Why Democrats Fear Merrick Garland As FBI Director

Posted on in Uncategorized

Senator Mike Lee has suggested President Trump nominate Merrick Garland as the new FBI director. Predictably, Ann Coulter, who like a female actress starring in hardcore pornos, makes a career out of screaming no, objected to Lee’s proposal.


Here’s a hint Ann. When you’re accusing Senator Lee of being too liberal, you have officially joined the tin foil hat club. Instead of blasting strategically sound political advice, Anne should be calling Alex Jones to learn the date and time of her groups next meeting.


The challenge for democrats in the age of Trump is twofold. First, they need to attack Republican for being too Conservative. Second, and most important for our purposes, Democrats must also defend themselves from potential primary contenders. Predictably, these primary contenders will try and attack incumbent Democrats of not offering sufficient opposition against Trump; someone the democrat voters hate to such an extent, many compare him to Hitler.


But as I have pointed out previously, Democrats have a lot in common with the policies announced by “Hitler.”


There are two ways to defeat a political opponent. First, you can energize one’s own base, resulting in a higher voter turnout among your supporters then your opponent. This took place within the Republican party in 2016. Alternatively, you can weaken the enthusiasm for your opponent among their own base, thereby opening them up to primary challengers. This occurred in the Democrat party in 2016.


The nomination of Merrick Garland would be the political equivalent of a middle finger to Democrats. They would find themselves confronted with two impossible choices. Would they oppose Garland as unqualified to serve a ten year term as FBI director, despite previously claiming he was qualified to serve for life as a supreme court justice? Alternatively, if they support Garland’s nomination, they would open themselves up to accusations of weakness by infuriated democratic constituents. Either way, we win.


An act that forces your political opponents to choose between two horrible options, is one certainly deserving of serious consideration. Doing so exposes them to impossible choices at best, and primary contenders at worse.