Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Libertarians Big Fail

Friday, November 4th, 2016

If there were ever an election year when the Libertarian Party could make significant gains, this is the year.

The Bernie Sanders campaign caught fire and inspired a new generation of young people and rallied a cohort of progressives frustrated with eight years of cautious Obama politics.

Many of Bernie’s most ardent supporters were looking for a new champion when Bernie failed to win the nomination.

Donald Trump’s xenophobic populism abandoned traditional Republicans and their concerns about fiscal conservatism and government overreach.

The contest between Clinton and Trump quickly became a personality referendum. Issues took a back seat to an endless cycle of school-yard taunts, shocking revelations of personal weakness, and a deeply disturbing lord of the flies “kill the pig” frenzy.

Libertarianism had the perfect opportunity to assert its simple philosophy that people are perfectly able to make their own decisions and better decisions will be made if people are allowed to experience the consequences of their actions.

This also applies to governments. The world would be a better place, libertarians contend, if governments were less concerned with individual rights and more concerned with national defense.

So why is the Libertarian Party polling at less than 5% of the total vote?

My sense is that when push came to shove, the libertarian faithful including big money sources like David Koch, failed the Trump test.

Trump successfully turned this election into a reality show. Clinton became the villain. Trump became his own hero. His whole campaign is an effort to fan the flames of tribalism by drawing clear lines between us and them. Facts took a beating as every event was re-interpreted within the context of how “they” were biased, crooked, and untrustworthy and “we” were the only choice to save the nation from “them”.

The media, every established political party, the Clinton campaign, and the public have been challenged to respond.

The Libertarians had the opportunity to demonstrate that their philosophy was a better way.

Instead, their leaders and their followers could not resist the temptation to participate in this personality contest in hopes of attracting those who claimed that they disliked BOTH Trump and Clinton.

The issues with Clinton and the FBI are a perfect example. Early on both Johnson and Weld agreed with the FBI’s recommendation not to prosecute. This was consistent with the philosophy that individuals are smart enough to make their own decisions and don’t need government’s help. But when the FBI reopened the investigation, Weld was the only one who continued to stand on principle suggesting the FBI was “off the reservation”. Johnson followed Trump’s line in an effort to pick up some disheartened Clinton supporters. Weld on the other hand received the full wrath of the libertarian faithful.

On social media sites it is hard to distinguish the Trump trolls from the libertarian trolls when it comes to flaming anti-Clinton posts.

The challenge libertarians have always had is walking the talk.

Here’s a classic example from a book by a behavioral economist. The University of Chicago is a bastion of libertarian economists. Milton Friedman was their leader. When the University built a new office building for the economics faulty, there was the obvious challenge of how to allocate office space. Rather than setup a marketplace which would have resolved the issue using the principles that each of these academics spent a lifetime promoting, they essentially appointed a bureaucrat. He created a formula based on things like tenure, seniority, and individual contributions to the institution. That same person then applied the formula in a controlled fashion in an effort to reduce conflict. At the moment when these leaders of libertarian thought could actually put their theories to the test in their own lives, they trusted a government solution.

There are a lot of voters in this election cycle looking for a better choice. Libertarianism failed to gain their votes because libertarians lost track of their major asset which is their simple set of principles. Instead of demonstrating how principles can overcome tribalism, they became just as tribal, just as intolerant, and just as opportunistic as everyone else.

Trump Couldn’t Care Less

Tuesday, October 11th, 2016

gop_2016_trump-jpeg-0dacf_c0-112-4666-2832_s885x516

By now everyone on earth knows that Trump sometimes behaves like a pubescent middle school jerk.

His excuse is that this sort of stuff goes on in places where men gather all the time. As a man who has spent a lot of time in locker rooms from my youth to the present day, I can testify that many men tire of these conversations as we grow older. About the time that we become parents or uncles, we appreciate the hurt that objectification can cause. We choose not to associate with those men who remain focused on their own desires. We certainly don’t encourage it, as Billy Bush did. But some men never grow up. Trump appears to be one. The significant difference is that 12-year old boys are talking about what they would like to do. 70-year old billionaire celebrities have the power to live out their adolescent fantasies.

He said it was all talk. No harm was done. He didn’t actually do any of the things that he claimed he did on that video. He admitted that it was a mistake. He asked voters to forgive him and move on.

What moving on in this case means is criticizing perhaps the highest profile woman in US politics today who happens to be his opponent — Hillary Clinton.

The primary point of attack is Clinton’s use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State. This particular incident has been thoroughly investigated by both the Congress and the FBI. No charges were filed. Clinton admitted that it was a mistake. She said that no harm was done to anyone. She apologized for her mistake and has asked voters to move on.

Trump has built his campaign on the claim that Clinton did something illegal.Unbiased fact checkers dispute that claim. So I’m not going to dwell on the details of his false claims. They appear to motivate his base and they certainly are doing damage to the whole political process.

Hopefully the hypocrisy of these similar requests for forgiveness is obvious.

But there is more here that needs to be discussed.

That’s the claim against Clinton that her email use was an arrogant disregard for the law. That perceived arrogance is what fuels the deep distrust and even hatred of many Trump supporters.

Trump’s claims regarding this tape, whether true or not, also reveal an arrogant disregard not only for the law, but also for the dignity and respect that all women deserve just because of our common humanity.

Trump blames his actions on the way that beautiful women make HIM feel. He can’t resist the urge to go up and kiss them. What’s worse, there are many documented incidents where he has done just that. He has a pattern. People with OCD who also struggle with impulse control have behaviors that they repeat over and over again. Trump’s pattern involves consuming a breath mint so that his breath will not offend prior to “stealing” a kiss. What he doesn’t seem to realize is that it isn’t his breath that is offensive. It’s his assumption that every woman would welcome that sort of unsolicited embrace. This is the core of his arrogance. He can’t imagine why a woman would object.

He feels that his process of rating women based on their appearance is a complement to those at the top of his scale. He fancies himself as a connoisseur of beauty. But if a woman fails his test, or worse yet, objects to being treated that way, then he feels entitled to demean her in every way imaginable. Worse, he feels no remorse because, in his own words, they deserved it. They deserve it for their failure to “take care of themselves”, or their gall to reject him.

Some of his comments about groping women reveal another dimension to his delusion. Women allow themselves to be groped because he is powerful.

In Trump’s mind, his ability to assault them without consequence is part the privilege that he has earned as a star and a billionaire. Even if this were true, and women did allow those with that sort of power to fondle them without complaint — what sort of man would take advantage of this power?

That’s the difference between Trump and Clinton.

Clinton has used her power and position to protect her private life from those who would seek to use that information to attack her. She uses her power to defend herself and her family from powerful men like Trump who have attacked her from her earliest days in politics. As the first woman to be nominated by a major party for the most powerful political office in the country, she has had to confront sexism her whole life. Her success can in part be attributed to her willingness to acquire and use the power that she needs to accomplish her ambitions. Trump’s supporters admire his unbridled ambition. Unfortunately, an ambitious powerful woman is still feared by many in our country.

Trump has used his power for self-gratification. He doesn’t appear to have any concerns about how his actions affect others. I suspect he equates empathy with weakness. He celebrates his ability to prey on beautiful women because it supports his basic narcissism. When asked by Howard Stern about how he satisfies all of the women that he sleeps with, Trump said “I couldn’t care less”.

Trump’s Twilight Zone

Tuesday, October 4th, 2016

 

This has been a remarkable week or so in a remarkable campaign. There appears to be another dimension that the Trump campaign and their supporters live in. It’s the twilight zone where belief trumps fact and reality is defined by the campaign and the candidate.

Exhibit 1 — Who won the debate?

This one is easy on several different levels.

The debate happened. Reputable organizations polled the public using scientific methods. They reported the results of those polls. They all indicated that Clinton won by a wide margin.

The second measurement is what happened to the polls after the debate. Again Clinton’s polling numbers have gone up and her prospects for winning the election have improved. That improvement was directly related to her debate performance and the actions of the Trump campaign following the debate.

To hear it from the Trump campaign’s perspective, he won the debate because a number of online unscientific polls on conservative sites said he was the winner.

Any problem with the debate was the result of a bad microphone that affected sound in the auditorium. Then there was the moderator who attempted to fact check Trump. And of course there is the crooked media who are now operating as an arm of the Clinton campaign in attempting to report the facts on the ground.

Perhaps this approach makes some sense in perpetuating the “us versus them” meme that is at the heart of the Trump campaign. The problem is that this meme makes it very difficult for the Trump campaign to recruit any new voters. When anyone who isn’t with you is your enemy, how are you going to convince some of those that you have been treating as enemies that they should change their minds?

Exhibit 2 — I did not have sex with that woman. Oops sorry, I meant to type I opposed the Iraq War.

This was one of the key moments in the debate.

Trump has made this particular position his Big Lie. He insists that he was against the war in Iraq FROM THE START.

The fact is that in answer to Howard Stern’s question “Are you for invading Iraq?”, he said, “Yeah, I guess so.” That isn’t a hearty endorsement of the invasion, but it is clearly not opposition either. He also provided an equivocal answer to Neil Cavuto, “it’s sort like either do it or don’t do it.” Trump clearly was not a supporter, but he also was not the opponent FROM THE START that he claims.

In the debate, he doubled down by attacking the media for reporting the facts (again) and then suggested that the moderator give Sean Hannity a call. While they may have had private conversations, there is no public record of it. Since Sean Hannity is now an official advisor to the campaign, he is hardly a reliable reference to past private history.

The result is that many Trump supporters now question whether fact-checkers can be trusted rather than admit that Trump was again making stuff up.

Exhibit 3 — Trump loves women

Hillary Clinton set several traps in the debate and Trump fell into most of them.

The Alicia Machado trap was a public confirmation of two of Clinton’s basic claims. Trump is unstable and Trump mistreats women. In front of a national audience he not only admitted to attacking Rosie O’Donnell, but said that she deserved it. He continued to attack Machado after the debate suggesting that she deserved the treatment that she received because she gained weight. This caused a whole avalanche of new information about Trump’s past statements and behavior with other women including many of those who were involved with The Apprentice show.

Trump and his campaign have reacted by attacking both Bill and Hillary Clinton for their treatment of women who have claimed past relationships with Bill.

Women represent a substantial swing vote in this country. Trump is doing himself no favors by perpetuating his attack on Machado and attempting to drag around old news about Hillary and Bill.

Those old white men who are the core of Trump’s support appear to have no problem with either Trump’s past history or his current aggressive response any time a woman criticizes him.

Exhibit 4 — Trump and taxes

We finally found out that Trump lost a lot of money in the 90’s and may have used those losses to shelter roughly $1B in income.

Trump and his campaign have not disputed those figures. Instead they have tried to spin Trump as a savvy business man who is an expert in tax law and will fix the tax system that he took advantage of.

This fails to answer the basic question that many people have regarding Trump’s loss. How does a savvy business man manage to lose $1B. His weak defense is that it was a tough time and many people were losing money. So does that mean his business skills are going to be effective only in good times? In bad times he is going to lose money just like everyone else?

His debate comment that he was “smart” not to pay taxes is also losing him blue collar votes. His campaign has gone further by suggesting that he does pay a lot of other taxes. But that’s not the issue. Everyone else also pays all of those other taxes too. The issue is how does he support his populist stand when he pays no federal income tax? It isn’t a question of whether or not he has done anything illegal. It is the fact that he IS part of that .1% who have benefited at the expense of working people. So it is curious that some of those very same working people still trust him.

Trump and his campaign have been trying to cast the NYT as the culprit by releasing the documents. The reality is that he could have avoided this by releasing his tax returns as every other candidate has done for the past 50 years. The NYT has a responsibility to its readers to provide them all of the information that they need in order to make an informed choice. They are doing their job. Trump isn’t.

Trump supporters believe that the tax returns aren’t important. Clearly that’s not the case with the rest of the country.

Exhibit 5 — Trump and OPM (other people’s money)

The Trump Foundation may turn out to be the smoking gun, at least from a financial point of view, that Trump opponents have been looking for.

Trump already had to pay a fine because of a “contribution” that was made “in error” from the foundation to the Florida AG Bondi’s political campaign shortly before she declined to participate in the Trump University lawsuit.

Now it turns out that Trump hasn’t contributed to his own foundation for a decade. Instead he has used other people’s money. Why did those people contribute that money? Turns out that most of those contributions were directly connected to business dealings that Trump had. The contributions were NOT because of the charitable mission of the foundation.

We also learned that Trump used the foundation like a piggy bank to pay personal expenses to the tune of $250K.

Now we also have learned that Trump not only used the foundation to pay his personal bills, he also used his foundation to purchase speaking engagements at various conservative gatherings over the past six years. These speaking engagements were the start of his presidential campaign.

Finally, the NY AG confirmed that the foundation was operating illegally in taking contributions from third parties when they were licensed to only distribute family money. Until the foundation resolves those issues and provides more detailed reports on past activities, they are effectively out of business.

Trump and his campaign have not denied any of these claims. Instead they have said that Trump contributes millions of dollars of his own money to charity in addition to the money that comes from his foundation. They also say that the foundation is a volunteer organization that can’t be expected to get everything right. Finally, they are suggesting that the NY AG actions are just partisan politics.

But there is big difference between making a mistake and the pattern of behavior that the NYT and Real Clear Politics have discovered. If Trump is in fact the tax genius that he claims to be, he should have known about foundation tax rules too. If he did, then he knew what he was doing was illegal “self-dealing”. If he didn’t know, then perhaps he isn’t really the genius that he claims to be, and won’t be able to single-handedly rewrite the tax code.

Trump supporters don’t want to talk about the Trump foundation. They only want to talk about the Clinton foundation and how she brazenly “sold” influence during her time in the State department to big Clinton foundation donors. The problem is that they have failed to connect the dots between this supposed influence peddling and some evidence of personal enrichment. Even if she did provide special access to big donors, all that money went to charitable purposes that have all been documented and are easy to track. There is no evidence that any of the Clinton’s benefited from those donations in any personal way. Unfortunately the bias is so strong, that in the absence of evidence, suspicion is sufficient to convict Clinton in the minds of these voters.

Summary

The one thing that Trump is VERY good at is stoking the fears and supporting the biases of his voters. His success in branding his opponents from Low Energy Jeb to Crooked Hillary is at the core of his campaign’s remarkable showing.

His populist message combined with his caustic “take no prisoners admit no weaknesses” style appeals to disenfranchised and marginalized groups of voters. Ben White from Politico best summarized it.

The GOP nominee could probably set himself on fire and still count on around 40 percent of the electorate to support him.

Those 40% are content to live in the twilight zone that Trump and the right wing media have built for them. It works. They are less fearful. They are more optimistic. They feel justified that the evil doers are finally being held accountable. They feel part of a winning team.

The problem is that it is a fantasy. It is not real.

Hopefully the rest of the voting public will decline the invitation to join them.

 

Trump – a Joker, a Welsher, and a Crook

Tuesday, September 20th, 2016

trumpchump161618_600-540x382

Donald Trump nearly went personally bankrupt in the early 90’s as his casino empire collapsed.  Bankers forced him to give up his majority holdings in four properties, sell his yacht, and his airline.

He rebuilt his casino/real estate empire only to see it collapse again in 2004 and 2009.  As part of the 2004 bankruptcy, Deutsche Bank revealed that they had loaned Trump’s company $40M backed by his personal guarantee that included his own estimate that he was worth $3.5B.  The bank and the court discovered that he was only worth $788M.  He later defaulted on that loan and sued the bank. They settled in 2010 with Trump getting a 5 year extension to pay back the loan.  It is unclear whether than obligation was satisfied, but the bank has provided Trump other loans since.

What’s important about these timelines is that Trump’s business model changed in 2004 when he started a new business as a celebrity on the long running Apprentice series.  Trump reported that NBC paid him more than $200M over 14 seasons to appear on the show.  NBC said multiple times that those figures were “grossly inaccurate and … significantly overstated”.  But this was only one of the whole host of celebrity endorsements that Trump was making.  The problem is that celebrity endorsements simply don’t bring in the same cash that real estate does, but they also don’t require nearly the same amount of upfront cash.  So it appears that Trump began to suffer from a cash flow short fall between the costs of his lifestyle (needed to support his endorsement business) and the income that lifestyle was generating.

He did the same thing most every other family in the country does when that happens.  He took some money out of the piggy bank.  In this case the piggy bank was his personal foundation.

The Washington Post recently documented that he withdrew roughly $258M from his charitable foundation to pay his own personal bills.

Now you might say that this was his own money, after all, and he should be able to do whatever he wants with it, but that’s not how charitable foundations work.  Trump got a tax deduction for the money that he donated to this charity.  Taking money back out to pay his own expenses constitutes fraud and violates federal rules against “self-dealing”.

To make matters worse, he wasn’t even taking out his own money.  He had pretty much run his foundation dry of his own money by 2006, leaving it with just $4,238 at year’s end, according to tax records.  He made small donations in 2007 and 2008.  Everything after that was other people’s money.  Other people who were making donations to his charity in order to ingratiate themselves to him.

Hillary Clinton has been accused of selling access to the State Department in return for large donations to her family’s charity.  The difference is that the Clinton foundation used those donations to fight AIDs.  The Trump foundation used access to Trump to secure large donations, but then used some of that money to pay Trump’s bills.

Here’s how he used that money.

In 2007, he settled a dispute with Palm Beach over the size of a flagpole at his Mar-a-Lago Club.  The original unpaid fines for the zoning violation totaled $120,000.  Trump settled with the city by offering to make a $100,000 donation to a veteran’s charity.  Rather than write the check, the donation came from his charity.

In another case in 2010, Trump was offering a $1M prize during a charity golf outing at a Trump golf course for anyone who had a hole in one.  Martin Greenberg won the prize.  The small print on the rules said that the golf ball had to travel at least 150 yards.  The hole where this challenge was set up was deliberately less than that.  Greenberg sued Trump’s club, the charity of former NBA star Alonzo Mourning, which was also hosting the tournament, as well as the insurance company that had underwritten the prize.

Eventually, Trump’s club and Greenberg settled the case, with the course agreeing to donate $158,000 to a charity chosen by Greenberg.  Trump paid that bill using foundation money.

In 2013, the foundation purchased $5,000 advertising for his hotels in programs for three events organized by a D.C. preservation group.  In 2014, Trump paid for a portrait of himself purchased at a charity auction with $10,000 of foundation money.  This is reminiscent of a similar $20,000 purchase of a portrait in 2007 that he also made with foundation money.

The bottom line is that this is all illegal.

“I represent 700 nonprofits a year, and I’ve never encountered anything so brazen,” said Jeffrey Tenenbaum, who advises charities at the Venable law firm in Washington. After The Post described the details of these Trump Foundation gifts, Tenenbaum described them as “really shocking.”

“If he’s using other people’s money — run through his foundation — to satisfy his personal obligations, then that’s about as blatant an example of self-dealing [as] I’ve seen in a while,” Tenenbaum said.

 

The real question is if this guy is as wealthy as he said he was and as generous as he said he was, why didn’t he just pay these bills out of his own pocket?  Why would he take the risk of breaking IRS rules for what to him should have been pocket change?

You can ask the same question regarding the $25,000 donation that the foundation made to the Bondi campaign just before the Florida AG dropped her plans to bring legal action against Trump University.  That donation was also illegal.  It should also have been easy from Trump to write the check himself.  He didn’t.

There are only two answers.

  1. He is pathological and this was an obsession that he simply couldn’t control.
  2. He didn’t have the money and this was the only way that he could cover those expenses.

In either case, it is just another example of why this person is uniquely deceptive and wholly unsuited for the office that he is seeking.

 

 

 

Trump’s Huge Boomerang

Saturday, August 27th, 2016

1024px-Australia_Cairns_Boomerang-1024x330

Boomerangs have a wonderful property. Aboriginal Australians designed them as weapons that would come back if they missed their target. That works in hunting a bird. It is counterproductive in politics. Your attacks on your opponent should not end up coming back to wound you.

If this were just a one-time event in the Trump campaign, you could excuse it as just coincidence. But it has happened so often that you have to start treating as a feature rather than a bug.

Here are just a couple of examples.

“What is being uncovered now is one of the most shocking political scandals in American history,” Trump said on Thursday. “A secretary of state sold her office to corporations and foreign governments, betraying the public trust.”

This is in reference to a recent release of emails while Clinton was Secretary of State and Trump’s claim that donors to the Clinton foundation were getting special favors from Clinton in return for their donations. I’m not going to dig into the accuracy of these claims. They have already been fairly widely debunked by organizations like PolitiFact and CNN.

The boomerang is the fact that Trump himself donated to the Clinton foundation and got nothing in return. When confronted by Bill O’Reilly, here’s what he said.

And I have to tell you this, in all fairness, I thought that money was being put to very good use. I assumed it was being put to whether it’s Haiti or all of the different things that I heard about. I didn’t know about the private airplane rides all over the place and if you look at the kind of expenses that they charge and the way they lived, I had no idea that, but I will say, that as far as the foundation’s concerned, I assumed it was being put to good use, and so did everybody else that gave, and there were a lot of people that gave. They never really did anything for me, but I will say this, if I think they probably would have liked me, and, you know, whether you give here or give there, I got along with everybody, Bill.

Trump claims to be the best negotiator in the world. He claims that he will be able to get Mexico to foot the bill for a wall designed to keep Mexican’s out of this country. He claims that he will be able to renegotiate our trade agreements with China. He claims to take no prisoners and feels no remorse. Yet, if his claims about Clinton’s method of soliciting donations are true, he ended up being a chump. Many other people got a better deal that he did when they gave money to the Clinton foundation.

One of Trump’s other recent claims is that Clinton isn’t fit enough to be President.

“To defeat crime and radical Islamic terrorism in our country, to win trade in our country, you need tremendous physical and mental strength and stamina,” he said in Wisconsin. “Hillary Clinton doesn’t have that strength and stamina.”

He supported these claims using faked videos and out of context photographs. All of these were quickly and widely disproved, but remain a part of Trump’s basic stump speech.

Trump’s own claim to health, however, is based on one bizarre letter from a gastroenterologist who has dubious credentials. A gastroenterologist treats patients with some intestinal distress. They don’t generally treat healthy people. There are a lot of questions about the letter itself too, but the physician explains a lot of the strange terminology with the excuse that he wrote it in less than 5 minutes to satisfy a request by the Trump campaign.

The result is that the spot light has turned back to Trump’s health. If elected, he will be the oldest President ever to serve. He father died from early onset Alzheimer’s disease. He also received a medical draft deferment because of bone spurs. There is no mention of either condition in the physician’s letter. Ultimately the specious questions regarding Clinton’s health have lead back to a heightened awareness that Trump is the one with unanswered questions.

Then there is immigration. Trump made his mark on this issue, but it has also been his undoing since the end of his campaign. Clinton has effectively used this issue to paint Trump as a racist crazy person.

As Trump’s polling numbers began to head south, he brought in a new team and attempted to walk back some of his comments regarding mass deportation. His failed to thread the needle between those who support mass deportation and those who think it is crazy and racist. As a result, instead of revealing a “kinder, gentler” Trump, he seems even more uncertain and unstable.

Worse yet, his biggest supporters including Sarah Palin and Anne Colter are warning him that any wavering from his original plan will come at great cost.

All the while Clinton suffered the worst week of her campaign since Comey met with Congress. Instead of letting Clinton flap in the breeze, Trump continued his misguided attacks. So far, Clinton has only had to duck and wait for the inevitable. Trump wounded again by his own attack.

There is Something Going On

Saturday, August 20th, 2016

somthing going on

These are five of Trump’s favorite words. He uses them to provide some credibility to his various flights of fancy — Obama is in league with ISIS, Obama is secretly undermining law enforcement, Clinton is ill, etc.

What is really going on, however, is that Trump is losing this election — badly.

It’s not only that he is losing, but it is the manner in which he is losing and his reaction to that losing that is really interesting.

I’ve speculated that the narcissism that appears to drive him is satisfied by the public attention that he is getting. He dominates the headlines and refused to allow even his opponent more than a day in the spotlight. As result, even though that attention lately has been focused on Trump’s failures, he would prefer even that attention rather than allow the media to dwell on the weaknesses of his opponent.

Still there is the gnawing sense that there is another game at play.

Evidence of that is in the moves that his campaign made over the last week.

Corey Lewandowski rode the Trump campaign to national prominence with his famous “Let Trump be Trump” strategy. Trump won the nomination, but stumbled badly in the transition from presumptive nominee to Republican candidate. Political “have gun will travel” professional Paul Manafort easily ousted Lewandowski and shepherded Trump through the convention, defeated the stop Trump movement, and delivered the convention bump that put Trump in the lead. He failed to convince Trump to pivot to a kinder gentler more presidential guy. Some of Manafort’s Russian dirty laundry came out and suddenly he’s gone too. The people who replaced Manafort are REALLY interesting.

Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, and recently disgraced Roger Ailes are now running the show.

This is not a team intended to get someone elected President.

This is a team that is going to use the rest of this campaign to field test their alt-right Euro-inspired anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant message on the Trump faithful.

This is a full-on take down of Fox as the leading voice of the conservative movement. You can see why this would appeal to “vengeance is mine” Ailes.

You can also see why it would appeal to Trump.

He is free to dive deeply into the demagoguery where he seems most comfortable.

Just think of it. A 24-hour news channel devoted to all things Trump. That is WAY more interesting to him than the Presidency. It will certainly make Trump a lot more money. He has the perfect foil in Clinton. He has at least 4 years, and probably 8 to continue to blame the country’s woes (real and imagined) on her. He will also blame his loss on her and the “rigged” system that she represents. Ailes has already perfected the formula of made-up news and political influence.

Trump will laugh all the way to the bank as those who placed their trust in him eagerly switch their channel from Fox to Great America. Coming this fall, the new Republican Party brought to you by Donald Trump, Roger Ailes, and Steve Bannon. What a rush. What a waste.

You Can’t Just Wing It

Monday, August 8th, 2016

DCF 1.0

It wasn’t all that long ago that Trump was riding high.

He got the bump that he was looking for from his convention and many around the country were starting to talk about what a Trump presidency would look like.

But as quickly as he rose, he fell.

He couldn’t allow the spotlight to shine on anyone else.

Even after Clinton stumbled in an interview about her dealings with the FBI, Trump produced a virtual waterfall of “news” that turned the spotlight back on himself.  In more or less chronological order he:

  1. Attacked a Gold Star Muslim family who spoke out against his immigration policies.
  2. Said that the NFL sent him a letter complaining about the debate dates (NFL said it sent no such letter).
  3. Claimed that Russia would not invade Ukraine only to have to backtrack when informed that they already did in 2014
  4. Criticized a fire marshal in Columbus because the occupancy code was enforced.
  5. Praised Paul Ryan’s primary opponent.
  6. Told a woman with a crying baby to leave his rally.
  7. Accepted a Purple Heart from a vet with the statement, “I always wanted to get the Purple Heart, this was much easier.” Less than a day earlier, the NYT published a piece on his Viet Nam draft dodging.
  8. Refused to endorse Ryan, McCain, and Ayotte (he backtracked on this too later in the week)
  9. Claimed that the November elections would be rigged against him
  10. Claimed to have seen a top secret Iranian video of money being unloaded from a plane in Iran.  What he actually saw was publicly available video shot in Switzerland that had nothing to do with delivery of money to Iran. His campaign then corrected him. Then he repeated the lie again.

He has played right into Clinton’s hands with this strategy.  Her campaign has portrayed Trump as a dangerous choice and then patiently waited for Trump to prove it.  Just one indication of how big an issue this has become is when Charles Krauthammer, that champion hater of everything liberal, feels he has to comment on Trump’s fitness for the office.

As Trump’s poll numbers dropped, a parade of Republican incumbents have abandoned him.

Now 50 leading Republican security experts have released an open letter warning that a Trump presidency would put the nation’s security at risk. 

Mr. Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”

Mr. Trump, the officials warn, “would be the most reckless president in American history.”

Mr. Trump responded by laying the blame for the world “mess” at their feet.  He blamed them not only for the Iraq war, but also for the deaths in Benghazi and the rise of ISIS.  The latter two are curious since they occurred during the Obama administration when all of these officials were out of power.  But that’s about par for the course for the Trump campaign.

Here’s the basic problem.

The strategy that Trump used to monopolize the news cycle during the primaries is backfiring.  During the primaries the gaggle of other candidates were spending all of their time responding to Trump’s endless streams of insults and bravado.

In this general election cycle, the press is trying to inform the voters about who Trump is.  They hold him accountable for every gaffe.  They document the responses of experts when he says something dangerous.  But the sheer volume of this information simply reinforces Clinton’s claim that she is the more mature and experienced choice.  At this point, she doesn’t have to do a lot more other than to remind people that she isn’t Trump.

If Trump were able to stay on message for more than a day, he would have a real chance in this election because Clinton IS well known and has high negatives with many voters.

At this point, however, it may be too late.

His latest attempt to demonstrate some gravitas in a speech at the Detroit Economic Club drew mixed reviews.  His economic plan is a mishmash of old Republican ideas, old Democratic ideas, and new populist stuff.  There was a little something for everyone, which will likely confuse rather than satisfy undecided voters.  Just a couple of examples include making child care deductible.  Most working people don’t file the more complicated form required to claim this deduction.  Poor people don’t pay enough in taxes to take advantage of it.  As a result, it mostly benefits those that are well off.  That doesn’t square with his core demographic.  He also pledged to halt new regulations including those that would affect Wall Street.  This is seems to be at odds with his claim that he was going to crack down on Wall Street.

Trump is his own worst enemy because under the pressure of this campaign his true nature is on display for the whole country.  That nature is an unstable narcissist with an insatiable appetite for the spot light.  But like many who have also suffered from that obsession, the public is beginning to realize that he isn’t the winner that he claims to be.  He doesn’t really have wings, just wax and feathers.  Those are not enough to carry him to victory in the November.

 

 

 

Lazy

Thursday, July 21st, 2016

lazy big

I often wonder what motivates Trump to say the things that he says.

My latest theory is that he is just lazy (and obsessively needs the spotlight).

He is unwilling to put in the work to deeply understand an issue.  Instead he says the first thing that pops into his head and moves on.  If that’s true, it’s terrifying that he considers this sufficient to qualify him for the most powerful elected position in the country.

The first evidence of this laziness are the challenges his campaign is having during a period of time when Republicans are going to naturally dominate the airwaves.  Here are just a few examples.

  1. Opening night of the convention he scheduled a competitive lengthy prime time interview on the Golf Channel with David Feherty.
  2. Tuesday night his wife gave a speech that wasn’t properly vetted. The obvious plagiarism and the clumsy response by his campaign dominated the airwaves instead of the fact that he was formally nominated.
  3. Wednesday night Ted Cruz gets to speak and declines to endorse Trump and now all of the conversation is about dysfunction. How could that happen?
  4. Then today when Trump has the opportunity to speak to the convention, another careless interview with the NY Times comes out that embarrasses the Republican Party.

The NYT interview was a prime example of shallow lazy thinking.

  1. Trump suggests that the US may not honor its NATO commitments for the Balkan countries that border Russia unless they meet their financial commitments to the US. The first time he floated this idea four months ago, he got blasted.  He had four months to come up with a better answer.  He didn’t bother.  The result is that members of both parties, NATO, and our European allies have all expressed their concern – AGAIN.
  2. Trump seems to confuse military alliances with trade agreements. He argues that our existing trade deficits undermine any argument on strategic deployment of our military.  In other words, the world should be paying us to fill the role of the leader of the free world.  The corollary of course is that our allegiances are for sale to the highest bidder.
  3. Trump’s NAFTA answer is similarly shallow. He has a friend who is building a lot of plants in Mexico, so that must be bad for the country.  Trump could fill a room with policy experts on NAFTA, pick the one that he likes the best, and then reference his statistics.  Instead he simply repeats the story that new plants are being built in Mexico when they should be getting built in the US.
  4. When asked about cyber warfare as an alternative to military force, Trump basically said that he was “a fan of the future, and cyber is the future.”
  5. Finally, the NY Times interviewer asked Trump a made up question about Obama considering and no-first-use pledge regarding nuclear weapons. Obama has no such plan.  Rather than admit that he hadn’t heard about that, Trump made up an answer.  This is where Trump is really scary.  He is unwilling to admit what he doesn’t know, but he is running for a job where it is IMPOSSIBLE to know everything.  Experienced politicians have a stock answer when asked something that they don’t know.  They say that they don’t have an answer right now.  They ask if they can get back with you.  They defer to their staff.  They ask where the reporter heard that rumor.  They NEVER try to make up an answer on the spot on a subject that they haven’t been briefed on.  This isn’t a hard skill to learn for most people, but apparently it is one the Trump is unwilling to acquire.

Finally word came out of the John Kasich camp regarding the VP offer he received.  When asked what his duties would be, the interviewer said foreign and domestic policy.  Trump’s intent, if the reports are to be believed, is to delegate the running of the government to his VP.  Trump will fill the same role he does in his companies today, a figure head.

In other words, he is lazy.

Great Lies in American History

Saturday, July 9th, 2016

pinocchio-970x545

Just a little thought experiment.

Let’s rank these events in order of what was most damaging to the country.

Here’s a list in historical order.

  1. Nixon’s Watergate cover-up
  2. Reagan sold arms to Iran to fund a secret war in South America
  3. Bush I promised no new taxes and then raised taxes after he was elected
  4. Bill Clinton lied about an affair with an intern
  5. Cheney outed a CIA agent in retaliation for a NYTimes op-ed authored by her husband
  6. Bush II invaded Iraq on false pretenses
  7. Obama promised you could keep your doctor under Obamacare
  8. Hillary Clinton lied about permitted use of her email server

Here’s my ranking

  1. Bush II invaded Iraq on false pretenses
  2. Nixon’s Watergate cover-up
  3. Reagan sold arms to Iran to fund a secret war in South America
  4. Cheney outed a CIA agent in retaliation for a NYTimes op-ed authored by her husband
  5. Bush I promised no new taxes and then raised taxes after he was elected
  6. Bill Clinton lied about an affair with an intern
  7. Obama promised you could keep your doctor under Obamacare
  8. Hillary Clinton lied about permitted use of her email server

What’s your ranking?

Honesty

Sunday, June 12th, 2016


truth 2

 

One of the big issues in this campaign appears to be honesty.

Just looking at the facts, the answer is obvious.

As tracked by Politifact, Trump tells the complete truth only 3% of the time.  Clinton tells the complete truth 23% of the time.  It isn’t even that Trump is telling a nuanced truth.  60% of the things he says don’t have a shred of truth.  These aren’t just little lies either.  19% are pants on fire whoppers.

Here’s just a sampling.

Crime is rising.  It’s not.

“I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering” as the World Trade Center collapsed.    Trump appears to be the only person who saw this.

“Frankly, (Hillary Clinton) doesn’t do very well with women.”  She leads Trump with women by the largest margin in history.

The question has to be why some polls give Trump higher marks than Clinton on honesty when the facts simply don’t support it?

Some of it might be the fact that Clinton only recently clinched her party’s nomination.  Since that time her overall polling numbers have been going up.

But something else is going on here.

When we dig into the responses regarding Trump, what emerges is that some of those supporting Trump feel that he is more genuine that Clinton.  His willingness to speak in an unfiltered way causes them to assume that he is speaking from the heart.  Clinton on the other hand is a professional politician.  She is schooled in the sort of cautious speech that some people associate with fear of “telling it like it is”.

This is also reflected in the Trump’s assault on what he and his followers call Political Correctness.  His willingness to offend virtually every special interest group in the country for the entertainment of his white male audience wins him points for authenticity.

Perhaps this is how he actually feels.  It is also possible that he is sincerely expressing his unfiltered opinion, though that opinion appears to change based on the reaction that it generates.

IMHO nothing could be further from the truth.  His “authenticity” is an act.  It is the result of his talent as con man.  He built a following pointing out that the conservative working man has been duped by the Republican Establishment.  Trump, however, is also playing them for suckers by channeling Triumph the Insult Dog and letting them fill in the blanks based on their own fears and biases.

Those who support him, however, have such deep animus for Clinton, that they have latched onto to this difference to justify their support.  They say that he is just “Donald being Donald”.  That he doesn’t really mean all of the things that he says.  He will ultimately make “deals” that are in the best interests of the country.

Let’s look at some of those deals from the perspective of what is best for the country.

The most obvious is the Supreme Court.  Whomever is the next President will have at least two and perhaps three vacancies to fill.

Clinton will nominate liberal judges.  The result of that will likely be reversing the narrow Citizen’s United decision.  That will allow new limits to be placed on private money in elections.  Trump supposedly shares this interest.  He claims that his own personal fortune means he can’t be bought.  But the judges he has proposed nominating support the view that corporate money is free speech.

Instead Trump has promised that he will appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade.  Whether or not this is even possible, packing the court based on an abortion litmus test sets a very dangerous precedent.

Clinton has put forward solid policies to both reduce the debt and improve the job prospects for the very people who are supporting Trump.  Trump has only said that he will be the best job’s president the country has ever seen.  It also came out recently that he routinely fails to pay his own workers and contractors. 

None of this information will likely alter the minds of those who already have cast their lot with Trump.  They are so deep in their denial that there is little that Trump can do between now and the election to lose their support.  The rest of the country, however, who approach their job of picking the next President more analytically will discover that the Trump campaign is a sham.  They will reject the violence, xenophobia, and cult of personality that Trump has created and select Clinton because of her policies.