Tag Archives: 2016 election

Progress, perhaps, in Trump’s evolution

Let’s consider it a baby step toward Donald J. Trump’s acceptance of reality.

The president-elect today actually acknowledged that Russian spooks hacked into the Democratic National Committee. Are we now getting somewhere in battering down the president-elect’s stubborn resistance to criticize his pals in Russia?

Maybe.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-acknowledges-russian-involvement-in-meddling-in-us-elections/ar-BBya5DE?ocid=spartandhp

Then again, he is continuing to debunk the notion that the Russian hackers sought to influence the 2016 election, sought to discredit Hillary Rodham Clinton and, thus, swing the election in his favor.

He won’t go there. Maybe eventually, just not yet.

Trump’s press conference today was remarkable on a couple of levels. His opening remarks were fascinating in the way he trashed the “mainstream media,” calling reporters “dishonest,” only to then open questions to the very media reps he had just disparaged.

His criticism is centered on the media’s reporting of a two-page addendum to a security briefing that alleges Trump might be involved in some less-than-honorable dealings with Russian businesses and/or government officials.

Trump denied any involvement categorically.

He spoke well of some media representatives, ill of others. He declined to allow a CNN reporter to ask a question. He battled openly with the media while fielding questions from them. It’s a puzzling way to do the public’s business, if you ask me.

However, he did for the first time acknowledge Russian involvement in this hackingĀ story.

I keep thinking that ifĀ Trump finally accepts the idea that the Russians hacked into the DNC computers to influence the election in his favor that he’s going to say he thought that all along.

Don’t be surprised at how the president-elect processes this still-developing story.

Graham is correct, Trump is wrong on Russia

I am not inclined generally to speak well of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, but I want to say a good word or two now about the South Carolina Republican.

He says the president-elect is wrong about Russia and wants him to wake up and smell the coffee before too long about the nation formerly known as the Evil Empire.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/313194-graham-republicans-gleeful-about-russia-election-interference-are

Graham appeared this past Sunday on “Meet the Press” with his good buddy U.S. Sen. John McCain. He said this about his fellow GOP senators, according to The Hill: ā€œMost Republicans are condemning what Russia did. And to those who are gleeful about it — you’re a political hack. You’re not a Republican. You’re not a patriot.ā€

Trump happens to be one of those Republicans who are “gleeful” about the Russians’ behavior during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Trump continues to question the CIA assessment that Russia sought to influence the election in Donald J. Trump’s favor. The CIA and other intelligence agencies have concluded that Russian spooks were acting on the director orders of Vladimir Putin; they cheered in the Kremlin when Trump was declared the winner of the election.

Graham is rightfully dismayed at the findings of the intelligence community, as is McCain. These two loyal Republicans have joined others within their party — not to mention Democrats — who want a thorough, bipartisan investigation in Congress to get at the root of what the Russians did and to seek solutions to prevent any foreign government from such overt interference in our electoral process.

If only the president-elect would listen to them.

Yes, Donald, you ‘mocked’ the NY Times reporter

I awoke this morning to news that the great actor Meryl Streep tore Donald J. Trump a new one at the Golden Globes awards ceremony.

She called him a bully and some other fitting epithets. I don’t want to comment specifically on the totality of her comments, but I do want to offer a brief critique of part of the president-elect’s tweet-storm response.

He said “for the 100th time” he didn’t mock a New York Times reporter’s physical disability while delivering a campaign-rally speech en route to his election as president.

Actually, Mr. President-elect, you did mock Serge Kovaleski, who suffers from a debilitating muscular disease that inhibits his arm movements. It was a disgusting and disgraceful exhibition of childish petulance the likes of which many of us never have seen coming from a major-party presidential nominee.

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/movies/trump-meryl-streep-golden-globes-speech.html?partner=msft_msn&_r=0

For Trump to suggest — as if we’re all a bunch of rubes — that he merely was showing how the reporter was ” … ‘groveling’ when he totally changed a 16 year old story that he had written in order to make me look bad. Just more very dishonest media!”

Trump said he “would never do that,” meaning mock someone in such a hideous manner.

Actually, I believe he would. And I also believe he did!

 

Still waiting for sign of hope for Trump

Of all the men who have become president of the United States without my vote, I’ve always harbored hope that they would do the right thing for my country, that they would rise to the occasion.

Until now, that is.

I cannot reach that level of hope and optimism for the 45th president.

Donald J. Trump takes office in 19 days. He’ll raise his hand on a holy book, swear to uphold the Constitution, defend the nation against its enemies and follow the laws of the land.

That’ll be his solemn, sacred promise.

So help me, I cannot yet make the leap that allows me to believe he’ll do all those things.

I’ve voted in 12 presidential elections. I have voted for five men won. Of the men who became president, I have relied on my optimistic nature and my belief in our political system to suspend my own misgivings about them.

I am waiting for that moment to arrive as I watch Donald Trump tweet himself silly over this issue and that. I await that moment when I can actually believe he is giving serious and thoughtful consideration to the myriad issues that await him.

Yes, I hope for the best but as of this moment — on the eve of a new year — I fear for a lot less. I won’t fear for the absolute worst, because the worst is too frightening to ponder.

Happy new year, y’all. Let’s all hang on together.

Unity, Mr. President-elect, bring us unity

Donald J. Trump is having the time of his life as he taunts those who oppose his election as president of the United States.

He went on yet another Twitter rant with a message that belies his pledge to be the president “of all Americans.” Imagine that.

He wrote: “Happy New Year to all, including to my many enemies and those who have fought me and lost so badly they just don’t know what to do. Love!”Ā 

There you go. Such grace. Such class. Such a striving to make good on his promise to “unify” a divided nation.

I guess this latest example strikes right at the heart — in my view — of this guy’s temperamental unfitness for the job to which he has been elected.

He blasts out these tweets, using the social medium to inject himself into the middle of foreign policy discussions being conducted by the individual who still is serving as president and commander in chief.

This latest lack of decorum only servesĀ  to inflame the anger of those who need little reason to be angry that this guy won the election.

The unity you profess to seek, Mr. President-elect, cannot be found in these childish messages.

Trump sides with the bad guy?

How is this supposed to go?

President Barack Obama retaliated against Russian over reports that Russian spooks hacked into the U.S. electoral system.

He kicked out about 30 Russian intelligence operatives and set in motion some economic sanctions to punish the Russians.

What is Donald J. Trump’s response as he prepares to become the next president of the United States? He lavishes praise on Russian strongman Vladimir Putin for his decision to withhold any reaction to the president’s punishment.

Trump called Putin a “smart” man.

No expression of support for our own president’s decision to punish the Russians for something a number of key intelligence agencies have concluded: that their hackers sought to meddle in the U.S. presidential election.

Where in the world are the new president’s loyalties?

Hmmmm?

 

Give the smaller states a louder voice

This graphic showed up on my Facebook news feed as a statement against the Electoral College.

I looked at it and then thought: Wait a minute! What’s so terribly wrong with giving smaller states, such as Wyoming, a greater voice in the election of the president of the United States?

California has those 55 electoral votes; Texas has 38 of them; Florida has 29.

I remain officially undecided about whether to toss the Electoral College aside. It would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

But the more I think about it, the less inclined I am toĀ support such a drastic measure.

The 2016 election ended with the “loser” winning nearly 3 million more popular votes than the “winner.” But the guy who won carried the Electoral College, which is what the founders intended.

I happen to be one who doesn’t begrudge little ol’ Wyoming the extra stroke it gets from the Electoral College.

When did power sharing become a bad thing?

Here’s the most meaningless debate imaginable

Well now … let’s commence the most meaningless political discussion possible, shall we?

Who would have won if Barack H. Obama had been the candidate opposing Donald J. Trump in this year’s presidential election.

The president of the United States says he’d win. The president-elect — big surprise here — disagrees.

The meaninglessness lies in the indisputable fact that we’ll never know the answer. The U.S. Constitution bars the president from seeking a third term, thanks toĀ its 22nd Amendment.

But as long as the president has introduced this silly argument, I’d like to carry it a bit further.

I believe he would have won. Why? He’s got a ton of political moxie. He would have surrounded himself with he best political strategists possible. He would not have taken anything or any voter group for granted. Obama would not have “played it safe,” as he said Hillary Clinton did. He would have made mincemeat of Trump inĀ any number of televised joint appearances.

There. That’s my view.

However, it’s only my speculation, just as it is anyone’s speculation — including Barack Obama himself — about how an Obama-Trump contest would have ended.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/obama-vs-trump-dispute-erupts-over-who-would-have-won/ar-BBxAD1A?li=BBnb7Kz

Here, though,Ā is a bit of reality to toss into the mix.

Consider the context of the 2012 presidential election. Obama’s presidency was considered by many experts to be on the ropes as he prepared to run against the Republican nominee, who turned out to be Mitt Romney, another formidable and successful businessman — who also had political experience as a one-term governor of Massachusetts.

The economy wasn’t performing all that well. The Affordable Care Act was being vilified as a failure. The Republicans saw a huge opening for their nomineeĀ as the campaign commenced.

Oh, but what happened? Obama used his crack political team to target selected audiences inĀ various regions of the country and hammered Romney relentlessly over comments the GOP rival had made. Recall the “47 percent” gaffe.

Obama ended up winning the election by a comfortable margin: 5 millionĀ ballots and 332-206 Electoral College votes.

Would he have defeated Trump? I believe so.

However, it’s a silly debate to have.

President Obama is leaving office in less than a month. Donald J. Trump isĀ the man of the hour.

‘SECEDE’ has been replaced with …

I once had this neighbor who had plastered on the rear bumper of his pickup a stickerĀ I found a bit amusing.

It said “SECEDE.” Yes, the letters were in all caps.

He also had another sticker on the bumper that said he had served “proudly” in the U.S. armed forces.

Do you see the dichotomy here? I wrote about it once before, just before Christmas in 2012.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2012/12/love-it-or-secede-from-it/

The “SECEDE” bumper sticker has been replaced by another one.

It says “God Bless Texas.” I noticed it right after the 2016 presidential election. My strongest hunch is that the election turned out the way he wanted it.

There’s another bit of irony, though. The fellow who coined the “God Bless Texas” slogan was a proud Democrat. He was crusty ol’ Bob Bullock, a former Texas lieutenant governor and state comptrollerĀ who died some years ago.

I cannot help but wonder if Bullock would be as glad as my neighbor is with the election outcome.

Once ‘noble’ pursuit getting more vengeful

The late Robert F. Kennedy used to proclaim that politics could be a “noble” pursuit if its practitioners kept their eye on the public service aspect of their craft.

It’s gotten a lot less noble in the years since RFK’s time in the public arena.

Politics has become a contact sport. A blood sport in the eyes of many. We are about to witness it become even bloodier as the next president of the United States takes his oath and begins the work of leading the country.

Donald J. Trump is headed for the roughest ride imaginable. More than half of those who voted in this year’s election voted for someone else. There are myriad questions surrounding the president-elect’s fitness for office, about his business dealings and about the quality of the team he is assembling.

It’s been said there might be an impeachment in Trump’s future if he doesn’t take care of some of those business dealings that could run him smack into the “emoluments clause” in the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits presidents from receiving income from foreign governments.

Is all this to be expected? Sure it is.

Is it unreasonable to ask these probing questions? Of course not!

Vengeance can be most troubling. Trump will take over from a president who’s himself felt the wrath of those who opposed him at every turn. There was talk of impeaching Barack H. Obama, too.

President Obama sought to do some bold things, such as get medical insurance for millions of Americans; he sought to rescue the failing economy early in his presidency with a costly stimulus package; he continued to pursue terrorists abroad using aggressive military action; he sought to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

All along the way, his foes sought to stymie him. There were a couple of shameful incidents, such as when a Republican member of Congress shouted “liar!” at Obama as he was delivering a speech to a joint congressional session; there also was the declaration from Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell who said his “No. 1 priority” would be to make Barack Obama a one-term president.

The Democrats now are on the outside looking in at Republicans’ efforts to reshape the federal government.

It won’t be a cakewalk for the new guy any more than it was for the fellow he will succeed.

Memories are long in Washington, D.C., even if politicians who say spiteful things to and about each other can make up and join the same team — which happens all the time in the nation’s capital.

Trump’s team must know that political nobility is long gone. They’d better get ready to be roughed up.

As they say: Payback is a bitch.