Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

*Shocked* – Having Won NY Senate Reelection, Kirsten Gillibrand No Longer Ruling Out Running For President

*Shocked* – Having Won NY Senate Reelection, Kirsten Gillibrand No Longer Ruling Out Running For President

Backtracks on campaign promise to serve full Senate term…

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is apparently exploring a run for president in 2020. She made that clear during an appearance on “The View” on Monday.

This may come as a surprise to New York voters, who were told by the senator herself just two weeks ago that she intended to serve her full term if reelected.

WHAM News reports:

On ‘The View’, Gillibrand says she is considering 2020 presidential run

You never can predict what will happen in the world of politics.

After stating in an October 25 U.S. Senate debate that she would not run for president, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said Monday that she is now considering a run in 2020.

The Democratic junior senator from New York was re-elected handily last week to her third term.

During an appearance on ABC’s The View that aired Monday morning, Gillibrand said she is mulling her options in the wake of what she calls “corruption” within the Trump administration.

“I’m obviously very dedicated to serving New Yorkers,” Gillibrand said. “But that’s a very important moral question that I’ve been thinking about…what President Trump is putting into this country is so disturbing, so divisive, so dark, that I believe I’ve been called to fight as hard as I possibly can to restore that moral integrity, that moral decency. So, I’m thinking about it.”

Here’s the video. I’m sure you don’t want to watch the whole thing, so this is cued to start at the 3:00 minute mark. Just press play:

Just two weeks ago, Gillibrand was asked about this during a debate and gave a very different answer.

Carl Campanile reported at the New York Post:

Gillibrand: I won’t run for president in 2020 if re-elected to Senate

Trying to quash speculation that she’s plotting to run for president in 2020, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand pledged Thursday to serve her entire six-year term if re-elected next month.

She made the vow in a 30-minute debate with Republican rival Chele Farley airing on WABC-TV Sunday at 11 a.m.

Farley hammered Gillibrand — who’s been traveling around the country to boost Democratic candidates — as someone more interested in a White House run than serving her constituents in the Senate.

Gillibrand insisted that wasn’t the case.

“You will serve out your six-year senate term?” asked moderator Bill Ritter.

“I will . . . I will serve my six-year term,” Gillibrand replied.

Here’s a video of that moment:

In the real world, this is called being caught in a blatant lie.

Don’t count on the media to frame it that way, though. Especially if she polls well.

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Well, she probably figured if the nut job in AZ can win she must be Presidential material!

Going to be interesting watching all the Dem “contenders” for 2020.

Let the commie stampede begin!

I’m not sure that blatant lies by a Democrat are news any more than it turns out water is wet.

A Democrat’s promise is as good as the toilet paper it is printed on.

New York voters are getting what they paid for. Or at least the ones in the cities are…

Hillary already took out 1/1024 Warren. She can easily take out Biden again. Booker will take more work, but his Spartacus moment is a good start.

The people of America may not like Clinton, but she is nothing if not reliable. The drug cartels, ruthless tyrants, global corporations and many other powerful entities would love that they can once again reliably count on her to sell out America for pennies on their dollars. They will be happy to assist in her reelection efforts.

Gillibrand will be nothing more than a fly on the windshield of the Hillary for 2020 campaign bus.

Gillibrand is trying to become a younger version of Hillary. She’s not quite in the same league for graft (as far as I know), but she’s plenty cynical enough.

She has been one of the main instigators of anti-male kangaroo courts on campuses.

A leftist from the National Socialist Party lying? Say it isn’t so. They always lie, and sadly are believed in their lies.

Sad thing is, just like Obama and Hillary, so many times they lie when they have no reason to. This bimbo would have gotten re-elected without the lies. In this sad state of NY all you seem to need is a D next to your name and you get elected.

Time has not been good to Ms. Gillibrand! Hag would be a good descriptor. Approaching coyote ugly, but she would be there if you has to listen to her,

Come on, that doesn’t count as a real promise, because everyone of both parties who is asked such a question gives the same answer and nobody believes it. It’s just the thing you’re supposed to say, whether it’s true or not, like telling an inquirer into your health that you’re well when in fact you’re not, or politely claiming to be full when in fact you could do with seconds. Back in the days of fixed exchange rates, ministers who were planning a devaluation were expected — actually required — to deny it until it was announced, and nobody considered them liars for it.

TLDR: No, this is not something only Democrats do. Everyone does it, and everyone expects everyone to do it, which makes it OK.

    mochajava76 in reply to Milhouse. | November 13, 2018 at 11:26 am

    You are right in that it is not quite up to the level of stating under oath “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”.

    But using Everyone Lies is really a lousy defense. I think we should hold our politicians to a higher standard. I would be mad if a conservative did this. But progressives gotta progress . . .

      Milhouse in reply to mochajava76. | November 13, 2018 at 5:49 pm

      You didn’t read my comment. Conservatives do this. All the time. It’s not a lie, because everyone is expected to say it and nobody takes it seriously.

Bucky Barkingham | November 13, 2018 at 9:26 am

How many possible Dem contenders does that make now? Does anyone remember the media-branded GOP field of 2016 as the “clown car”?

Well, she’s not going to win the presidency, so she will serve her term.

    David Lentz in reply to hrhdhd. | November 13, 2018 at 12:10 pm

    Senator Gillibrand’s party leader, and fellow New Yorker, Charles Schumer is not exactly bowling them over an minority leader. If Gillibrand is willing to play second fiddle to Schumer, she is simply not presidential timber. The last Senate back bencher who tried to lead from the read did not exactly work out so well.

And I am no longer ruling out full-on throwing up in my mouth.

“You never can predict what will happen in the world of politics. After stating in an October 25 U.S. Senate debate that she would not run for president, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said Monday that she is now considering a run in 2020.”

Anybody surprised that Gillibrand says one thing one day and absplutely contradicts it another day hasn’t been paying attention to Gillibrand’s career.

From Wikipedia:

Gillibrand’s pro-gun rights positions received scrutiny after her appointment to the Senate and were the object of criticism by some of her fellow New York Democrats, particularly those in the New York City area. Within days of her being named to the Senate, Gillibrand indicated that her pro-gun rights position was “flexible.” By late 2010, the NRA had regraded Gillibrand to an F rating, citing her votes against NRA-backed bills.

In one of her first votes as a senator, Gillibrand voted to reject a measure that would have expanded gun rights in the District of Columbia. While Gillibrand’s spokesman characterized the vote as consistent with her previous view that local governments have the right to determine gun restrictions, the Albany Times Union noted that her position was counter to her vote just five months earlier on an almost identical House bill.

She’ll have to bump walking-cadaver hillary klinton and Airhead Cortez first.

Gillibrand is a living, breathing blonde joke. I think some clever satirist should write a NYT op-ed on questijoning how white female New Yorkers could possibly vote for such a travesty.