Tag Archives: party

Things We Can Count On In the Next Two Years

Mother Jones

What is Donald Trump going to do in office? Beats me. For the most part, I’d ignore what he said on the campaign trail, since he said so many different things at different times. It’s obvious that (a) he doesn’t know much, and (b) he doesn’t truly care about very many things—and that means he’s going to be willing to negotiate. On that score, I mostly agree with Tyler Cowen, who speculates that “his natural instinct will be to look for some quick symbolic victories to satisfy supporters, and then pursue mass popularity with a lot of government benefits, debt and free-lunch thinking.”

However, this also means Trump is likely to follow the lead of Congress, which is completely in Republican hands and likely to follow the lead of Paul Ryan. Given that, I think there are a few things we can speculate about. Here’s a short list:

The filibuster is toast. Republicans will get rid of it as soon as they need to.

There are three Supreme Court justices who support Roe v. Wade and are getting on in years: Stephen Breyer (78), Anthony Kennedy (80), and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (83). Using standard actuarial tables, there’s a 60 percent chance that at least one of them will die during Trump’s term. That means there’s a 60 percent chance that Roe v. Wade will be overturned.

Repealing Obamacare will be harder than Republicans think, and it’s possible that they’ll shrink from it when they truly have to face up to the consequences. For one thing, it’s impossible to keep the “good parts” (pre-existing conditions, community rating, etc.) and only get rid of the bad parts. In the best case, they’ll pass a bill that repeals Obamacare in name, but leaves most of it in place under a different name. But I doubt that. In the end, I think they’ll rip down the whole thing.

There will be a recession sometime during Trump’s term. I don’t know what this means. But I’ll bet the Republican Congress will be a whole lot more eager to fix it with crude Keynesian pump priming than they were for Obama.

Trump seems to really care about infrastructure, which makes sense since he thinks of himself as a builder. So we might very well get an infrastructure bill passed. I expect that a wall on the southern border will be part of it.

Congress will pass a big tax cut for the rich. Not as big as Trump’s, I think, but plenty big anyway.

Winners from a Trump presidency: rich people; pro-lifers; Paul Ryan, who will now be reelected Speaker easily; China; Wall Street; Vladimir Putin; James Comey; and CNN president Jeff Zucker, who did everything in his power to help elect a guy who could keep his ratings up.

Losers from a Trump presidency: poor people; anyone on Obamacare; illegal immigrants; climate change; the white working class, which fell for Trump’s con but will get virtually nothing from his presidency; anyone who cares about human decency and national dignity; Barack Obama, whose presidency will now be considered a failure; and the Democratic Party, which has lost control of the presidency, the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, and most of the states.

Since I have the Reconstruction era on my mind right now, it’s hard to avoid the obvious comparison. Reconstruction lasted about eight years, and then was dismantled almost completely. Barack Obama’s presidency lasted eight years and will now be dismantled almost completely. I will withhold my opinion for now on the obvious reason for this similarity.

Follow this link: 

Things We Can Count On In the Next Two Years

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Things We Can Count On In the Next Two Years

Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Trump Campaign to Prevent Voter Intimidation

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a surprise ruling, a US district judge in Ohio issued a restraining order against Donald Trump’s campaign to prevent anyone working on the campaign from harassing and intimidating voters at the polls on Tuesday.

The order came after a two-hour hearing in which the judge pressed Trump’s lawyer to justify the candidate’s inflammatory rhetoric about voter fraud. It also applies to close Trump adviser Roger Stone, who has organized poll-watching activities, and the “officers, agents, servants, and employees” of Trump and Stone.

Voter fraud has been a popular theme among Republicans this year, from Trump to state Republican leaders who cite fraud as a reason to make it more difficult to vote. But as Friday’s ruling shows, it’s a lot easier to warn about fraud on the campaign trail than in front of a judge.

The restraining order is the result of a lawsuit filed by the Ohio Democratic Party against Trump, Stone, and the Ohio Republican Party. The suit asked the court to declare it illegal to intimidate voters at the polls. Similar suits have been filed in Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Michigan. The Ohio complaint laid out a long history of remarks by Trump and his running mate, Mike Pence, encouraging supporters to watch the polls. (For example, Trump told a crowd in Akron, Ohio, “And when I say ‘watch,’ you know what I’m talking about right? You know what I’m talking about.”) The order also covers Stone, after the complaint detailed efforts by his group, Stop the Steal, to recruit poll watchers and conduct exit polls on Election Day, among other activities. The complaint cited provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 that prohibit voter intimidation.

Here’s the order:

DV.load(“https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3214407-Order-Trump-Stone.js”,
width: 630,
height: 600,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-3214407-Order-Trump-Stone”
);

Order Trump Stone (PDF)

Order Trump Stone (Text)

Civil rights lawyer Subodh Chandra was in the courtroom and tweeted throughout the hearing. Here’s what he observed:

Later Friday afternoon, the Trump campaign appealed the ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

This story has been updated to include the judge’s order and Trump’s appeal.

See original article here:  

Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Trump Campaign to Prevent Voter Intimidation

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Trump Campaign to Prevent Voter Intimidation

Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

With 13 days left until the end of the campaign, Donald Trump seems to have all but given up. He’s mostly promoting his hotels these days and has stopped all big-dollar fundraising. In fact, he seems as if he’d be pretty happy if Republicans lost in an epic wave election, which might make his own loss seem less of a personal humiliation and more a party failure. Given all this, I suppose this means that Republicans are resigned to losing and are probably putting their heads together to figure out how they can work with Hillary Clinton over the next four years in order to accomplish at least—

Eh? What’s that, Ilya Shapiro?

The Senate Should Refuse To Confirm All Of Hillary Clinton’s Judicial Nominees

Um, OK. That’s clear enough. Gonna be tough on the federal judiciary, though. Don’t big businesses need the courts to stay fully staffed so they can continue suing each other over dumb patent infractions? Maybe not. But anyway, Shapiro is just one guy. This is probably not a common opinion, right?

OK, fine: two guys. But surely wiser heads in Congress will prevail?

Jason Chaffetz, the Utah congressman wrapping up his first term atop the powerful House Oversight Committee, unendorsed Donald Trump weeks ago. That freed him up to prepare for something else: spending years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton.

“It’s a target-rich environment,” the Republican said in an interview in Salt Lake City’s suburbs. “Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

Welp, it’s sure sounding like the Republican Party has learned nothing and forgotten nothing over the past eight years. If this is how things go, they’re planning to double down on total obstruction starting on Day One—or even before that for Chaffetz. Then in 2020 they’ll wonder yet again why they have such a hard time winning the presidency. I wonder if it will ever occur to them that getting nothing done just isn’t a winning argument for a majority of Americans?

Continue reading: 

Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele Announces He Will Not Be Voting for Donald Trump

Mother Jones

Former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has added his name to a growing list of Republican figures disavowing Donald Trump, announcing on Thursday that he will not be voting for his party’s presidential candidate next month.

“I will not be voting for Clinton,” Steele said at the Mother Jones 40th anniversary dinner. “I will not be voting for Trump either.”

He singled out Trump’s first remarks disparaging Mexicans as rapists and criminals as the moment that party leaders such as current RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and House Speaker Paul Ryan should have stepped in to oppose Trump’s views.

“The chairman has the responsibility to provide law and order, in the sense that you want to inflect party discipline and instill party discipline where you need it,” he said, speaking from his experience as the party chair from 2009 until 2011.

He went on to describe Trump as the voice of the frustration of the “racist” and “angry” underbelly of America and noted, “I was damn near puking during the debates.”

Link:

Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele Announces He Will Not Be Voting for Donald Trump

Posted in Cyber, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele Announces He Will Not Be Voting for Donald Trump

Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Mother Jones

What’s going to happen to the Republican Party after November 8? I’ve raised the possibility that if Trump loses massively, the party establishment might get serious about marginalizing the tea party caucus in Congress instead of being held endlessly hostage to them. Most of the responses to that suggestion have been skeptical. The more likely possibility is that tea partiers will increase their influence and the GOP will become even crazier and more obstructionist than ever.

That’s pretty much what apostate Republican Max Boot thinks:

Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan may hope that after Trump’s inevitable defeat the party will return to their brand of conservatism — in favor of free trade and American leadership abroad, cutting government spending and taxes, a balanced approach to immigration, and making deals where possible with centrist Democrats. But that’s not a safe assumption anymore.

….Perhaps Trump will fade away after the election and the Republican Party will return to its Reaganite roots. But…survey findings suggest a strong possibility that instead the GOP, or at least a substantial portion of it, could continue veering toward the fringe, muttering darkly about how Trump was robbed of his rightful victory. If that is the case, then the Republican Party may not survive the Trump takeover.

I want to make this easy. There’s basically only one thing that matters for the GOP: whether they double down on being the white men’s party, or whether they take the painful but necessary steps necessary to broaden their appeal. That’s it. Everything else pales in comparison.

If they continue on their current course, the presidency is going to get further and further out of reach. Eventually they won’t be able to hold on to the Senate or the House either. They’ve simply run out of ways to increase the white vote and suppress the non-white vote, and the demographics of America just flatly don’t support a party that’s increasingly loathed by women and minorities.

Lindsey Graham’s critique of four years ago is famous: “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.” Republicans need to print this on a hat and start wearing it at all times. The Southern Strategy worked great for half a century, but nothing lasts forever. It’s time to abandon it.

Taken from: 

Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Why Did Hillary Clinton Send Michelle Obama to Arizona?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Clinton campaign is going all-in for a state it doesn’t even need to win. On Monday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager announced that her campaign would spend $2 million on ads and direct mail in Arizona. Perhaps more important, the campaign is redirecting some of its top surrogates from traditional battleground states to Arizona, including Chelsea Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and perhaps the campaign’s most valuable asset, Michelle Obama, who spoke in Phoenix on Thursday afternoon.

Sometimes presidential candidates with a commanding lead try to expand the electoral map simply because they can; a dominant win can translate into a mandate once in office. In 2008, for example, Barack Obama’s campaign was so far ahead in polling and resources that it started investing in Indiana. Obama won the state, which became a symbol of how big his 2008 victory really was.

But Arizona could serve a strategic purpose that Indiana did not. Unlike the Hoosier State, it has a large and increasingly politically active Latino population. Tellingly, when Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook announced the investments in Arizona, he also announced an ad buy in Texas, another state with a large Latino population that was thought to be out of play for Democrats until the Donald Trump campaign began its recent implosion. If she wins Arizona, Clinton could bring Republicans to the table on immigration reform by proving to them that they have no shot at the White Housethat even formerly safe red states will turn blue—if they continue to hold the Trump line on immigration.

“We have been able to move the Latino community to participate in the civic life of Arizona on the issue of immigration,” says Ben Monterroso, executive director of Mi Familia Vota, a group that has worked to register Latinos in Arizona and other states this year. He points out that in 2010, the year Arizona passed its draconian anti-immigrant law, there were 50,000 Latinos registered to vote by mail. Today, he said, there are more than 350,000. “I hope that Hillary Clinton and her campaign see this as an opportunity to send a clear message to Republicans that enough is enough to be playing around with the issue of immigration.”

The fact that Clinton has sent the popular first lady to Arizona is a sign that the campaign is in it to win it. “Sending Michelle Obama sends a signal that a lot of it will hinge on turnout, and in that state particularly Latino turnout,” says Gabriel Sanchez, a pollster with the firm Latino Decisions. Sanchez says his survey data shows that if the campaign can ramp up turnout among Latinos, it has a “legitimate” shot at winning Arizona. Obama did not disappoint; the first lady delivered a rousing speech to a sea of fans in Phoenix. Of course, there will still be hurdles to accomplishing immigration reform in Congress, thanks largely to the uphill battle Democrats face in taking back the House of Representatives. But it would be a warning shot to Republicans in Washington to help move on immigration reform—and to future Republican presidential candidates that Trump’s hardline immigration stance was a losing electoral strategy.

Monterroso believes Arizona is more like California than like Indiana. Just as Arizona’s Barry Goldwater helped launch the conservative movement with his 1964 presidential candidacy, California was once a home base for the Republican Party, sending Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan to the White House. In 1994, California’s Republican governor supported an anti-immigration ballot initiative known as Proposition 187. The move is largely credited with turning the state solidly blue by mobilizing Latinos against the GOP. “Look at what happened in California,” he says. “I think Arizona is in the same direction if the Republican Party doesn’t do anything different in this election.”

Read this article:  

Why Did Hillary Clinton Send Michelle Obama to Arizona?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Did Hillary Clinton Send Michelle Obama to Arizona?

A Parliament in Australia Just Passed a Motion Declaring Trump a “Revolting Slug”

Mother Jones

Just after the damning Access Hollywood tape dropped last week, my mom called from my family home in Sydney to tell me Donald Trump was a “sleaze.” Such was the power of the tape: My polite and lovely mom never uses such strong language in referring to political figures.

She’s not alone. Along with the rest of the world, Australians are fiercely monitoring the US campaign for signs of impending global apocalypse. Every morning I awake to an antipodean surge of concern from friends and family on social media, built up over the previous night. But the outrage isn’t restricted to Facebook or private conversations.

Trump creates drama everywhere, even half way around the world in Australia, where issues of race, immigration and the threat of terror are equally divisive and galvanizing for the electorate. Australian politicians have been forced to declare their views on Trump in media appearances. This week, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott, a conservative, appeared to defend Donald Trump, telling a radio show that Trump’s policies were “reasonable enough” and his supporters were “decent people.” But the current PM, Malcolm Turnbull (who replaced Abbott in a dramatic intra-party leadership coup) called Trump’s behavior on the Access Hollywood tape “loathsome.”

The energy minister Josh Frydenberg called Trump “a dropkick.”

Brutal.

But perhaps the most eloquent condemnation of Trump came from one of the houses of state parliament in New South Wales, which, according to Buzzfeed Australia, just passed a unanimous motion to declare Donald Trump a “revolting slug.” The motion—a symbolic declaration of sorts with no real legislative heft—was tendered by a member of the Greens Party:

“I move that this house condemns the misogynistic, hateful comments made by … Mr Donald Trump, about women and minorities, including the remarks revealed over the weekend that clearly describe sexual assault … and agrees with those who have described Mr Trump as ‘a revolting slug’ unfit for public office,” the motion read.

Read the full story over at Buzzfeed. This from their Facebook page sums it up:

It wasn’t immediately clear which “revolting slug” the legislators had in mind. Australia is home to an array of mollusks. Perhaps I could suggest the giant bright pink slug—Triboniophorus aff. graeffei—found in the Mount Kaputar National Park in northern New South Wales:

Meanwhile, in contrast to the US, both Prime Minister Turnbull and his parliamentary opponent, the opposition leader Bill Shorten, recently backed a bipartisan declaration in favor of immigration. “Australia is an immigration nation,” Turnbull said. “Everyone sitting in this chamber and every Australian is a beneficiary of the diversity that is at the heart of our nation.”

Excerpt from: 

A Parliament in Australia Just Passed a Motion Declaring Trump a “Revolting Slug”

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Parliament in Australia Just Passed a Motion Declaring Trump a “Revolting Slug”

A Note to Sunday’s Debate Hosts: Focus on Trump’s Actions, Not His Words

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Obviously Pussygate has to be addressed at tomorrow’s debate. In theory, all the questions will come from the audience, but I’m assuming the moderators will open things up with a question or two of their own. My recollection—possibly mistaken—is that this is how past town-hall style debates have worked.

I hope so, anyway, because that will give them a chance to ask Trump the right question. They need to ask not about Donald Trump’s lewd comments, but about his actual behavior. On the tape, Trump says “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful â&#128;&#149; I just start kissing them….And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.

Forget the “locker room bantering.” The question for Trump needs to be: How many times has this happened? How many times have you grabbed women “by the pussy”?


It’s been obvious for a long time that the Republican Party has a big demographic problem: their core base is white voters, but the country is getting less and less white every year. Republicans are well aware of this, and have worked assiduously to overcome this weakness. In the early 90s, they zealously pursued pack-and-crack gerrymandering to create more majority-white congressional districts. A few years later Fox News came along, dedicated to nurturing the GOP’s white base. George Bush and Karl Rove squeezed the last few drops out of the white evangelical community. Finally, in the late aughts, Republican legislatures passed a raft of voter ID laws in a last ditch attempt to suppress the non-white vote by a point or two.

But that was it. What more could they possibly do? The answer, to my surprise, was to nominate a man who was a straight-up bigot, and then run a campaign that was only a hair’s breadth from being openly white nationalist. But it didn’t work. Even in a Republican year against a flawed opponent, Donald Trump has lost as much as he’s gained from his bald-faced appeal to whites. And now that his defeat is all but certain, the question hanging over the GOP is simple: what’s next?

It’s now plain—beyond any doubt—that Republicans can no longer win the presidency with only their white base. But after Hurricane Donald’s performance this year, they’re even further in the hole with minorities than ever. And there’s really no sense that their white base is ready to accept a more minority-friendly party anyway. Past attempts at “post-mortems” and “autopsies” that recommended even bare minimum amounts of outreach to women and minorities were quickly and thoroughly crushed.

So now what?


I’m kind of curious: how do you think the whole “grab ’em by the pussy” affair would have played out if we’d had a transcript but no tape? The same? Or would it have dropped quickly out of sight without some audio and video to play constantly on cable news? I’d guess the latter. The power of sound and images has always been strong, but in the past couple of decades it’s become simply immense. “Photo or it didn’t happen” is a bit of a Twitter/Instagram/Snapchat joke, but it’s not really much of a joke anymore.


Last month, after Donald Trump Jr. decided to compare refugees to a bowl of Skittles, the Mars Corporation felt obligated to tweet a response. So naturally, now that Tic Tacs are on a 24/7 cable loop as Donald Trump’s favored breath mint before assaulting women, they too feel the need to put out a statement:

Which colorful pellet-shaped food item will be next?


From a purely political perspective, should Democrats root for Trump to drop out of the race? On the one hand, it would throw the Republican Party into total chaos. That has to be good for Team D. On the other hand, it would allow Republicans to start fresh with a new candidate who wasn’t a huge albatross around their necks. On the third hand, it would demoralize Trump’s core supporters, who might stay home entirely and leave the field wide open for downballot Democrats to win a landslide victory. On the fourth hand, Hillary Clinton is none too popular, and a Trumpless GOP might very well re-attract a lot of moderate voters who have steadily defected thanks to Khan-Curiel-Machado-$916-Million-gate

Thoughts?

This article:

A Note to Sunday’s Debate Hosts: Focus on Trump’s Actions, Not His Words

Posted in alo, ATTRA, bigo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Note to Sunday’s Debate Hosts: Focus on Trump’s Actions, Not His Words

Obama Now Not Tyrannical Enough

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Ladies and gentlemen, your Republican Party:

Do you think Grunwald is exaggerating? Nope. The Wall Street Journal, for example, spent several hundred words acknowledging that Congress’s position on the 9/11 bill was embarrassing, “But not nearly as embarrassing as the junior-varsity effort by the president, who made it easy for Congress to trample him.” Somehow, it’s always Obama’s fault, isn’t it?

Excerpt from: 

Obama Now Not Tyrannical Enough

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Now Not Tyrannical Enough

Judge Upholds Arizona Ballot Collecting Ban, Raising Fears of Suppressed Minority Vote

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A federal judge denied a Democratic challenge on Friday to Arizona’s ban on collecting other people’s absentee ballots, a move that opponents of the ban fear will suppress the minority vote in the state in the upcoming November elections.

The Arizona Republic reported Friday that US District Court Judge Douglas Rayes ruled that the law didn’t disproportionately impact minority groups. Although it could cause inconvenience for some voters, Rayes found, it didn’t create a significant enough burden to warrant blocking its enforcement during this election. The legal fight over the constitutionality of the law will continue, but the law will not be blocked for the Nov. 8 general election.

The law, Arizona House Bill 2023, targets so-called “ballot harvesting.” It makes it a felony, punishable by up to a year in state prison, for somebody to submit a ballot that isn’t his or hers. Election officials, family members, and caregivers are exempt.

Arizona Republicans have tried for three years to block the ability of people to gather other voters’ absentee ballots and submit them for counting. Republicans have argued that the practice would allow a person to take someone else’s ballot and not turn it in, or to alter it in some way before turning it in, constituting a form of fraud. Arizona Democrats and community activists argued that the practice was common in areas of the state with a substantial minority population, including the Phoenix metro area, and that a ban would be a form of voter suppression. The bill was finally approved this year.

“Voting is a key pillar of our democracy,” said Republican Gov. Doug Ducey when he signed the bill in March. “The bill ensures a chain of custody between the voter and the ballot box.”

State Republicans acknowledged during court arguments in early August that there’s no evidence that a ballot has ever been tampered with or thrown away during the process of ballot collection. But they argued that was irrelevant. “You need not wait until someone breaks into your house before putting a lock on the door,” Arizona Republican Party attorney Sara Jane Agne said during court arguments.

Source article: 

Judge Upholds Arizona Ballot Collecting Ban, Raising Fears of Suppressed Minority Vote

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Judge Upholds Arizona Ballot Collecting Ban, Raising Fears of Suppressed Minority Vote