Should the GOP Gamble on the Government Shutdown?
A Reporter Tried Eating at NYC's Finest Establishments Dressed Like John Fetterman
I Bet You We’re Not Better Off Now With So Much Gambling
Government Weaponization, Accountability, And The UAP Question
For the Love of Charlie
Rupert Murdoch: Right From the Start
Hey, Republicans: Don't Forget About Growth and Prosperity
The Real China-III: 'Follow the Sun'
President Biden’s Offshore Wind Policies Make National Lobster Day a Day to Mourn
Statement of Conservative Ideals Rightly Addresses Nation’s Union Problem
How Do We Maintain a Strong America?
We Now Know Who Will Qualify for Second RNC Debate
Why Did Biden Receive His COVID Booster in Private?
A Disturbing Amount of Democrats, Young People Want Government Censorship
Comer Announces Witnesses in First Impeachment Inquiry Hearing

Two-Faced Claire McCaskill On Rural Voters: There Are Areas Where I Can Ignore These Folks, You Know

Claire McCaskill is one of the most vulnerable, if not the most vulnerable, Democrats running for re-election. Her state broke heavily for Trump. She’s running neck-and-neck with Republican Josh Hawley. And she’s saying she can just discard votes. It’s another episode of two-faced Claire. In 2018, she spoke about how reaching every voter in Missouri was important:


“I was not taught, and nor did I see role modeling, of really emphasizing campaigning everywhere in the state, and my mother is probably more responsible for knocking sense into me after 2004 and saying, ‘you cannot expect to work for the people of this state if you are not in every corner of the state so quit thinking you can run up the margins in St. Louis and Kansas City and ignore the rest of the state.’”

Now, she was caught saying, “If we do our job in St. Louis County, you know, I can give up a few votes in the Bootheel.”

McCaskill needs every vote she can get. For black voters, who are key in her re-election bid and a key Democratic Party voting bloc, they’re not enthused by her at all

We all knew she was going to vote against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. It wasn’t due to the baseless and evidence-free allegations of sexual misconduct that were hurled against him. It was because he was soft on hard money, or something. Yeah, says the woman who benefits from a dark money PAC—Senate Majority PAC—which is financed by wealthy liberal millionaires and billionaires who aren’t from her state. With her vote against Kavanaugh, the embattled red state Democrat might have stepped on a rake, as more women are now less likely to vote for her in November.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos