Tag Archives: Democratic Party

national news, political news

What a difference a day makes

BBuRyjq

Let’s see … today is Tuesday.

Democrats opened their presidential nominating convention a day earlier. They had been rocked and rolled by allegations that their lame-duck national party chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had sought to rig their nominating process in favor of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Schultz quit the chairmanship. Democrats opened their convention amid signs of open rebellion by delegates loyal to Sen. Bernie Sanders, who battled Clinton throughout the primary process.

Then came those rousing speeches by first lady Michelle Obama, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Cory Booker and, oh yeah, Sen. Sanders.

What happened to that dissension? What happened to the insurrection?

Well, today is a new day. And Democrats proceeded to make some history by nominating Hillary Rodham Clinton as their candidate for president of the United States.

What’s more, the roll call of votes cast on the convention floor ended with Sanders himself calling for a “suspension of the rules,” which the convention chair interpreted as a call for nominating Clinton by acclamation.

The delegates cheered loudly as they endorsed the acclamation vote.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-wins-historic-nomination-%E2%80%94-with-a-boost-from-sanders/ar-BBuSbWh?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Just as the party made history eight years ago by nominating the first African-American to run for president, it did so again today by sending its first woman nominee into political combat against the Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.

Will the anger subside over the shenanigans of the former DNC chair? Oh, probably not. Republicans will make sure to keep it roiling along with the dedicated Sanders supporters whoĀ might have to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote for Clinton this fall.

Former President Bill Clinton is going to speak tonight.

This is just a hunch, but my gut tells me he’s going to bring the house down, just as he did in 2012 when he lit up the convention hall in Charlotte to exhort the delegates to fight for Barack Obama’s re-election.

It’s been said many times that “a week is a lifetime in politics.”

So, too, it appears is a single day.

national news, political news

Government: It’s a partnership, yes?

13631414_1745253302411619_3376219339678446266_n

This graphic showed up on a social media feed that I get.

I find it most instructive. I won’t recite it to you, as you can see it for yourself.

It does, though, prompt a thought or two about government and its very nature as created by the founders of our great country.

They created a partnership. They limited the power of the president on purpose by dividing the power among three co-equal branches of government … and by allowing states to create their own governments to deal with issues germane to those who live within those states and other territories.

So, when I hear Republicans these days yap and yammer about how the country is going to hell — a notion to which I do not subscribe — I also have to wonder if they’re really ready to take ownership of the government in which they, too, are an integral part.

The party that opposes the individual in the White House has been as much a part of what supposedly ails the country as the president.

Sure, the president — and vice president — are elected in a nationwide vote. Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives are elected by those who live within their states and/or congressional districts. Collectively, though, they also represent a national constituency.

The same logic can be applied to governors and state legislators.

As the graphic points, most of those office at this point are occupied by the Republican Party.

Which begs the question: Why are they bitching so loudly?

national news, political news

Republicans are looking like … uh … Democrats!

A woman checks out a tee shirt at a merchandise booth outside Quicken Loans Arena during first day of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Monday, July 18, 2016. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

The first day of the Republican Party’s presidential nominating convention has gotten off to a start no one might have seen coming.

Those stodgy, staid, stuffy Republicans are looking like Democrats.

More to the point, they’re looking like Democrats of Yesteryear, back when the Democrats used to fight among themselves, convention delegates walking off the floor.

The GOP started its Donald J. Trump nominating convention by having a knock-down floor fight initiated by the anti-Trump forces. They wanted to change the rules to allow a roll-call vote that could have allowed delegates to abandon their obligation to voting for the frontrunner.

They didn’t clear the hurdle. The convention chair declared the voice vote to have gone to the Trumpkins, and the move died at the scene.

Democrats in 1968 and again in 1972 used to fight like that. Republicans, meanwhile, conducted orderly conventions those years … and went on to win the presidential election. The 1980 Democratic convention had its share of drama, too, with Ted Kennedy’s forces fighting to change the rules, only to lose that fight to the Jimmy Carter juggernaut. That election turned out badly for Democrats, too.

This year, Democrats are going to be mild-mannered. Republicans are going to fight among themselves.

What does any of this portend for the fall election?

I am not going there. I’ve tried to predict political outcomes for too long without success.

I’ll just sit back and watch the theatrics.

national news, political news

VP picks don’t matter … really

here-are-the-top-vice-president-picks-for-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton_1

Donald J. Trump is getting set to have the most important day of his presidential campaign.

He’s going to announce his selection as a vice-presidential running mate.

No need for a show of hands — if you get my drift. But does anyone out there in Blog World really think Trump’s selectionĀ is going to matter, that it’s going to sway anyone’s vote, that it’s going to be determinative of this election?

For that matter, do you think Hillary Rodham Clinton’s choice is going to matter, either?

The only way these picksĀ might determine anything is if they select absolute dogs, losers, Fruit Loops. I don’t expect that to happen Friday or a week from Friday.

Recent political history is full of questionable VP picks. Richard Nixon selected Spiro Agnew in 1968; the Republicans won a squeaker that year and rolled to a historic landslide four years later. George H.W. Bush picked Dan Quayle in 1988 and then piled up a huge victory.

I guess you could make the case that John McCain’s hail-Mary selection of Sarah Palin in 2008 might have turned off some voters, but I believe McCain would have lost anyway.

One of the more interesting selections — to my way of thinking — was Lloyd Bentsen, the Texan who ran with presidential nominee Michael Dukakis in 1988. More than a few Democrats were grousing that year that Bentsen and Dukakis should have traded positions on the ticket.

But this year’s focus has been solely — and not entirely in a flattering way — focused on Republican Trump and Democrat Clinton.

These are two of the most polarizing figures ever to be nominated by the major parties. So, whoever they select will be relegated to the shadows.

I agree, though, that Trump’s selection is drawing the most attention, mostly because the pool of potential GOP stars is so shallow. The word is that he’s leaning toward former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

However, given Trump’s mercurial behavior, there’s a part of me that wonders if he’s going to stun us all with someone no one ever saw coming.

Sure, we’ll then chatter about it for a time.

Then it’ll be Trump being Trump … and the insults will fly.

national news, political news

Is Trump’s campaign unraveling

donald-trump-angry-caricature-flickr-cc

So, where do we stand on the eve of the Republican National Convention that is set to nominate Donald J. Trump for president?

* The presumptive nominee has about 1/40th of the money on hand that his Democratic opponent has.

* He is losing senior staff members.

* Trump’s “short list” of prospective vice-presidential picks hasn’t been winnowed much from anything resembling a long list.

* Key congressional Republicans are still declining to sing the nominee’s virtues.

* The five previous Republican presidential nominees are not going to attend the convention.

Hmmm. How’s it going for the nominee? Not good.

I’m having difficulty grasping how this major-party presidential nominee is going to keep his campaign from unraveling.

Who’s going to give the keynote speech at the GOP convention? That’s the speech that’s supposed to set the tone for the campaign to follow. These assignments usually go to up-and-coming political stars. Sometimes a shining-light governor gets to deliver the speech.

Who’s lining up for that task in Cleveland?

With so few actual GOP luminaries even committing to being present at the convention, I am left to wonder: How in the world is this event going to unfold?

The guy with the toughest job of all surely has to be House Speaker Paul Ryan, the convention chairman who has to figure out a way to manage the mayhem that seems set to ensue.

Ryan cannot even bring himself to speak with any sort of enthusiasm about the nominee he has “endorsed.” And to my ears, his “endorsement” is one of those you hear from politicians giving it through gritted teeth.

I’ve seen the polling that puts Trump within striking distance of Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. I’ve seen the surveys that suggest Clinton has a much broader path toward election than Trump, but with Trump still being able to trumpet some success.

But the GOP nominee has little campaignĀ money, virtually no organization, no apparent strategy to win those so-called “battleground states.”

Trump has promised an unconventional campaign for the presidency.

Boy howdy! He’s delivering on that promise.

In spades.

local news, national news, political news, State news

Come back, Republican Party

obamabarack_getty_1

I share Barack Obama’s concern for the Republican Party.

Yes, the president of the United States — the nation’s leading Democrat, at least until January — is concerned that the GOP is fading away, it is morphing into something that cannot join in the act of governing.

That’s what he told late-night comic Jimmy Fallon in an interview to be broadcast tonight.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282812-obama-im-worried-about-the-republican-party

Spoiler alert: The interview is a scream.

Obama said his party is delighted at the prospect of facing Donald J. Trump in this year’s presidential election. Trump’s fellow Republicans, though, aren’t so thrilled.

The president said the Republican presidential nominee should be someone who can do the job, understands the issues at hand, and “ultimately can still move the country forward.”

Does that sound like Donald Trump?

I’ve seen dominant political parties here in Texas. Both of them — Democrats and Republicans — have at times abused their dominance over the other side.

I came to Texas in the spring of 1984 and settled in the Golden Triangle region, which at the time remained a strong “yellow dog Democrat” stronghold. Local Republicans felt disrespected and dismissed by Democrats who held tightly onto virtually every office in three counties — Jefferson, Orange and Hardin.

The political landscape has shifted dramatically in Texas. Republicans now are the top dogs. They have clamped vise grips on every statewide office in Texas.

I moved to the Panhandle in January 1995 — and into the heart of GOP Country.

The Democratic Party virtually doesn’t even exist here, no matter what the few of them around the Panhandle would say.

Has it been good to have one party so dominant? No.

The president’s point, though, is that the national GOP has become something unrecognizable from the party that used to take pride in being able to govern.

As the president told Fallon: “But what’s happened in that party culminating in this current nomination, I think is not actually good for the country as a whole.Ā It’s not something Democrats should wish for. And my hope is, is that maybe once you get through this cycle, there’s some corrective action and they get back to being a center-right party. And Democratic Party being a center-left party. And we start figuring how to work together.”

Work together. I believe that’s how government works best.

 

national news, political news

Bernie wins while losing

sandersclinton_040116getty

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders has lost the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

However, he’s also won the argument within the Democratic Party.

How? By pulling presumptive nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton closer to his end of the political spectrum than she was at the beginning of this campaign.

Sanders is expected eventually to end his campaign. He’ll throw his support behind Clinton. He’ll join President Obama and other party dignitaries in campaigning hard for Clinton against Republican nominee Donald J. Trump.

Sure, he still says he’ll fight “all the way to the convention” in Philadelphia. That’s what they all say. Ted Cruz said it the day before he dropped out of the GOP race. So did John Kasich. It’s just brave talk.

Sen. Sanders will take away from this campaign the satisfaction that he’s not got Clinton talking about income inequality, corruption on Wall Street and stricter international trade policies.

Do not expect Clinton to declare herself a “democratic socialist,” which Sanders proclaimed throughout his campaign with great pride

What the defeated Democratic presidential candidate cannot determine, though, is whether a President Clinton would carry that message forward once she takes the oath in January.

As of today, though, he’s changed the dialogue within the Democratic Party.

That, folks, is no small victory.

 

national news, political news

How do you campaign against a moving target?

donald-trump-gag-big

So much about this presidential campaign is a puzzle and I’m having trouble finding the pieces to complete it.

I’ll start and finish with Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee.

He has tossed every single bit of conventional wisdom into the Dumpster. Trump has no public service experience; he has demonstrated zero understanding of how government works; he has blustered, bullied and bloviated his way to this point in the campaign; his insults and innuendo should have doomed his candidacy months ago; his personal history is, well, checkered.

To my way of thinking, the most confusing element of this campaign is the absence of any philosophical grounding for this individual.

In normal election years, Democrats nominate a candidate who stands for a set of principles; Republicans do the same.

Hillary Clinton is about to become the Democratic nominee. She, too, has switched positions on occasion as she battles Sen. Bernie Sanders for her party’s nomination.

But one gets a general idea of Clinton’s world view: It seems to tilt left, with a more hawkish view of the use of military power than her more progressive political brethren.

Trump? Where does this guy stand? On anything?

He changes his positions almost hourly. Women should face punishment if they obtain an abortion; on second thought, he didn’t mean that. He would ban Muslims from entering the United States; oh, wait, that’s just a “suggestion.” He once was pro-choice on abortion; now he’s pro-life. He once called Hillary Clinton “great”; now he calls her “Crooked Hillary.” He said Mexico is sending drug dealers, rapists and killers into this country: but he says “I love Hispanics.” He has boasted about his philandering; now he seeks to woo the evangelical voters who comprise much of the GOP “base.”

How is Clinton going to campaign against any of that? How is she going to pit her ideas against his ideas, when he doesn’t seem to stand on a single principle — other than furthering his own ambition?

The late Gertrude Stein once said of Oakland, Calif., that “there is no ‘there’ there.”

I’mĀ sensing that Trump lacks a “there.”

media news, national news, political news

Polls, polls … and more polls

sandersclinton_040116getty

Is it me or have the media become more obsessed with poll coverage in this presidential election cycle than ever before in the history of mass media in this country?

Of particular interest to me are a certain type of intraparty poll that measures candidates’ relative strength against each other.

These surveys drive me nuts. Bonkers, man!

Why? They’re meaningless.

Here’s the latest: NBC says Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a nine-point lead over Democratic Party primary rival U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders. That’s nationally.

What, I ask, does that mean? Does that mean if we had a national political primary that Clinton would beat Sanders by nine percentage points?

Maybe. Except that we aren’t going through a national primary election cycle. Candidates are trudging through these primaries state by bloody state, where the voters in each state have different perspectives, different worries and concerns, different philosophies.

Wisconsin is going to have its Democratic and Republican primaries today. Sanders is favored at this moment to win the Democratic primary; U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is favored to win the GOP primary.

Still, the media keep reporting that Donald J. Trump holds a diminishing national lead over Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich in a national poll of Republican voters.

I’m running out of ways to say this: I do not care about national intraparty polls. They are notĀ relevant to anything.

Some TV pundits the other evening were saying that they perceive fewer “horse-race” questions coming from the media as the primary campaigns head toward the home stretch. They say they’re hearing more “policy-driven” questions … allegedly.

More policy and fewer polls, please.

 

national news, political news

Remember when The Gipper was a pushover, too?

2 Comments

GTY_hillary_clinton_donald_trump_split_jt_150912_16x9_992

Let’s play this election season out, theoretically, to the end.

The Democrats will nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton as their presidential candidate; the Republicans will select Donald J. Trump as their standard bearer.

Clinton is the one with the experience: a policy-wonk first lady; a twice-elected U.S. senator from New York; a secretary of state. She’s well-schooled on the nuance of foreign and domestic policy. She’s articulate and is a cool customer under fire.

Trump is none of that. He’s a hot-headed reality TV celebrity. He made a fortune in real estate development. He’s married to his third wife. He has boasted about his sexual exploits with women who were married to other men. His campaign has featured little substance and virtually zero political philosophy — but a whole lot of insults and outrageous proclamations.

Clinton’s the favorite. The prohibitive favorite. She’ll win in a landslide while making history as the nation’s first female president.

Hold on a second.

Thirty-six years ago, the Democrats nominated a former one-term Georgia governor. He was a U.S. Naval Academy grad. He was a policy wonk. He was a smart guy, although perhaps a tad self-righteous. Republicans nominated a former movie actor who starred in those films with Bonzo the chimp; and oh yes, he made that film in which he portrayed Notre DameĀ football player George Gipp. Sure, he was a two-term California governor.

The Democrat was supposed to win, right?

It didn’t turn out that way. The Republican, Ronald Wilson Reagan, carried 44 states and blew President Jimmy Carter out of the White House.

It’s that history that should tell Democrats to take this upcoming election very seriously if it plays out the way it’s projected to play out.

By any normal measure, Donald Trump should be an easy mark for Democrats. This campaign, however, hasn’t gone according to the form sheet in almost any measure.

Clinton wasn’t supposed to be challenged so seriously from within her party. As for Trump, no one took him seriously when he announced his intention to seek the GOP nomination; his “fellow Republicans” are taking him seriously enough now — so much so that they’re staying up at night trying to concoct ways to derail his political juggernaut.

Both candidates are going to carry a large amount of baggage into a fall campaign, if they are the nominees. They both are packing a lot of negative feeling from within their respective parties.

Of the two, Trump’s negatives — from my perspective — far outweigh Clinton’s.

That doesn’t give the Democratic opposition any reason to fall asleep at the wheel.

The Gipper was supposed to lose big, too.