Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Here’s a final shot at the popular vote issue

This likely will be the final entry on my blog about the popular vote result of the 2016 presidential election. I believe I need to make this point.

Some of my social media acquaintances have been yapping about a peculiar aspect of the popular vote, which Hillary Rodham Clinton captured over Donald J. Trump, who won enough electoral votes to be elected president of the United States.

They’ve been saying that “if you take away California,” Trump would have won the popular vote by 1.4 million ballots.

My reaction: huh? You can’t do that.

Clinton won California’s 55 electoral votes by winning more than 4 million votes in that state. It helped pad her national vote, which ended up around 2.8 million ballots cast for her than for Trump.

I get that Trump has been elected president. He won it fair and square. His team cobbled together a stunning electoral strategy that hardly anyone saw developing. He scored upsets in many of those “swing states” that had voted twice for President Obama in 2008 and 2012. Thus, the outcome was determined.

But you can’t manipulate the popular vote margin by removing certain states from the equation. All 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, are calculated in the final vote total.

Period. End of argument.

The debate over whether to throw out the Electoral College will proceed. I’m still undecided on that issue. I like the idea of giving additional clout to smaller states. However, the margin of the loser’s popular vote total in 2016 does diminish whatever “mandate” the winner will seek to claim.

The argument over Clinton’s popular vote victory, though, need not get muddled and conflated with nonsensical scenarios, such as deleting one or two states’ votes from the total count.

We are, after all, the United States of America.

I’m done now with this issue.

Texas lawmakers oppose Trump wall … who knew?

BorderFenceImage_jpg_800x1000_q100

Texas happens to constitute the largest single-state border with Mexico.

Do members of the Texas congressional delegation endorse Donald Trump’s notion of building a wall across our nation’s southern border?

Umm. No.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/20/where-texas-congressional-delegation-stands-trumps/

No Democratic member of the delegation favors the wall. Republicans who comprise a large majority of the state’s congressional delegation, interestingly, also are decidedly cool to the idea.

The Texas Tribune reports that Trump’s notion of building the wall runs headlong into a politically conservative principle. Check this out: “Among many Texas Republicans in Congress, the concept, while popular with the party’s base, collides with another conservative tenant: eminent domain.

“A wall would require the confiscation of ranching land near the Rio Grande, and several Texas Republicans expressed concern about the federal government taking away property — often held by families for generations — and the legal tangles that would inevitably arise from that.”

Well now. Do you think congressional Republicans will go along with federal seizure of private property, which happens to be a huge issue throughout our large state where private property owners possess almost every acre of land? There happen to be plenty of Republicans in New Mexico, Arizona and California who also adhere to the principle that private ownership is more important than a government takeover of property.

Eminent domain looms as the bogeyman that well could doom Trump’s ill-considered assertion that building a “beautiful wall” will end illegal immigration.

No select panel, but let’s get to heart of hacking matter

bbhcr1a

Mitch McConnell says he won’t appoint a select Senate committee to examine the impact of alleged Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

OK. Fair enough, Mr. Majority Leader.

But let’s not allow these questions to wither and die now that your fellow Republican, Donald J. Trump, is about to become president of the United States.

We’ve got some questions that need clear, declarative answers.

What did the Russians do? How did they do it? Did their computer hacking efforts have a tangible impact on the election outcome? How in the world does the United States prevent this kind of computer hacking in the future?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mcconnell-rejects-calls-for-select-panel-on-russian-meddling/ar-BBxmZzP

If the majority leader were to ask for my opinion, I’d suggest that we need an independent commission that doesn’t answer to Senate Republicans or Democrats. We formed one of those after the 9/11 attacks and it came out with some serious findings about what went wrong and how we can prevent future terrorist attacks.

McConnell’s decision to nix a select committee is at odds with many Republicans — such as Sen. John McCain — along with Democrats are demanding. They want a select panel that would be tasked solely with looking at this most disturbing matter.

The new Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, said this, according to The Associated Press: “We don’t want this investigation to be political like the Benghazi investigation,” he said. “We don’t want it to just be finger pointing at one person or another.” Schumer added: “We want to find out what the Russians are doing to our political system and what other foreign governments might do to our political system. And then figure out a way to stop it.”

McConnell wants to hand this over to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Fine. Then allow them to clear the decks and concentrate on getting to the heart of what the Russians have done.

Seventeen intelligence agencies have concluded the same thing: The Russians intended to influence the presidential election. The president-elect has dismissed their conclusion, opening up a serious rift between his office and the intelligence community.

Trump and his team are virtually all alone in their view of this disturbing matter. Congress needs to get busy and tell us what the Russians did and when they did it.

Now he’s a ‘great guy’

bbxo0nc

Carlos Slim is a “great guy,” says Donald J. Trump.

Hey, wait! We all thought he was a tool of the Democratic Party. Isn’t that what the president-elect said of the Mexican gazillionaire? Didn’t he disparage Slim because of made-up suspicions about the U.S. presidential election being “rigged” against Trump?

Not so. Apparently.

Trump and Slim had dinner the other night at Trump’s Florida resort. They had a good time. Trump and Slim now are BFFs.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-says-carlos-slim-a-frequent-campaign-target-is-a-great-guy/ar-BBxnNkm?li=BBnb7Kz

So help me, my head is spinning. I cannot even begin to keep up with the way Trump turns enemies into friends. How he manages to take back all those angry and reprehensible things he says about others.

For his part, Slim had been critical of Trump’s policies toward Mexico, such as his plan to build that wall across the nations’ border. Now he says Trump’s presidency will mean success for Mexico.

Politics has this way of making people switch positions on a dime. Which view are we supposed to believe?

POTUS, FLOTUS and kids take time off

2015-04-15-1429074557-4314458-president_vacations

A young Amarillo businessman — a friend of mine — griped recently that the Obama family would be jetting off to Hawaii for a little Christmas R&R.

It’s a tradition the president and first lady have followed since they moved into the White House in January 2009.

My friend seems to think that since the president is the lamest of ducks — with less than a month to go before he leaves office — he doesn’t need a vacation.

Actually, he does.

This brings up a point I want to make about presidential vacations … which is that they don’t really take vacations the way I — or my young friend, for that matter — understand the meaning of the word.

Presidents are never off the clock. They are accompanied by that military officer who’s carrying “The Football,” aka the briefcase containing the nuclear codes; the president gets his daily national security briefing; he is on-call 24/7.

I wrote about the Obamas’ vacation in a blog post two years ago:

https://highplainsblogger.com/2014/12/vacation-for-first-family-potus-will-need-the-rest/

I don’t begrudge presidents from taking time away from the office.

You may choose to believe or disbelieve my next point, but I’ll make it nonetheless. I won’t begrudge the next president and his family from taking time away.

Donald Trump will need some time away — presuming, of course that he works as hard at being president as his predecessors have done. Despite what my friend asserted the other day, Obama has worked his tail off, as did Presidents Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman, Roosevelt … I’ll stop there.

They all faced crises and conflict. They need time to chill, to collect their thoughts, to spend time with their spouses and kids.

They are not out of touch or out of reach.

So, with that I say to the current president and his beautiful family: Surf’s up, enjoy yourselves … but keep the phone nearby. We might need you, Mr. President, in a pinch.

Take our ag commissioner, please

sid-miller

I don’t know if this will happen, but there’s some chatter out there about Donald J. Trump’s potential final Cabinet choice.

It would be a doozy if it comes to pass.

There’s some talk that Texas Agriculture Commissioner (and loudmouth) Sid Miller is under consideration to become the next secretary of agriculture.

Holy smokes, man! I don’t know quite how to react if such a thing happens.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/12/heres-why-usda-remains-trumps-last-unmade-cabinet-pick

Miller has not distinguished himself — in a positive way, by my reckoning — since becoming head of the Texas Department of Agriculture in 2015. Instead, he’s managed merely to call attention to himself through his reckless use of Facebook and his tasteless remarks about the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee.

Miller has been spreading “fake news” stories on the social medium and he infamously referred to Clinton in a tweet, using a hideously profane epithet that I won’t repeat here. He recently came to Amarillo and had a dinner at a downtown restaurant — and then made a big splash as he expressed his displeasure over the meal he consumed; suffice to say he didn’t make many new friends here in the heart of Trump Country with his ridiculous display of public petulance … over a steak!

Now it might be that Miller would depart Austin to serve in the president-elect’s Cabinet at secretary of agriculture.

He would be the third Texan selected by Trump: Rex Tillerson has been nominated as secretary of state, despite (or because of) his close friendship with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin; Rick Perry has been chosen to be energy secretary, despite his lack of any real experience in the energy sector.

What would Miller bring to USDA? He once was a champion rodeo cowboy. There. That’s all I know about him … other than his big mouth and penchant for making a spectacle of himself.

We’ll just have to wait for Trump’s final Cabinet call.

It’s not a ‘landslide,’ Donald … really

trump_donald_getty_1

May I call you “Donald”?

My head is about to explode as I listen to the president-elect refer to his victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton as a “historic landslide.”

Historic? Yes. Surely. No one saw this victory coming. No one predicted that Donald J. Trump would win this election, that he would become commander in chief of the world’s greatest military complex. No one predicted this showman/reality TV celebrity/real estate mogul/serial philanderer/admitted groper of women would actually get the keys to the White House.

It’s historic, man.

Landslide? Nope. Not even close to one.

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/311115-trump-touts-historic-electoral-college-victory

He is trailing Clinton by 2.8 million votes. He won enough electoral votes to become elected. He finished with 304 of them; Clinton’s total ends at 227. Interestingly, Clinton lost more “faithless electors” than Trump when the Electoral College cast its vote on Monday; that, too, is “historic.”

Trump cannot possibly actually believe he won in a landslide. He has seen the numbers. He must know about the nation’s great divide.

He keeps spouting this nonsense. I guess we just need to get used to it. There’ll be much more to come.

Islamophobe to lead national security team

18-michael-flynn-trump-tower-w710-h473

President Bush declared it in 2001.

President Obama reaffirmed it in 2009.

“We are not at war with Islam,” both men said. The enemy, they asserted, comprises individuals who have “perverted” a great religion for some decidedly unholy causes. They are murderers, terrorists, thugs, goons … you name it.

So, who does the next president select as his national security adviser? A retired U.S. Army lieutenant general who calls Islam a “cancer.” Michael Flynn has said repeatedly over the years that the fight, indeed, is against those who adhere to a certain religious faith.

The attack at the Berlin Christmas market allegedly by an Islamic State agent, according to Donald J. Trump, underscores the hatred that Muslims harbor against Christians. Gen. Flynn shares that view and he will have the new president’s ear when the administration takes over on Jan. 20.

This is a dangerous situation that we’re about to enflame with the expected rhetoric that will come from Trump’s national security adviser.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/report-nsc-facing-staff-exodus-over-michael-flynn.html

Now we’re hearing reports of career security analysts leaving the National Security Council rather than serving under Gen. Flynn. There apparently is little contact between the NSC staff and the incoming team. What’s more, there are questions emerging about whether Flynn shared sensitive information with foreign military officers while he was serving in Afghanistan.

I don’t doubt for an instant that Gen. Flynn is a top-flight military tactician. He once ran the Defense Intelligence Agency and apparently did so with great competence. However, I do question his temperament — not to mention the temperament of the man who has selected him to lead the NSC.

Do we really need someone operating at the right hand of the commander in chief who has this nutty view that we’re fighting a war against more than 1 billion Muslims around the world?

We are at war with terrorists who do not represent the overwhelming majority of people who want to live in peace alongside the rest of the world.

The doctrine to which we have adhered since 9/11 has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of terrorists. We’ve eliminated the mastermind behind the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. We have blown other terrorist leaders to bits and have decimated the terrorists’ ability to sustain combat on the battlefield.

Have we eliminated the threat? No. The Berlin attack, the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey and the shooting this past week at the Swiss mosque show us that the fight continues.

It’s a fight against terrorists. It’s not a fight against a religion.

Enough of the excuses … Hillary lost!

clintonhillary_110716getty

I am growing weary of the constant blame-gaming that’s going on among those who wanted Hillary Rodham Clinton to become president of the United States.

By all means, I preferred her over the candidate who won. I’ve already stipulated as much — many times! — on this blog.

She didn’t win. She lost. Hillary was thought to be the prohibitive favorite to become the next president. She didn’t get there.

And yet, we keep hearing that FBI James Comey’s 11th-hour letter to Congress about those pesky e-mails doomed Clinton’s campaign. Now we hear that the Russian hackers might have tilted the election in Donald J. Trump’s favor.

On the first matter, there’s nothing anyone can prove about Comey’s last-minute intervention. On the second matter, there ought to be a special commission convened — independent of Congress — to examine what the Russkies did, how they did it and recommend ways to protect us from future hackers. Hey, we convened such a commission after the 9/11 attacks.

Former President Bill Clinton, one of New York’s presidential electors, chimed in today about Comey and the Russians.

A lot of things went wrong with the former president’s wife’s campaign. If anyone needs to take the hickey on this stunning loss, it ought to be folks such as Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign manager Robby Mook.

Hillary Clinton should have put herself miles ahead of Trump by the time Comey’s letter came out. She fell short.

Who gets the blame? Hillary Clinton and her team need to look inward.

Is this when Trump becomes ‘presidential’?

aalkvcj

It’s official … finally!

The Electoral College voted today and put Donald J. Trump on track to become the next president of the United States.

I’ll offer the perfunctory congratulations to the president-elect.

Now, though, I want to make a request of him: I want him to start sounding and acting like the future head of state of the greatest nation on Earth.

There’s a certain form of irony in what we’ve witnessed from the president-elect. He says certain things about the state of our great nation. He vows to “make America great again”; he has ridiculed our military, our intelligence network, our political leadership, Congress, certain members of his own political party and certainly the Democratic Party leadership.

With all of that rhetoric coming forth from the president-elect, what have we seen him do at those “thank you tour” rallies? He’s exhibited much of the buffoonery he displayed throughout his campaign. A protester was hauled out one rally and Trump said from the podium, “Get him outta here.”

We’ve heard zero high-minded rhetoric from the next president as he has toured the country. Yet … he vowed to sound more “presidential” as he prepares to take office.

It has happened. There’s no sign it will happen.

Trump has been elected officially, though. The electors put him over the top.

So, let’s start hearing something of substance from the new guy. How about talking to the entire nation, Mr. President-elect, not just to those who voted for you?

He vowed to be “president for all Americans.” It’s time he started at least sounding as if he means it.