Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Election’ Category

donald-trump-sexist-comments__optYour daughter will be at new risk for sexual predation, assault or even rape if Trump is in the White House.

Trump’s election would give license to your daughter’s boss, teacher, boyfriend, husband, or any man in a position of celebrity or power, to do what Trump does. Trump’s election would put your daughter at risk because it would loudly say to other young men that this society not only tolerates sexual predation, but celebrates, enables and even ennobles those who prey on women.

Trump is no mere philanderer, adulterer or admirer of women. Adultery is, after all, a consensual act. He is a repeat sexual molester who boldly confessed to making a habit of sexual assault and battery (which, under the law, means unwanted physical contact).

It’s not just his own admission – others accuse him of sex crimes, too (see https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/20/donald-trump-sexual-assault-allegations-jill-harth-interview). Strange reversal, isn’t it, when a sexual super-predator brags of his own guilt, and the victims’ statements are merely the corroborating evidence?

Serial sexual predators such as Trump should be on trial for their crimes, not in the Oval Office.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

It may be time to work for Donald Trump’s nomination. Trump’s catastrophic defeat in the general election is now sufficiently certain, his chances of fracturing the Republican party, and his chances of bringing in congressional Democrats on his negative coattails, that the patriotic thing to do may be to work for his nomination. Either Hillary of Bernie is likely to best Trump, unless, paraphrasing Governor Edwin Edwards they catch one of them in bed with a live boy or a criminal indictment. And Hillary may even be able to survive an indictment. She wouldn’t be the first Clinton to do so.

Ted Cruz, on the other hand, is a real electoral threat. Perhaps not as unhinged as Donald Trump, he represents a more classically Republican neoconservative danger to America. And his chances of beating Hillary are pretty good. Her average polling margin over Cruz is within the margin of error on most polls at the moment, so a tie. Florida recount, anyone? That’s a chance we can’t take.

Read Full Post »

paxromanamapDonald Trump wants to end Pax Americana because it costs too much. Countries protected by American military dominance must pay, according to Trump, because we can’t afford our present posture.

Contrary to Trump, we can’t afford to abandon defending others. The cost of our own defense would rise, and we would endanger ourselves, if we walk away.

There’s a quid pro quo in place. Everyone benefits. Especially America. If we stop providing global stability, others would need to see to their own defense, and the fundamental post-war deal would unravel. We would trigger a dangerous return to a multi-polar, unstable world. That kind of isolationism is dangerous and misguided.

By providing a security umbrella we save others money, that much is so. But we also save ourselves, and we increase our own security. Countries under our umbrella pose no threat to us, and they pose no threat to others. Thus our potential rivals face a simplified defense posture, and so do we. They need only concern themselves with a unified western world, and we need only concern ourselves with a few rivals.

Could we ask for more from our putative friends? Yes. Specifically, we must demand that the Saudis and others abandon tolerating and promoting religious fanaticism. Their cash and their troops are secondary. Trump should know this if he aspires to be President.

If Trump has his way, and we return to a multi-polar world, all military budgets would be larger, especially ours. Each country would necessarily go after its own parochial agenda, with our ability to moderate allies’ behavior greatly diminished. The risks of local tensions escalating out of control would be much greater.

Pax Americana remains a safer and cheaper situation for all. We must not abandon it, even if Mr Trump wins the election. He claims he listens to the best people. Let’s hope he does, before he triggers a of round regional conflict and global re-militarization.

Update: An editorial in USA Today concludes, “this prospective commander in chief’s views are not just irresponsible: they are cataclysmically dangerous.”

Read Full Post »

“Cultural pessimism is always fashionable, and, since we are human, there are always grounds for it. It has the negative consequence of depressing the level of aspiration, the sense of the possible. And from time to time it has the extremely negative consequence of encouraging a kind of somber panic, a collective dream-state in which recourse to terrible remedies is inspired by delusions of mortal threat. If there is anything in the life of any culture or period that gives good grounds for alarm, it is the rise of cultural pessimism, whose major passion is bitter hostility toward many or most of the people within the very culture the pessimists always feel they are intent on rescuing.”

— Marilynne Robinson in The Givenness of Things: Essays, October 2015

Do those in thrall to politicians peddling pessimism and panic recognize themselves in her words?

Read Full Post »

Trump Watch is a page logging Trump’s incitements to violence in his own words, updated with appalling frequency.  Follow Trump Watch for the latest updates, or post your own comments.

Read Full Post »

trump_flicker_face_yessPaul Krugman’s piece Clash of Republican Con Artists eloquently details how Trump is not the only Republican candidate who “talks complete nonsense on domestic policy; who believes that foreign policy can be conducted via bullying and belligerence; who cynically exploits racial and ethnic hatred for political gain.” They’re all the same, as Krugman sees it.

Krugman misses the most important distinction. While the policy fraud may be the same among Trump and the establishment Republicans, the men selling this fraud are not. Character counts, and one candidate is dangerously flawed.

If there’s going to be a Republican commander-in-chief, I’d much rather it be a Romney, Rubio or Kasich. Those guys are, if nothing else, not insane megalomaniacs – they are fit to be commander-in-chief.

Since a Trump nomination seems inevitable now, it may be time for Republicans in Congress to rein in a President’s ability to access the nuclear arsenal without adult supervision, to misuse the military, or to misuse the rest of government. The last time we had a vindictive, paranoid, insecure, small-minded Republican creep in the White House, he badly misused Presidential power.

Today’s Republican creep has far deeper character problems than Nixon, and has no moorings whatsoever. The parallels with the Germany of the 1930’s are unmistakable. This is not a person to trust with loaded weapons.

Read Full Post »

Hillary or Bernie?

Democrats are debdemocratcandidates61815ating the wrong questions about their candidates.  Only electability counts.

There are reasons to prefer Hillary or Bernie, but none of that matters if Republicans win. Either candidate will be perfectly satisfactory to most Democrats, if elected, but will have been a disaster if defeated.

This is not a back-handed endorsement for Hillary.  There are reasons to imagine either candidate could best a Republican.  Here’s my chart, in alphabetical order, of factors that may matter.

  • Broad experience – Advantage HILLARY
  • Compelling personality – Advantage BERNIE
  • Foreign policy capacity – Advantage HILLARY
  • Inspiring message – Advantage BERNIE
  • Passion and Purpose – Advantage BERNIE
  • Ready for the ‘midnight call’ – Advantage HILLARY
  • Rhetorical power – Advantage BERNIE
  • Tested Under Republican Fire – Advantage HILLARY

Of these, there is one factor that is the sine qua non of electoral politics – passion and purpose.  That’s not a laundry list of policies – Hillary’s got that covered – it’s a kind of maniacal fire in the belly that you can feel burning in the person. Trump’s got it. Bernie’s got it. Hillary – that remains to be seen.

Here are RealClear Politics numbers today.  These numbers may not be the final answer, but they do illustrate that it is a difficult call.

Trump v. Clinton = Clinton by 2.7
Trump v. Sanders = Sanders by 5.3

Cruz v. Clinton = Cruz by 1.3
Cruz v. Sanders = Sanders by 3.3

Democrats need to stop comparing the policies, and focus on one thing: which candidate can win?

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »