It’s a toss up whether four years of Biden would be better or worse than four years of Jared-Scott McConnell

“It’s really up in the air whether two or four or whatever years of Biden is better or worse than four years of Jared.”
 

Image, 5/25/20, “Good for Ann. With this kind of thing going on, it’s really up in the air whether two or four or whatever years of Biden is better or worse than four years of Jared.” Scott McConnell twitter







……………………………………
......

Image, 5/3/2017, “Trump Adviser Kushner’s Undisclosed Partners Include Goldman and Soros,“ Wall St. Journal, Eaglesham, Chung, Schwartz 

In June 2016 Scott McConnell explained exactly why Candidate Trump would beat the GOP and win the presidency. We later learned that Trump’s election was for naught, because he turned the presidency over to his beloved daughter’s ridiculous husband Jared. (In 2015 Jared of course became a Soros business partner and accepted a $250 million credit line from him): 

6/27/2016, “Why Trump Wins,” Scott McConnell, The American Conservative

“Donald Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee because he won the GOP’s untapped residue of nationalist voters, in a system where the elites of both parties are, as if by rote, extreme globalists. He won the support of those who favored changing trade and immigration policies, which, it is increasingly obvious, do not favor the tangible interests of the average American. He won the backing of those alarmed by a new surge of political correctness, an informal national speech code that seeks to render many legitimate political opinions unsayable. He won the support of white working-class voters whose social and economic position had been declining for a generation….And he won with backing from the growing group of Republicans who understand that the Iraq War was an unmitigated disaster. 

When one examines Trump’s main opponents— Bush and Rubio then, Hillary Clinton now—on the critical issues of immigration (legal and illegal), trade, and Iraq and other military interventions, one finds no substantial differences between them. In foreign policy, the liberal interventionists who would staff a Hillary administration line up seamlessly with neoconservatives in support of continued American “hegemony.”…With some tweaking on social issues and the Second Amendment, Hillary Clinton could have run interchangeably with Bush and Rubio in the Republican field, and vice versa.“…Image from The American Conservative





..............