Senators Demand Turkey Extradite Hamas Terrorists
Democrats Set the Standard for 'Unqualified'
Trump Scores Another Win Against New York's Corrupt 'Justice' System
Trump Has Decided Who He Won't Pick for FBI Director
Trump Makes His Pick for Treasury Secretary
Trump Clinches Another Win in Hush Money Case. How Some Libs Reacted.
The Proverbial Sacrificial Lamb
One of Trump’s Biggest Allies Says He’s Never Getting Into Politics Again
The View Forced to Read Three Legal Notes Within Minutes of One Another...
Watch This ABC Reporter Goes on Massive Tangent Blaming Trump for Laken Riley's...
Guess Who Joe Biden Just Awarded the Highest Civilian Honor To
Are Teens Leaning More Conservative or Liberal? Here’s What a New Poll Is...
Here's What the DOJ Is Demanding of Google
Georgia Conducted a Hand Count Audit of Its Election Results. Guess What it...
Top Pollster Calls on Joe Biden to Resign
Tipsheet

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:

Advertisement

“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.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement