April 4-5, 2016
Apr 04 04:36 Branch Trumpidians vs. reality Apr 04 06:06 Trump attacks Sykes Apr 04 12:22 Can a whiner defeat Hillary? Apr 05 05:34 Revisiting Ronald Reagan's Republican Party Apr 05 12:06 Explaining Trump's theft Apr 05 13:22 Roger Stone's intimidation tactics Apr 05 13:53 Tweet of the day
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Branch Trumpidians vs. reality
Today's big news from the campaign trail is that Sen. Cruz won a majority of delegates to the Republican National Convention. Since the delegates are technically not bound, however, it's impossible to state with certainty that they're Cruz delegates.
On the pro-Trump spin trail, Trump's supporters insist that following the well-written and long-established rules for the Republican National Convention is anti-American. For instance, Laura Ingraham is upset that the rules are being followed , saying "GOP Establ delegate games in TN & LA proves that they wd rather blow up the party than change on issues driving @realDonaldTrump voters."
Like others who've been infected with Trump's mind control disease, Ms. Ingraham's insistence that following the rules is playing games. I'd love hearing Ms. Ingraham explain that statement. Yesterday, a Branch Trumpidian insisted that Republicans were stealing Trump's nomination. The Trumpsters didn't like hearing that it wasn't Trump's nomination until he accumulated a majority of the delegates. While Trump frequently talks about leading the silent majority, the truth is that he's leading a noisy plurality. This picture speaks volumes:
The implication is that only Trump voters are "patriots, vets and voters." Obviously, that's a lie. While there's no doubt that patriots, vets and voters support Trump, there's no doubt that patriots, vets and voters support Cruz and Kasich, too.
For Trump's supporters to hint that they've got a lock on those people is intentionally insulting and divisive. If Trump insists that he's trying to bring the GOP together. There's nothing in his supporters' words that say he's capable of uniting people other than uniting them in opposition to him.
It's time for people like Laura Ingraham to accept reality that they aren't the final arbiters of who's patriotic and worthy of support.
Posted Monday, April 4, 2016 4:36 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 04-Apr-16 09:42 AM
I like that image, Gary.
When a cop writes Trump a traffic ticket, equal resonance everywhere? What? Vets and patriots get ticketed too?
Is there a chance Trump got his ego at a drive-up window at McDonalds, and said, "Supersize it?"
Trump attacks Sykes
It's indisputable that Donald Trump has gotten lots of traction attacking specific media figures. This time, though, Trump won't gain traction attacking a media figure. That's because Trump's attacked Charlie Sykes , saying "Charlie Sykes is a lowlife. Charlie Sykes is a guy who is not a real believer, he wants the establishment to win because it's good for his third-rate show. He's not a smart man, he's actually a dumb man. He's a dummy."
In the past, like now, Trump has attacked media figures to take attention away from Trump's misstatements. That's worked well when he's attacked 'the media' or if he's attacked Megyn Kelly. It won't work this time because Wisconsin conservatives know that Charlie Sykes is one of the smartest conservatives in Wisconsin. The only way that Trump benefits from picking this fight is if it helps him in later primaries. With New York's primary 2 weeks away, attacking Sykes isn't likely to benefit Trump there. Criticizing Sykes in Wisconsin isn't as fatal as criticizing the Packers or cheese but it isn't bright, either. Attacking Sykes is like criticizing Scott Walker. To use Sykes phrase about attacking Walker in Wisconsin, it's "weapons-grade stupid."
Sykes didn't take the criticism sitting down:
"I believe he was quoting Abraham Lincoln," Sykes said. "Seriously though, he took time out from talking about ISIS, the war on terror, international trade, immigration and the economy, to talk about me? A talk-show host who asked him some questions? Kind of sad. But kind of typical."
Trump has proven that he's the thinnest of thin-skinned candidates in recent presidential history. His 'rattle-factor' is off-the-charts high.
Wisconsin voters, from what we've seen, aren't easily distracted. They aren't shiny object voters like Laura Ingraham, Eric Bolling and Sean Hannity. Finally, Trump made this foolish statement:
"I would tell you, I think this has the feel of a victory," Trump told reporters Sunday during a campaign stop at a Milwaukee diner. "This has the feel of a victory."
Trump's onto something ... if you define victory as finishing second, 8-12 points behind the guy getting the most votes. Trump cited the PPP 'poll' as reason for optimism. The Marquette University poll is Wisconsin's gold standard. Their final poll before the primary didn't show a tight race between Sen. Cruz and Mr.Trump.
Posted Monday, April 4, 2016 6:06 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 04-Apr-16 09:32 AM
"Wisconsin conservatives know that Charlie Sykes is one of the smartest conservatives in Wisconsin."
Faint praise.
Comment 2 by eric z at 04-Apr-16 09:37 AM
Have to add, Gary, I actually did follow your link while having no idea at all who Charley Sykes is, and why I should care. This from that item:
"I believe he was quoting Abraham Lincoln," Sykes said. "Seriously though, he took time out from talking about ISIS, the war on terror, international trade, immigration and the economy, to talk about me? A talk-show host who asked him some questions? Kind of sad. But kind of typical."
Gary, you're taking time to write about Charley Sykes.
Just saying . . .
Can a whiner defeat Hillary?
If, God forbid, the general election pits Hillary against The Donald, the most important factor might be whether Hillary is better at playing the victim card or whether Trump is better at playing the whiner. At this point, it's anyone's guess on who wins that match-up.
What isn't open for debate is whether Trump's demographic troubles are too deep to dig out of. This graphic shows Trump underwater with Hispanics in a big way:
That's a net -65 with Hispanics. By comparison, Romney lost Hispanics by 44 points in 2012. Trump performs worse than Romney. It's interesting to note that Trump accuses Romney of running a terrible campaign and of losing an election he should've won. Then there's Trump's women problem.
I'm not talking specifically about Trump's name-calling of women like Megyn Kelly and Carly Fiorina, although that's contributing to his women problem. Trump's rating with women is terrible:
The good news for Trump is that his net favorability with women is better than his net favorability with Hispanics. Trump is just a -47 with women compared with a -65 with Hispanics. The bad news is that women make up a majority of voters in the United States.
Which brings us to whether voters will vote for a whiner like Trump :
Trump: Honestly Kasich should not be allowed to run. And I'll go opposite on you- he hurts Trump much more than he hurts Cruz. And, in New York, I have tremendous numbers in New York and I have tremendous numbers in Pennsylvania, those two numbers just came out from CBS, I guess you saw them: but Kasich shouldn't be allowed to run.
Reporter: Under what grounds?
Trump: Under the grounds that Rand Paul could have stayed in, and he had nothing. Marco Rubio could have stayed in, Jeb Bush could have stayed in. They all could have stayed in. They could have just stayed in. That's all he's doing. He's 1 for 29. And the one thing that he won barely, and if I spent one more day in Ohio, I would have beaten him because I came pretty close. The only thing Kasich won was Ohio, where he's the governor and where he has the machine working. Which isn't doing well, it's in the middle of the pack of his neighbors. He's only in the middle of his pack, he's not doing well in Ohio. If you look at his neighboring states, he's exactly in the middle of the pack. That's not great. Kasich shouldn't be allowed to continue, and the RNC shouldn't allow him to continue. And Kasich has more of an impact on me than he does on Cruz.
Kasich shouldn't be allowed to continue because he hurts Trump more than he hurts Cruz? What a whiner. A candidate's supporters and family have the final say over who stays in and who needs to drop out, not King Donald.
Posted Monday, April 4, 2016 12:22 PM
No comments.
Revisiting Ronald Reagan's Republican Party
This op-ed reminds us that Ronald Reagan's Republican Party didn't start smoothly. In fact, it's true that the Republican Party initially rejected Ronald Reagan's reforms. Then as now, the GOP preferred policies that maintained the status quo. Then as now, there was a rebel wing to the GOP. Back then, Ronald Reagan was that rebel. That rebel wing of the GOP was idea-driven and idealistic.
Today, the GOP Establishment, in its truest definition, prefers policies that maintain the status quo and that took care of big corporations through corporate welfare, aka crony capitalism. Today, the GOP's rebel wing has a formal name. It's called the TEA Party. At its best, the TEA Party is bustling with ideas that would solve America's biggest problems. At its worst, the GOP has been the party of crony capitalism and corporate welfare.
These days, both parties are guilty of supporting crony capitalism and using the governments' regulatory authority to limit competition.
In 1981, the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, (D-NY), called the Republican Party the party of ideas. When Republicans got crushed in the 2006 midterms, Mara Liasson said that that election was "the ideology-free election." It was a referendum on GOP corruption. It was about Democrats running on criticism alone. They opposed the Iraq War for the wrong reasons but at the right time.
It's obvious that Donald Trump isn't an ideas guy. Ted Cruz isn't the Republicans' top idea man but he's a good candidate with a very good campaign organization. That's why I think Sen. Cruz translates into being the Republicans' best hope of recapturing the White House.
Sen. Cruz isn't just comfortable with Gov. Walker's reform agenda. It's that he gets the importance of getting government off the people's backs so they can innovate and prosper. While a well-trained work force is essential, it's indisputable that a good education is wasted if people aren't willing to put their capital at risk.
I'm not advocating for a return to the glory years of the Reagan administration. I'm advocating for rejecting Donald Trump so the GOP can return to being the party of ideas.
Posted Tuesday, April 5, 2016 5:34 AM
No comments.
Explaining Trump's theft
For about 2 weeks, Donald Trump has complained that Sen. Cruz is stealing the election. For almost 2 weeks, Trump's complaints have been without merit. Trump's latest complaint is about how Cruz's campaign is outmaneuvering Trump's campaign for second ballot delegates . Trump insists that this is outright theft. It isn't.
Years ago, delegates weren't bound to that state's winner. Then the RNC passed a rule saying delegates were bound for the first ballot. At no point did the RNC say that delegates were committed to a specific candidate multiple ballots. That's foolish on its face unless the RNC wanted a presidential nominee who won a plurality of delegates.
What Trump's complaint is about is his campaign team's ineptitude. Trump's run a cult of personality campaign. In Iowa, for instance, Trump promised to have 1,681 precinct chairs in place before Thanksgiving. A month later, when they held their first training meeting, fewer than 100 people attended. Not surprisingly, Trump finished second despite the DMR poll showing him leading by a healthy margin. Simply put, Trump tried running his campaign on the cheap. As a result, he lost momentum and delegates.
In the email obtained by CNN, Sam Stone from the Cairn Consulting firm contacted Republican precinct committee members in Arizona's 10th legislative district and invited them to join Cruz.
"National delegates are required to pay their own way to Cleveland, but for those non-Trump supporters who are interested in doing so, the Cruz campaign is organizing a delegate slate at our state party convention to elect people who would be willing to support Sen. Cruz on a second ballot," he wrote. "Being part of the slate will dramatically increase your chances of attending the national convention."
Stone explained the effort: "As you know, the state convention will select our delegates to the national convention. At the convention, these delegates are bound to vote for Donald Trump on the first ballot. However, it looks increasingly unlikely that Trump will earn the 1,237 delegates needed to win on the first ballot, and after the first ballot most delegates, including those from Arizona, will be free to vote for the candidate of their choice."
That's an accurate statement. Further, to change that rule now would introduce chaos into the process intended to create order. I've stated it before but I'll repeat it again. There are 2 options for people. One option is to follow the rules that were laid out in advance of the convention. The other option is to introduce anarchy into the process. It's one thing to make a minor tweak to convention rules. That's happened before. It's another if the rules are dramatically changed.
Trump essentially wants the rules rewritten to help him win. On one level, that's understandable. This is the ultimate competition. I'd be worried if candidates didn't compete to win. That being said, the rules are there to maintain a level playing field so everyone can compete without worrying about a strongman stealing the election.
Trump talks about stealing the nomination. That's a bit of verbal subterfuge. The nomination isn't anyone's until they reach 1,237 delegates. The nominee isn't the candidate with the biggest plurality. The nominee is the candidate who wins a majority of delegates.
Posted Tuesday, April 5, 2016 12:06 PM
No comments.
Roger Stone's intimidation tactics
Anyone that thinks Roger Stone doesn't still work for Donald Trump is kidding themselves. More importantly, anyone that thinks that they aren't cut from the same immoral cloth is delusional. Media Matters has posted a video of an interview Stone did with Stefan Molyneux. During the interview, Stone lays out his plan to threaten and intimidate "anti-Trump delegates."
Nobody questions whether Stone is an expert in exaggeration. What people need to know about Stone is that he's one of the most ruthless people in recent American political history. During his interview with Molyneux, Stone said "You may have seen recently that, although Trump handily won the Louisiana Primary, the Party mechanism sat non-Trump delegates in those seats. Trump initially threatened to sue only to learn that the Republican National Convention isn't governed by state or national law. It's governed only by its own rules. The court has no jurisdiction in party matters. Only the temporary convention rules committee, and the full convention itself, in a vote of ratification, can determine who will and who won't be allowed to vote in Cleveland. So I have warned the public, I have warned Trump supporters, of what I believe is 'The Big Steal'. One of two things will happen here, Stefan. Either Trump will have 1,237 votes, in which case the Party will try to throw out some of those delegates in a naked attempt to steal this from Donald Trump or he will be just short of 1,237, in which case many of his own delegates, or I should say people in his delegates' seats, will abandon him on the second ballot. So the fix is in."
That's breathtakingly dishonest. First, let's deal with the notion of "Trump's delegates." Delegates to the National Convention are state party delegates. They don't belong to anyone except that state. By RNC rules, those delegates are apportioned to candidates based on how they finished in that state's caucuses or primary. For instance, in Wisconsin, the candidate that wins the most votes statewide wins 18 delegates. The candidate who receives the most votes in each of Wisconsin's congressional districts gets 3 delegates per congressional district. They are required to vote for that district's winner on the first ballot. Nothing more, nothing less.
Here's the video of the interview:
Next, Stone's statement that "the Republican National Convention isn't governed by state or national law" is misleading. The Democratic National Committee isn't governed by state or national law, either. Ditto with the Libertarian Party. It's been that way since the founding of the Republic.
Third, saying that Trump won Louisiana handily is subjective at best. Trump won with 41.4% of the vote, compared with Cruz's 37.8% of the vote. While that isn't a squeaker, it certainly isn't a landslide, either.
Fourth, Stone intentionally tried inflaming Trump's supporters when he said that "the Party will try to throw out some of those delegates in a naked attempt to steal this from Donald Trump" if Trump has 1,237 or more delegates. Stone knows that's BS because it's irrelevant who's sitting as delegates on the first ballot. Those delegates are bound to Trump on the first ballot. Period. Simply put, if Trump gets to 1,237 delegates, he's the GOP presidential nominee.
Stone is inflaming Trump's supporters as part of his plan to intimidate delegates into supporting Trump:
If Trump does not run the table on the rest of the primaries and the caucuses, we're looking at a very, very narrow path in which the kingmakers go all out to cheat, to steal, and to snatch this nomination from the candidate who is overwhelmingly selected by the voters, which is why I have urged Trump supporters: come to Cleveland. March on Cleveland. Join us in the Forest City. We're going to have protests, demonstrations. We will disclose the hotels and the room numbers of those delegates who are directly involved in the steal . If you're from Pennsylvania, we'll tell you who the culprits are. We urge you to visit their hotel and find them. You have a right to discuss this if you voted in the Pennsylvania primary, for example, and your votes are being disallowed.
Notice the slippery language. Let's hear Stone explain what he means by people voting in the Pennsylvania primary having their votes be "disallowed." Is Stone implying that the votes cast in their primary can be ignored? If that's what he's saying, he's lying outright. Coming from a caucus state, I know that endorsing conventions aren't binding unless all of the candidates agree to abide by the endorsement. The only thing that's legally enforceable are primaries because they're governed by state statutes. The Secretary of State certifies that state's primary results.
Clearly, Stone is attempting to intimidate people into supporting Trump. Anyone who is a delegate to the Republican National Convention should immediately contact law enforcement if they're visited by one of Stone's goon squads.
Finally, Stone's Gestapo-like tactics don't have a place in American politics. If he organizes non-peaceful protests, he should shoulder the responsibility for the property damage done and for the torment inflicted on delegates.
Posted Tuesday, April 5, 2016 5:09 PM
No comments.
Tweet of the day
Trump: Having to Get 1,237 Delegates For the Nomination Is 'Very Unfair' https://t.co/YEhW7rBxkJ pic.twitter.com/fTtJW380Bp - Mediaite (@Mediaite) April 5, 2016 ">That's unfair.
Brilliant reply:
Chris Loesch ?@ChrisLoesch 4h4 hours ago
Chris Loesch Retweeted Mediaite
Breaking: Cubs fans think having to win 4 out of 7 games in the World Series is 'Very Unfair'...
Posted Tuesday, April 5, 2016 1:53 PM
No comments.
