Connect with us

Politics

Here’s How Bad Bernie Sanders’ Son Just Lost His First Election

Published

on

If the future of the Democratic party is socialism, it’s not starting with Bernie Sanders’ progeny.

This is fitting, considering the Senator wouldn’t even endorse his own son, Levi Sanders, because the family doesn’t believe in “dynastic politics.”

How very noble of them.

As taking such a highly moralistic stand often does, Sanders’ move did his son no favors in his first congressional primary.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

He lost, and bad.

Politico reports:

Levi Sanders was one of 11 candidates vying for the Democratic nomination in New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, a seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Rep. Carol Shea-Porter. The seat has seesawed between Shea-Porter and Republican Frank Guinta in every election since 2010.

State Executive Council member Chris Pappas was the victor in the race for the Democratic nomination. With about 70 percent of the vote counted, Pappas had 43.5 percent of the vote; his closest challenger has already conceded the contest.

Levi Sanders, in comparison, had received less than 2 percent of the vote and was in seventh place among the Democratic candidates.

Pappas’ GOP opponent is projected to be Navy veteran and former police chief Eddie Edwards; Guinta is not running this cycle either.

Ouch!

One has to wonder if it would have been any different had his father endorsed him.

Levi did run on his father’s same platform, that is, thinly veiled Marxism.

This ideology seems to be walking a very thin line between giving Democrats hope and being a thorn in their side, and no one seems to be able to decide if they want to just go full socialist or if they want to be entirely honest with themselves and work to win back the votes that went to Trump in 2016.

Considering how much they loathe Trump and resent those who support him, it looks like they’d sooner go full-in for Marx than ever woo a Trump voter.

Opinion

US State Pushes to Make Mask Mandates Permanent

The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged. 

Published

on

The American landscape is currently littered with a hodgepodge of coronavirus precautions, as each state, country, town, and business takes the COVID-19 pandemic at their own level of seriousness.

This has, of course, made it somewhat difficult for any individual to navigate their day in compliance to the ever-changing rigidity of the pandemic’s threat.  And, furthermore, it has led to some questionable decisions by local leaders looking to simplify the issue.

The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) assembled a Rules Advisory Committee (RAC) earlier this week to address a permanent indoor mask mandate in the state. Oregon is one of a few states that still retain one nearly two years into the pandemic.

The committee included several community stakeholders, including representatives from the hospitality industry, the business sector, and faith communities, according to local ABC affiliate KATU.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Local leaders attempted to downplay the “permanent” status of the mandate.

Dr. Paul Cieslak, the medical director for communicable diseases and immunizations with OHA, explained to KATU that OHA’s potential “permanent” indoor mask mandate is not necessarily permanent because it can be repealed.

“Permanent means indefinite. It doesn’t necessarily mean permanent,” Cieslak said. “We can repeal it as well, but we are only allowed to have a temporary rule for 180 days, and anything that goes beyond 180 days, we cannot extend it.”

The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged.

The American landscape is currently littered with a hodgepodge of coronavirus precautions, as each state, country, town, and business takes the COVID-19 pandemic at their own level of seriousness. This has, of course, made it somewhat difficult for any individual to navigate their day in compliance to the ever-changing rigidity of the pandemic’s threat.  And, furthermore, it has led to some questionable decisions by local leaders looking to simplify the issue. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) assembled a Rules Advisory Committee (RAC) earlier this week to address a permanent indoor mask mandate in the state. Oregon is one of a few states that still retain one nearly two years into the pandemic. The committee included several community stakeholders, including representatives from the hospitality industry, the business sector, and faith communities, according to local ABC affiliate KATU. Local leaders attempted to downplay the “permanent” status of the mandate. Dr. Paul Cieslak, the medical director for communicable diseases and immunizations with OHA, explained to KATU that OHA’s potential “permanent” indoor mask mandate is not necessarily permanent because it can be repealed. “Permanent means indefinite. It doesn’t necessarily mean permanent,” Cieslak said. “We can repeal it as well, but we are only allowed to have a temporary rule for 180 days, and anything that goes beyond 180 days, we cannot extend it.” The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Trump Makes Major Fundraising Haul for Social Media Platform

That’s a lot of moolah.

Published

on

Truth is coming, and if recent fundraising figures are any indication of the might of the forthcoming social media platform, the online world could be in for a major paradigm shift.

The network, which was conjured by former President Donald Trump as a response to the rampant online censorship of conservative voices, will undoubtedly be a smash hit when it eventually arrives.  And while the date for its inaugural truth to be posted has wavered a bit, there is no lack of support for the project.

Former President Trump’s social media group, Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. (TMTG), and its blank-check company announced on Saturday it had received a commitment of $1 billion from an unidentified “diverse group of institutional investors.”

TMTG and blank-check company Digital World Acquisition Corp. said that “subscription agreements for $1 billion in committed capital” would be received from an unknown group of investors once TMTG and Digital World are combined.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

In October, Trump announced that he would be creating a social media network dubbed “Truth Social,” whose full launch is expected in the first quarter of 2022. The network has been advertised as a platform “that encourages open global conversation without discrimination on the basis of political ideology.”

Trump will undoubtedly rely heavily on Truth Social in the coming months, particularly as he begins to prepare for a likely 2024 reelection campaign.

Truth is coming, and if recent fundraising figures are any indication of the might of the forthcoming social media platform, the online world could be in for a major paradigm shift. The network, which was conjured by former President Donald Trump as a response to the rampant online censorship of conservative voices, will undoubtedly be a smash hit when it eventually arrives.  And while the date for its inaugural truth to be posted has wavered a bit, there is no lack of support for the project. Former President Trump’s social media group, Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. (TMTG), and its blank-check company announced on Saturday it had received a commitment of $1 billion from an unidentified “diverse group of institutional investors.” TMTG and blank-check company Digital World Acquisition Corp. said that “subscription agreements for $1 billion in committed capital” would be received from an unknown group of investors once TMTG and Digital World are combined. In October, Trump announced that he would be creating a social media network dubbed “Truth Social,” whose full launch is expected in the first quarter of 2022. The network has been advertised as a platform “that encourages open global conversation without discrimination on the basis of political ideology.” Trump will undoubtedly rely heavily on Truth Social in the coming months, particularly as he begins to prepare for a likely 2024 reelection campaign.

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week