Joe Biden’s mental decline is obvious to everyone, to the point where Joe himself has acknowledged that it is “legitimate” to worry about his fitness for office. That was big of him.
The latest in Biden’s long string of senior moments (to use a phrase that, in this context, is unfair to seniors) came when he told an interviewer that the forgiveness of student debt that he purported to implement by executive order was narrowly passed by Congress. First the video, then a larger point:
Like so many recent video clips, this one shows a shocking mental degeneration. Does Biden really not remember that loan forgiveness didn’t pass the Congress–it never could have–and that he himself circumvented Congress, and the law, by signing an executive order? Apparently not.
But that raises a more basic question: did Biden ever understand that he signed such an order? Charitably, one might imagine that Biden knew what he was doing at the time, but then forgot. But why should we assume that? Based on the evidence of our eyes, it seems equally likely, if not more so, that there was never a time when Biden understood that loan forgiveness couldn’t pass Congress; that it was deemed helpful to Democrats’ election chances; and that he therefore should sign an (illegal) executive order.
Who carried out that analysis? Who came up with a legal justification, to the extent there was one? Who prepared the executive order? Who told Joe Biden to sign it? Was Biden in the loop at all? Does Biden know anything about the order, other than what he may have read off a teleprompter at the time? Who, in short, is acting as president?
I don’t know the answer to that question, but I don’t think it is Joe Biden.
Remember during the 2020 presidential campaign, when Joe Biden would give a speech in front of a vacant lot to a handful of people who were in cars, one or two per vehicle, spaced widely apart? The Democrats pretended that Biden ran a basement campaign because of covid, but really it was because he can’t draw a crowd. There are plenty of people willing to vote for a nonentity like Biden, often for reasons of self-interest. But hardly anyone is proud of it.
By way of contrast, check out these video clips of Ron DeSantis making a surprise appearance before 20,000 country music fans over the weekend. It was the Country Thunder fest in Kissimmee. Sure, it was a predictably friendly audience. But you can’t fake this kind of enthusiasm, and no one on the Democrat side inspires it:
More here. DeSantis brings excitement and enthusiasm, and it isn’t because he is a rabble-rouser or a spellbinding speaker. It is because he is doing a great job, because he stands for freedom, and because people know he is a bulwark against the forces that are trying to bring our country down.
The 2022 midterm elections are two weeks away. Will it be a red or blue wave? Or a shade of purple? Which party will control Congress in January?
Rasmussen Reports, in a recent survey of likely U.S. voters found that: “Republicans have a seven-point lead in their bid to recapture control of Congress.” They also observed: “The GOP lead is up three points from last week, when they led 47% to 43%.”
Republicans should not break out the champagne quite yet as the GOP, also known as the “stupid party,” is fully capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. One example is in my state of Colorado where the Republican Senate candidate Joe O’Dea made these remarks on CNN:
“I don’t think Donald Trump should run again,” O’Dea said in an interview Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I’m going to actively campaign against Donald Trump and make sure that we’ve got four or five really great Republicans right now.”
Is that a smart move for a GOP Senate candidate? Even in blue state Colorado? CNN reluctantly acknowledged a month ago: “Yes, the former president is, without question, the favorite to win the Republican nomination for a third time.” Running against Trump now, when he is not on the ballot next month, may lead many MAGA Republicans to not vote for Trump-bashing Republican candidates or else vote for the Democrat out of spite.
I am not endorsing this strategy, as control of the Senate is vitally important. I would rather hold my nose and vote for a Joe O’Dea as I did for Mitt Romney and John McCain than risk Congress fully in control of the Democrats, accelerating America’s destruction.
In contrast, are there any Democrats announcing that they will “actively campaign against Joe Biden” should he last until 2024 and seek a second term as president? Democrats circle the wagons around their candidates, even if they wish the candidate was someone else. Republicans on the other hand are quick to throw their most promising candidates under the bus, infuriating their base, all but guaranteeing their defeat.
A former Colorado congressman, Mike Coffman, learned this lesson in 2018. In a 2016 campaign ad, Coffman promised Republican voters, “So if Donald Trump is the president, I’ll stand up to him. Plain and simple.” Two years later, the five-term congressman lost reelection to Democrat Jason Crowe as GOP voters “stood up” to Coffman for dissing their party’s leader. GOP candidate O’Dea may be delivering a concession speech on election night if voters react similarly to his anti-Trump rhetoric.
As Donald Trump isn’t on any ballot next month, he should not be an issue, unless the GOP candidates decide to make him one. While they may think they are appeasing a hostile media and a few moderate voters by dissing Trump, if they alienate the GOP base, they will lose, soundly.
In Colorado the argument is that the Republican candidate can’t win without the “unaffiliated” voters. But they certainly can’t win without their GOP base. Why even say things that will alienate one group over the other? This is an unforced error.
Instead, GOP candidates need to ask one simple question that has nothing directly to do with Donald Trump.
“Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”
Flash back to the presidential campaign of 1980. Another successful GOP candidate asked this same question.
In the final week of the 1980 presidential campaign between Democratic President Jimmy Carter and Republican nominee Ronald Reagan, the two candidates held their only debate. Going into the Oct. 28 event, Carter had managed to turn a dismal summer into a close race for a second term. And then, during the debate, Reagan posed what has become one of the most important campaign questions of all time: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” Carter’s answer was a resounding “NO,” and in the final, crucial days of the campaign, his numbers tanked. On Election Day, Reagan won a huge popular vote and electoral victory. The “better off” question has been with us ever since. Its simple common sense makes it a great way to think about elections. And yet the answers are rarely simple.
This is a no brainer for any Republican candidate. They don’t have to weigh in on Donald Trump or the January 6 commission clown show. Instead, just ask the question. If asked about Trump, simply reply that he is not on any ballot and this campaign is not about Trump but about reversing Democrat policies that are crushing the wallets, spirits, and lives of Americans.
Start with the top issues for voters. CNN notes: “The economy and inflation are the dominant issues three weeks out from the midterm congressional elections.” Let’s look at some of those issues.
Inflation in September 2018 was 2.3 percent. Four years later, in September 2022, it was 8.2 percent, a more than 3-fold increase.
GDP, picking time points four years apart, provides a similar view. Second quarter GDP in 2018 was 2.8 percent. In second quarter 2022, GDP was -0.6 percent, a 3.4 percentage-point difference.
Consumer confidence was hovering near 100 in 2018, and is now at 60 in 2022, according to the University of Michigan.
Average gasoline price is another metric, $2.25 per gallon in 2018 versus at $3.82 per gallon today.
Illegal immigration is an important issue to compare today to four years ago. According to Statista, alien apprehensions by the U.S. Border Patrol increased from 311,000 in 2017 to 1.66 million in 2021, a more than five-fold increase. This does not count those that were not apprehended, which is likely a much larger figure. The latest 2022 data from the Associated Press are even worse:
In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, migrants were stopped 2.38 million times, up 37% from 1.73 million times the year before, according to figures released late Friday night. The annual total surpassed 2 million for the first time in August and is more than twice the highest level during Donald Trump’s presidency in 2019.
These are but just a few metrics that are far worse now than they were four years ago. That should be the message Republican candidates deliver to potential voters, not what they think of Donald Trump or his hypothetical candidacy.
As James Carville once said: “It’s the economy stupid.” That’s still the message. “More than 90 percent of voters are concerned about the U.S. economy and inflation, according to the latest POLITICO/Morning Consult poll.”
Democrats know better. They are neither asked nor do they volunteer their opinions on potential Democrat presidential candidates for 2024, whether it’s Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, or Gavin Newsom. Why should they pontificate on hypothetical candidates?
Yet Republicans do just that, goaded into commenting by the media, eager to divide the Republican Party by pitting MAGA supporters against NeverTrumpers, splitting the GOP vote, guaranteeing a Democrat victory. As Glenn Reynolds recently wrote: “Dems want the midterms to be a referendum on Trump, not bungling Biden — and the media are compliant.”
Republicans should know better and had better wake up.
There’s this RINO character in the Great State of Colorado, Joe O’Dea, that is running against the incumbent Democrat for the United States Senate, who is having a good old time saying that he wants to “distance” himself from President Trump, and other slightly nasty things. He should look at the Economy, Inflation, Energy Independence, defeating ISIS, the Strongest EVER Border, Great Trade Deals, & much more, before he speaks. MAGA doesn’t Vote for stupid people with big mouths. Good luck Joe!
Good luck indeed. Republican candidates already have the deck stacked against them, vehemently opposed by the media, Hollywood, academia, big tech, and much of the woke corporate world. Alienating their base is a self-inflicted error, easily avoidable, and if pursued, leading to a predictable outcome.
Wake up, Republican candidates, and just keep it simple. Ask the question, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”
I’ve banged my head against the wall on the matter of Keith Ellison for 16 years. He is unfit for any public office. He is most unfit for a public office with responsibility for law enforcement. One such office is the position of Minnesota Attorney General. Unfortunately, that is the position he currently holds.
His run for the position in 2018 prompted my column “Can Keith Ellison turn lawman?” Ellison’s long-standing record of support for cop killers might have the power to shock if it were reported by local journalists. As it is, he has essentially never been called on it or held to answer for it.
Now Ellison is up for reelection as Minnesota Attorney General. Republican challenger Jim Schultz is making a race of it. Ellison has the advantage of friendly media. CBS Minnesota reporter/anchor Esme Murphy represents a classic case. If Ellison has the feeling that he can get away with saying anything, you can understand why.
On Friday Ellison was part of the rally featuring Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush at the University of Minnesota. “Defund the police” is part of their calling card, but Ellison claimed in debate with Schultz last night that he doesn’t know anyone who thinks we should defund the police.
The episode puts me in mind of the column I wrote for the Star Tribune about Ellison’s 2014 memoir: “Keith Ellison remembers to forget.” FOX News has covered this story. Will the Minnesota media?
Less than three weeks out from the midterm elections, the polls are moving in one direction. Even MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough “senses” the shift in voter sentiment.
Earlier this week, he spoke to NBC analyst Steve Kornacki, who compared the midterm elections to previous elections. He sees striking similarities to 2014 when a “slow and late-building wave to the point where, even on election night, the magnitude of it took some folks by surprise.” He pointed out that Republicans in 2014 won back the Senate and “reached their highest level in terms of House seats since 1928.”
As Democratic candidates try in vain to resurrect the fervor among pro-choice voters triggered by the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade, Kornacki confirmed the obvious: The economy, inflation, and crime are the most important issues.
Even widely followed, left-leaning data analyst Nate Silver has dialed back his expectations of a Democratic victory in the Senate from 71% a month ago to 61% on Wednesday. Much of this shift has come in the last two weeks, which is an indication that Republicans are gaining momentum.
Signs of a red wave abound. Although it’s premature to predict that Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin will pull off an upset victory against New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, he has managed to close the gap from 24 points to 4 in a newly released Quinnipiac poll . New York hasn’t elected a Republican governor in two decades, but it seems Zeldin’s singular focus on the state’s skyrocketing crime rate is resonating with voters.
A look at the RealClearPoliticslist of House race changes since Oct. 1 provides another indication of the Republicans’ increasing strength. All 17 changes favor the GOP. Eight races changed from “Leans Dem” to “Toss Up,” three from “Likely Dem” to “Leans Dem,” two from “Safe Dem” to “Likely Dem,” three from “Toss Up” to “Leans GOP,” and one from “Leans GOP” to “Likely GOP.”
RealClearPolitics has made only four changes in Senate races since Oct. 1. Two favor the Democrats and two the Republicans. None of these changes affect the most closely watched seats that will determine party control of the Senate.
The Cook Political Report reported three changes. The Florida Senate race was moved from “Leans GOP” to “Likely GOP.” Washington Sen. Patty Murray’s race went from “Solid Dem” to “Likely Dem,” and in Iowa, Sen. Chuck Grassley’s seat shifted from “Solid GOP” to “Likely GOP.”
RealClearPolitics lists seven Senate races in its toss up column: Arizona (D +2.5), Georgia (D +2.4), New Hampshire (D +5.8), North Carolina (R +2.8), Nevada (R +1.2), Pennsylvania (D +3.2), and Wisconsin (R +2.8).
Republicans need to win four of these races to win the Senate. Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican, is well known for outperforming his polls. Of the eight most recent polls, he has led in seven and tied in one. It is beyond me why this race remains in the toss-up column.
North Carolina Senate candidate Ted Budd, a Republican, has increased his lead over Democratic opponent Cheri Beasley. And in Nevada, Republican Adam Laxalt is now 1.2 points ahead of Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto. RealClearPolitics projects this seat as a pickup for the GOP. In a recent article, Nate Silver wrote that “Nevada could be Senate Republicans’ ace in the hole.” Republicans are extremely optimistic about this race.
Assuming Republicans prevail in these states, they still need a win in one of the following states: Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire, or Pennsylvania.
Once considered a long-shot, GOP candidate Blake Masters is rapidly closing in on Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. Masters has momentum. He recently dominated in a debate with Kelly by tying him to Biden’s disastrous policies. He hit Kelly especially hard on immigration, an issue Arizonans have become all too familiar.
New Hampshire remains a long-shot for Republicans. Georgia Republican Herschel Walker is trying to recover from allegations that he paid for his then-girlfriend’s abortion in 2009. And in Pennsylvania, Dr. Mehmet Oz has managed to shrink his gap with Democratic Lt. Gov. John Fetterman to 3.2 points in recent weeks.
Republicans remain optimistic that Kornacki’s “slow, late-building wave” will carry at least one of these four candidates over the finish line. Indeed, for the sake of the country, we better hope the wave appears.
Elizabeth Stauffer is a contributor to theWashington Examinerand theWestern Journal . Her articles have appeared at MSN, RedState, Newsmax, the Federalist, and RealClearPolitics. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn .
If you think the price of energy and food has reached the limit, I have bad news for you: All signs are it’s going to be much worse. Hot Air described the coming supply chain wreck.. Water levels on the Mississippi are tied with an all-time low. And that portends a bitter winter for consumers:
Just under half (47%) of all grain is moved by barge, according to the USDA. Approximately 5.4 million barrels of crude and 35% of thermal coal are moved on the Mississippi.
That’s just a small amount of Mississippi traffic, A great deal more than grain and coal normally is shipped by barge on the Mississippi.
That domestic decline in shipping is compounded by the mess in those ports bringing in foreign products. To avoid the snarl in California’s ports (compounded by California’s labor laws and air-quality regulations), ships are being diverted and unloaded in New York and New Jersey. Those ports offer far less unloading capacity than those in Los Angeles and Long Beach.
But transferring cargo to East Coast ports has also caused its own set of problems. The ports themselves are smaller in scale than either Long Beach or LA, and can’t hold as many ships or get them offloaded and cleared for the next cargo to come in. That is causing significant delays in on-time reliability. In other words, there’s a pretty decent chance that what you ordered may not get to the United States anywhere near the date they quoted you for its arrival. Once your container does arrive, it may sit in the boat for a while.
Even the next-tier port in Savannah is overwhelmed with more traffic than it can service, and once those ships are unloaded there’s insufficient storage and labor to move the products out to retailers and ultimately consumers.
The supply chain problem is likely to get even worse because the threatened railroad workers strike has not been settled but simply postponed to November 19.
Logistics managers are dusting off their plans for a possible railroad strike in November that could wreak havoc on the supply chain and cost the U.S. economy up to $2 billion a day.
Do you imagine our economy is so strong we can afford another $2 billion loss per day? I don’t think so. Inflation is already destroying the poor and middle class. You’ve probably noticed this yourself, but Don Surber details the food price horror story:
Vegetables up 40.2
Baked goods up 14% Pasta up 34.1% Dairy products up 18.2% Fresh fruit up 20.7% Turkey up 38.2%
Each delay — especially of perishable products — will lead to even higher costs and more product loss and scarcity. Stock up on as essentials as best you can
Neither the President nor the Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg seem to have the ability to deal with these disruptions. Indeed, Buttigieg’s
focus seems to be directed to ripping up Interstate 375 that runs through Detroit at a cost of $104.6 million in federal funds under some lunatic notion of racial justice. Also high on his list of priorities is handing out big federal checks for “infrastructure” before the midterms:
Buttigieg’s blitz to sell one of Biden’s signature domestic victories comes just 10 weeks before the midterm election. In a stroke of fortuitous timing, Buttigieg’s department doled out some $2.2 billion last week alone to 166 transportation projects.
The oversized checks and new signage that should appear on 5,300 construction projects over the next 30 days or so will be a visible sign to Americans that the administration is making progress on its agenda despite the challenges of working with a closely divided Congress, he said.
“The point is not to chase after the percentage of people who know that a certain piece of legislation moved in a certain way,” Buttigieg said in an interview inside Berlin’s City Hall, not far from where he once had a campaign office in this North Country town. “The important thing is for people to know that this administration, with support from leaders in Congress who’ve worked together to get this done, is now delivering for that and getting those numbers to leap off the page, turning it into real tangible benefits. That’s a story that I think we do need to do more work to tell, because it doesn’t tell itself.”
There is no evidence that either Biden or Buttigieg have the skill or will to deal with these critical supply chain disruptions. I doubt this tsunami of cash to the Democrats before the midterms will impress anyone before November 8. The administration could not be worse at performing its executive functions. The only bright spot in a broader sense that I can see is that there seems to be a strong and strengthening likelihood that on November 8 we will elect a new Congress and Senate with some chance of impeaching Buttigieg, tying up our demented President’s hands and refocusing the federal government on matters of national interest, instead of payoffs and partisan warfare. Of course, his own party may force him out immediately after the midterms and then the new Congress will be tying the hands of his likely successor, the word-salad queen Vice President Kamala Harris, who was selected for this spot on the ticket upon the same diversity over competence basis as Buttigieg was.
I’m not alone on the notion of butting Biden out of the White House. You may have noticed the mainstream media is suddenly reporting the President’s apparent befuddlement, something they’ve been hiding for two years. They’re bailing on him. Not, unfortunately, because he’s so obviously corrupt and incompetent, but because the media is in synch with the party’s left-wing base and the base is unhappy with him.
The Democratic activist base and the media want bold, loud, concrete action. Whether that means abolishing the filibuster to codify Roe, adding additional Supreme Court justices, or even impeaching them, as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has called for, they want action. Failing that, Joe has to go. The media were always going to hold Biden accountable from the Left flank on the issues they care about, such as climate change and abortion. They see a tired, part-time president and sinking poll numbers, not to mention the terrifying possibility of a Ron DeSantis presidency or the return of Donald Trump, and have hit the panic button.
All polling points to Biden’s majorities in the House and Senate being wiped out come the November midterm elections. When that happens, and I mean the very next day, these innuendos and grumblings for Biden to step aside will become full-bore primal screams, and he won’t be able to survive them.
Prepare for a wild few weeks politically and a difficult winter to come.
Kamala kame to town yesterday to shore up support for sagging DFL candidates. In Minnesota, abortion remains a right protected by our state constitution. In case you hadn’t heard, however, Democrats believe in abortion. It is something of a positive good.
There must be good news behind Kamala’s visit. I take it from Kamala’s konjuring of the abortion theme in the Twin Cities that the DFL candidates believe they need help to whip up their partisans. The Biden administration is not hugely popular among independents in Minnesota.
No sentient voter can have missed the chips DFL candidates have placed on the promotion of abortion in this election. They have moved all their chips on it to the middle of the table. Unsurprisingly, Kamala focused on it during her appearance yesterday. As the Star Tribune headline puts it on the story featured on its homepage: “Vice President Kamala Harris issues call to action on abortion during Minnesota visit.”
As I write this morning, these is the list of the five most-read stories on the Star Tribune site. I should like to think it’s a komedown.
In Minnesota, as in other states, concerned parents have banded together to try to wrest control of the public schools away from teachers’ unions, in order to improve the quality of education and to stop left-wing indoctrination. Earlier this year, we started a 501(c)(4) organization called the Minnesota Parents Alliance to lead those efforts in our state.
Today the St. Paul Pioneer Press and the Star Tribune both posted stories on the MPA and Minnesota’s school board races. The Pioneer Press article is long, and is titled “Social issues bring wave of conservative candidates to MN school board races.” Is educational quality now a “social issue”?
The Pioneer Press piece is reasonably fair and includes an account of MPA’s founding:
In Minnesota last year, the Center of the American Experiment — a prominent think tank and member of the State Policy Network, which promotes conservative positions like an opposition to public-sector unions and support for voucher laws that help parents redirect tax dollars toward private school tuition — toured the state to fight against an “alarming” rewrite of the K-12 social studies standards for Minnesota schools.
“We filled rooms all across the state,” said the Center’s spokesman, Bill Walsh.
All true so far.
When the tour was over, the Center seized on the momentum by holding a candidate school where around 30 school board candidates heard about critical race theory, school funding and how to get elected.
When few of their candidates won last fall….
A number of the candidates who attended our training session won, as did a number of other insurgents. But that was only the beginning. This year, we had time to get organized.
…the Center made plans for a spinoff nonprofit that would focus on school board elections.
Cristine Trooien, a Mound woman who helped run a school board campaign last year, would become the founder of the Minnesota Parents Alliance, with Center president John Hinderaker and chairman Ron Eibensteiner joining her on its three-person governing board.
MPA’s web site is here. Its voter guide, which endorses around 120 candidates, is here. The press, in an effort to support Education Minnesota and the liberals who run the schools, try to make school board races about “social issues” and the “culture war.” It is true, of course, that liberals have used the public schools to wage war on American culture and history, and on normal values. But the main focus of the Minnesota Parents Alliance and its endorsed candidates is educational excellence. With only 36 percent of Minnesota’s 11th graders able to do math at grade level, the quality of the state’s schools has reached crisis levels.
MPA’s voter guide says:
Minnesota Parents Alliance identifies and endorses school board candidates across the state who are aligned with our mission of prioritizing academic achievement, equality and parental rights in their school district.
While liberals prefer to talk about George Floyd and LGBTQ+ issues, the Pioneer Press article acknowledges the central role of academic achievement in the “conservative” insurgency:
The [MPA] voter guide includes brief statements from 104 of the 115 candidates. According to a Pioneer Press analysis of those statements:
* 60 candidates mentioned a desire for schools to focus on academic achievement or just “teach the basics.”
* 45 discussed wanting to take politics, bias or activism out of schools or to stop schools from indoctrinating children.
* 45 cited parent empowerment as a value.
* 17 were unhappy with the way schools are handling matters related to race, gender, equity or sexuality.
* Nine expressed opposition to mask mandates or other measures schools took to protect students and staff from the coronavirus.
American Experiment’s polling indicates that by a wide margin, Minnesotans want the public schools to prioritize academic excellence, not politics, “equity” or culture war issues. Thus, a lot of the MPA-endorsed candidates are going to win, even though only a handful are incumbents.
The Star Tribune story is a bit of a mystery. It was posted early this morning, but the story was soon replaced by a “404” error message–“The page you requested could not be found.” The story went up for a while later in the day, but now is gone again. The reporter told Cristine Trooien that he thinks the story is being held for tomorrow. We will see.
In any event, I have the Strib article on my phone and so can write about it. The headline is, “Culture war issues drive debate in some hotly contested school board races.” Like the Pioneer Press, the Strib doesn’t want to publicize the fact that parents are unhappy with the quality of their children’s education. Hence the “culture wars.”
The Strib introduces the Minnesota Parents Alliance this way:
In New Ulm, a slate of conservative candidates is railing against LGBTQ-friendly policies.
Have you noticed that liberals never “rail”? It’s a tell.
Two of those candidates…were endorsed by a parents association backing conservative school board candidates across the state.
Cristine Trooien of Mound founded the Minnesota Parents Alliance, reaching out to parent groups on Facebook, after the lackluster performance of conservative school board candidate slates in 2021.
I think the reporter is whistling past the graveyard. In 2021, the movement to assert parental control over the schools had barely begun. This year, and in years to come, we will see candidates who represent educational quality win lots of races against the formerly all-powerful teachers’ union and its defense of the indefensible status quo.
Trooien declined an interview, but she said via email that prerequisites for an endorsement are that candidates commit to bolstering “academic achievement, equal and inclusive treatment of all students and respecting parental rights.”
It is notable that the teachers’ union, and the liberal establishment as a whole, views these principles as an existential threat to their hegemony.
I expect good results for conservatives on November 8, including in many school board races. It is not what reporters and editors at the Pioneer Press and the Star Tribune intended, but I suspect that most readers of today’s articles will track down the MPA voter guide to see what candidates they should vote for in their school district.
MN Prager Discussion Group 
You must be logged in to post a comment.