Where I Stand on the Current Candidates - March 2016

1. MARCO RUBIO - Rubio's been the one I've supported because I agree with him on the issues the most of the four remaining men. I think he would be a transformative president. I love the thought of a Rubio/Haley ticket. Poll after poll shows he would beat Hillary Clinton in a general election, better than Cruz or Trump would fare.

I like most of his tax plan, I like that he supports Congressional term limits and balancing the budget. I don't like that's he's taken a much more hawkish tone since the Paris attacks and wants to beef up the Patriot Act.

He's won Minnesota and Puerto Rico, but the other 18 contests so far have gone to Trump or Cruz. At least Rubio can claim he's the only won to get more than 50% of the vote in any one contest.

Rubio really threw himself on the Trump grenade. It's diminished him, but it also did slow down the momentum of Trump. Unfortunately for Rubio, Cruz is the main beneficiary from it. I saw someone mention that Rubio lost the prisoner's dilemma. Rubio and Cruz seemed poised to go after Trump after their last debate, but Cruz stabbed Rubio first. Cruz is campaigning hard in Florida, not because he think he can win, but because he believes he can do enough damage there to stop Rubio from winning.  If Rubio loses Florida, a winner-take-all state, it's over.

2. JOHN KASICH - If Rubio loses Florida, but Kasich wins Ohio, it's a new day. Kasich may be playing a longer game than anyone. He doesn't have the money of Cruz or the free air-time of Trump so he keeps pinpointing certain states to focus on, and lets the vast majority of chips fall elsewhere.

Kasich actually has a pretty good track record. He was a Congressman for a while and was part of the 1990's Congress that actually balanced a budget. He went back to work in the private sector for a while, also would guest on Fox News sometimes. I remember him guest-hosting the O'Reilly Factor more than once. Then he ran for governor of Ohio and he's shown reform there, making him one of the more popular GOP governors in the nation.

Kasich's the last governor standing, and generally it's a governorship that provides the best training for becoming a president. I like that he's trying to keep things optimistic. I like that he's for limiting the scope of the Patriot Act. He strikes me as the best of the four who could actually get Congress to work together. But if he loses Ohio, it's over.

3. TED CRUZ - I feel like my life as a Republican would be easier if I liked Cruz, but when almost everyone who has ever worked with him despises him, that's a warning sign. He comes across to me as opportunistic and phony. I don't get inspired from listening to him speak, I get annoyed. I don't want my president to sound like a nasally Jimmy Swaggart and smile like an alien trying not to blow his cover.

Once Cruz was elected, he has done a lot in the Senate to obstruct and undermine, but not win. It may win with his brand, but he hurts everyone else and doesn't seem to care. The real character signal for me is the way he blasted Mike Lee. Lee is the closest thing he has to a friend in the Senate, and his willingness to throw Lee under the bus shows he has no loyalty to anyone but himself. And then he turns around and says anyone who doesn't support him is "the establishment" or "the elites." Strawmen.

Cruz says reporters are telling him they have exposes on Trump that they're not going to run until June or July. But Ted won't say who. Does anyone really believe reporters would confide in Cruz that way? Cruz makes my skin crawl.

But ... according to ISideWith, I actually agree with Cruz more than Kasich. And he's better than Trump.

4. DONALD TRUMP - Trump's reaching working-class voters in a way that the other three aren't. After fifteen years of war, too big to fail, and stagnant wages - on top of conservative media types more concerned with enriching themselves than actually solving anything - a lot of people feel left behind too. They'd like a Republican who's as anti-mainstream as possible to blow things up. A lot of working-class voters on the left feel the same way, where they see the embodiment of crony capitalism / DC corruption in Hillary Clinton as a front-runner, and so the rise of Bernie Sanders.

One thing that drove me nuts about Romney's 2012 campaign was his disproportionate emphasis on helping small business owners over regular workers.

So Trump comes along. He's a strongman. He shows toughness. He gets a lot of support from people who like that he "tells it like it is" even though he lies more than anyone else running on both sides.  He talks circles around questions without answering them. He's a narcissistic vulgarian who hasn't shown much of a moral code in his life. When he gives speeches, you don't hear much about love of country. You hear about polls and how people love him. The slogan "Make America Great Again" has the implied "I Will" in front of it.

More than once in the most recent debate, he said he'd order the military to kill family members of suspected terrorists, even though it was illegal. Sure he walked it back the next day, but that evening, he felt really good about planning to commit future war crimes. He's the American Benito Mussolini.

Now what does that mean, really? He appeals to the authoritarian, nationalist side of a lot of people. He's about the cult of his personality. His high-tariff trade-war plan would kill the economy. He's demonstrated he doesn't really understand the details of the federal budget. If people think Obama made America lose some stature and/or credibility around the world, that's nothing compared to what Trump will do.

Even now, as he says he's funding his own campaign, it's a shell game. He's funding loans to his campaign, but as donors come in, he's going to reimburse himself.

Back to the conservative media types. At least Trump's exposed a lot of hypocrites, the craven attention-seekers who care more about spotlight than principle. I'm no purity-test guy, but good grief. When Trump says he will order the military to do illegal things and they don't bat an eye, what is going on?

So here's to his enablers and suck-ups: Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Joe Scarborough, most of Fox News, and most of Breitbart. Shoutout to Fox Business Channel, soon to be renamed Trump Business Channel. Mazeltov to Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Matt Drudge, and everyone at Right2Rise. Applause to the decisions boards of CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC for his wall-to-wall coverage. Kudos to Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Jeff Sessions, and Paul LePage for bowing to the Strongman.

As for the Democratic race...

1. BERNIE SANDERS - At least he's honest. His wild aspirations for a socialist America would get stopped by a Republican Congress.

2. HILLARY CLINTON - Probably the most vulnerable Democratic nominee since Jimmy Carter ran for re-election, and yet the GOP can't get its act together.

Chris Christie Has Sold His Soul

I can't say I've ever liked Gov. Mike Huckabee. If I had any respect for him, it was tossed away when he and Rick Santorum went to Trump's rally during the primetime GOP debate. Mike & Rick, already on the return road to irrelevance, turned themselves into Trump's bumbling henchmen.

Chris Christie was something different. He is still the governor of New Jersey. He was very influential of the Republican Governors Association in 2014 and helped get a few Republican governors get elected. Now he has thrown his career away, and for what? I think Commentary's Noah Rothman said it best:

"Standing beside Donald Trump and endorsing the most unfit man to seek the presidency in my lifetime for the highest office in the land, Christie’s base careerism and disregard for the nation were exposed. Gone was the prosecutor who had ruthlessly fought corruption in New Jersey. In his place was a man defending Trump’s handling of the scam operation Trump University, which pitilessly bilked thousands out of their savings. Gone was the man who had scolded conservatives for indulging to bigotry by presuming an American Muslim jurist had to be an advocate for Sharia Law. Instead, there stood a figure linking arms with a demagogue who had proposed banning any Muslim entry into the United States – a proposal Christie had called “ridiculous” – and who dubiously cites the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 as constitutional precedent. Gone was the “straight talker” who “tells it like it is.” In his place is a man endorsing a serial compulsive liar who seems constitutionally incapable of honesty about himself, his record, or his beliefs, and who tells outrageous and slanderous lies about the heroes of his country and of his party. Gone was the conservative reformer who promised the necessary overhaul of the country’s entitlement programs. Instead, the diminutive figure debasing himself in the shadow of a reality television star now defends the unsustainable status quo in perpetuity and with no regard for fiscal realities. 

"For another few fleeting moments in the intoxicating light of the cable news cameras, Chris Christie has sacrificed every principle for which he once stood. Christie will spend the remainder of the campaign season aggressively compromising his integrity and shouting down anyone who refuses to abide the intolerable stench of hypocrisy that now accompanies his presence. This is a man who pounded the table when the facts were with him. Imagine the spectacle we will be forced to witness now that they’re not."

Where I Stand on the Current GOP Candidates

Going by reverse polling average.

11. RICK SANTORUM - An absolute joke. If he comes in the top five in Iowa, I automatically vote for the national GOP to kick Iowa further down the schedule.

10. MIKE HUCKABEE - An absolute joke. If he comes in the top five in Iowa, I automatically vote for the national GOP to kick Iowa further down the schedule. Period.

9. CARLY FIORINA - If you've never held political office, then you really need to have a good bio, and unfortunately her bio is too easy to dismantle, since it mostly hinges on Hewlett-Packard. She'll be a good regular talking-head on cable news.

8. RAND PAUL - It's always good to have some libertarianism in there somewhere, but it's time for him to focus on keeping his Senate seat instead.

7. JOHN KASICH - I like Kasich. I think he's been a good Republican for decades. I don't agree with everything he's done, but he has the best track record and the most experience. I could support him and not hold my nose doing so. He's just not my top guy.

6. CHRIS CHRISTIE - If it came down to Trump, Cruz, and Christie, I'd head the Utah Chapter of Christie 2016, if it hasn't already been organized. I don't get why he's not taking Trump and Cruz head-on more.

5. BEN CARSON - His campaign is like a slowly deflating balloon. It's just clear to me he's a very smart man but shouldn't be president. Nothing wrong with that. I'm a smart guy. I should not be president.

4. JEB BUSH - I used to like Bush. I used to think he'd be a good president. I used to think if he had any other last name, he'd be a good candidate for the Republicans to put forth. But I despise what he and his Super-PAC are doing. They are spending millions and millions and millions of dollars running negative ads against... Christie. And against Kasich. And more than anyone else, against his old pal Rubio.

Why are they trying to destroy Rubio, and now turning their attention to Christie and Kasich? Months ago there was a story how Mike Murphy, head of the Jeb super-PAC Right2Rise, came up with a strategy. Destroy every candidate other than Trump, to force it to a two-man race between Trump and Bush. We're seeing now that the story is true.

New reports show that Marco Rubio has had more attack ads run against him in Iowa than any other candidate. Why is the guy in third place in Iowa, third place nationally, taking all of the hits? Because of Jeb(!). The vast majority of money spent on ads in Iowa is from Jeb(!). And since he's sliding further and further toward the edge of the stage, he somehow thinks Rubio is the one he needs to eliminate the most. Has it helped Jeb at all? Three months the RCP average for him in Iowa was 6.3% Now? it's 4.5%. Three months ago Rubio was 9.3% Now? he's at 11.4%. And he and Carson and Cruz and Trump all remain above Jeb.

Jeb had the money to take out the #1 guy. If he really wanted the job, he should have used all that money on Trump. But he didn't. He backed down in debates against him, and his attack dogs are going after other guys not in first place. Now he needs to realize he is not the candidate for the Republican Party in 2016 and shift the money elsewhere for the good of the country.

3. MARCO RUBIO - He's been my top guy. I haven't liked his increased emphasis on fear, i.e. expand the powers of the NSA and doubling down on the Patriot Act. I like that he's come out in favor of Congressional term limits, and I like most elements of his tax plan. I think he'd be the perfect contrast to Hillary Clinton. She's about the past; he's about the future.

2. TED CRUZ - There's a reason he's the only senator running for president who has yet to be endorsed by another senator. Just about everyone who's worked with him does not like him. I think that matters. He rubs so many people wrong that even his alleged allies, fellow Republicans, are not going to go along with anything he does that they don't like. Over the decades, Senators and Representatives of the party in power in the White House have signed on to things they might not like, but they wnt to support their party, support their president. Cruz would inspire no such loyalty from Republicans, and forget any Democrat compromising with him. I think his televangelist style just comes across as too phony. I would like Cruz to be likeable, but he's not.

1. DONALD TRUMP - The last time I took the ISideWith quiz, the only Republican candidate I agreed with less than Trump was Santorum. Donald Trump is an entertaining guy, he's an off-the-cuff guy, he's a confident strongman. But he can change his mind on a whim. In fact I was watching Jessica Jones on Netflix, and Kilgrave (David Tennant) had this line that instantly jumped out to me as Trump's philosophy. "I'm a man of my word, unless I change my mind." Trump likes to win. If he wins, once he won, what would he really do? No one knows. And with all of his disparaging remarks against Mexicans, women, take your pick, he'd destroy the Republican party.

So this would be my voting preference:

1. Rubio
2. Kasich
3. Brokered convention for Romney
4. Paul
5. Fiorina
6. Christie
7. Carson
8. 3rd party
9. Oh, Bloomberg's running? 4th party.
10. Bush
11. Trump/Cruz/Clinton/Sanders/O'Malley/Huckabee/Santorum

How would the TSA handle Donald Trump's "Ban all Muslims" policy?

TSA: State your name.
Terrorist: My name is Ach...drew Jones.
TSA: Achdrew Jones?
Terrorist: Yes.
TSA: Religion?
Terrorist: Mus...thodist. Methodist.
TSA: You're Methodist?
Terrorist: Yes.
TSA: Thought you were going to say Muslim.
Terrorist: No, no. Methodist.
TSA: You can board. Next! State your name.
Dave: Dave Chappelle.
TSA: Religion?
Dave: Muslim.
TSA: GET HIM!! SWARM, SWARM!!!

Politically Speaking - 11/2/15

Some random thoughts on the current state of politics.

- It's been pretty amazing and yet completely predictable how Hillary Clinton has played the "sexism" card against Bernie Sanders. Bernie's been saying people shout for years, but Hillary somehow spun that into a craven dog-whistle for sexism. It was pathetic, but it worked. Now anything Bernie or his campaign says about Hillary that isn't fawning is somehow considered a sexist attack. RNC take note: learn how to handle crap like this, because it's nothing compared to what the Clinton Machine will throw at your eventual candidate.

- RNC chair Reince Preibus has decided "enough is enough" with the way the GOP debates have been going, compared to the substantive one Anderson Cooper moderated for the Democrats. He has removed NBC from their planned February debate, and this actually serves as a warning to the other networks. The candidates have since held their own meeting to figure out how they want to proceed. Reince has thus far been incompetent in how these debates have gone.

- Jeb Bush's claim that he hadn't seen the PowerPoint on attacking Marco Rubio until it was leaked was weak sauce. And he reboots his campaign with the instantly mockable #JebCanFixIt. He should drop out. Of course, so should Jim Gilmore, Rick Santorum, George Pataki, Bobby Jindal and Lindsey Graham.

Hillary Lied About Benghazi; So What?

We've known for years that the Obama Administration misled the American people about the motivations of the attack on Benghazi. They blamed a YouTube video for sparking outrage across Libya when they knew it was a terrorist attack. We can't let a terrorist attack seven weeks before the 2012 election muddy up the narrative, can we?

After 11 hours of Hillary Clinton testifying before the House Benghazi Committee, we have confirmation of what we've known. And when I say 11 hours, I really mean about 3 hours. The other 8 hours was taken up by Congressfolk pontificating, monologuing, whining, theorizing, making mini-speechs, crafting soundbites, and wasting time by complaining about all the time being wasted.

So was the hearing worth it?

"Thanks to Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi testimony on Thursday, we now understand why the former secretary of state never wanted anyone to see her emails and why the State Department sat on documents. Turns out those emails and papers show that the Obama administration deliberately misled the nation about the deadly events in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012. 

Don’t forget how we came to this point. Mrs. Clinton complained in her testimony on Capitol Hill that past Congresses had never made the overseas deaths of U.S. officials a “partisan” issue. That’s because those past deaths had never inspired an administration to concoct a wild excuse for their occurrence, in an apparent attempt to avoid blame for a terror attack in a presidential re-election year." - Kimberly Strassel, The Wall Street Journal

And also:

"Even by today's standards of rabid partisanship, the breast-beating threat display from Democrats and members of the press alike to which voters were privy yesterday was something to behold.  The message has been clearly received: Republicans, back off from the nest in which Barack Obama’s anointed Democratic successor is incubating... 

Even if you were inclined to be extraordinarily charitable toward former Secretary Clinton and the administration in which she served, one must at least concede that new questions about what the administration knew and when it knew it have been opened up by this committee. It seems, however, that those with a passing attachment to intellectual honesty are in short supply inside the Beltway. 

The Benghazi Committee is owed a public debt if only because it has exposed the decay in Washington’s culture of wagon-circling. Pundits who forever lament America’s sense of alienation from the political class and their growing cynicism towards elected elites appear not to notice when they are exacerbating that condition. While news media and Democrats are praising Clinton’s performance, Americans are waking up to the notion that they might have been deliberately misled about the deaths of their fellow citizens in a terror attack and likely for petty political gain. There is something rotten here." - Noah Rothman, Commentary

On the Republican side, I thought Troy Gowdy and Martha Roby acquitted themselves best. Linda Sanchez and Adam Smith were probably the worst partisans on the Democratic side. When Adam Smith complained about not learning anything, Gowdy shot back with this: "I'll be happy to get a copy of my opening statement for the gentleman from Washington so he can refresh his recollection on all the things our committee found that your previous committee missed."

As for the Republicans in Congress as a whole, they are re-learning the lesson that the GOP from the 1990's learned: you cannot bring a Clinton down with a scandal.  Most of the media reports are praising her performance. And that's what politics is: performance. Democratic donors are thrilled to jump aboard the H-Train now.

Benghazi as an issue in 2016 is dead. Her email server is not. But really, for a year where the majority of Americans want an outsider, when they view DC as corrupt, is Hillary Clinton not the ultimate corrupt insider?  Between her and Trump, this is so far the most bizarro election ever.

Sean Hannity Loves Donald Trump

I did something I haven't done in a long time. I watched Hannity. I used to keeps tabs on him, and it's pretty obvious that he's there to give talking points. O'Reilly could go off on weird stuff at any time, Rush sometimes surprises me with his take on things, but Hannity is a reliable automoton with his spin on whatever the subject is.

So I watched Hannity last night because I heard he and Ann Coulter were singing Trump's praises. He started with guest Newt Gingrich, where they both talked about why Trump is a credible candidate. Hannity was spoonfeeding for the slower folks at home that Trump gave a speech earlier this week with a lot of specifics. Lots, I tell you.

Then Coulter came on and they started defended Donald Trump's position.

Charles CW Cooke was the other guest, and Hannity or Coulter would not let the guy finish a sentence without interrupting him and blasting him with Trump talking points. Hannity and Coulter tag-teamed him for the whole segment, and Coutler said stuff that was flat-out untrue. Cooke, if you read his writing, is a credible conservative. Coulter, if you read her writing, is a carnival sideshow. And Hannity sided with the sideshow. My favorite line from Cooke was that she was changing her position on issues based on whatever Donald Trump said last.

Remember when Donald Trump said he had a call with Roger Ailes and he said he felt like Fox News would be fair to him now? Well, Sean Hannity is the good little soldier wearing the "Trump 2016" button now.

Trump's Iowa Supports Slips; Still #1

Donald Trump showed weakneeses at the August 6 debate, but still leads polls.

The first post-debate Iowa poll is out, and it does show some movement, some hints for where voters are leaning in that state.

Gravis Poll in Iowa August 4

1. Trump - 31%
2. Walker - 15%
3. Bush - 10%
4. Jindal - 7%
5. Cruz - 6%
5. Huckabee - 6%
7. Carson - 5%
7. Kasich - 5%
9. Fiorina - 4%
10. Rubio - 3%

PPP Poll in Iowa August 10

1. Trump - 19%   (-12)
2. Carson - 12%   (+7)
2. Walker - 12%   (-3)
4. Bush - 11%      (+1)
5. Fiorina - 10%  (+6)
6. Cruz - 9%       (+3)
7. Huckabee - 6% (-)
7. Rubio - 6%      (+3)
9. Kasich - 3%     (-2)
10. Paul - 3%       (+2)

Bobby Jindal actually looked like he was making headway in Iowa, but one has to wonder if his inability to stand out at the kids-table debate has sunk his campaign. Maybe it's too easy to declare campaigns "sunk," but I don't see Jindal going anywhere.