1. I’m a Brit so I wouldn’t have been able to vote in 2016, but if I had been eligible, I would have voted Hilary, but I would have held my nose while doing so.

    So given my perspective, yep, I would regard Michelle Obama as a considerable improvement on both Trump and Hilary. (Neither of which, IMHO, is difficult.)

    However I get the impression that a candidates stance on 2A is going to be a major concern to readers of this page. Well, consider that Trump was perceived as being pro-2A, and yet banned bump-stocks by executive order. And seemed quite proud of himself for doing so.

    A candidates – apparent – position on an issue is not necessarily the only indicator of their suitability for holding elected office.

    • Hey, over there in formerly Great Britain. A difference is that you are subjects. Governed by a ruling elite that has no scruples when they decide to ignore your natural rights as people. It appears that you are quite used to that environment. We over here in deplorable land would prefer not to have that happen to us, actually, old man.

      • Chuck, I see no reason to insult someone for speaking the truth.

        Trump *did* ban bump stocks by executive order and has floated support for red flag laws. He’s never been a 2A supporter, as many of us warned the NRA before they endorsed him. He’s proven true to his New York roots.

      • You’re entitled to your opinion old boy, but as a free-born Englishman my opinion is still that Mrs Obama would be a better choice for the office of POTUS than Mr Trump. Even if, IMHO, that is a low bar to clear.

        In the meantime though, have a nice a day. As I believe you trans-Atlantic chappies put it.

      • @Cookie – Fair point, put it down to my being a Brit and missing out on the finer points of US Government.

        So, yep, Donald Trump did not issue an Executive Order banning bump-stocks. It was the ATF re-classifying these items which had been legal under previous administrations, including the Obama administration.

        However . . .

        The ATF re-classified bump-stocks as machine guns at the specific direction of Donald Trump. The relevant memorandum can be found here:

    • I apologize unreservedly for my descent into taunting. I continue to hold the English in the highest esteem. We here in the US enjoy the benefits of western civilization and the common law that are bestowed on us by our English brothers. What seems to be lacking in this exchange is an appreciation for the notoriously wicked English sense of humor. I am pointing out that if we deplorable non-elites do not stand up for ourselves, we will lose our first amendment rights when we give up our second amendment rights. We will lose our country to a ruling class that will put themselves first. The Obamas stand for the elites. In England I would probably be jailed on a hurt feelings beef for my comments.

      • Never mind about it old boy, humour is somewhat subjective. But while in England it sadly seems as if some of us are making a career out of being perpetually offended, speaking your mind about the Great & Good is still a perfectly respectable pastime.

  2. Setting aside all the complaints from the Far Left and Far Right about the two-term presidency of Barack Obama, he essentially governed as a Moderate Republican concerning US domestic and foreign affairs. If Michelle Obama were elected president I suspect she would do the same, perhaps with a slightly liberal attitude toward gender and immigration issues.

    • I have trouble reconciling Obamacare with ‘moderate Republican’, even today’s ‘moderate’ Republicans. I hope you’re wrong on that…but you may be correct.

    • Whatever her beliefs or intentions, I don’t believe any Democrat candidate could stand up against the terrible direction that the current crop of candidates have set on that party. Largely, they are off the rails due to their disdain for Trump. Any Democrat in the White House in 2020 will lead toward more complete undermining of the both the First and Second Amendments in the tradition of the current crop of mob-rule Antifa devotees.

    • Are you kidding or just uninformed? There is no way that BHO governed as a moderate. At the very least he was an apologist.! As sorry as his Presidency was she would be much worse. She treated her Marine attendants as serfs and the secret service personnel as an anathema. She is so superior, intellectually that the “serfs” havre no clues. Please, Hillary would have been bad, but Michell would be worse!

  3. I recall some interviewer asking her about the Presidency and her answer was reported as not being “no” but “Oh hell, NO!” Hopefully that was an accurate, direct quote and she sticks to it.

    What strikes me as different this time around is the opposition readily admits that their proposed “needed actions” will actually have no effect. But they still need to do it.

    It’s also worrisome that the constitutional issues in most of the red flag laws are ignored by those who’d be issuing ringing denouncements if “guns” were replaced with “drugs” or other contraband. Not that that isn’t business as usual.

    • I’m 100% with you.

      My extended family recently had an incident of domestic abuse where the victim was assaulted physically and with a firearm (placed the gun in her mouth then shot it through the floor). Felony charges were filed, he spent a couple of months in jail, then the prosecutor dropped the charges. He still has his guns and will be guiding duck and goose hunts this season. Pardon my skepticism about the effectiveness of a red flag law, restraining order or, even, criminal prosecution.

      As far as suicides are concerned, should we take medication, knives, clothing long enough for hanging, their car, bathtub, electrical appliances, and lock them in their house so they can’t run into the streets?

  4. Michelle Obama has repeatedly denied that she has any intention of running.

    I can’t imagine an Obama lying…

    : 0

  5. I devoutly hope she does NOT get the nomination. She will pull lots of the feminist vote and Black vote. She is anti-gun, very liberal in my opinion, certainly would move the supreme court left and was not a “proud American” until her husband got the nomination. Assuming the “birds of a feather” idea, we can expect lying to accomplish her goals. (See “if you want to keep your doctor,” “insurance,” etc.) Please review what O did to the military. Remember the flag rank officers who were retired, the real warriors. Remember the guy (the Prez) who went to bed while men were dying in Benghazi. Think back to the way the police were treated. And the apparent use of the FBI and DOJ is still unwinding.
    O governed as a liberal who lied outrageously and as an apologist for The US. Say NO! to Michelle.

    • Dan Chu,

      That would be quite a team. A black woman is a double minority, and of course, Oprah is super-popular so together they would be very powerful and likely to win. Guilty whites could say, “Look at how compassionate I am! I am trying to elect the first female, and only the second black President at the same time!” This would force Donald to retire Mike and get a quadriplegic, female Eskimo (Inuit) with Down’s Syndrome to be his new running mate. That would be a close race.

      But seriously, we thought we didn’t have to worry about gun control legislation with Donald Trump. We thought we were going to get nationwide recognition of state-issued concealed carry licenses. I’m afraid our nation is doomed. The only thing which is keeping civilization intact right now is our illusion of wealth.

      I would love to see a good actor dress up as King George III. He could run for President saying, “Come back to me, America! I’ll only tax you at 3%!”

  6. IF our voting population is so naive’ to even consider ANY Obama as a viable leader in these difficult times, then we are certainly on our way to the pits of zool as a nation.

  7. Wouldn’t surprise me a bit, and what a better way to set the table for her. Tell the base they can’t have Michell, then play her as a hole card later in the game. Perhaps some of the current candidates are little more than shills sent to make her all the more appealing. It’s fine with me. The gun industry needs all the help it can get. This Trump slump is becoming costly.

  8. The eventual Democrat nominee isn’t even in the race yet.
    I’ve been saying that for a while now.
    But I welcome an attempt by Michelle. It will give us a chance to further examine and display the manifest failures of her husband and his policies.

    If the Democrats keep up their insane rhetoric and hopefully become even more strident as each tries to run further to the left and embrace socialism it’s going to be a Trump landslide.

    For a hoot, find the video of the socialist convention held this past week.
    I promise you’ll spit your coffee laughing.

  9. I fear that Michelle Obama is electable, and even more authoritarian than her husband. I’ll always remember her comment to the effect that she had never been proud of America…until we were foolish enough to elect her husband president. Inexperienced, authoritarian, corrupt, a red diaper baby and grandbaby, a man who promised to ‘fundamentally change’ America. Has anyone ever set about fundamentally changing ANYTHING they loved? I can’t think of any.

  10. God help us. Like her husband, she is smart and charismatic. And like her husband, the “America” she wants (where folks who make no real effort get free stuff) is not the (free to succeed) America we have and continue to want.

  11. I think MO would soar above the other candidates, certainly Shotgun Joe. She’d be yet another lightning rod to Trump supporters though, and will rally their base. It’ll be interesting. Off topic question: seems like everytime a mass murder occurs, the killer is described in the media as wearing body armor, like the Dayton killer. But how many of these killers actually wore body armor, or is it a media invention? The only instance I can recall is the North Hollywood bank robbery.

  12. I forget which radical anti 2A laws Obama signed? The Democratic party was never happy with him precisely because he DIDN’T go after firearms. I live in what Mas refers to as “commie” California, and owned many more firearms at the end of his presidency than at the beginning, and the various 2A infringements in my home state during his presidency were state laws, not federal. Just sayin. Trump had toyed with more radical 2A infringements than Obama ever did.

    • Exactly..Obama NEVER attacked weapon owners. ONE time he made a statement about AR type weapons. He never ..never said anything against GUN ownership. NEVER. The VERY racist NRA hated Obama. They oppose even backgrounds checks because many of theie=r members are convicted felons..Violent felons..Violent felons,those that hurt or want to hurt or threaten to hurt people should not have access or process any GUN period.
      If you have GUN you should have an ID saying you are not a violent felon or you go to jail.. Lot’s more to it but that’s the basic statement. Gun owner or not in 3-5 years every state drivers license or ID card old contain the background information if you are a convicted felon.. You would not be able to pocess a weapon with out an ID.. PERIOD.Not guh registration .. Just an ID saying you are a violent felon on not…

      • “Very racist NRA?” “Many of their members are convicted felons?” Strong whiff of troll, there…

      • Ray Wells,

        Obama would confiscate our guns if he could. The reason he largely left gun owners alone was because he is smart enough to follow Bill Clinton’s advice. Bill Clinton knows that gun control is a losing issue for Democrats. There was an election where Bill watched Dems lose because they were against guns. Many Democratic voters want to keep their guns. Bill Clinton is a smart politician, and so is Obama. Hillary? Not so much.

      • Ray Wells,

        How could the NRA be racist? We need as many women and minorities on our side as possible. Where did the Second Amendment-infringing laws which have been on the books in some states for decades originate? They were put in place after the Civil War, because newly freed black men were walking around with guns. So, laws were written to stop this practice. The laws were written as though they applied to everyone, BUT THEY WERE ONLY ENFORCED AGAINST BLACK MEN. Gun control is racist. People are not afraid of white men with guns (Vermont, Utah), but they are afraid of black men with guns (Chicago).

      • First, all felons, even the Martha Stewart variety, and several kinds of misdemeanors are prohibited from possessing firearms. The penalty is 10 years/violation, if the federal prosecutor can be convinced to take the case.
        Second, any time a LEO runs your driver’s license it will tell him if you have a felony.
        So problem solved, except that criminals don’t obey the laws nearly as well as the average NRA member.

        President Obama didn’t pass gun control laws because by the time he signed the ACA he no longer had a Congress who would go along.

  13. We generally refer to people who want increased regulation or bans on weapons as ‘anti-gun’, which is true enough, but avoids the core issue: they are largely not simply anti-gun. They are anti-Constitution in general.

    For over a century people in both parties have, knowing the Constitution either doesn’t authorize or outright prohibits their favored policy options, and knowing they didn’t have the support to amend the Constitution, simply ‘reInterpreted’ it. Example: ‘shall not be infringed’ obviously means ‘may be made a felony.’

    Example: guarantees of freedom of religion means that bakers and wedding photographers may be prosecuted for exercising their religious beliefs, and according to the last administration, political groups may be prosecuted for airing a film critical of Hilary Clinton (that’s what Citizens United was about, and the admin claimed in court that the 1st Amendment allowed criminalizing publishing a book critical of her during campaign season) So much for freedom of the press, peasants. Bow down to your betters. Or else.

    So I advocate referring to such people not simply as anti-gun, but anti-Constitution, because that is exactly what they are.

  14. The Obama presidency was an unmitigated disaster. Corrupt from start to finish; a foreign policy nightmare. Government is often wrong but never in doubt. The concept of big government is to turn over all private endeavors to the government to be regulated and controlled by the incompetent ministrations of apparatchiks who screw up and move up. The US has never been so divided politically and along racial lines. Each pen and phone decision worked against the US citizenry, depriving us of natural and legal rights and protections. The Justice Department and its agencies were thoroughly corrupted to serve the ends of big government. It will take us years to recover from the hate and discord brought to us by that infernal man and his minions. The Obamas believe that citizens exist to serve government and that’s not how it works. So, ask me what I really think.

  15. She hated America initially then her husband won and she could take trips on AF One and family to Vail and Aspen. As for all the leftists they seem to want the guns vs looking for reasons people use them in the wrong manner and therefor I’m suspicious of their motives. She’s popular among many but would she be a good leader and uniter of a divided country that by many accounts her husband began during his presidency?

  16. I “Mike” possibly being the DeomincRat nominee a few years ago !

    # Lift Your Dress

  17. I am doubtful that Michelle Obama will run, for the office of President of the United States, for a couple of reasons:

    1) She has near Zero (0) experience. Donald Trump brought to the table his decades of experience in both domestic and international business. Even so, he was not fully prepared for the office as shown by the lousy picks he made for some of his early appointments (Sessions, Flynn, etc.). Many past Presidents brought years of government experience as well as business experience. Experience gained in legislative office or as Governors of various States. Even Hillary touted her experience although, given her failures, I don’t know why. What does Michelle Obama bring? A few years as First Lady? She has no experience running large corporations and no experience in legislative or government office. She is vulnerable in this area to the charge of lack of experience. Let’s face it, if she was elected President, it would simply be Barack Obama’s third term rather than Michelle’s first one. Given the corruption and hidden scandals of the Obama Administration (which are just now seeping out despite the efforts of the Anti-American Media to cover them up), does anybody (beyond the insane Left) really want that?

    2) President Trump plays hardball with political opponents. Does Michelle really want to enter into the dogfight that will follow if she enters the race? Trump won’t cut her any slack because she is a woman no more than he did Hillary or the Squad nut-jobs. I don’t think that Michelle wants to put herself through that although she can take it for granted that the Media will love her and do everything in their power to promote her.

    No, the Obama’s time is past, Thank God!

    I would also like to respond to some of the other comments above:

    @ Fruitbat44 – If you thought that Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt woman in American Politics, is better than Donald Trump and that even Michelle Obama, a woman with zero experience and nothing but her attachment to her husband’s coattails is better too, then I seriously worry about your ability to reason clearly. Perhaps you just need to read something other than the propaganda put out by the Left-Wing Media. I recommend that you read the book entitled “Life at the Bottom”. It is written by a fellow Brit who goes by the pen-name of Theodore Dalrymple.

    @ Spencer – President Obama governed like a Moderate Republican? What are you smoking? Whatever it is, it must be laced with LSD! Even if you modify your statement to “Modern Republican RINO”, it still would not be true.

    President Obama’s Left-Wing polices did the following:

    1) They burdened the American economy with useless regulations and taxes leading to eight (8) years of stagnant performance.

    2) His weakness on the international stage lead to (A) destabilization of the Middle East and the growth of ISIS, (B) Russia to push Ukraine around, and (C) the encouragement of every petty dictator from North Korea to Somalia.

    3) His leftist domestic policies lead to (A) increased racial strife, (B) attacks on and loss of confidence in our domestic police agencies, and (C) a flood of illegal aliens crossing our borders.

    4) Despite the cover provided by a sycophant media, it is becoming clear that his administration was one of the most corrupt and lawless in American History.

    Despite the many flaws in the modern Republican Party, I don’t see the justification to badmouth them to the extent of comparing them to Obama’s Socialist Regime!

    • I’m familiar with Theodore’s work. And I didn’t say Hillary was good, just a better choice then Trump.

      Do you know P.J. O’Rourkes work? I find him robustly amusing, and often in agreement with him, but a quote I rather liked from him was, “Yes, Hilary’s bad, but at least she’s bad within normal parameters.”

      • @ Fruitbat44 – “Yes, Hilary’s bad, but at least she’s bad within normal parameters.”

        In other words, better the Devil that you know rather than take a risk with the unknown?

        Sorry, I don’t think like that. I will admit that I was not a Trump fan at first. I did not vote for him in the Republican Primary. However, there was no way on this EARTH that I was EVER going to pull the level and vote for Hillary in 2016. I would have cut off my right hand AND THROWN IT AWAY before doing that!

        Today, both the Media and most of Academia are too caught up with left-wing ideology and partisanship to view the Clinton Crime Family (Bill, Hillary and their various Capos) objectively. For decades, the media has followed behind them and acted to sweep every crime and scandal under the rug. However, this unfortunately condition will not last forever. Historians, a century or so from now, will be able to look back, dispassionately and without bias, at the true history of current events. They will have the time and distance necessary to do so. As a result, I am confident that future generations will come to look upon the Clinton Crime Family in much the same way that the 16th Century Borgias are viewed today. In other words, as corrupt and amoral as it is possible to be.

        While I had many doubts about Donald Trump, I would have voted for him any day rather than vote for Hillary. So far, I have been rather pleasantly surprised by his Administration. Most of his policies, especially on the economy and immigration, I wholeheartedly support.

        So far, he has not done anything serious to disappoint me. However, if he stabs the 2nd Amendment in the back and signs, into law, yet more useless gun-control legislation, I will reconsider my support. I will not stand for this continual effort to disarm the American People as a prelude to their enslavement under totalitarian Marxist rule.

        Well, some might say, what other choice do you have? You can’t support the Democrats because they are a thousand times worse on this issue. Maybe not, but what I can do is stay home on election day and not vote for ANY politician on the ticket. If they ALL betray the American People then NONE of them are worthy of my VOTE!

      • @TN_Man: @Fruitbat44 – “Yes, Hilary’s bad, but at least she’s bad within normal parameters.”
        In other words, better the Devil that you know rather than take a risk with the unknown?

        Well, no actually. I’d see it more as choosing the lesser of two evils. Hilary has her faults (and probably those of several other people as well) but I still think that a dodgy career politician would make a better fist of the job that a dodgy ex-reality TV star.

        And FWIW, had I’d been able to vote in the 2012 election I’d have most likely gone for Romney.

      • @ Fruitbat44 – “…but I still think that a dodgy career politician would make a better fist of the job that a dodgy ex-reality TV star.”

        I can only conclude, from this statement, that Brits must have far more faith in their politicians then Americans do in theirs. Over here, in the U.S.A, we have been continually betrayed and deceived by politicians from both parties. So much so that it is actually “shocking” when someone, elected to public office, actually tries to keep their campaign promises. Most American politicians, like our current crop of Democrats, will “promise the Moon” during the campaign and then start breaking their promises within hours of taking the oath of office.

        Indeed, many of our “career politicians” think that President Trump is “naive” to even try to keep some of his promises. They fail to realize how refreshing it is and how much it contributes to the devotion of Trump’s base of voters.

        So, in America, being something other than a career politician is actually a plus. Even for a businessman and ex-reality TV star.

        Almost all of our politicians are “dodgy”. However, “Crooked” Hillary is far, far, far worse than just “dodgy”. She is in a class by herself!

        So, in America, you can see why your “lesser of two Evils” thinking did not work back in 2016.

  18. Oh, you mean the “this is the first time I’ve been proud to be an American in my life” Michelle (when her husband became prez.) Obama. Yeah…I can see her being the darling of the Socialist-Democrats.

  19. Wow
    Never expected comments like this on your blog.
    Time to go somewhere else.
    Obama a moderate Republican? No I am a moderate Republican and never believed a thing coming out of his lying mouth.

    • BHunter, this section is ABOUT debate. If you leave such places because someone else left a comment with which you disagreed, you’ll find yourself isolated in an echo chamber and not knowing what it is you have to fight. Just sayin’…

  20. The only person I can think of who would be a better candidate of the Democratic Party for POTUS is Josef Stalin. Unfortunately the great benevolent Soviet leader is deceased (we think, or he could have faked his death like Elvis and Marilyn did) and being a Russian, may not be able to qualify as a candidate, although our previous Dear Leader managed to con his way into the Oval Office. According to the liberals, Donald Trump is our first foreign born president as he’s really a Russian mole and former gay roommate of Vladimir Putin when both were attending the KGB academy before Donaldmir Trumpolov (his real name) was expelled for being a woman hating racist. If we could bring back Uncle Joe Stalin to run for president, Bernie Sanders would certainly vote for his idol.

  21. Barack Obama is itching to get back into the White House…what a disaster!! All of President Trump’s deregulation policies will be reversed. And the 2nd Amendment will be in danger!!!

  22. Possible. But her baggage is substantial. A more likely, and no less threatening dark horse is Gavin Newsom. Lots of high tech, globalist, megalomaniacs behind him.

  23. MO would be an even bigger disaster for this country than her utter failure of a husband was. BO is neither particularly smart nor cunning. Without a teleprompter he regularly proved his ignorance and bigotry. She has a lot more intelligence than he does and would be less of he puppet… but then her hatred is more passionate, and she is cunning.

    Of course the media would back her just as it did mrsklinton and would regularly gloss-over and ignore any misstatements she would make.

    The establishment in d.c. would be supportive, just as they were in 2016, but hey, too, would be a lot more motivated now that hey recognize Trump’s popularity… popularity the media is constantly downplaying.

    Meanwhile all the twenty or so current demo-candidates all are just slightly different clones of each other and none have a chance against the sitting President.
    She might be the best person the dems could run because despite her baggage, all the current potential candidates are baggage.
    On the other hand she would be a horrible, self-involved, self-righteous, anti-American bigot with her thumb on the American economy and her foot on the throat of The Constitution she despises.

    • It is way too late IMO for MO to consider a run in 2020 and I wouldn’t worry about it this time around. Don’t think she could gin up the machine that fast and Biden, Bernie, and Lizzie would not go down without a fight.

      • Given that the demokrat party is not governed by voter choice but by its own elite she will/would not require anything more than her expressed desire to be the candidate and an adequate indication that she will/would also be the slave of that elite, carrying on its agenda, just as her hubby did.

  24. Don’t forget, if Trump is dumb enough to go along with the stampede for guncontrol, he will lose a lot of his base and make the job of stealing the election for the Dems that much easier.

  25. Crongrats, Mas. I must have missed a post on your nuptials. At least I don’t recall a post. Evil Princess is the endeared term, as I recollect…

  26. What am I hearing here, a bunch of DNC Shills.

    Anyone who believes in Guns, The U.S. Constitution, with all it’s Amendments, Can’t possibly Believe in the CRAP I’m hearing here.

    I’m with TN Man, all the wayy!!

    Old Paul

  27. “…drafted as the next Presidential nominee…” What else do they have?
    “…Michael Moore declared Michelle Obama to be his only hope.” And that is the state if the Dem Party.
    “Her gender and ethnicity check two boxes important to the Democrat base.” And that is all that is important to them; no clue as how to run a government, except into the ground.
    Yes, it is possible – who else do they really have?
    KAG 2020

  28. A couple pretty strong personal attacks posted here against those who offer a reasoned opinion that conflicts with the status quo. There could be a few uncomfortable truths expressed by the contrarians.

  29. Well this topic surely is associated with a high rate of responding by the target audience.

    Despite the woman’s apparent popularity, Mrs. Obama can easily be tied to an administration that said the American economy had seen its best days. Whether he was serious or not, Mr. Obama in 2016 asked if Trump had planned to use a magic wand to turn the economy around. Well, Mr. Trump either took that magic wand out and used it off camera- or he and his administration are much better at economics than Obama and his team. Yes, Trump knows what he is doing with the economy. The number of good decisions he makes will far exceed poor or questionable ones. And the Black, Hispanic, and Asian unemployment rates are the lowest in history- Obama never came close to helping the minority communities like this. Is Michelle Obama proud of this? How could she improve on what Trump has already done in three years despite constant obstruction by Democrats and RINO Never-Trumpers?

    Mr. Obama was and is a community organizer (should I refrain from using the term “shit stirrer?”). He has radical socialist beliefs and supports radical action. That includes using Alinsky-like tactics of dividing the citizenry against itself: man vs. woman; gay vs. straight; non-white vs. white; citizen vs. cop; government vs. private citizen…Lies, smears, and violence are all acceptable fighting tactics for them. There is no question in my mind that those tactics contributed to the rising threat to our social order: America as founded. Those tactics are still being used by the Democrats, the media, and many educational institutions.

    Hell, at my gun-free university you can major in Social Inequalities! For what career path might this be useful? The Leftist plan must be to destroy America as founded.

    Michelle Obama represents a return to decline or, at best, mediocrity. You could say the same for any of the Democrats should one of them become President. For those who are disappointed in Trump and perhaps angry at him because of the bump stock ban and possibly signing more gun control into law- I get it. Me too. To say that you will not vote for him in 2020 because of this- I hear you. But, think of the possible alternatives: a Democrat President will be a gun-grabber who has the House. If the Senate flips- look out. Consider too, that Ginsburg and Thomas are very close to retirement from the Supreme Court- I don’t see a Democrat President appointing a constitutionalist to the bench. Trump has done it twice.

    And, who do you see in government now- someone on “our side” who stands up to the Leftist lunacy better than Trump? No one- no one ever did because they feared the media and feared losing their elected office. Now look where we are…Trump could care less about losing office- he will just go back to his successful business (and will likely be fighting in court the rest of his life- but that will happen anyway if he is re-elected). Trump’s effectiveness is, in part, reflected in the incredibly shrill reaction of the Leftist politicians and media- what has worked in the past for them is no longer working. At the individual level, what do many people do when a formerly reliable vending machine no longer works? Press the button(s) harder? Shake the machine? Speak a few expletives? In behavioral psychology- this is an “extinction burst” and it happens when behavior is no longer reinforced (i.e., no longer “works”).

    The gun rights folks still have time to work on Mr. Trump. I have seen him operate in business for 40 or so years- and I know he listens to people. I hope we all are able to vote in 2020 with our head- and not on emotion. There is too much at stake.

    • @ VinFromNewYork – You are correct. We owe President Trump the benefit of the doubt.

      This is actually one of Trump’s negotiating tactics. He will often begin by taking a dishwater weak stance (verbally) on a hot issue that’s on the table for a deal. He does this to see if the other side will snap at the bait. If they are serious about really doing a deal, they will bargain in good faith and try to meet him halfway despite his apparent weak start.

      However, if their intent is to screw Trump, then they will think that his weak verbal statements means that he is an idiot and that he will cave to their demands. In their eagerness to defeat Trump, they will pounce and demand that Trump give them the whole store. They may even up their demands and start adding new conditions to the deal.

      However, Trump is just testing them. He baits them with his seeming weakness and is looking to see if they pounce. Once he detects that they want a “Kill” rather than a “Deal”, he just walks away and blames them for being unreasonable with their demands. He blames the failure to do a deal on them.

      We have seen Trump use this technique before. Notably, in trying to get a deal on changes to immigration law. Trump knows that the Democrats are fanatics. That they don’t know the meaning of the word “compromise”. With totalitarian Leftists, it is always “my way or the highway”. So, Trump baits them with fair words and then, if they don’t give even one inch in response, he picks the highway and walks away.

      So, all this talk from Trump about going along with more gun-control laws, for broader background checks and for unconstitutional “Red Flag” orders, may just be bait from Trump. He may just be ringing the bell to see if the Leftist dogs will slobber. 🙂

      If so, then it is doubtful that Trump will end up signing anything because the Marxists are wild to disarm all Americans and will react like sharks do to blood in the water. When they do, Trump will just put his “Chum Bucket” away and motor back to port!

  30. Trump has been successful in business in the past, and now he has had some success in politics, even though huge forces are up against him. My favorite thing about him is how he fights the media, calling them “fake news.” The media used to destroy people with whom they disagreed. I especially remember how they took down Dan Quayle. I love how Trump fights the forces of evil, I love it!

    Being a pessimist, I am expecting the economy to tank, and Trump will wrongly be blamed for it. Our economy has been built on a shaky foundation for decades. However, if we go through rough economic times, I have some confidence that Trump will do everything he can to fix it. Imagine going through a depression with a Democrat as President. He/She would make the Depression worse, and extend it. Hey, isn’t that what happened in the 1930s with FDR? If FDR had not interfered with the economy, it would have recovered more quickly than it did.

    • Bravo Roger. Very few Americans know that FDR actually prolonged the Great Depression with his Socialist programs, especially the NRA (National Recovery Act) which made the Soviets smile with pride. FDR was a great admirer of Stalin and Communism and wanted to be a dictator too, but that pesky U.S. Constitution prevented that. Rats! It’s sad that so many Americans were deceived by the liberal controlled press into thinking that people like FDR, JFK, MLK, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight Eisenhower, George Marshall, and other past leaders were great Americans.

  31. Getting back on topic, there is another reason that Michelle Obama may decline to run for President. Her husband’s previous administration may be vulnerable to criminal charges. Consider this possibility:

    1) Michelle enters the race late but quickly shoots to the top in the primaries.

    2) By the time of the Democrat convention, she has the votes to secure the nomination.

    3) At the convention she is nominated and hailed as the savior of the Party and of America.

    4) Approximately one month later, just as she is really getting into the General campaign, the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) hands down indictments against more than a dozen former Obama Administration top officials. The Democrats and their media lapdogs all foam at the mouth and declare that this is the lowest political trick in the history of the World. They are all out baying at the moon and slapping themselves silly in pure rage! However, Trump points out that these indictments do not include Michelle, herself, or any member of her campaign. This is just the Wheels of Justice turning like normal. Move along people! Nothing to see here!

    5) As the Trump DOJ turns the screws on the accused, some of them crack and begin to do deals. They agree to plead guilty to reduced charges and to testify against their co-conspirators.

    6) As we roll toward the General Election, the DOJ begins to rack up guilty pleas and convictions. The press can no longer ignore the story and just pretend that its not real. Trump is holding rally after rally after rally in which he paints the former Obama Administration as the most corrupt in American History. He declares that Watergate was nothing compared to the corruption of the Obama(s) – (plural, thus including Michelle in the mix).

    7) Michelle plunges in the polls and, on Election Day 2020, Donald J. Trump is re-elected President of the United States by a wide margin in the Electoral College.

    Mr. and Mrs. Obama both know that such a chain of events, as outlined above, could occur if she chooses to run. They will not want that kind of heat. Especially since the chain of possible indictments could, in theory, eventually approach the former President himself.

    Therefore, they will be taking a huge risk if Michelle jumps into the race. No doubt, President Trump would consider it sweet justice. The Obama DOJ joined in the effort to destroy the Trump Presidency. It would be poetic justice if the Trump DOJ was then used to destroy Michelle’s presidential campaign. After all, “Turn about is Fair Play!”

    I doubt that even B.O and M.O are so arrogant as to run this risk!

    • We should buy Devil’s Island and renovate it, including stocking the place with lots of alligators, so that tropical paradise will be ready to house the former members of the Clinton and Obama regimes, plus the numerous other guilty liberal politicians and media personalities when they are brought to justice and convicted of their many heinous crimes against America. Alcatraz is too nice a place to imprison those slimy scumbags and the crazy fanatics in San Francisco may try to break them out.

  32. Moochelle and Hitlery are reason enough why we need a law saying that you can’t run for public office if your parent, spouse, or sibling ever held public office. We don’t need political dynasties, whether they are named Obama, Clinton, Kennedy, or Bush.

    Re the “convicted felons” in the NRA, it is (as larryarnold correctly pointed out) already illegal for convicted felons to own firearms. (Also drug addicts, people who are legally insane or incompetent, people diagnosed as dangerously mentally ill, and veterans who were dishonorably discharged from the armed forces.) We don’t need new “red flag” laws, we need better enforcement of already existing laws.

    But the Democrats’ policies allow dangerous criminals to slip through the cracks. The kid in Parkland had beaten up his girlfriend. He should have been prosecuted for assault. Then he would have been a convicted felon, ineligible to buy a gun in all fifty states. But, instead, he was placed in a diversion program to keep his record clean (and to artificially keep Broward County crime statistics down.) The killer in Sutherland Springs had been court martialed and convicted for domestic violence. But a plea bargain deal allowed him to get off with a bad conduct discharge instead of a dishonorable.

    And it’s true that “anti-gun” activists are actually anti-Constitution and anti-freedom in general. Elizabeth Warren is calling for more government regulation (i.e., censorship) of the internet. And leftist politicians and journalists are claiming that the First Amendment does not protect “hate speech.”

    “Hate speech” means any disagreement with the PC party line.

  33. ??? Who put the magic mushrooms out in the candy tray??? The Dems running are cannon fodder… none of the stand a chance until 2024. Do not look for MO to make a move before then. She has the same personality problems as H. There is her disbarment. That is connected with her husbands disbarment. Which in turn gets into why he was never seen in two years of college… and his truthfulness on his college apps… The only way it would work would prove Joan Rivers right.

    Brits are too far removed from day to day American politics to have a valid understanding, due to grand biases of our media. We love ya, but be a good ex!

  34. Mrs. Obama is not “brilliant” . Read her college thesis: a bland recapitulation of liberal dogma, in flat, barely readable prose.

    She’s not stupid; IQ of about 115, same as Barack. But in their milieu, with their ethnic credentials, they get hailed as geniuses.

    BTw, in 2016 I suspected that Obama would torpedo Clinton just before the DNC, so Michelle could step in as replacement candidate. A lot of Dems were muttering that Clinton was unelectable.