Nikki Haley predicts Biden’s demise

Commentary

Not demise as in the end of his presidency or his downfall. No, demise as in his death!

In an interview on Fox “News” yesterday (I guess she didn’t get the “news” that Fox “News” is not about “news”) Nikki Haley, the GOP’s one-third answer to Kamala Harris and diversity (one-third because Haley is only of Indian descent while Harris is Indian, Black and married to a Jew) said, “I think we can all be very clear and say with a matter of fact that if you vote for Joe Biden, you really are counting on a President Harris because the idea that he would make it until 86 years old is not something that I think is likely.” 

The former South Carolina governor and later, Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, the GOP’s so-called intelligent, moderate Great Bxxxn (no, I’m not going to say it) hope, said what? She predicted, with apparent extreme confidence – “very clear” and “a matter of fact” – that Joseph R. Biden, the sitting president of the United States, will, in fact, die before January 20, 2029? Wow!

Her startling prediction got me thinking. You know Trump likes to attach humiliating nicknames to his political rivals: “Lyin’ Ted” (Cruz); “Liddle Marco” (Rubio); “Ron DeSanctimonious”* (DeSantis); “Crooked Hillary (Clinton) – a name he announced yesterday that he’s retiring, replacing it with “Crooked Joe” (Biden); among others. But for whatever the reasons, Trump has not endowed Haley with an epithetic nickname.

*(Wait, you really don’t believe that Trump actually knows what “sanctimonious” means?)

So, and you know I’d be the last one to want to assist Trump in anything, given Haley’s outrageous pronouncement, I had to come up with a Haley nickname; I simply couldn’t help myself:

“Nostradamus Nikki!”

Actually, I needn’t worry about assisting Trump. First, there’s no way he, or any of his supporters are reading my stuff. And second, even if he or one of his acolytes did see this, as with “sanctimonious,” they’d have no idea what it means.

Haley has also been advocating for “…mental competency tests … starting at 75 just to make sure that these people deciding our national security, deciding our economy policy, deciding what happens to our kids in schools. It matters.”

Interestingly, she seems only to advocate this testing for +75 year olds she’s running against (i.e., Biden and Trump). Not others, particularly members of Congress who are also involved in “our national security, deciding our economy policy, deciding what happens to our kids in schools.” Let’s see who comes immediately to mind? How about Iowa GOP senator Chuck Grassley who is 89! Or, because Around the Block is a 100% nonpartisan blog, California Democratic senator Diane Feinstein, also 89! (I know, even putting Diane Feinstein and 89 in the same sentence will label me to some as sexist and misogynistic …so deluge me with comments. Not only can I take it, I can tell you why putting Feinstein and 89 together is not only not sexist and misogynistic, but the right thing to do in order to start a discussion about duty, country and Congressional term limits! )

By the way, you know how to put 89 years old into perspective? Grassley and Feinstein were born in 1933.

What happened in 1933

1933 was the first year of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first term. The country was in the middle of the Great Depression. “Grand Hotel” with Greta Garbo and John Barrymore won best picture (then called, “Outstanding Production”) and Walt Disney won a special award for the creation of Mickey Mouse (take that Ron DeSantis!). And, a German radical, Adolf Hitler, became Chancellor of Germany.

You know the expression, “I’m old enough to remember…” While I have a number of friends who, when it comes to the events of 1933, might be able to use that line. But, my goodness, it was a long time ago.

Now, of course almost nothing I just wrote would suggest that I’m head over heels for a second Biden term. I’m not. In fact, I’m old enough to remember that as Biden was contemplating entering the 2020 presidential race there was a suggestion that his plan was to serve one term, fix the mess that Trump had created, and then decline a second term, leaving it to his, still to be named, vice president.

From THE HILL, 12/11/19 :

Former Vice President Joe Biden has reportedly signaled that he would only serve one term in the White House if elected in 2020 as the top-tier Democratic candidate faces questions about his age.

Four people who regularly speak with the 77-year-old Biden told Politico that it is unlikely he would run for reelection in 2024, when he would be in his 80s.

“If Biden is elected,” an adviser to the campaign told the news outlet, “he’s going to be 82 years old in four years and he won’t be running for reelection.”

“He’s going into this thinking, ‘I want to find a running mate I can turn things over to after four years, but if that’s not possible or doesn’t happen then I’ll run for reelection.’ But he’s not going to publicly make a one-term pledge,” another adviser reportedly said.

So what happened?

The obvious conventional answer is that Kamala Harris’ vice presidency hasn’t been distinguished. (What VP has been distinguished besides Dick Cheney…and we all know how that worked out).

I, and many others back in 2019, thought a Biden-Harris ticket was ideal. Biden had the experience and Harris was an up-and-comer. She had outperformed all her Democratic senatorial colleagues on the Judiciary Committee, particularly during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. And, she had the right demos–youngish (55 at the time), a woman and a woman of color to boot.

I guess she did not turn out to be the “running mate I can turn things over to after four years,” resulting in “…if that’s not possible or doesn’t happen then I’ll run for reelection.“

With all indications, at least right now, that Harris will again be on the ticket, it begs the question, will four more years provide the opportunity for her to distinguish herself? I, unlike “”Nostradamus Nikki!”, don’t know. But with much of the GOP clinging to the legally-challenged Trump, the rest alienating the country with their stances on abortion and other social issues and the alleged Trump beater, DeSantis, making a fool of himself with his “anti-woke” laws and his fight with Mickey Mouse, perhaps Biden’s age and Harris’ performance won’t count as much as we think and worry about.

One last thing about Haley. In an attempt to bash another potential GOP presidential rival, DeSantis, and his ongoing battle with Disney, Haley said this last week in an interview on Fox “News” (seeing a pattern with Haley here? And, she’s the supposed the smart one!) that South Carolina would “happily accept” Disney if they wanted to move operations.

To that, all I can say is, paraphrasing none other than Ms. Haley, “I think we can all be very clear and say with a matter of fact” that Nikki Haley is no longer the governor of South Carolina so she has no say in “happily accepting Disney.” In fairness, she did go on to say that “…I’ll be happy to meet them in South Carolina and introduce them to the governor…” 

Of course her “happy” acceptance with no authority and her “happy” offer to introduce them to the governor, as if Disney needed her to make an introduction, might suggest some “delusions of Haley grandeur.”

And, I wonder if all those “happy” references were an awkward attempt to curry favor with Disney? After all, Walt Disney World is the self-proclaimed, “Happiest Place on Earth.”

More importantly, do you think based on her possible delusional statements, she would qualify for some kind of pre-75 mental competency test?

Just saying.