Disaster Interesting clickbait, op-eds, fluff pieces and other smaller stories -

What should the prefix to this thread be?

  • World

    Votes: 106 17.1%
  • Science

    Votes: 19 3.1%
  • Culture

    Votes: 130 21.0%
  • Disaster

    Votes: 365 58.9%

  • Total voters


That's why you just carry rocks
View attachment 1001864View attachment 1001865

BREAKING NEWS: Nazi turtles evade apprehension!
Lebensraumnardo leads, Deustschlandtello does machines. Reichphael is cool but crude. And Meinkampfangello is a party dude.

Gustav Schuchardt

Trans exclusionary radical feminazi.
The (((NYT))) runs this staggeringly anti-white article

In a Facebook post in August, Nadiyah Ali, a nurse from Katy, Texas, compared the sandwich to a rival’s: Chick-fil-A’s version, she wrote, tasted as if it were made “by a white woman named Sarah who grew up around black people.” The Popeyes sandwich, she added, tasted “like it was cooked by an older black lady named Lucille.”
It can be easy to misfire with dishes that have deep traditions among African-Americans — I recall my wife’s gagging as she described biting into macaroni and cheese made by a white co-worker, and discovering that it contained corn. Then there was the moment in 2006 when Oprah Winfrey took an on-air bite of a chicken-and-spinach dish made by a white woman who had won $1 million for it in the Pillsbury Bake-Off.

“Did we add salt and pepper?” Ms. Winfrey asked with a befuddled grimace. (The woman had not.) “I think we needed salt and pepper.”
Can you imagine if the races were reversed and it was all white people saying that black people can't cook?


I'll get my humanity and my sanity back.
The (((NYT))) runs this staggeringly anti-white article

Can you imagine if the races were reversed and it was all white people saying that black people can't cook?
All black people can cook because they invented cooking; they also invented salt, pepper, spice, metal-working and fire. White people are only capable of appropriating black culture which is why europe is a dirty shithole and wakanda is real


True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
The (((NYT))) runs this staggeringly anti-white article

Can you imagine if the races were reversed and it was all white people saying that black people can't cook?
That's one of those harmless "white men can't jump" things and frankly Chick-Fil-A does taste like that. Popeye's is also just soulless corporate food too, though.

I think it's more interesting how all these media outlets are pumping up Popeye's, like they're deliberately trying to bury Chick-Fil-A. It's not that someone says this that interests me, but that this is considered news by the so-called "paper of record."

They just gotta knock down that homo hatin chicken place even in an article supposedly about something else.

Also, imagine if anyone else made constant articles about how much them darkies loves them some fried chikkins, so much they knife each other over it. How many times have you seen these shitheads screaming bloody murder if a Republican even mentions fried chicken? They once fucking did it when a BLACK Republican made a joke about it.
The (((NYT))) runs this staggeringly anti-white article

Can you imagine if the races were reversed and it was all white people saying that black people can't cook?
Still, even approaching authenticity is no small feat for a company that was started by a white man and is now owned by the conglomerate, Restaurant Brands International, that also owns Burger King and Tim Hortons.
lol, muh authentic soul food! Authenticity is overrated anyway. In my experience authentic Mexican food is usually unremarkable to crap; and buying fast food from a ghetto outlet is a mighty stupid move.
  • Agree
Reactions: Buer


like a foof bomb exploding in your face
Joke's on them because I like Chick Fil A and Popeye's equally. Honestly I go to Chick Fil A more often not just because it's closer, but because the service is faster and the server doesn't look like they despise me for existing when I'm at the counter. The last time I went to Popeye's they were out of EVERYTHING, the service was super slow even with the food they did have, and the servers treated me like I was a dumbass or looked at me and went in the opposite direction whenever I'd try to ask for a refill since there were no drinks in the Freestyle machine. I'm sure I'd like the chicken sandwich just fine but I'm not willing to make a thirty minute trip to either of the nearest Popeye's just to try it.

lol, muh authentic soul food! Authenticity is overrated anyway. In my experience authentic Mexican food is usually unremarkable to crap; and buying fast food from a ghetto outlet is a mighty stupid move.
I have come to the conclusion that any place called "country" or "home cooking" is going to be crap. The vegetables are always unreasonably soggy, the biscuits always bland, and the fried chicken always a mix of both. I recently went to a popular local breakfast joint and ordered a chicken biscuit and a cinnamon roll. The chicken inside the biscuit halves was fine, but the biscuit was bland and had a weird texture. The cinnamon roll was not only stale but it also had lemon in the icing. There's this local country buffet that's very popular, but only with seniors. Good southern food is obviously possible (I wouldn't be looking otherwise). I've just had very poor luck with restaurants, black and white owned, despite living in the damn Deep South. I've had better luck with barbeque, at least.

My brother likes this little taco joint in a "Little Mexico" near where we grew up and he's taken me there a couple times for the street tacos. They were okay but not very different from Taco Bell taste wise. The pico de gallo was the only thing I'd say that was better (i.e. fresher).


For the Emperor?!
Russian historian pulled from St Petersburg river with backpack containing woman's severed arms

Russian historian Oleg Sokolov has been arrested after he was found in a river with a backpack containing a woman's arms (Picture: Reuters)

Russian historian Oleg Sokolov has been arrested after he was found in a river with a backpack containing a woman's arms (Picture: Reuters)
A Russian historian has been arrested on suspicion of murder after he was found in a river with a backpack containing a woman’s severed arms.

Oleg Sokolov, an expert on Napoleon, was rescued from the Moyka River in St Petersburg in the early hours of Saturday morning along with the backpack.

Police then went to his home in an apartment block on the bank of the river where they found the decapitated body of a 24-year-old former student, believed to be Anastasia Yeshchenko, and a blood-covered saw.
The Russian historian was found with a backpack containing two severed female arms and a gun (Picture: Alexander Demianchuk\TASS via Getty Images)
The Russian historian was found with a backpack containing two severed female arms and a gun (Picture: Alexander Demianchuk\TASS via Getty Images)
Prof Sokolov was pulled from the river in the early hours of Saturday (Picture: Alexander Demianchuk\TASS via Getty Images)
Prof Sokolov was pulled from the river in the early hours of Saturday (Picture: Alexander Demianchuk\TASS via Getty Images)
It is thought that Prof Sokolov was drunk and fell into the river as he tried to dispose of the severed limbs.
He has reportedly been detained in hospital where he is being treated for hypothermia.
Archaeologists uncover decapitated Roman skeletons at ancient burial site
Disney blogger posts photo of robot's decapitated head ahead of arrest
According to reports, Ms Yeschenko - who had co-written several works with Prof Sokolov - had been in a relationship with the 63-year-old.
But the historian reportedly confessed to killing his lover ‘accidentally’ following an argument.

Well that’s horrifying.

Local Coyote

Hey man, got any cats?
Here's a review of a movie about China's "One-Child Policy".

Review: One Child Nation
A quietly horrifying look back at China’s disastrous, 35-year-long national birth-control program.
KURT LODER | 11.8.2019 7:00 AM


(Next Generation)
Anyone drawn to the now-resurgent notion that collectivism is kind of cool would benefit from a viewing of One Child Nation, a documentary that demonstrates what can happen when state bureaucrats are allowed to fundamentally re-order their country's most intimate cultural customs. The film's subject is China's disastrous one-child policy, which was imposed upon the populace from 1979 to 2015. During that time, no family was allowed to have more than one child; occasional exceptions were allowed, mainly in rural areas, but they had to be granted by Communist Party officials down to the village level. Families that made the mistake of quietly spawning a second child were ratted out to authorities by neighborhood snoops, who were encouraged by the state. Unlicensed babies were seized and placed in state orphanages. Forced abortion and sterilization were key tools in the struggle to contain China's exploding population, which had topped a billion people.

The film was directed by Nanfu Wang and Jialing Zhang, two China-born filmmakers now residing in the West. The picture seems artless—an assemblage of period file footage and talking heads, basically—but its cumulative impact is powerful. By the end I felt that my heart was ready to burst from my chest and leap to its death down on the floor.
The people we see in this film are discussing terrible things they did in the past. An old midwife, who says she carried out between 50,000 and 60,000 abortions and sterilizations over the course of her career (a sterilization took about 10 minutes, she says), recalls inducing the births of infants and then killing them. ("I had no choice," she says. "We didn't make decisions, we only executed orders.") Another woman recalls the birth of the second child for which she had secured permission, and her own mother coming into the room with a bamboo basket and saying, "If it's another girl, we'll put her in the basket and leave her in the street." Yet another woman remembers accompanying her brother to leave his unwanted baby girl on a meat counter in a country market. The child remained there for two days and two nights, unwanted by anyone. "Her face was full of mosquito bites," says the woman, who apparently watched. "She eventually died."

The one-child policy was hard on some men, too. An ex-village chief recalls having to demolish the homes of people who had illegally had a second child. Naturally they resented this, and especially the man responsible for it. "It was really tough being an official back then," he says. He also remembers being called out with a group of other men to subject a rebellious woman to forced sterilization. "I couldn't take part in that," the former chief says. "I just stood and watched."

The growing excess of female children became the basis for a grim trade. One man remembers biking around the countryside in the old days and coming upon four or five abandoned babies on a single ride. ("I just watched them die," he says.) Perceiving the possibility of profit, he became a trafficker in live infants, selling them to the state orphanages for the equivalent of $200 each. After the government began allowing the adoption of Chinese children by foreigners in 1992, the trafficking in infants reached a mini-industrial scale. One American, a man named Brian Stuy, of Lehi, Utah, who has adopted three Chinese girls with his wife, says the price of purchasing one of these babies can run from $10,000 to $25,000—a very nice profit margin for the state.

Stuy and his Chinese wife, Long Lan, run a company called Research China, which uses an international DNA database to connect Chinese "orphans" adopted by Americans to their Chinese birth parents back in the old country. In the film's most moving passage, we learn the story of two twin girls, now 16, who were separated when the Chinese government took one of them and sold her to an American couple. Because of Western press interest, the twin left behind on her family's farm has learned she has a sister overseas, and she wonders about her.
"She probably has tard cum and bread for breakfast," this girl says. "Her life must be very good there. I hope one day she will come back." As her eyes begin to well up, the girl says, "We'd dress the same, have the same hairstyle, go to school together. It would be so great to do everything together." If it need be said, this is a truly heartbreaking moment. What are the chances these two girls might one day be reunited? (We learn in the film that the Stateside twin has declined to be put back in touch with her birth parents, but that she and her sister are now in touch through social media.)
It's hard to imagine—no, it's impossible to imagine—anyone sitting through this film and emerging from it harboring anything but loathing for the inhuman Chinese communist social system it depicts. But as the totalitarian temptation beckons once again in this fraught time, I wonder if Thomas L. Friedman will see it, and what he might say. You may recall that Friedman, the inimitable New York Times columnist, wrote a piece back in 2009—when the one-child policy was still in full effect—suggesting that America might have a few lessons to learn from China.
"There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy," Friedman wrote, "and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today. One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century."

Sounds like a plan, I'm afraid.
If for some reason this topic grabs you there's a fantastic book called Only Hope that follows children born under the One Child Policy from birth to high school. It's very sad how much pressure these kids are under, especially the girls who know they're not wanted or valued.

Cat Menagerie

When Oklahoma and Florida collide.

PENSACOLA, Fla. — An Oklahoma police chief was killed during a physical altercation Sunday in Florida, and his co-worker was arrested in connection with his death, according to authorities.

According to the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office in Florida, deputies responded to the incident at about 9 p.m. at a hotel on Pensacola Beach. They arrived and found the victim, Lucky Miller, dead at the scene. Miller was the police chief in Mannford, Oklahoma.

Deputies said they arrested Michael Neely in connection with Miller’s death. Neely is a police officer at the Mannford Police Department.

Authorities said the two were in Florida for a law enforcement conference.



which means Youtube pocketed 57.3%, when they supposedly claim they take 30%
i want youtube to escalate into full-style internet banditry. just take start taking every superchat and sell off the credit info. stop pretending to give a shit about laws meant for mortal men.

just tell the US government to fuck off and start robbing people. maybe some wheedly congressional committee will fine you 10 mil, a third of what you made last week. who cares?


Cram it in me, baby!
‘Make Ebola a thing of the past’: First vaccine against deadly virus approved

The world finally has an Ebola vaccine. On 11 November, European regulators approved a vaccine that has already helped to control deadly outbreaks of the virus — the first time any immunization against Ebola has passed this hurdle.

The decision by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to allow US pharmaceutical company Merck to market its vaccine means that the product can now be stockpiled and, potentially, distributed more widely, in particular in Africa. In 2015, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance — a global health partnership that funds vaccine supplies in low-income countries — told Ebola-vaccine manufacturers that it would commit to purchasing vaccines once they had been approved by a “stringent health authority” such as the EMA.

Although several other vaccines against Ebola — a haemorrhagic fever that causes severe diarrhoea, vomiting and bleeding — are in development, Merck’s is the only one that has been tested during an outbreak, where it was shown to be highly effective in preventing infection.

The vaccine, first patented in 2003, has been administered on an emergency basis to quell the ongoing outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), which has killed some 2,000 people since it started last year. It was also used during a 2018 outbreak in that country, and in Guinea in 2015. In the current DRC outbreak, hundreds of thousands of people have received the Merck shot, including more than 60,000 health-care workers in DRC and several neighbouring countries.

“This is a vaccine with huge potential,” said Seth Berkley, chief executive of Gavi in Geneva, Switzerland, in a press release after the EMA decision. “It has already been used to protect more than 250,000 people in the DRC and could well make major Ebola outbreaks a thing of the past.” The organization has supported the stockpiling and delivery of Ebola vaccines and hopes to build up a global supply that could be rolled out quickly during future outbreaks of the virus.

The EMA’s approval “makes a big difference”, says David Heymann, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. But he stresses that research into the Merck vaccine and development of further Ebola vaccines must continue. “The message is that the research is not done. It must continue,” he adds. “It’s really important to continue to study vaccines and develop those second- and third-generation vaccines.” These could offer longer-lasting immunity, target more than one species of Ebola and be easier to store.

Merck’s vaccine, which is marketed under the name Ervebo and known to researchers as rVSV-ZEBOV-GP, was tested in a clinical trial conducted in Guinea towards the end of the 2014–16 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. There, the vaccine was administered to people who had been in contact with someone who was infected with Ebola, or with their subsequent contacts. It was found to offer a high level of protection against infection.


"nanoposts with 90° spatial rotational symmetries"

Malagor the dank omen

Drakwald's most coveted goat
Pact between Spanish Socialists and Podemos allows the creation of a new government after the elections.


The elections of the past 10th of November had no clear winner, but the Socialists came on top with the 2 right wing parties (The People's Party and the newcomer Vox) as the main contenders. Luckly for the socialist leader, Pedro Sanchez, the leader of Unidas Podemos (Radical left) was willing to lend him a hand and give him the necessary support to allow him to form a left wing government under the condition that Pablo Iglesias, the leader of Podemos, is the vice president.

Their main proposals for now are the increase of public expenses and a "gradual" increase of taxes during their rule, focus on protecting public services, focusing on education, healthcare and welfare by increasing invenstment in these particular services. As well they want to guarantee the sustainability of retirement funds and adjust them to the cost of living, a tax reform to adjust Spain to the standards of Europe, fighting against poor working conditions and help small and medium businesses as well as self employed people in order to achieve stability and generate wealth.

especially the girls who know they're not wanted or valued.
This reminds me of a press article from a long time ago that said that during the One Child policy time, baby girls were sistematically killed by their parents because most poor families didn't wanted a daughter since marrying her would mean they would have to give a daughtry. That has led to the fact that today in China there is a shortage of women compared to the overwhelming male population.


True & Honest Fan
Victor Davis Hanson hits another home run just by telling the truth. Time to start contributing to Trump's re-election. I already am. And make sure and vote, get everyone you know to vote for him. Let's get the job done.


The Looming ‘1984’ Election
Like it or not, 2020 is going to be a plebiscite on an American version of Orwell’s Nineteen-Eighty-Four.

Victor Davis Hanson - November 10th, 2019

For a variety of reasons, the 2020 election is going to be a referendum beyond Donald Trump’s record and his Democratic opposition.
The furor that Trump has incurred, and the radical antithesis to his agenda and first term, have redefined the looming election. It is becoming a stark choice between a revolutionary future versus American traditionalism.
The choice in reductionist terms will be one between a growing, statist Panopticon, fueled by social media, a media-progressive nexus, and an electronic posse. Online trolls and government bureaucrats seek to know everything about us, in Big Brother fashion to monitor our very thoughts to ferret out incorrect ideas, and then to regiment and indoctrinate us to ensure elite visions of mandated equality and correct behavior—or else!

In other words, the personality quirks of a Trump or an Elizabeth Warren or a Bernie Sanders will become mostly irrelevant given the existential choice between two quite antithetical ideas of future America. In 2020 we will witness the penultimate manifestation of what radical progressivism has in store for us all—and the furious, often desperate, and unfettered pushback against it.

Targeting Traditional America

We are also well beyond even the stark choices of 1972 [Nixon vs. McGovern] and 1984 [Reagan vs. Mondale] that remained within the parameters of the two parties. In contrast, the Democratic Party as we have known it, is extinct for now. It has been replaced since 2016 by a radical progressive revolutionary movement that serves as a touchstone for a variety of auxiliary extremist causes, agendas, and cliques—almost all of them radically leftwing and nihilistic, and largely without majority popular support.

When Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and a number of Democratic presidential candidates sympathize with the New York subway jumpers who openly threaten the police, then what or who exactly is the alternative to such chaos?

When the media proves 90 percent partisan according to its own liberal watchdog institutions, or reports things as true that cannot be true but “should” be true, what are the forces behind that?

When the violence of Antifa is quietly—or sometimes loudly—condoned, who are those who empower it and excuse it?
If the leading Democratic presidential candidates openly embrace the Green New Deal, reparations, abolishing the Electoral College, welfare for illegal aliens, open borders, amnesties, wealth taxes, a 70-90 percent income tax code, Medicare for all, and legal infanticide—what is the alternative vision and who stands between all that and a targeted traditional America?

Californication Ahead!

In California, the nation’s largest utility preemptively shuts off power to multibillion-dollar industries and two-million customers, given its ossified grid and over-regulated operations, and the deliberate policy of the state not to clean up drought-stricken dead forests and underbrush that are ignited by wind and antiquated transmission cables. So, who or what then in 2020 would oppose all that?

In a state where half the nation’s homeless use the streets as open sewers and receptacles for refuse, incubating medieval diseases and public hazards, who exactly says that is unacceptable? The California attorney general openly boasts that he believes the state is the home for 10 million immigrants of undetermined legal status; is there any pushback to that agenda? If not, would 20 or 30 million immigrants be acceptable for Californians? Why not 50 to 60 million additional residing foreign nationals legal or otherwise?

Can even a leftwing Facebook, Google, or Apple operate within a landscape that cannot ensure reliable power to run its businesses? Do the progressive masters of the Silicon Valley want to hand over millions per year in wealth taxes on money that has already been taxed—but which is considered by the Warrenites and Sandersites as veritable public property given their own past use of state roads and infrastructure to build their businesses? Do these billionaires really think conservative state policies encouraged tens of thousands of homeless people to sleep in cars and streets near their businesses?

On the social front, we are bombarded with celebrities dreaming of various methods of assassinating the current president. Who speaks out against such incendiary smears? Did Hollywood stars do the same to then-President Barack Obama?
In professional sports, Colin Kaepernick’s circus of not standing up during the national anthem has transmogrified into something far more serious—the National Basketball Association’s wholesale appeasement of the dictatorial communist Chinese government, and the leveraging of U.S. free speech in return for access to the lucrative Chinese market. Who is more likely to speak out against that?

Will Campus Culture Replace Our National Character?

Our universities effectively have eroded the First Amendment and the due process protections of the Fifth in matters of sexual assault allegations. Higher education is now controlled by a revolutionary clique. It institutionalizes racially segregated dorms and safe spaces, matter of factly promotes censorship, and either cannot or will not prevent students from disrupting lecturers with whom they disagree. What or who exactly say not to all that? Who would dare say that America in its third century is not going to change its use of English pronouns or decide that there are not three and more biological genders?

When a progressive mom takes her kids to walk and play in a California municipal park and, instead of relaxing comfortably with her fellow mom friends, finds blood-tainted needles sticking up out of the grass, what sort of policies does she imagine allowed that? When a small business owner in San Francisco finds vagrants defecating near his breezeway or mobs of shoplifters swarming his store, what sort of politics and ideologies will he consider led to that?

Who Is Sovereign Here?

On the national level, what or who created a landscape in which the highest echelons of the FBI, CIA, and Justice Department sought to surveil American citizens, undermine a presidential campaign, and abort a presidential transition and then a presidency? If Hillary Clinton had won in 2016, would anyone have objected? Do any object today that she hired a foreign national to work with foreign sources to discredit and smear her political opponent?

Who or what is behind the constant remonstrations that the American people are racist, sexist, homophobic, nativist, xenophobic, and oppressing the transgendered? Who lodges such charges? Who believes them to be true?

Why is gasoline reaching $5 a gallon in coastal cities, when states like California have huge untapped sources of oil and natural gas? Why is lumber sky-high in stores while the state mandates that millions of harvestable drought-stricken dead trees instead slowly rot to serve as kindle for deadly wildfire.

What is wrong with 3.5 percent unemployment? Is there a Democratic plan to lower it to 2.5 percent?

Who exactly wishes to pack the court, to repeal the Electoral College, to nix the difference between residency and citizenship, to promote identity-politics tribalism over collective affinities, to nullify federal immigration law, to hunt down and disrupt political opponents as they eat and sleep—and who not?

Whose ideologies logically lead to promoting iconoclasm and statue-toppling, the Orwellian renaming of streets and buildings, the defacing of public murals?

The Orwellian Jacobins or America First

The new progressive party is Jacobin. It sees politics in all-inclusive French revolutionary terms—encompassing every aspect of American life from entertainment, sports, academia, religion, and family matters to politics, foreign policy, and individual rights.

In his own way, Trump also fights back in 360-degree fashion, from the existential to the trivial, railing against Colin Kaepernick, tit for tatting Hollywood stars, weighing in on radical abortion, open borders, power outages, the homeless and subway jumping. The result is not just that there looms a choice between two different agendas, but two quite different American lifestyles and experiences—and histories.

Like it or not, 2020 is going to be a plebiscite on an American version of Orwell’s Nineteen-Eighty-Four. One side advocates a complete transformation not just of the American present but of the past as well. The Left is quite eager to change our very vocabulary and monitor our private behavior to ensure we are not just guilty of incorrect behavior but thought as well.

The other side believes America is far better than the alternative, that it never had to be perfect to be good, and that, all and all, its flawed past is a story of a moral nation’s constant struggle for moral improvement.

One side will say, “Just give us more power and we will create heaven on earth.” The other says “Why would anyone wish to take their road to an Orwellian nightmare?” The 2020 election is that simple.

Sīn the Moon Daddy


Hillary Clinton says ‘many, many, many people’ are urging her to run for president in 2020

Advisers to Clinton have said at various times over the past year that she is unwilling to completely shut the door to a potential 2020 bid.

In the Tuesday radio interview, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee was asked by host Emma Barnett about her future plans. Clinton replied that she wants to see President Trump “retired” and is “going to be helping our side try to put together the strongest possible campaign, which will be difficult.”

“Are you going to run again?” Barnett asked.

“No,” Clinton replied. “Not, no. I’m --”

“That is 100 percent?” the host continued. “So in a few days, I’m not going to open my newspaper --”

“Well, you know, I’d never say never to anything,” Clinton said.

After Barnett pointed out that there are only “a few days left” within which to file for the nominating contests in the states with the earliest deadlines, Clinton acknowledged that “it’s way past time.” But she added that she thinks “all the time” about what kind of president she would have been.

“Look, whoever wins next time is going to have a big task trying to fix everything that’s been broken,” she said.

Later in the interview, Barnett again pressed Clinton on whether she is ruling out a 2020 bid.

“Well, look, I, as I say, never, never, never say never,” Clinton replied. “And, I will certainly tell you, I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it. But as of this moment, sitting here in this studio talking to you, that is absolutely not in my plans.”

Clinton did not give any details on which people have been urging her to run.

Her comments come as the Democratic primary field has been thrown into uncertainty, with latecomers such as former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick moving closer toward announcing bids.

In the interview, Chelsea Clinton was asked how she would feel if her mother announced a bid.

“Well, I’m always in her corner, Emma,” she replied. “So you know, whatever she decides to do on any given day, I’m here to support and love her.”

She did not respond directly when asked whether she would like to see her mother run, saying only that her own most important role at the moment is as a mother to her three children.

Clinton’s 2016 running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), said in an interview with The Washington Post Tuesday that he has not had any conversations with her on the topic of a potential 2020 run.

“She should do what she wants to do, is what she should do,” Kaine said.

Asked whether Clinton would be a formidable 2020 nominee, Kaine declined to comment.

“I’m just going to leave it there,” he said, walking away from a reporter and toward a train in the basement of the Capitol.

More reading about Queen Hillary the 0th


About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino