SHREVEPORT – Saturday, my husband and I went downtown for
early voting. The line snaked out the door and down the sidewalk and it stayed
steady the entire day. Saturday was the
first day of early voting and apparently a lot of people wanted to take
advantage of the opportunity. Of course, the LSU-Florida game is on October 12,
the day of the primary, and maybe people are going to be out of town or otherwise
Reports from across the state are consistent with what we
saw in Shreveport. In New Iberia over 700 people turned out for early voting.
The gubernatorial race is what everyone is interested in. Current
Governor John Bel Edwards (D) has two Republican challengers and both of those
are too close in the polls to say either one is really ahead of the other.
What I am worried about it that they’re going to split the
vote and Edwards will win outright without having to go to a runoff.
Edwards has not been the worst governor we’ve ever had and
as Democrats go, he’s pretty conservative on a couple of issues like gun
control and abortion, but economically he has done real damage to the state
through his alliances with trial lawyers. Companies
are fleeing the state to avoid excessive litigation. There are no jobs
here, no real industry, few Fortune 500 companies, and out children are running
for the Texas border as soon as they graduate from college. The outlook is grim.
Based on what I was hearing in the early voting line yesterday, there were a lot of Democrat votes cast yesterday. I know that’s far from official evidence, but I think this just might be one of those elections where every single vote counts.
Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport and is the author of Cane River Bohemia. Follow her on Instagram @patbecker25 and Twitter @paustin110.
Today I woke up much earlier than I expected and attend mass at my old parish where the pastor giving a sermon on today’s Gospel (Luke 9) he mentioned a fact that I’ve brought up before that the truth IS (I’m not so sure about his assertion that it doesn’t need defending but be that as it may…).
I thought about this when I saw the lead story at Drudge concerning congressman heard about congressman Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Il) hitting the president with this tweet.
It’s not all that newsworthy that the MSM is quoting a member of the GOP when they hit Trump ( in fact it’s the surest way for a member of the GOP to get positive coverage from them) but not only is the President tweet the truth, it’s a rather important truth that needs to be stated aloud at the start.
All of this points to the necessity of Trump but there is one other factor that I think is even more decisive. It’s a subject I brought up a few years ago. American culture traditionally is like an old Popeye cartoon. It takes hit after hit after hit until finally it exclaims:
I think the breaking point is near, I think there are a lot of people in this country who are deciding that the Government is openly hostile to them. I think that the sight of women and gay men being beaten by leftists because they support the presumptive GOP nominee, having it happen in full sight of police ordered to do nothing AND SEEING THOSE OFFICERS CHOOSING TO LET THEM BE BEATEN means that they can not count on the authorities to obey their oaths of office if they think doing so might cost them their jobs.
Even worse than this is the obvious question it raises: If leftists are willing to resort to violence and boast about it before an election when it might hurt their ability to persuade the people to vote for them, how much more willing will they be to violently suppress their political foes when such behavior is rewarded with electoral victory by the people? What will that tell a populace that has already been arming itself nonstop for the last 4-6 years?
Remember I wrote this piece on July 3rd 2016 and the piece it links to with the Popeye cartoon is from June 14 2013!
Now ask yourself this question: Has the behavior of the left gotten better or worse since 2013, since 2016? When you’re done with that question ask yourself the follow-up to the point I made above concerning political violence:
If the left/media and their allies are able to remove a sitting president after:
Smearing folks like Justice Kavanaugh without anything approaching credible evidence
Forcing members of the administration out of public places such as restaurants
An attempt to murder republican congressmen which led to a GOP house leader being shot,
The Beating of a sitting senator, leading to serious injury
And repeated violence by masked thugs in cities like Portland Ore and elsewhere and justification of said violence by dubbing their foes “Nazis” and “White Supremacists”
What will they conclude about such behavior? They’ll decide it works!
Furthermore if they are willing to make this attempt before an election when it might hurt their ability to persuade the people to vote for them (as I suspect it did in 2016) and it works, how much more bold will they be about suppressing their political foes through both lawfare and violence after all of this is rewarded by the removal of the only man who has been willing to stand in their way?
Don’t think for a minute that Americans who have been arming themselves for the last decade and are now being openly told by candidates that they intend to disarm them, don’t know the answers to those questions.
So with all due respect to the sensitivities of the congressman from Illinois I think if this is going to be done, it needs to be done with eyes wide open as to it’s costs and risks thus it’s not only quite proper for the President to bring this up it’s highly necessary for him to do so.
Closing Thought: I suspect the left doesn’t see these risks or as I mentioned in this tweet the comfortable snowflakes are too foolish or too ignorant to care if such a civil war comes, perhaps because they all believe the 16 year old prophet of doom that the world will end before they’re 50 anyways.