Category Archives: political news

A campaign of paradoxes staggers to its finish

evangelicals

There may be no greater example of just how weird the 2016 presidential campaign has become than this example right here.

It speaks volumes. Hideous volumes.

The evangelical Christian bloc that is so critical to Republicans’ ballot-box success remains — more or less — devoted to the party’s current presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump.

Yet many of those folks just couldn’t bring themselves to support the candidacy of its most recent nominee, Mitt Romney. The 2012 GOP nominee is a Mormon. There were many within the evangelical movement who contend that Mormons belong to a “cult.”

As for Trump, the current nominee … well, the photo accompanying this blog posts says plenty about him.

Those of us who oppose this man’s presidential candidacy are left to ponder what we thought was the imponderable: that evangelical voters would continue to give this guy a pass on some of the most reprehensible behavior imaginable.

Sure, many of them have bolted. That recording of Trump boasting to “Access Hollywood” about his behavior toward women have sent many of those evangelicals packing. Many others, though, remain.

The rest of us are asking, simply: Why?

These pro-Trump evangelicals are more than willing to convict Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton of crimes for which she hasn’t even been accused of committing. Due process? It doesn’t apply in their minds to a leading politician.

Yet, they look the other way when their guy acknowledges seeking to seduce a married woman, who has boasted about previous extramarital affairs, has hung ghastly labels on women he believes are physically unattractive.

Ugh!

Someone has to explain this to me. I’m all ears.

No honeymoon for Hillary

hillary

Let’s play out how many of us believe this presidential election will conclude.

Hillary Rodham Clinton will become the 45th president of the United States. She’ll be the second consecutive history-making president, following immediately the election of the nation’s first African-American; she’ll become the first woman to hold the exalted office.

Will she be granted the “traditional honeymoon period” that Congress grants a newly elected president?

You can stop laughing now. I realize that borders on a stupid question. It’s also a rhetorical one.

She won’t get one any more than President Barack Obama was granted such a period when he was elected in 2008.

I harken back to what Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declared in 2009, that his “No. 1 priority” was to make Barack Obama “a one-term president.”

Do you remember that? That was Job One. Front-burner stuff. Forget working with the newly elected president to solve the economic crisis that was destroying our nation’s well-being. McConnell’s primary mission ended in failure when Obama was re-elected in 2012.

Hillary Clinton is likely to face the same level of hostility — if not a greater level — from congressional Republicans, many of whom she worked with while she served in the Senate from 2001 to 2009.

The leader of the peanut-gallery jeering section well might be the guy she’s going to defeat — Donald J. Trump, someone who has zero public service history, zero commitment to fighting for the nation at any level, zero understanding of how government works.

Honeymoon period? Those days may be gone for the foreseeable future.

E-mail controversy rivals Watergate? Hardly

widemodern_watergatecomplex_051513

Donald J. Trump is likely going to lose his bid to become the next president of the United States, so he is bound to say damn near anything.

Thus, the Republican nominee has declared that the Hillary Rodham Clinton e-mail controversy rivals Watergate as among the nation’s worst “political scandals.”

Umm. Let me think. No, it doesn’t even come close.

Let’s review.

Hillary Clinton used her personal e-mail server to communicate with staffers while she was secretary of state. The FBI director determined there was no credible evidence to prosecute her over suspicions that she might have let classified information fall into the wrong hands. Now comes an announcement — 11 days before an election — that he’s reopening the investigation.

What do we know about the new e-mails? Very little, other than they came from a top aide of Clinton and might include communications with her estranged husband, a former congressman who’s been disgraced because of a “sexting” escapade with underage girls. It’s disgusting in the extreme. Scandalous? Give me a break.

Now, about Watergate.

Some goons broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters in June 1972. Investigators looked into it. Two newspaper sleuths at the Washington Post began snooping around. They discovered a White House connection.

Then they learned that President Nixon was involved. They found out he ordered the FBI to squash the investigation. Then came news about those infamous Oval Office tape recordings, which then revealed that the president used the power of his office to obstruct justice.

That, folks, is a serious constitutional crisis … not just a political scandal.

Nixon quit the presidency. Others went to prison. President Ford pardoned his predecessor.

I see no symmetry here. One does not match the other.

Come clean, now, on e-mail issue

FBI Director James Comey has told only part of an on-going story regarding Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

He has left the most important part of it out. Comey very well might be keeping secrets from the public. He needs — immediately! — to finish telling this tale.

Comey announced today that he has uncovered more e-mails that Clinton sent out on her personal server while she was secretary of state. Perhaps you’ve heard about these e-mails.

Comey then said they might amount to nothing, or they might be important.

Which is it, Mr. Director?

Eleven days before a presidential election, Comey has tossed a serious pile of goo into this contest.

Clinton happens to be correct to demand that he let the public know all the facts regarding the e-mails. No delay. No hanging cloud. No suspicion.

He has determined once already that he had no grounds to seek a criminal indictment. Now this?

Let’s clear the air. Now.

No way in the world I’m voting early

th

Some of my friends and family are boasting about having voted early for president of the United States.

Good for them.

It’s not for me.

You know my feelings about early voting. I hate doing it. I’ve done so before, but only because I was going to be “absent” on Election Day from my polling place.

This election has demonstrated in stark terms the risk one takes in voting early, especially if you’re a fan of that scoundrel aka the Republican presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump.

Had you lived in one of those state that already had allowed early voting, you might have cast your vote for Trump — and then learned about that hideous “Access Hollywood” recording of Trump boasting about how he treats women.

Then again, even that might have rolled off your snout — as have so many other things that Trump has said and done while campaigning for the presidency.

My wife and I will be available to vote on Nov. 8. I’ll wait as long as I can on that day.

 

Humans tinker with ballots, not machines

vote1

Potter County Judge Nancy Tanner has put the kibosh on a social media rumor about ballot integrity.

“There is nothing wrong with any of the machines we use for voting,” Tanner said in a statement. “They do not flip your vote. They do not flip parties. Humans do that.”

At issue is a complaint filed by a voter in Randall County who said that after voting for a straight Republican ticket her ballot showed a vote for the Hillary Clinton-Tim Kaine Democratic ticket for president and vice president.

Tanner said it didn’t happen, apparently consulting with her colleagues in Randall County.

The maddening aspect of this episode is that it comes in the wake of repeated allegations by GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump about “rigged elections” at the precinct polling level. Quite naturally — and this is of zero surprise — Trump hasn’t provided a single snippet of evidence to back up his specious contention.

That hasn’t stopped — in my mind, at least — the Internet trolls from promoting such nonsense in the GOP-friendly Texas Panhandle.

I’m glad to hear Judge Tanner weighing in with her assertion that her county’s election system is working as promised.

Indeed, about the only way to suspect actual voter fraud would be if the Clinton-Kaine ticket actually won in Randall County.

http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2016-10-25/potter-county-judge-nothing-wrong-voting-machines

 

Amarillo voters reporting, uh, fraud … seriously?

thmyadek02

Well, wouldn’t you know it’s happening in this election cycle — amid allegations from Republican presidential candidate Donald J. Trump about “rigged” elections.

An Amarillo radio station reports that at least two Amarillo voters are reporting incidents of “vote changing.”

As Popeye would say, “What a coinck-i-dinck.”

http://kissfm969.com/early-voters-from-amarillo-are-saying-their-votes-were-changed-on-the-ballot/

The issue reportedly occurred when voters hit the “straight Republican” option on their electronic ballots. They reported that their votes were recorded for the Clinton-Kaine presidential ticket. They supposedly asked election officials to correct the ballot, but that they couldn’t.

You’ll note on the link that there’s no reaction from Potter or Randall County election officials. Did it happen or didn’t it?

The radio station went with the story told it by the voters.

Hmmm. Imagine that this complaint would occur this year — for the first time since the introduction of the electronic balloting.

Whoever posted the item for the radio station’s link noted that it’s always wise to check your ballot if you vote for either party’s straight ticket.

Me? I hate straight-ticket voting. I prefer to make that call race by race, candidate by candidate, issue by issue.

But that’s just me.

Do I believe the stories being told in this first day of early voting?

No, not until I hear from the election officials in both counties who heretofore have operated first-cabin voting systems.

Sarah Palin: MIA

palin

Here we are, 15 days from the presidential election and the question is burning in my gut …

Where on Earth is Sarah Palin?

You recall her, yes? The former half-term Alaska governor who long ago announced her support for fellow Republican Donald J. Trump. The former GOP vice-presidential nominee campaigned actively on behalf of House Speaker Paul Ryan’s primary opponent, who lost to the speaker by a million percentage points; she wanted to stick it to Ryan for his initial refusal to back Trump’s presidential campaign.

She’s disappeared from view.

Her Fox News gig has ended. Her reality TV show ended. Some of her children have been in “in the news” for less-than-flattering reasons.

Palin’s former 2008 running mate — U.S. Sen. John McCain — is in a tough re-election fight in Arizona. She hasn’t even campaigned for him, for crying out loud. Oh, wait! McCain has gotten into a terrible public spat with Palin’s pal Trump. OK, so that’s out.

In a perverse sort of way, I kind of miss listening to Sarah Barracuda making a fool of herself.

Oh well. This hideous campaign is nearly over.

Sarah, just know that at least one of us out here has missed you … more or less.

‘Ground game’: critical to victory

campaign_groundgame_getty

Political pundits and media commentators I guess have become enamored of football terminology to describe political campaigns.

They keep referring to the “ground game.”

A report from The Hill tells us that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s ground game is far superior to Republican Donald Trump’s game.

It means, I guess, that the Clintonistas are better — politically speaking — at blocking and tackling than the Trumpkins.

http://thehill.com/campaign/302231-clinton-holds-huge-ground-game-advantage-over-team-trump

This is a critical element in the campaign that has been evident for months. Clinton’s precinct-by-precinct, state-by-state apparatus has been in full mojo since before the party’s nominating conventions. They have ramped up considerably in these final days before the end of balloting.

As The Hill reports: “’Campaigns are won on the ground which is why we invested early to organize and register voters in this historic election,’ said Lily Adams, a spokeswoman for Clinton’s campaign.

“By contrast, Trump’s campaign, the Republican National Committee and state parties employ just 1,409 staffers in 16 states. Lindsay Walters, an RNC spokeswoman, said the RNC has paid staffers in 24 states across the country.”

That compares to the Clinton staffing level of 5,138 staffers in 15 battleground states.

What are they doing? They’re telephoning voters. They are registering new voters. They’re setting up get-out-the-vote drives, arranging for transportation for shut-ins to vote.

The Trumpkins are showing “little interest in investing in a ground operation,” according to The Hill.

Since I’m no longer predicting outcomes, I’ll just conclude that if the “ground game” is as critical as the pundits, pollsters and pols say it is, then Clinton is going to cruise on Nov. 8 to a historic election victory.

However …

As I’ve noted before — throughout this campaign — nothing about it is normal. The Clintonistas had better take nothing at all for granted as they head for the finish line.

Donald Trump, after all, wasn’t even supposed to win the Republican nomination for president of the United States … for crying out loud.

Hey, what about that Obamacare lawsuit?

I’m still waiting.

Remember the lawsuit that former U.S. House Speaker John Boehner filed to strike down the Affordable Care Act? It’s been filed. But I’m waiting for something to happen. Some decision. Some court motion.  Anything!

obamacare

But wait! Boehner then quit the House and went into private life. He’s still living in D.C., or so I understand. I’ve heard some things about him wanting to become a lobbyist.

Whatever.

The lawsuit, though, has drifted into the mist. It’s been shoved way past the back burner.

Has anyone heard of its status? Does anyone at this point care about its status?

I have wondered about it already. An earlier blog post is right here:

https://highplainsblogger.com/2014/10/gop-lawsuit-takes-another-hit/

I get that Obamacare, as the ACA has come to be known, still isn’t entirely popular. Yes, more American are insured now than ever before. The premium costs remain a problem.

But its legality? Is that really the issue, or was the lawsuit meant to drive home a political point?

Plaintiff No. 1, former Speaker Boehner, is now out of the picture. He’s no longer in public life.

I’m beginning to believe that the lawsuit is continuing to die a slow death … somewhere.