Kirsten Gillibrand uses Trump and abortion to fuel White House run

The 2018 election already looks bad. The GOP would be wise to pay attention to Kirsten Gillibrand.

When Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) called on Donald Trump to resign or face a Congressional investigation after he was accused by several women of various forms of sexual assault, she was immediately chastised for her political opportunism—a valid accusation considering her possible 2020 run for president.

Gillibrand has based her entire political career on so-called women’s issues. When she ran for re-election in 2012, Gillibrand earned the full endorsement of Feminist Majority, an organization committed to “empower feminists, who are the majority, and to win equality for women at the decision-making tables of the state, nation, and the world.”

So, when the avalanche of sexual harassment and assault accusations occurred, Gillibrand wasn’t jumping on the anti-Trump bandwagon; she was celebrating the fact that the issue had finally caught up to her and her agenda.

And Gillibrand isn’t letting it end with sexual harassment. Much like Trump who is rebranding the Republican Party into the Trumplican Party by getting rid of conservatives, Gillibrand is working on ways to rebrand the Democrat Party into the “Femicrat Party,” using a host of other issues near and dear to the feminist cause in order to get rid of "undesirable" Democrats.

Of course, one of those issues is women’s health, particularly the unlimited right to murder unborn children. On that issue, Gillibrand is teaming up with Gloria Steinem, NARAL, Move, Democracy for America, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and the Human Rights Campaign to form an unofficial coalition designed to defeat Democrats who don’t march in lock-step with the pro-abortion agenda of the left.

One of the reasons Roy Moore lost the Alabama special election was the huge support women voters gave Doug Jones due to the allegations of sexual assault against Moore. Meanwhile, the Fellowship of Pharisees continue to defend Trump’s sexual indiscretions because they weren’t voting for a “Pastor-in-Chief,” and Trump now claims that the Democrats are only making it an issue because the Russia investigation has failed—which it hasn’t.

With the 2018 election already looking bad, the GOP would be wise to pay attention to Gillibrand. This Femicrat stuff is right up her alley, and it could make her president in 2020.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

No. 1-2

Gillibrand is going to be one of the DNC nominees, but she is the wrong skin color for the multicultural party of the left. she will be knocked out before the first or second rodeo in the primary season. Gillibrand is a lightweight in national politics. If Elizabeth Warren enters the race, I will be concerned because she has a much larger following in the party, but the DNC will trot out Kamala Harris against Bernie Sanders type who is young enough, if they can find one. Harris is the right complexion for the multiculturalists, and will get a more than even chance of being the next DNC nominee, that is, if the Clintons are out of the picture, which they should be. The Democrats are revamping their image into lightly disguised communism. I'll take Trump against that, any day of the week. We don't have anyone else, other than Ted Cruz, to fight that battle and the media will tear him up, if not handled properly. Cruz may have learned some valuable lessons through the last election season, though, and may try to run, if Trump doesn't run, due to his age, or something like that. Trump's pragmatism, a word I really hate, is showing signs of intelligent guidance through the tricky DC political and world political maze. Give him a chance and quit the tirades of Pharisee an Trumplican nonsense. Politics is war, regardless of your views.


You can continue to trash anyone who supports Trump , until Hell freezes over, but one thing you don't realize is you are trashing a lot of others who sucked it up and voted for the Republican candidate who saw through the campaign and saw it necessary to accept reality and make a decision. Looking back, I should have done the same by voting for him. All your rhetoric is doing is trying to split a still usable party apparatus, for reasons unknown to me. I just can't accept some of the rhetoric people use to continually bash a sitting president, when he is doing the conservative things that other Republican presidents refused to do. If you don't like it that he has cojones, and has good advisers, or other people steering him to the right, I can't change that, but the continual attempt to split the party into good and bad is preposterous. The race was decided a year ago.