A few months after Trump was sworn in as, gulp, our president, I read a Washington Post story about the residents of rural areas that would be hard hit by the administration’s budget cuts. One woman in Durant, Oklahoma—a Trump voter—was particularly upset at the thought that her favorite senior center might have to close. But she remained pro-Trump anyway.
The woman in Oklahoma explained she had a ten-strike rule. Closing the senior center would be strike one, leaving Trump with nine more to go before he struck out.
Ten strikes?
As listeners to my radio show can tell you, I talked about that woman for days. I couldn’t get over the oceanic volumes of her tolerance toward Trump, one of the most intolerant, unforgiving men of recent times.
You’d figure that the closing of her favorite senior center would be worth ten strikes in and of itself.
OK, at least nine and a half.
Well, I’m thinking of that woman today as I watch many Democrats dancing cartwheels over J.B. Pritzker’s victory in Tuesday’s primary.
“Finally, we got our billionaire. Just beat Rauner!” is the attitude.
Pritzker’s their guy and they’re sticking with him, no matter what, despite . . .
Offshore tax havens, property tax dodges, and his various phone conversations with Blago that were secretly taped by the feds and somehow miraculously found their way to the Tribune.
By my count, that’s at least three strikes. But for most Democrats I’m not sure they count as strikes at all.
I can totally relate.
Rauner is a travesty. He used up his ten strikes soon after he was sworn in, when he waged war against the most vulnerable people in the state in order to destroy unions and cut taxes on the superrich.
I eagerly await the day when Republicans, like that woman in Nebraska, start counting their own strikes against Trump. And Rauner.
Till then—just beat Rauner . . .