Charlie Kirk: Game of Thrones vs. Game of Dems – how big is the difference?

America is gripped with anticipation for this weekend’s premiere on HBO of the final season of “Game of Thrones.” The series has taken its place alongside “The Sopranos” as transcendent entertainment that has become part of America’s cultural landscape.

For anyone like me who just simply can’t wait for Sunday, let me suggest a great lead-in drama for your viewing: the Democratic presidential candidate race and the subplot of Joe Biden and Barack Obama.

For anyone not familiar with “Game of Thrones,” let me first offer condolences and then fill you in on the storyline. The show is set in the mythical region of Westeros where seven separate kingdoms are ruled reluctantly under one “Iron Throne.” There are power grabs, treason, assassinations, betrayals, treaties honored and broken, and military insurrections. In other words, it is a medieval-looking portrayal of a journey around today’s globe.


There are also “White Walkers,” a legion of frozen undead who have been held outside Westeros and who are now, in the final season, about to enter. These are mindless soldiers focused only upon death and destruction. You cannot speak with them; you cannot reason with them. They are quite similar in nature to the socialists who have now invaded not only the Democratic Party but the party’s presidential field.

So, with the table set for a final conflict in Westeros, pivot with me to view the Democrats’ current tale of plotting and betrayal. I am referring to President Obama and his deafening silence in the Joe Biden skirmish with #MeToo.

Biden served President Obama faithfully for eight years as his vice president, king’s hand in Westeros terms, and never once wavered in his support. This could have been because of Biden’s belief in the president’s agenda. It could have been because of how Biden felt about the president as he expressed back in 2007, saying “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.  I mean, that's a storybook, man.”

Or it could have been simply because he was loyal.

Now, as Biden comes under attack, likely an orchestrated attack, from women across our kingdom claiming he touched them or behaved with them in a manner that was inappropriate and made them feel uncomfortable, Barack Obama is standing on the sidelines refusing to come out and defend his former defender and trusted servant.

There has been a great deal of speculation as to why the former president is not stepping in. Articles in publications as wide-ranging as The Hill and Vanity Fair have offered differing ideas and analysis. One source said that unlike President Trump, the former president doesn’t like to try to shape public opinion.

Seriously? This was a man who used his office to step in on all sorts of events, such as back in 2009 when he said police “acted stupidly” in arresting a Harvard professor in his Cambridge home. Likewise, in the Ferguson, Missouri police shooting of Michael Brown, he quickly made comments before facts were known.

Obama has been very willing to weigh in on anything and everything.  In fact, he did it this past Saturday in Berlin while speaking at an Obama Foundation event

The former president said: "One of the things I do worry about sometimes among progressives in the United States, maybe it’s true here as well, is a certain kind of rigidity where we say, ‘Uh, I’m sorry, this is how it’s going to be’ and then we start sometimes creating what’s called a ‘circular firing squad’, where you start shooting at your allies because one of them has strayed from purity on the issues. And when that happens, typically the overall effort and movement weakens.”

Well, there he goes weighing in again. A side note:  This man who warns of rigidity is the same man who once famously wagged his verbal finger at John McCain and told him that “elections have consequences.”

I will offer you two different possible explanations for Obama’s unwillingness to defend Joe Biden. They are completely opposite in nature, and yet both are completely outside conventional wisdom.

The first is that Obama sees Joe Biden as being far too moderate to be the heir to Obama’s progressive throne. Everything we know about Obama tells us he is radical in his politics and in favor of using government to socially engineer almost every outcome. He is far more in step with Kamala Harris than he is with Joe Biden.  He wants Biden’s candidacy to end so that it can’t possibly interfere with a preferable field.

An alternate explanation would make “Game of Thrones” author George R. R. Martin green with plot envy. While I have it on good authority that Michele Obama does not like politics and would never consider running for the presidency, she, her husband, and Democrat experts have to be looking at this current field of lightweight misfits and realizing that if she stepped into the race she could likely win the nomination without having to get out of bed each morning before 11 a.m. Given the current American obsession with celebrity, discounting her as a formidable candidate would be a mistake.


As I and a large, dedicated audience eagerly brace for this Sunday night, a much larger audience, the audience of American citizens, braces for the 2020 election and the Democrat primary that precedes it. In Westeros, nothing is ever quite as it seems, and nobody can ever truly be trusted. There are things going on behind the scenes with the Democrats that are likely unseemly. Remember how they conspired to destroy the candidacy of Bernie Sanders just a few years ago.

All of this Democrat mischief and intrigue revolves around choosing who will do battle with President Trump in 2020. Democrats would do well to remember that the president brings dragons to the fight.