Voter math is the same, no matter how you spin it

avote

I’m having some fun rattling the cages of my friends on the right by reminding them that Hillary Rodham Clinton has a significant — and growing — lead in the popular vote overĀ Donald J. Trump.

They, of course, remind me — correctly, of course — that Trump won the votes that actually elect the president, the Electoral College.

Now comes a new spin that is born out of an old one. They are reminding me that Trump won many more counties across the country, that Hillary’s votes were gathered in the large urban areas — such as Los Angeles, Chicago, New York. They also seem to infer that because her votes are clustered in the larger metro areas that they somehow are less representative, or even less legitimate, than the vast expanse of territory that Trump was able to claim on Election Day.

Hold that thought!

Mitt Romney also won more counties than President Obama in 2012; but the president corralled 5 million more votes than his challenger. Sen. John McCain also won the vast majority of counties in 2008, but Sen. Obama piled up nearly 10 million more votes than McCain.

And yes, we heard much the same refrain from the losers in both those elections: Sure, Obama won, but Romney/McCain each carried more actual real estate than Barack Obama.

Sure thing, but human beings cast votes. More of them voted for Obama than they did for either of his presidential challengers.

I need no reminders that Trump’s victory was forged in Rural America. He turned out the rural vote precisely to counteract the large urban vote that Clinton was sure to get. It turns out that his rural vote outnumbered Clinton’s urban vote — in the states that mattered. I refer to those swing states that voted twice for President Obama.

However, I refuse to accept the notion that Clinton’s popular vote is somehow de-legitimized because of where her massive vote totals are being compiled.

“We are” — as the young state senator from Illinois reminded us during his keynote speech at theĀ 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston — “the United States of America.” We aren’t divided into political parties, said state Sen. Barack Obama. We are one nation, undivided and united, he said.

So it is that our votes all count the same. Whether they are come from large cities or small farming communities, they all are tabulated together.

Thus, Hillary Clinton’s popularĀ margin — sitting currently at 2.5 million — is the product of a targeted effort to boost turnout in strong Democratic bases within our cities, it remains irrefutably a national total.

Donald Trump has been elected president. I accept Americans’ electoral verdict. I don’t like it, but it’s what we’re going to get.

Accordingly, it would do the other side just as well to accept the notion that while Trump won where it counted the most, Hillary Clinton — and those who voted for her — still command a significant voice of opposition to the policies that the new president is about to drop on the nation’s lap.

Mattis at Pentagon? Not as bad as some others

mattis

James Mattis is Donald J. Trump’s pick to be defense secretary.

OK, from my perch here in the middle of the country, the retired Marine Corps four-star general looks to be not as bad as some of the other selections the president-elect has made to fill out his Cabinet.

He is just four years on from hanging up his greens, which means Congress will have to enact a law that gives him a waiver from existing law; current statute requires a seven-year interim between military and civilian service. Congress waived the requirement when General of the Army George C. Marshall was picked by President Eisenhower to be secretary of state.

Gen. Mattis has gotten some high marks. According to the Washington Post: ā€œThe president-elect is smart to think about putting someone as respected as Jim Mattis in this role,ā€ said a former senior Pentagon official. ā€œHeā€™s a warrior, scholar and straight shooter ā€” literally and figuratively. He speaks truth to everyone and would certainly speak truth to this new commander in chief.ā€

The new president will need some truth-tellers in his inner circle. I would hope that Mattis provides that role.

Mattis is a former head of the Central Command and has extensive experience plotting military strategy in the Middle East. He’s a tough dude.

He’s also a blunt talker who’s spoken ill of the nuclear deal hammered out by the Obama administration that seeks to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-has-chosen-retired-marine-gen-james-mattis-for-secretary-of-defense/ar-AAl18p1?li=BBnb7Kz

Still, I kind of like this selection as defense boss. Mattis is far superior for this post than Betsy DeVos is for education secretary, Jeff Sessions is for attorney generalĀ and — oh, perish the thought — Sarah Palin could be if Trump picks her to head the Department of Veterans Affairs.

It is rather fascinating, though, that an individual who said he knows “more about ISIS than the generals, believe me,” wouldĀ pick one of those generals to lead the nation’s military establishment and, thus, carry the fight to the Islamic State.

My strong hunch is that Trump doesn’t know more about ISIS than Gen. James Mattis.

Trump is redefining ‘populism’

don-trump

Donald J. Trump ran for president brandishing the label of a “populist” who understands how average Americans think and believe about the state of their country.

Then the president-elect starts his transition. What does he do? He starts enlisting some of the richest cats in the land. As the Washington Post is reporting, he is putting together the wealthiest government in modern history.

This is what Trump’s populism looks like?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-is-assembling-the-richest-administration-in-modern-american-history/ar-AAkYy02?li=BBnb7Kz

According to the Post: “Trump is putting together what will be the wealthiest administration in modern American history. His announced nominees for top positions include several multimillionaires, an heir to a family mega-fortune and two Forbes-certified billionaires, one of whose family is worth as much as industrial tycoon Andrew Mellon was when he served as treasury secretary nearly a century ago. Rumored candidates for other positions suggest Trump could add more ultra-rich appointees soon.

“Many of the Trump appointees were born wealthy, attended elite schools and went on to amass even larger fortunes as adults. As a group, they have much more experience funding political candidates than they do running government agencies.”

So, there you have it. The man who became a champion of the working stiff, the family looking for ways to make it in a tough economic climate, is surrounding himself with fellow rich folks, many of whom parlayed healthy inheritances — as Trump did — into even healthier business empires.

Is this the new definition of populism?

I prefer the historical definition, which means that a populist opposes putting too much power in the hands of the rich.

That darn popular vote is getting in the way

election-day-2016-in-united-states

I know I am sounding a bit repetitive to some of you. Maybe I’m far too repetitive to suit you.

That’s just too damn bad. I’m going to say it again … with emphasis.

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s popular vote margin over Donald J. Trump is expanding. It’s now at slightly more than 2.5 million votes. It’s likely to grow even more, although I’m beginning to think we’re getting quite close to the end of the ballot tallying.

Oh, yes. We have that recount in Wisconsin with which to contend. Don’t expect much of a change there. Or in Pennsylvania or Michigan, two other states that might get their votes recounted.

Here’s my point. The president-elect is going to find a growing voice of discord among his constituents if and when he tries to foist his agenda on the nation.

Donald J. Trump’s vote deficit is approaching record levels among those candidates who won the presidential election while losing the popular vote. He and Clinton’sĀ vote percentagesĀ are zeroing in on the Rutherford B. Hayes-Samuel Tilden contest of 1876.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

What’s fascinating, too, is that Clinton’s popular vote total mirrors what the polls were indicating on the eve of Election Day. Trump, though, benefited by his ability to flip several states that had voted twice for President Obama, enabling him to win the Electoral College votes he needed to become president.

I am not calling for a wholesale reform of the electoral system.

I merely want to caution the president-elect to mindful of the hurdles he and his team are going to face governing a country with a widening vote deficit.

Go slow, Mr. President-elect. Stop playing to your “base” and remember that more of us out here voted against you than voted for you. Got it? Good. Now … proceed.

Has the ‘war on Christmas’ recommenced?

war-on-christmas

I have grown weary of conservative media’s bogus assertion that liberals have declared a “war on Christmas.”

Fox News usually leads that chorus. And of the Fox commentators, the lead griperĀ usually is Bill O’Reilly.

IĀ have run out of ways to declareĀ such a “war” doesn’t really exist the way that conservative media portray it. I’ll just re-post this earlier blog to make the point once more.

It’s from Nov. 30, 2013. I believe it holds up to this day.

Frenzied shoppers declare war on Christmas

 

How would Mitt take back all those things he said?

I cannot get past that 17-minute tongue-lashing that Mitt Romney delivered to Donald J. Trump during the heat of the Republican Party’s primary campaign for president.

Mitt let Trump have it, man. He delivered the most stinging rebuke of someone seeking his party’s nomination that I’ve ever heard.

Trump ended up winning the nomination and then winning the presidential election.

Now we see Trump and Mitt breaking bread at a posh New York City restaurant and Trump considering Mitt to become the nation’s next secretary of state.

What on Earth has Mitt said to Trump that enables the president-elect to consider him for this post? Did he take it all back? Did he admit to saying those things only for effect? Was he seeking to be “entertaining,” the way Trump said he was denigrating women only for entertainment sake?

A part of me thinks Trump needs someone of Mitt’s stature to carry the nation’s foreign policy forward. Whatever it is!

Then again, Mitt issued that blistering critique of the next president of the United States.

Here’s the video of Mitt’s remarks. If you haven’t seen it, take a gander. It’s worth your time. Then someone out there can tell me how the 2012 Republican nominee — whom Trump dismissed as a “loser” — can make nice with the guy who received theseĀ rhetoricalĀ bombs.

 

Palin emerges in Trump Cabinet search … finally!

aaky9hd

Therrrre she is!

Sarah Palin has come out of hiding. The former half-term Alaska governor — and 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee — now might be in the running for a spot in Donald J. Trump’s Cabinet.

For what post, you might ask? Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

And what, you also might ask, are Gov. Palin’s qualifications for that post? About the only thing I can come up with is that her son served a couple of tours during the Iraq War, then came home and got arrested on weapons charges, to which he pleaded guilty. Palin then blamed the Obama administration for ignoring veterans’ health care issues and suggested that was the cause of her son’s legal troubles.

There you have it. That’s all the qualification the president-elect might need in this highly critical position.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-may-consider-sarah-palin-for-va-secretary-source-tells-nbc/ar-AAkY9HF?li=BBnb7Kz

Palin has not distinguished herself since she and Sen. John McCain lost the 2008 presidential election to Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden. She has starred in her own reality TV show, been a contributor to the Fox News Channel, been the subject of some gossip tabloids, watched a few of her kids get into trouble with the law.

My biggest concern for the president-elect, if he’s seriously considering Palin to head the Department of Veterans Affairs, is whether she’ll “go rogue” in the manner she did while running as Sen. McCain’s VP running mate.

We keep hearing how Trump doesn’t much cotton to subordinates stealing his thunder. The way I see it, Palin has made a bit of a habit of doing that very thing.

Still, the idea that Trump might even be thinking about placing Palin in his Cabinet suggests — to me, at least — that the GOP talent pool available to the president-elect is mighty thin.