SHOT:

Tulsi Gabbard is friendly with Tucker Carlson and was invited to do spots with Sinclair, ⁦@maxwelltani⁩ reports https://t.co/Dn7ItQTsFq — Justin Miller (@justinjm1) January 15, 2019

Justin Miller is currently at The Daily Beast, and has bylines at other reliably left-leaning publications. In this tweet he’s carrying water for the Beast’s Max Tani, who appears to be about 27 and probably knows literally nothing, except perhaps that Gabbard is insufficiently progressive, and must therefore be tainted with the Curse of Carlson before she can even announce a presidential bid.

Which brings us to…

CHASER(S):

https://twitter.com/MrJoshPerry/status/1085173905919221761

And that brings us to a Daily Wire piece I blogged about earlier at Instapundit.

This is a column from Charles Kolb:

Late last year, at a New York City economic-policy conference, I ran into a friend who held a senior Clinton White House position. He was certain that Trump — whom he dislikes — would be easily reelected. I disagreed: with low approval ratings and a quarrelsome, unpredictable personality, Trump was undermining his 2020 chances and making it difficult to repeat his electoral romp through Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. He was alienating, not attracting, independent voters. My friend countered that Trump’s base remained solid, and his fellow Democrats would probably do something foolish, like nominate an extreme progressive. In 2020, he expected another 1972 McGovern-style blowout. He might be right — but I’m not sure. The Democrats seem much smarter than that. Potentially.

I’ve been of the opinion that if Trump continues to deliver on jobs and wages to the Obama-to-Trump Rust Belt voters who put him in the White House, then his reelection might be all but assured.

So here’s the Democrats’ dilemma: Do they nominate the winner of the Progressive Intersectional Whackjob Purity Contest, and hope to slip one of their crazies past the American electorate and a faltering Trump? Or do they go with someone a bit more sane and centrist, who might stand a chance of beating Trump even with a still-strong economy?

Given the current state of the Democratic electorate, my gut says they’ll go with the first option and nominate someone who makes Bill de Blasio’s recent DEATH TO KULAKS remarks seem sensible in comparison.

But if the economy is faltering in 2020, we could very well end up with the most radically leftist president in American history — and the MSM-DNC frenzy might help them keep the House and maybe even win the Senate.

That’s just the worst-case scenario, and we won’t even have a good feel for the Dem field for (almost) a year. So keep your powder dry — and keep lots of powder.