Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Here is how you concede an election

Donald J. Trump gave a gracious victory speech Tuesday night when it became clear he would be elected as the 45th president of the United States.

The candidate he defeated, Hillary Rodham Clinton, took a few barbs for failing to speak last night to concede the election to Trump.

Then she stepped to the microphone this morning and delivered perhaps the best political speech of her life. It likely was the final political speech of her lengthy career, one that spans more than three decades.

At one level — possibly a vague one — her speech reminded me just a bit of the late Ted Kennedy’s “the dream shall never die” speech at the 1980 Democratic National Convention. Sen. Kennedy lost his party’s nomination fight to President Carter and then spoke to the convention, declaring that the “fight goes on” despite his defeat for the party nomination.

There was an element of that in Clinton’s speech today, although she also spoke to Trump becoming the president for all Americans.

It was a gracious and graceful exit from the national political stage and it speaks well — once again — of how American politicians can set aside their pain for the good of the nation they seek to lead.

 

Hey, isn’t the electoral system ‘rigged’?

many-people-in-established-democracies-have-echoed-trumps-warning-of-a-rigged-election-png

This just in.

A “rigged, crooked and corrupt” political system has just elected Donald J. Trump as the next president of the United States of America.

The president-elect his own self made that declaration for months while he campaigned for the office he has just won.

He made the assertions, of course, while the polls showed Hillary Rodham Clinton leading in the horse race to the Oval Office. Trump wasn’t buying it. Not only that, he said the system was “rigged” against him and that he possibly wouldn’t accept the result if Clinton won the election.

She didn’t. Trump did.

Did he benefit from a “rigged” system?

Well, I didn’t believe the system was “rigged” when Clinton was leading. I don’t believe it is “rigged” now that Trump has won.

I think one of the unity messages Trump needs to deliver is to assure Americans that the system that elected him is on the up-and-up.

Perhaps an apology, too, might be in order to the local election officials who take their jobs seriously and are committed to protecting the integrity of our political system.

Well, that is some surprise … yes?

trump

Americans have spoken a language I don’t quite understand.

I am acutely aware that my friends on the right will be glad to translate for me the message that voters delivered yesterday by electing Donald J. Trump as the next president of the United States of America.

Let’s see. I opened the blinds on my home office this morning and noticed that the sun rose in the east, the leaves that were on my trees are still scattered on my lawn. The sun is shining.

Despite the language barrier that has developed overnight, I am going to remain steadfast in a couple of core beliefs.

First, Americans have elected a patently unqualified and unfit man to become commander in chief/head of state and government/leader of the Free World. I won’t belabor the point. I’ve made it ad infinitum already on this blog.

The very core of Trump’s campaign was based on dividing people and religious groups against each other. Now he says he intends to unify the country? Good luck with that.

Second, my hope had been all along that had Hillary Clinton won — as every pollster in the country seemed to expect would happen — that Trump would accept the result and offer his support for the new president. I expect Clinton to do that very thing later today.

I, too, accept the result. Do I agree with it? Obviously, no. Given that I believe in our political system, I understand how it works and how we elect presidents.

I hasten to point, too, that when all the votes are counted, Clinton is going to command a significant popular vote majority over Trump. But Trump won where it counts, in the Electoral College. Unlike the 2000 election, which required a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision to stop counting ballots in Florida to elect George W. Bush, there won’t be that headache this time around.

I take small comfort in realizing that few Americans saw this result coming, that they would awaken this morning to the news that Donald J. Trump would be the next president. The pro-Trump partisans stood out like pie-in-the-sky braggarts prior to Election Day.

Now they look like geniuses.

Congratulations to them.

Now I need to clear my head … and learn the language that voters spoke last night.

Election-day voting still produces excitement

election-day-quotes

We went to the polls, we voted, we returned home … all in a span of about 20 minutes.

The time we spent at our Randall County, Texas “voting center” didn’t amount to much. However, it remains one of the things I love to do every time they have an election.

For those of us who live in Texas, that’s a frequent occurrence, indeed. We vote on everything around here.

Election Day is a big deal. I wish we would place more emphasis on it than we do. Instead, U.S. political media and politicians have become enamored with early voting. Get your ballots cast early and avoid the rush, they say.

I have heard some staggering numbers relating to early voting here in Randall County. More than 43,000 ballots were cast early for the 2016 election, a new presidential election record. Consider this: In 2012, nearly 49,000 total ballots were cast. If the percentage turnout this time is anywhere near what it was four years ago, voter traffic at the voting centers is going to mighty sparse.

We expected a larger crowd than what we saw this morning when we went to the polling place.

Whatever the case, this event always gives me a thrill.

Yes, we’ve all commented — or heard others comment — on the dismal nature of this presidential campaign. I thought the high negative perceptions of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump would drive down the turnout. I guess I was wrong about that, too.

My wife and I have completed our civic duty. We’re glad we did it.

Pardon the cliché, but I’m proud to be an American.

How will we respond to the result?

election-day

Let’s play this out for a moment … or maybe two.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is poised to make history in about 24 hours. Her opponent, Donald J. Trump, is poised to lose the first — and likely only — political campaign he’s ever run.

How will the rest of us react?

Clinton voters will be joyful. Trump voters will be, um, angry? Filled with rage? Suspicious?

If we are to believe the last-minute polling, Clinton’s lead is holding firm at around 4 or 5 percent nationally.

The national anger well might hinge on the speech that Trump will be forced to give sometime Tuesday night. The networks will call the election for Clinton. Trump will embrace his wife and kids. He’ll take them by the hand and walk onto a stage at Trump Tower and make some kind of statement.

Tradition holds that the loser’s speech precedes the winner’s victory proclamation.

Will the loser do the right thing? Will he accept the result? Will he do something finally — finally! — that hues to longstanding political tradition?

If he does what he should do, Trump can go a long way toward heading off the anger he has fomented with his own rhetoric along the way. Would a graceful exit quell all the anger? Don’t bet the farm on that one.

Yes, it’s been a long and difficult slog. It’s about to end.

It’s fair tonight to wonder: How would Clinton sound if the world spins off its axis tomorrow? How would she handle defeat? My gut tells me she would follow tradition, that she would honor the result.

The most important speech of this entire campaign is going to occur when the loser concedes.

A speech that strikes the right tone can do far more than any of the bluster we’ve been hearing since seemingly forever.

 

Recalling the first time

politics-word-cloud

I am in a reminiscing kind of mood today.

I’m thinking of the first vote I cast for president of the United States. It was 44 years ago; that’s 11 presidential elections ago! I was 22 years of age. Newly married. My wife was pregnant with our first son. I was full of exuberant idealism.

The Vietnam War was still raging. My candidate for the presidency wanted to end the war quickly. I had returned from service in the Army as confused about the war as I was when I reported for duty at a place called Marble Mountain in the spring of 1969.

He got my vote on Nov. 7, 1972. Sen. George McGovern needed a whole lot more votes than he got that day. He lost the election huge to President Nixon.

I was proud of that vote.

Eleven elections later, I am decidedly less proud of the vote I am about to cast. To be certain, my enthusiasm for presidential candidates has had its ups and downs. Some campaigns got me far more excited than others.

This one, though, feels different — and it’s not in a good way.

You might ask: Is this a difficult choice? No. Not at all. My preference is clear. Both major-party candidates are deeply flawed. One of them, though, is far more flawed than the other.

When it’s over — and I expect we’ll have a new president chosen by the end of the night Tuesday — I am going to cling to another hope.

It will be that the loser will accept the result, deliver a concession speech that at least contains a semblance of grace and agrees to support the next president.

Do I expect all of that to happen? Will the person who should lose this contest — Donald J. Trump — toss aside the stuff about “rigged elections” and do the right thing? I am not holding my breath.

However, as they say: Hope springs eternal.

Having declared my general unhappiness with the choices we face, I remain proud of the fact that I have the right to make that decision. I will go to our polling place Tuesday morning excited that I will have my voice heard.

I just wish I could be as proud of the vote I am about to cast as I was the first time.

Now … the wait begins

aajcgbc

I’m out.

You’ve heard from me countless times already about how much I detest Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. I’ve said much less about Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. I guess I’ve fallen into the trap that lures people to speak negatively more readily than they speak positively.

So, with less than two days to go before we decide this presidential election, I’m done commenting on the candidates.

I’m going to await the results along with the rest of a dispirited nation.

Those who know me best might recognize that I am generally an optimist. I tend to see the good in people and in institutions. This election campaign — which has gone on non-stop for a year and a half — has tested that optimistic outlook to the max.

I am unhappy with the choices we face. I’ll make my own choice on Tuesday. My wife and I plan to vote early on Election Day, hoping to get to the polling place before the most of the rest of our neighbors wake up.

For me, it’s never really been a close call. I had considered a third party choice. I’ve decided against that.

My vote is more valuable than for me to cast it as a protest. On that score, my idealism remains strong.

If only I felt better about the process we’ve witnessed for an interminable length of time or about the candidates who’ve been responsible for bringing this process about.

What’s more, if only I felt better about the media that have contributed to this miserable exercise.

Wait for the apologies … if you have the time

comey

FBI Director James Comey on Oct. 28 sent a letter to Congress informing lawmakers that he was looking at more e-mails relating to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Republicans were quick to jump all over it — and all over Clinton. GOP nominee Donald Trump called her a crook; he said the “scandal” was the “worst since Watergate.”

Trump rallied in the polls; Clinton sunk.

It was “game on.”

Today, Comey said that after reviewing the e-mails, he has decided there will be no further action taken. His statement from this past summer that “no reasonable prosecutor” would seek an indictment for wrong-doing.

It’s now back to where we started. No criminal investigation. No indictment.

Will there now be any mea culpas offered by those Republicans? Will they apologize for rushing to judgment?

You can stop laughing now.

What will be your agenda, Mr. Clinton?

bill_clinton

Melania Trump has disclosed her signature first lady issue if she gets to move into the White House with her husband, Donald J. Trump.

It’s cyber-bullying. It’s a nice issue to concentrate on, although the irony of her focus on this issue has been lost on no one, given the GOP nominee’s abuse of social media.

That all said, what about Bill Clinton’s agenda as the nation’s first-ever “first gentleman”?

First, we’ll have to clear up how the media will report on the former president’s coming and going. Do they call him “former president Clinton” or do they refer to him as “first gentleman”? I’ve heard that when he and his wife are together, they will be introduced as President and Mr. Clinton.

What, though, will be the issue that occupies his time, enables him to speak out publicly on behalf of his wife’s administration?

First ladies all have identified themselves with signature issues: Michelle Obama — healthy eating and physical fitness; Laura Bush — education; Hillary Clinton — children’s welfare; Barbara Bush — family literacy; Nancy Reagan — drug abuse … and on and on it goes.

Hillary Clinton has indicated her husband will play a key role as an economic adviser. That’s a good call, given the economic vitality the nation enjoyed during the 42nd president’s two terms in office. That’s no “theme,” though, for the first spouse.

I will await — assuming Hillary wins the election Tuesday — word from the former president/first gentleman on how he intends to use the enormous public profile his new status will provide.

FBI boss tries to cover his trail; Hillary breathes more easily

122316507

What? Do you mean to say, Mr. FBI Director, that the letter you released to Congress a few days ago has amounted to a whole lot of nothing? Is that what you’ve said today, sir?

James Comey has sent another letter to Congress, telling members that his agency has pored through the e-mails it recovered regarding Hillary Clinton’s years as secretary of state and has — get a load of this — found that nothing has changed from its conclusion this summer.

The FBI determined that “no reasonable prosecutor” would seek criminal charges against Clinton over the e-mails. Now he’s said the first conclusion will stand.

Oh, but that doesn’t end the story … even though it should.

Comey’s first letter to Congress sent the campaign into serious tumult. It has been the primary reason for Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s recent rally in public opinion polls. Trump used the letter to say that Clinton was guilty of corruption, that his campaign had struck the “mother lode,” and that Clinton was involved in the “worst scandal since Watergate.”

The lode has dried up. The “scandal” won’t materialize.

The FBI director has effectively concluded his probe into those e-mails. End of story?

Well, one might hope. Republicans, though, aren’t about to let it go.