Tag Archives: Donald Trump

It’s do or die for ‘Jeb!’

Jeb  Bush

Erica Greider, writing for Texas Monthly’s blog, offers an interesting analysis of the stakes for today’s South Carolina Republican presidential primary.

She thinks Sen. Marco Rubio has the most to gain — or lose — from the results.

But she inserted this into her blog:

“The prevailing wisdom is that the alternative with the most at stake tomorrow is Jeb Bush. More specifically, there’s a sense that if he can’t manage a strong third-place finish, at least—despite all his advantages at the outset of the race, a strong performance in the most recent Republican debate, and being joined by his brother, former president George W. Bush, on the trail—that it’s time to pack it in.”

Here’s the rest of what she writes.

I’m going to go with the “prevailing wisdom,” which is that the biggest loser from the South Carolina primary could be John Ellis Bush, aka Jeb!

His brother, W, came out of the shadows to campaign actively for hisĀ  younger sibling. The 43rd president — who’d made a vow, like their father had done — to stay out of the political arena once he left office. George W. Bush could remain silent no longer, as Donald J. Trump continued blustering about how W and his bunch had “lied” their way into starting the Iraq War.

Jeb figured that Brother W’s continuing popularity in South Carolina could propel him a strong finish when the votes are counted.

I am not privy to the details or the fine print, but it’s looking as though Jeb Bush might not make the grade.

I’ll just offer this bit of personal privilege. I did not vote for W any of the four times I had the chance: his two elections for Texas governor or his two elections for president of the United States. I do, though, like him personally. I’ve had the privilege of visiting twice with him extensively while he was governor — and once briefly in 1988, before he won his first term as Texas governor.

He’s an engaging andĀ personable fellow.

It was my hope that some of that would rub off on Jeb. It apparently hasn’t. Jeb has been caught in that anti-establishment buzzsaw being wielded by he likes ofĀ Trump and — oddly enough — U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

I will not dare to predict the outcome of the South Carolina vote today. Jeb Bush had better hope he finishes much nearer to the top of the heap than the bottom of it.

At this moment, I am pessimistic.

 

President Gingrich, anyone?

1407859219000-Election-3-

How decisive will the South Carolina Republican primary be after the votes are counted?

That remains a matter of considerable discussion.

Donald J. Trump is the frontrunner. The fight now is for second place.

But consider what transpired there four years ago.

Newt Gingrich won the state’s primary, which when you look back shouldn’t have been a huge surprise. The former U.S. House of Reps speaker hails from next-door Georgia. He was more or less a “favorite son” candidate of GOP voters. He then promptly flamed out.

The same theory perhaps applies to Sen. Bernie Sanders’ blowout win in the New Hampshire Democratic primary just a while ago. He represents neighboring Vermont in the U.S. Senate. Familiarity didn’t breed contempt there, either.

This process remains in its early stages.

The Republican field has been winnowed considerably from that massive horde of contenders/pretenders that began the race.

For my money, though, the serious test will occur on March 1 when Texas joins several other states in that big Super Tuesday primary.

Then we’ll see who’s got the chops to keep going.

Let’s all stay tuned.

 

More major culling to occur?

republican-elephant-668x501

It’s beginning to look as though the Republican Party primary presidential field is going to endure another serious thinning out … maybe soon.

The South Carolina primary is coming up. Donald Trump continues to lead the pack — for the life of me I don’t know how.

Ted Cruz is in the mix. So is Marco Rubio.

That leaves the three also-rans, one of whom I had high hopes could resurrect his campaign.

Ben Carson should leave the race. John Kasich — my favorite Republican and possibly my favorite candidate in either party — needs to score well if he’s going to continue. Jeb Bush? I fear that he’s done, too.

That will leave us with three men running for the GOP nomination.

Two of them are serious, although none of them — for my money — should be the nominee.

It’s looking like one of them will survive the dogfight.

It’s been said that the primary system is a grueling battle that determines whether the “fittest” of the candidates will survive. I’ve called it a form of political natural selection.

This election cycle is proving to be a test of conventional wisdom, which used to suggest that the fittest candidates were those with the most experience, the most knowledge, and who are the most articulate in explaining their philosophy.

That’s not the case these days.

The fittest candidates are those who scream the loudest and who appeal to the fears of an electorate that has been told they have plenty to fear.

 

Pope’s statement careless, wise all at once

B-5

Pope Francis was correct to suggest that nations shouldn’t build walls, but should instead erect bridges.

That’s as far as his wisdom extends.

The pontiff demonstrated a remarkably tin political ear when he suggested that “anyone who builds walls” isn’t a Christian, which a clear shot at Republican presidential frontrunner Donald J. Trump.

The pope should have known that Trump would respond as he has done. He should have anticipated the firestorm he would create when he weighed in on the American presidential campaign.

He didn’t do that. Yes, the pope tried to take back some of what he said initially. It was too late to tamp down Trump’s anger — not to mention the anger of those who are supporting his presidential candidacy.

The Washington Post does take note of the fundamental message the pope sought to deliver, which is that we should treat each other with more humanity. We shouldn’t fall into the trap of demonization.

Of course the pope’s comments drew a sharp response from those who have noted the Vatican — where the pope lives — also is surrounded by walls. Hmmm. Well, I would simply add that the comparison isn’t entirely an accurate one, given the security concerns that the pontiff, whoever he is, has faced for centuries from those who would seek to do harm to him and the Catholic Church.

Whatever his noble intentions, the pope — if you’ll pardon the indelicate language — has managed to step in it.

 

Court to rule on Cruz’s eligibility to run

IMG_0631_JPG_312x1000_q100

It won’t be the “big court” that will decide it, but a judge in Illinois has agreed to hear a case that’s been dogging a major Republican presidential candidate ever since he entered the race.

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas was born in Canada; his mother is American, a U.S. citizen. HisĀ father is Cuban.

Cruz has maintained that because Mom is an American, he was a U.S. citizen the instant he was born. Thus, says the candidate,Ā  he is eligible to run for president as a “natural born citizen.”

But a fellow who happens to support Ben Carson, another GOP presidential candidate,Ā has filed a lawsuit to challenge Cruz’s assertion.

Of course, we have Donald J. Trump continuing to threaten to sue.

The Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill., has agreed to hear the case. I wish the U.S. Supreme Court would hear it; perhaps it will … eventually.

To be honest, I am tired of this kind of hatchet-job politicking on candidates. I do not want Cruz to become president of the United States. However, I believe he is right to say that he is fully eligible to run for the office.

Let the judge decide.

I’m not a legal or constitutional scholar, but the way I read U.S. law as it refers to citizenship, the senator has made his case.

I doubt a lower court decision is going to provide any closure. Still, I am glad that someone with legal authority — and presumably the educational background — to make an informed decision will take us closer to ending this ridiculous discussion.

 

Weirdness overtakes reason on campaign trail

sophiepope

It’s been like this for some time now.

Probably since the day in June 2015 when Donald J. Trump — the one-time reality TV celebrity and real estate mogul — entered the Republican Party presidential primary campaign.

Events of the past 24 hours, though, have brought about a level of weirdness that I don’t think many of us ever saw coming.

It involves Trump and — of all people — his Holiness, Pope Francis I, the head of the Catholic Church.

The pontiff is touring Mexico and he said that anyone who wants to build a wall to bar immigrants is “not Christian.” He said Scripture doesn’t condone such a thing. I should note that Pope Francis made his remarks in Spanish and they have been interpreted into English; I trust the translation is accurate.

Trump fired back, calling the pope’s criticism of an American politician’s faith “disgraceful.”

Trump kept up his criticism of the pope. To my knowledge, the pope hasn’t yet answered the GOP frontrunner’s criticism of him.

I am just not certain now where this campaign goes from here. Nor do I have a clue as to how it could get even stranger.

But you know what? Given that I never thought it would devolve to this level — with the pope and a leading American politician at odds over a proposal to build a wall — I am preparing myself for the weirdness level to keep escalating.

 

Religion collides with politics

B-5

Didn’t someone once suggest that you shouldn’t ever discuss religion and politics?

Here we are, then. Talking about both things in the same sentence.

Pope Francis I decided to weigh in with remarks about Republican presidential frontrunner Donald J. Trump’s proposal to build a wall across our southern border to keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States.

Anyone who’d propose such a thing, the pontiff, said isn’t a Christian.

Trump fired back. Trump calledĀ the pope’s view “disgraceful” and said, by golly, he’s a devout Christian.

Others on the right are criticizing the pope for engaging in this political discussion in the first place. Who is this guy? they wonder. What qualifies him to comment on the American political system?

Let’s take a breath.

Maybe the pope made his statement in Spanish, or Italian, or Latin and it got mistranslated.

Surely, too, he isn’t the first public figure — American or otherwise — to drag religion into a campaign for a secular political office. U.S. Sen. John F. Kennedy faced intenseĀ suspicion over his Catholic faith in the 1960 campaign and he ended up dispelling much of it with a speech in Houston in which he said he’d follow the Constitution and would not — contrary to allegations — be a puppet for the Vatican.

And there have been others as well.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable for the pope — a renowned international public figure — to weigh in on a U.S. public policy discussion. He’s entitled to his view.

It’s that it has ignited a firestorm that makes meĀ uncomfortable when I hear politicians feeling forced to defend their religious beliefs while seeking an office to which they will take an oath to protect and defend a wholly secular document.

That would be the Constitution of the United States.

 

Likability vs. irascibility

hillaryclintonselfie_021416getty

The Hill is reporting a story that seems to define — for me, at least — just how confusing and confounding this election cycle has become.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is trying to enhance her likability. She’s taking selfies with voters and celebrities. Remember when Sen. Barack Obama told her during a 2008 campaign debate that “You’re likable enough, Hillary”? Apparently not this time around.

She’s fighting image woes that seem to suggest she isn’t authentic, let alone likable.

Do her Democratic primary voters want her to become warm and fuzzy? Do they insist that she show her grandmotherly side more often? I have no clue.

Read the link.

Now, for the Republicans.

Likability isn’t part of the formula that’s propelled Donald J. Trump to the top of the GOP presidential candidate heap.

He’s not likable. Frankly, for my taste, he’s not a lot of things: He’s not presidential; he’s not sophisticated; he’s not grounded in a philosophy other than, say, narcissism.

But there he is. He’s leading South Carolina’s GOP primary polls after threatening to sue Ted Cruz over whether he’s qualified to run for office; after saying President Bush “lied” to get us into the Iraq War; after insulting candidates, a bona fide war hero, disabled people, voters, media types . . . anyone within earshot.

I’m not sure what this might say about any possible differences between Democratic and Republican “base” voters. I hope it doesn’t reveal that Democrats inherently are softer and that Republicans just as inherently love nastiness.

But now I’m beginning to wonder.

 

Who’s ‘lawless’ now?

donald

Donald J. Trump went on one of his stream-of-consciousness riffs today at a press conference in South Carolina.

In the midst of his 45-minute press conference, the Republican presidential primary frontrunner answered a hypothetical question about what he would do as a governor regarding immigrants.

He wouldn’t let them into his state, Trump said, ignoring the concern from many experts who say that immigration is a federal issue and that governors don’t have the authority to deny someone from entering their state.

Then he said, “I don’t care what the rules and regulations say.”

He would work around them as a governor to make it so difficult for immigrants seeking to enter his state that they would want to go somewhere else.

There you have it.

He doesn’t care about the law. He’ll do what he wants.

I believe that’s the definition of “lawlessness.”

 

As GOP field thins out, so might Trump’s support

republican-elephant-668x501

An interesting dynamic might be unfolding as the Republican presidential field continues to thin out.

It involves Donald J. Trump and the support he’s been able to get so far.

I believe it’s fair to ask: Who are the voters supporting the dropouts going to endorse?

The GOP field now is down to seven candidates; it started out at 17, if you’ll recall.

Some of the so-called “establishment” candidates have packed it in. The latest significant casualty was New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Others have gone by the wayside and none of them appears to be friends of Trump, who’s managed to insult his way to the top of the GOP heap.

I’m wondering if Trump’s support now will dwindle as Republican voters who were loyal, say, to Christie, or Mike Huckabee, or Rick Santorum, or Bobby Jindal start looking around for someone else to support.

Ted Cruz is mining the ultraconservative voters. Marco Rubio, although now severely damaged by the battering he took in the most recent GOP debate, is on the hunt for the same folks. John Kasich, my favorite Republican, also is beginning to gather some steam. Jeb Bush also could find himself thrust into the game.

All of these individuals stand to gain from the remnants of support that rallied around theĀ candidates who’ve departed the campaign trail.

Where does that leave Trump? With his base of support, comprising voters who somehow are infatuated with the candidate’s brashness and don’t seem to care one little bit that he doesn’t seem to possess a political philosophy on which he would govern.

Let’s just watch this thing continue to play out.

I’ve seen the polls that show Trump still leading in South Carolina. However, as we’ve seen in previous election cycles, the Palmetto State is where the GOP campaign has been known to get nasty … as in real nasty.

I’m now wondering how well Trump will hold up when the mud starts flying.