Category - Republican Candidates

No re-litigating the primary

I post this because I personally disagree with Jay. I may be in “wishful thinking” land in preferring Saunders over Clinton. Pragmatically, I believe Saunders more electable, and can win over Trump, see chart below.

Jay’s view:

When Sanders drops out and endorses Clinton, pragmatic progressives will do the same.


Now for the analysis:

This is a NYT chart, and the point currently being made is: Clinton only wins primaries against Saunders in states she cannot win in a general election.Clinton's Wins



Discern for oneself what the means in the General election, as my speculation could be taken for an attack on Clinton herself.

However, I’m not yet ready to embrace the theory she will be a better president than Trump, because I personally cannot trust the evidence (what there is) that Clinton will actually not pivot to the Right, so signing TPP and TTIP and TISA. After signatures you can kiss what currently remains of democracy worldwide goodbye – We’ll all be singing to the refrain of “Yes Boss”, or as I leaned the phrase, “Yes Bass” in apartheid South Africa. I perceive good futures on knuckling the forehead, too.

I do believe Trump will become the Republican nominee. I hope Trump would not sign TPP and TTIP and TISA. At least Trump’s said he is against those treaties, which pragmatically is a better position for me to support. As for the Torture and banning Muslims, we’ll have to be Pragmatic: Those memes have to be viewed in the context of of Drones, Wedding Parties, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia and Syria, Honduras, Nicaragua, Chile and others (It’s such a burden having goals of Empire and not goals of enlightenment.)

I do believe Trump’s vision of bringing jobs back to the US naive, because after reviewing my 2015 Pre-Tax filing accounting, I find my wife and son’s health insurance premiums to be about $12,000 per year, about the same as the sum of my mortgage interest and property taxes, $13,000. If I were a business manager I’d move business to a country where I can hire two employee’s for the cost of one employee’s health care in the US.

I also believe the pearl-clutching by the Republican establishment is due to their fear of Trump’s (long) enemies list. All the members of which will be purged from their positions of influence (for them that’s death sentence, because they have to retire from the scene and grow roses, and their asses will dry out due to the lack of kisses.)

Which reminds me of the Wagnerian Opera “Schadenfreude, O Schadenfreude…”

Clinton-Bush: Now and Forever

first published April 14

The stars are aligning for another Clinton – Bush presidential election campaign.  I’m not referring to Hillary vs. Jeb (or “Heb” as some are now calling him, since it was revealed he identified himself as Hispanic when registering to vote in 2009).  No, I’m thinking ahead to the 2028 campaign, when Chelsea Clinton will be primed to battle George Prescott Bush, Texas Land Commissioner, for the privilege of exercising their family’s timeshare rights to the White House.  Chelsea is the inheritor of the Bill & Hillary political franchise, and George P. Bush, the son of Jeb Bush, nephew of George Walker Bush, grandson of George Herbert Walker Bush, and great-grandson of Senator and Hitler enabler (it’s a long story) Prescott Bush, is the most prominent of the possible Bush dynasty President-electables.  Chelsea vs. George P. – I can feel the non-excitement building already!

The grooming process for the 2028 race for the White House is already underway.  Chelsea is playing an integral role in her mother’s campaign for president, formally announced this week.  Chelsea is now described by insiders (always nameless people when it comes to the Clintons) as a full and equal member in the family business, which has the public philanthropy part through the Clinton Foundation, and the not-so-public part involved in maintaining ties to the high and mighty who have access to a lot of money necessary to run a modern political campaign.  It’s this second part that is really important.  In 1996, when Bill Clinton was running for reelection, his campaign costs were $196 million.  Hillary’s campaign, according to unnamed sources, is expected to raise $2.5 billion in order to reclaim the White House.

Read More

Hillary and Jeb propose Marriage

In their attempt to become the next President of the United States, Hillary and Jeb have proposed to get married.
No, they are not divorcing their current spouses, they have decided under the equal protection for all part of the US constitution to enter into lawful bigamy.

Thus they will steal the entire Moron vote from Mitt Romney, because we all know Morons will instinctively support any bigamist over some weird monogamist, even with his dog strapped to the roof of his car.
Read More

Today’ coffee spew moment: Ted Cruz may run for President in 2016

I really hope that you had the good sense to swallow your coffee before reading this…and no, you read it correctly: Ted Cruz really is floating a trial balloon. He’s not denying that he’s considering the possibility of running for President in 2016. The fact that Cruz is the most hated wackjob on Capitol Hill is probably enough to torpedo his Presidential prospects. There is one tiny little detail that Cruz seems willing to gloss over:



(read the full post at What Would Jack Do?)

Rick Santorum Has a New Cause

He is actively opposing U.S. Senate ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities:

The former presidential candidate pronounced his “grave concerns” about the treaty, which forbids discrimination against people with AIDS, who are blind, who use wheelchairs and the like. “This is a direct assault on us,” he declared at a news conference.

Lee, a tea party favorite, said he, too, has “grave concerns” about the document’s threat to American sovereignty. “I will do everything I can to block its ratification, and I have secured the signatures of 36 Republican senators, all of whom have joined with me saying that we will oppose any ratification of any treaty during this lame-duck session.”

Lame or not, Santorum and Lee recognized that it looks bad to be disadvantaging the disabled in their quest for fair treatment. The former senator from Pennsylvania praised Lee for having “the courage to stand up on an issue that doesn’t look to be particularly popular to be opposed.”

Courageous? Or just contentious? The treaty requires virtually nothing of the United States. It essentially directs the other signatories to update their laws so that they more closely match the Americans with Disabilities Act. Even Lee thought it necessary to preface his opposition with the qualifier that “our concerns with this convention have nothing to do with any lack of concern for the rights of persons with disabilities.”

Their concerns, rather, came from the dark world of U.N. conspiracy theories. The opponents argue that the treaty, like most everything the United Nations does, undermines American sovereignty — in this case via a plot to keep Americans from home-schooling their children and making other decisions about their well-being.

The treaty does no such thing; if it had such sinister aims, it surely wouldn’t have the support of disabilities and veterans groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Republican senators such as John McCain (Ariz.) and John Barrasso (Wyo.), and conservative legal minds such as Boyden Gray and Dick Thornburgh.

But the opposition is significant, because it shows the ravages of the Senate’s own disability: If members can’t even agree to move forward on an innocuous treaty to protect the disabled, how are they to agree on something as charged as the “fiscal cliff”? And although the number of senators who actually oppose the treaty — such as Lee, Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Jim DeMint (S.C.) — is probably quite small, Lee’s boast of 36 signatures means he has persuaded enough of his colleagues to block action, at least temporarily. (Treaties require a two-thirds vote in the Senate to pass.)

Santorum made an emotional appeal, even bringing his daughter Bella, who has? a severe birth defect, to the Senate hearing room for the event. “There’s no benefit to the United States from passing it,” he said, as Bella wriggled in her mother’s arms. “But what it does is open up a Pandora’s box for the most vulnerable among us: children with disabilities.”

Yes. A Pandora’s box of legally defined and guaranteed human rights for “the most vulnerable among us: children with disabilities.”

The man is certifiably insane.

Here, by the way, is the full text of the “Pandora’s box for the most vulnerable among us: children with disabilities.”

What Hurricane Sandy brought to the presidential campaign

was an unscripted dose of reality. As the deadly wind and water flattened homes and flooded the Jersey shore and streets in Queens and lower Manhattan, Americans saw, courtesy of Mother Nature and climate change, precisely the purpose and necessity of a well-funded and capable government.

Every nationally-televised image of hundreds of submerged homes and thousands of pedestrians trudging across bridges might as well have had a caption reading, “Are you sure you don’t like government?”

In 48 spectacularly tragic hours, the roof was swept off of a year’s worth of lies about self-reliance and “freedom” from government and the virtue of going it on your own. This false narrative was always a temporary ruse, you understand; the Mitt Romneys and Donald Trumps of the nation, who make their fortunes from the political and military force of big government, have always understood that trashing the idea of government in order to deceptively flatter working- and middle-class whites’ sense of individual power would only work in the window between revelatory catastrophes. The rich were betting, understandably, that this window would extend at least beyond the election. They bet wrong.

President Barack Obama cannot take credit for this instant’s storm of clarity, although he certainly benefits (check out Republicans Chris Christie and Michael Bloomberg lately!). Mitt Romney cannot be blamed for it, although splinters of his rottenly dishonest platform about the venality of government are now among the flotsam being carried down the Hudson. And it remains to be seen how much this profound lesson will register next Tuesday.

But talk about an October surprise.

Candidate Obama: Can He be Trusted Yet?

The massive crowds that followed Barack Obama four years ago in his run for the presidency are nowhere to be seen this time around.  Obama’s campaign managers haven’t even bothered to stage such events.  Instead, they have Candidate Obama appearing on television – David Letterman, The View, and probably before this is all over, he’ll have a nice chat with Jon Stewart.  When the president does show up in person at a rally, it’s in a few states like Florida, Ohio, Iowa, and Colorado, where people aren’t sure they like him well enough.

When he is out in public, the president gets big enough and enthusiastic enough crowds to create some good television, and in a way, his campaign managers have to be saying to themselves – So What?  What does it matter if 50,000 to 70,000 people aren’t interested this time around in lining up for tickets at some sports arena to see a political superstar?  His opponent is self-detonating every time he opens his mouth.  Mitt Romney’s slide in the polls has been devastating for his hopes for the White House, and all because Mitt Romney is caught in a vise – he can’t stray too far from his “base”, since the radical Tea Party (grumpy old white men) and evangelical Christians who constitute what’s left of the Republican Party never trusted Mitt Romney in the first place.  Yet he has to soft-peddle the views of his base if he has any hope of appealing to independents.  He winds up being Everyman, appeasing everyone at the cost of appearing devoid altogether of political principles.

Read More