Search This Blog

Thursday, March 31, 2016

How we got into this mess, and what will happen next

Antiestablishmentism -- the New Racism

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

GOP Frontrunner Thinks Health Care, Education Are Among Federal Government's Top Roles

Ask any Republican and they'll likely tell you that the federal government should not be involved in education or health care. Ask Donald Trump and he’ll say these are among the top three functions of the U.S. government. Really.

During CNN’s town hall on Tuesday night, Trump said, “the greatest function of all by far is security for our nation.  I would also say health care, I would also say education.”

When CNN’s Anderson Cooper tried to clarify that his main response was security, Trump agreed, but again added health care and education.

“I say all top three are security, but health care, education, would be probably three that would be top.  And then you can go on from there.”

A confused Cooper needed to follow up again: “So in terms of the federal government's role, you're saying security, but you also say health care and education should be provided by the federal government?”

“Well, those are two of the things.  Yes, sure,” Trump replied. “I mean, there are obviously many things, housing, providing great neighborhoods...”

Recognizing that Trump's response contradicts what he’s said on the campaign trail, Cooper asked: “Aren't you against the federal government's involvement in education?  Don't you want it to devolve to states?”

In typical Trump fashion, he flip-flopped on what he said moments earlier: “I want it to go to state, yes.  Absolutely.” 

And on health care run by the federal government, Trump said: “Health care - we need health care for our people.  We need a good - Obamacare is a disaster.”

“But is that something the federal government should be doing?” Cooper fired back.

“The government can lead it, but it should be privately done.  It should be privately done.  So that health care - in my opinion, we should probably have - we have to have private health care.”

Trump vs. Trump is real. 

Trump’s Amazing Technicolor Dream List of Government’s Functions from CNN’s Town Hall [VIDEO

DonaldThrowingMoney

At CNN’s GOP Presidential Town Hall on Tuesday, Donald Trump was asked about what he thinks the top three legitimate functions of government are. His answer was, in exactly three words: an amazing laundry list of self-contradictory government largesse that totally undercuts every argument his followers think he has made this campaign. 

That was three words, right? Anyway, watch this video from Digitas Daily. It’s hilarious and painful and depressing and good.

What? Good neighborhoods? Housing? Healthcare? It should be government run but also privately run? What .. I’m asking. Donald. Guy. What are you talking about? 

This is what I and so many others have said so many times. Donald Trump does not make an argument for smaller government. He is not interested in decreasing the size of government. He doesn’t want to cut programs, he does’t want to defund Planned Parenthood, and he does believe the government should be providing all these Democrat goodies. Yet every Super Tuesday “conservatives” and “Republicans” turn out and vote for him. It’s maddening.

Right? Maddening? I’m mad.

Anyway, here’s the full segment. I’ll be tearing my hair out in the corner. Enjoy .. I guess.

The post Donald Trump’s Amazing Technicolor Dream List of Government’s Functions from CNN’s Town Hall [VIDEO]appeared first on RedState.


Read More Here

Electability Is Not a Four-Letter Word

If the average of recent polls showing Donald Trump losing to Hillary Clinton by more than 11 percentage points is correct, you’d have to go back to Ulysses Grant’s 1872 thumping of Horace Greeley to find such a landslide.

Even recent elections that we think of as utter domination (1980 – Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter by 9.7%, 1988 – George H.W. Bush over Michael Dukakis by 7.7%, 1996 – Bill Clinton over Bob Dole by 8.5%, 2008 – Barack Obama over John McCain by 7.3%) pale in comparison to Trump’s looming loss to Clinton.

Perhaps the comparison to 1872 is particularly apt as Grant, running for re-election, carried a whiff of corruption and scandal (which turned into outright stench a few years later) but won an overwhelming victory against a famous but unappealing challenger who ran, literally, as a Liberal Republican. In 2016, we face the spectacle of an utterly corrupt, national-security-risking, professionally incompetent Alinsky-loving rape-defending shakedown artist and liar trouncing the current front-runner of the FGOP (Formerly Grand Old Party) who has a lifetime full of holding liberal policy positions.

From time to time, “conservatives” tell me that my consideration of electability — who has the best chance of winning the general election — is misplaced and I should focus more on principle. Then when I do (as I always do anyway), and write that, for example, I can’t support John McCain, they tell me that the most important thing is beating the Democrat and I should vote for any candidate, no matter how flawed, who has an “R” after his name. They can’t have it both ways.

Some of those same people, whether pundits or activists or readers of these pages, are today supporters of Donald J. Trump. It would be one thing if Mr. Trump were either conservative or electable. But in fact he is neither.

There is almost nothing more important in 2016 than defeating Hillary Rodham Clinton in the November elections. Mrs. Clinton is a power-mad radical without a principled bone in her body who earns millions by peddling influence to cronies and foreign governments. And that’s the nicest thing I can think to say of her.

But those who claim that Donald Trump will redraw the electoral map, leading to a victory that no other Republican could achieve, are engaged in what Mrs. Clinton might call a “willing suspension of disbelief.”

In short, the idea that Donald Trump can beat Hillary Clinton in November is sheer fantasy.

A few data points to consider:

  • The most recent CNN/ORC poll of the 2016 election shows that a stunning 67 percent of registered voters have an unfavorable opinion of Mr. Trump, far more than even the appalling Hillary Clinton who stands at 56 percent unfavorable. Back when Trump’s unfavorability rating was a mere 60 percent, Gallup reported that that made Trump the least favorably viewedpresidential candidate since they began tracking this question in 1992.
  • In the same poll, Clinton and Trump are tied (at 45 percent) on the question of which candidate is “a strong and decisive leader,” a very weak performance for a man whose entire candidacy is based on that precise trait.
  • On every other question of key presidential characteristics and qualities, including being “in touch with problems facing the middle class,” able to “handle the responsibilities of commander in chief,” “more honest and trustworthy,” and “a person you admire” Mrs. Clinton crushes Mr. Trump by an average of 11 points. Yes, Donald Trump is losing to Hillary Clinton on honesty and admirability. And this isn’t the only poll to show the same result.
  • According to RealClearPolitics, Trump has led Clinton in only 5 of 55 polls taken since last May, with Clinton’s lead widening substantially over the past month — during which not a single poll shows Trump over Clinton and most show her up by double digits. Half (49%) of voters polled by Fox News use the word “scared” to describe their reaction to a potential Trump presidency.
  • Mr. Trump claims to have “won Hispanics” in the Nevada caucuses, a meaningless achievement in a closed caucus in which Hispanics, who are mostly Democrats, represented a minuscule percentage of participants. In reality, Hispanics despise Trump and will vote against him in record numbers. While Mr. Trump has a slightly more plausible case that he could attract support from blacks, even if true it won’t be enough of a change from decades-long black voting patterns to make a difference. The recent Fox News poll shows an incredible 85 percent of blacks holding an unfavorable opinion of Trump.
  • More than a third of Republicanswould consider voting third party or not voting at all if Donald Trump is their party’s nominee.
  • People view Mr. Trump as turning out the “angry white vote” but he will also turn out many whites to vote against him. Indeed, CNN/ORC measures Trump’s unfavorable rating among whites at about 60 percent, as it is among other groups you may think matter in elections such as: independents, men, women, people with college degrees and people without college degrees, urbanites, suburbanites, rural folks, and people in the Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. Young voters of all races will oppose a man who they perceive as angry, divisive, misogynistic and racist; roughly three quarters of voters under the age of 35 disapprove of Mr. Trump.
  • These findings bear repeating as more than one poll duplicates the results: According to Fox News, if the election were held today, Mr. Trump would lose to Hillary Clinton by 11 points, tying among men and winning by only six points among whites (both of those representing a horrendous showing for a Republican) while losing by nearly 20 points among women and losing every age bracket. For comparison, Romney won men by 8 points and white voters by 20 points — and still lost the election due to losing women by 12 points — the 20-point “gender gap” being the largest measured by Gallup in sixty years. (In the same Fox poll, Ted Cruz beats Hillary by three points, winning men by 15 percent and only losing women by seven percent while winning whites by 19 percent.)

These are just some of the reasons that betting odds of a Democrat winning the presidency have risen to over 70 percent as Donald Trump has stabilized his position as the GOP frontrunner. The Democrats are more than a 2-to-1 favorite in November despite how noxious both Democratic candidates are and despite the fact that the Democrats have only won a third consecutive presidential term twice in the history of the modern American parties. (FDR gaining a third term for himself in 1940 and Martin Van Buren’s succeeding two-term Democrat Andrew Jackson in 1836.)

Trump polls even worse against Bernie Sanders than he does against Hillary Clinton, although I believe those numbers to be an artifact of Sanders having had no serious attacks against him during this primary season. If Sanders were the nominee, those numbers would change quickly — although, and I can’t believe I’m saying this, Trump would likely lose even to the ancient socialist.

On a related note, Mr. Trump says that current Trump-Clinton matchup polls are to be discounted because he “hasn’t even started on Hillary yet.” The problem for Donald is that the public already views Hillary as repellant, unethical, and incompetent and yet they still prefer her to him. How much more is to be learned about Hillary Clinton that people don’t already either know or assume about her? (This is why I maintain my view that Bernie Sanders has almost no chance to be the Democratic nominee even if Clinton is indicted.)

On the other hand, as much as people believe they know about Mr. Trump, the opposition research yet to be dumped on his head will be beyond anything he has ever experienced and anything he is prepared for. It’s not as much that he hasn’t started on Hillary as that the Democrats haven’t started on him. (They can start with this man or this woman, just to warm up.)

For those Trump supporters who have over the years chastised Americans who consider electability as a factor in whom to support for president, how can you now support a man who will not only hand Hillary Clinton the White House but likely give Democrats complete control of Congress?

And why do those of you who hate the “establishment” and the way Washington operates today think that Mr. Trump, the quintessential politician-buying establishment figure, is more likely to disrupt the status quo than is Ted Cruz, who has made a career of annoying colleagues by doing just that?

I understand conservatives supporting a truly conservative candidate even if that candidate is an underdog. I understand Republicans supporting someone, warts and all, who can beat a Democrat.

But I don’t understand how, in the face of so much evidence that Donald Trump is neither a conservative nor an electable candidate, otherwise rational and principled right-of-center voters think that they are doing anything other than destroying the country by their support of a narcissistic self-promoting hand-size-fetishizing authoritarian nationalist charlatan who spends half his day on social media and the other half telling us that everyone from the U.S. military to the Mexican government to the news media will bow to his will should he be elected. (For responses to each of these dictatorial impulses, see here, here and here — and a bonus here.)

Despite the understandable frustration and anger of many Americans (and especially many Republicans), our fellow citizens will never elect Donald Trump president. Whether you like Mr. Trump, as my colleague Jeff Lord does, or whether you find him politically repugnant, as I do, if the idea of a President Hillary Clinton frightens you it is imperative that you are honest with yourself about which Republican can actually win in November. That person is not Donald J. Trump.


Read More Here

Paul Ryan’s Road Ahead

The Speaker of the House, the Hon. Paul Ryan, recently expressed his hope for a “confident America.” He went on to say “we don’t shut people down. If someone has a bad idea, we tell them why our idea is better. We don’t insult them into agreeing with us.” He spoke of the superiority of persuasion to execration.

Close observers of the Ryan métier thought he was addressing Donald Trump. After listening to the campaigns in both parties, I have a different view. To my mind, Ryan was urging caution on everyone campaigning for the presidency this year. Certainly his remarks were aimed at his fellow Republicans including Ted Cruz and John Kasich. Yet they were also aimed at Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, both of whom whenever they take to the podium disparage Trump, Cruz, Kasich, and forget not the infamous one percent.

Ryan calls for reflection and restraint from both parties. Nonetheless he is in a tricky position. In a year of riotous politics, he has taken a chance of offending the rabble rousers by calling for a sense of restraint. He even has a Tea Partier challenging him back home.

Of course, he has no alternative given his lofty goals in the House of Representatives. As Speaker of the House he is responsible for getting budgets through that chamber that are acceptable to a majority while advancing his free market policies. He has never been known for heated rhetoric and he is not calling for it now. His role is unique in national politics. He wants to be effective, which seems to be what the majority of Americans call for but he is an advocate of free markets.

Ryan comes from the Jack Kemp corner of the Republican Party. Thus he would solve the problem of poverty and unemployment through pro-growth policies. He favors tax cuts as the route to economic growth. The War on Poverty has not worked. We have almost as many Americans living beneath the poverty level today as when LBJ began his War on Poverty more than five decades ago. All that has changed is that we have spent, by Ryan’s reckoning, $15 trillion in a futile effort to extinguish poverty. Ryan wants to try to end it with an alternative, economic growth. He will have to keep his Republicans united in the House to be successful.

He also wants to repeal Obamacare. This too will require a united Republicans Party. There are various approaches to repealing Obamacare, but his Republican colleagues are going to have to settle on one approach. Ryan has advanced the pieces. He must now bring the pieces together. Finally he says he wants to start paring back the federal debt that President Obama has doubled in his nearly eight years in office. That is going to be tricky too. Once again he will need party loyalty. No wonder he has been on a crusade to cool the rhetoric.

Moreover, as chairman of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland this summer he is facing the possibility of the first contested convention in decades. He has to remain neutral. He is right to show no partiality. Whether Donald Trump arrives at the convention with the necessary number of delegates for victory or new candidates enter the race, Ryan has to be an honest broker. His role at the convention may be very large.

So now he has asked that the race for the presidency proceed with dignity. At the Republicans’ last debate on March 10 there were signs that it would proceed with dignity. Since then there has been a tabloid eruption and the battle of brides on Twitter. Now my guess is that things are going to settle down. The Republicans will act like statesmen. Bernie and Hillary will continue to bore. And Paul Ryan will play his role as leader in the House and an honest broker at the Republican convention. Nevertheless, the elections of 2016 will have some surprises.


Read More Here

The Battle to Save America Begins, Once Again, in Wisconsin

Back in 2010, America was struggling with a financial crisis it could not resolve and state budgets were creaking under its load. States were unable to meet their obligations and the budgetary outlook for the future was even more bleak. For the sake of the long-term health of the country, something had to be done.

You know the rest of the story. Scott Walker grabbed the third rail of state politics – public sector unions – and held on for dear life. He directly challenged one of the most well-organized lobbies in America and defied conventional wisdom about how to cut budgets. The left responded with a furious attempt to cut his term short and recall him, and millions of dollars in union money poured in. However, they were unable to topple Walker or his reforms, which became a blueprint for many states across the nation. Now, states have a blueprint for how to take on the bloated public sector unions and win, in order to save their own budgets.

Make no mistake; nothing less than the future of this country is at stake in the current Republican primary. If Donald Trump is nominated, not only will he lose, but he will take the Senate and House majorities down with him. Hillary Clinton will face literally no opposition to anything she wants to do for at least two years. After seeing what Obama has tried to accomplish even though he hasn’t controlled either chamber for the last two years, that should send chills down your spine.

And oh yeah, Hillary Clinton will get to nominate Scalia’s replacement and there won’t be a Republican majority to stop her from nominating the worst liberal ideologue she can find.

The tide is turning on Donald Trump, and the antics of his campaign over the last week demonstrate that they know they are a long way from reaching the 1,237 delegate threshold. The only question right now is whether it is all too late. Some of the states that are ahead on the nominating calendar – like New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island – are presumably very good territory for Trump. If Trump is going to be stopped from reaching the 1,237 threshold, it has to start next Tuesday in Wisconsin. He hasto have his nose bloodied there by Cruz – and possibly also by Kasich.

Scott Walker’s endorsement of Cruz today, while important in and of itself, signals that in addition to his own campaign organization, Cruz will likely get help from the state GOP’s formidable election organizations – even if it’s just in the form of expertise. This all adds up to an excellent opportunity to crush Trump in what will be the only electoral contest within a 4 week period. That will help solidify the narrative that Trump is sliding and once again give voters a chance to reconsider what the Trump trainwreck would do to the country.

The fight to save America is on, and once again Wisconsin is ground zero.

The post The Battle to Save America Begins, Once Again, in Wisconsinappeared first on RedState.


Read More Here