Amy Schumer, he’ll probably lock up the overweight, foul-mouthed, slutty chubbies vote. And that demographic grows bigger every day, in both senses of that word.


    July 31, 2017 at 11:29 AM

  21. His anti-gun views alone make him a sorry POS like every baby boomer Obama fellating Democrat. I wish he to could physically removed from society.


    July 31, 2017 at 12:55 PM

  22. has enough of prole vibe about him that he can appeal to the white proles in the Rustbelt who abandoned the Democratic Party for Trump.

    Bwahahaha! Going to bat for the home team, bubala? Schumer is loathed by whites across the country and rightfully so. His entire career is pretty much based on “bad for the whites.” Is there any anti-white agenda or legislation that he hasn’t backed? Starting with that genocide through racist colonialism we laughingly call immigration. Open borders – good for America, good for Europe. For Israel? Not so much. He’s clearly running though, as his anti-Clinton remarks show. Any Democrat running has to get past the Clinton machine. He can win only one way – suppress his white-hating racism long enough to pretend he’ll crack down on mass immigration, McCain style, and hope the gullible buy it. The strain of having to make nice with ordinary whites would probably make his face break out in giant blue pimples.


    July 31, 2017 at 4:48 PM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: