;)
The Commentariat -- May 5, 2016
Afternoon Update:
Sabrina Tavernise of the New York Times: "The Food and Drug Administration made final sweeping new rules that for the first time extend federal regulatory authority to e-cigarettes, popular nicotine delivery devices that have grown into a multibillion-dollar business with virtually no federal oversight or protections for American consumers. The 499-page regulatory road map has broad implications for public health, the tobacco industry and the nation's 40 million smokers. The new regulations would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to Americans under 18...." -- CW
Sam Thielman of the Guardian: "Donald Trump has named an ex-Goldman Sachs partner, Hollywood financier and former Hillary Clinton supporter as his national finance chairman. Steven Mnuchin brings with him an impressive list of contacts in Hollywood and Wall Street. The founder of film finance company Dune Capital, he backed action movies including the X-Men franchise and James Cameron's box office record-breaker, Avatar." -- CW
David Roberts of Vox: "... that whole superstructure of US politics built around two balanced sides, there will be a tidal pull to normalize this election.... So there will be a push to lift Donald Trump up and bring Hillary Clinton down, until they are at least something approximating two equivalent choices.... No institution needs a competitive election more than the media.... What's more, the campaign media's self-image is built on not being partisan, which precludes adjudicating political disputes.... To date, the anti-Trump position has been safely inside the Washington consensus. That will change once the GOP apparatus inevitably swings around behind Trump and begins accusing journalists who write critical stories of bias." -- CW ...
... Dexter Filkins of the New Yorker: "Erdoğan is well on his way to becoming a dictator, if he isn't one already.... [President] Obama and Erdoğan are supposed to meet today in Washington. Let's hope President Obama skips the diplomatic language and goes straight to the point: that any leader who jails journalists -- and arms Al Qaeda and bombs the Kurds and jails his opponents -- is no friend of the United States." -- CW
Paul Ryan Not Yet Ready to Back Trump. Eric Bradner of CNN: "House Speaker Paul Ryan said Thursday he cannot yet support presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump's presidential campaign. 'I'm just not ready to do that at this point. I'm not there right now,' Ryan's position makes him the highest-level GOP official to reject Trump.... Ryan's comments were striking because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday night that he'd back Trump."
... Akhilleus: There must be some kind of logical fallacy term for the situation in which one self-promoting fraud opts out of supporting another self-promoting fraud. Not to mention a situation in which a different self-promoting fraud DOES decide to support self-promoting fraud number one. Republicans are so confusing!
*****
David Nakamura of the Washington Post: "President Obama arrived [in Flint, Michigan,] Wednesday to check in on a disadvantaged city that has been denied a most elemental government service -- safe drinking water -- but his visit turned into an outpouring of emotion from a community aggrieved by years of neglect from its elected officials." -- CW ...
... Timothy Cama of The Hill: President Obama took a drink of filtered tap water from Flint, Mich., Wednesday while visiting the city to address its lead contamination. Obama drank the water in a show of solidarity with the city of 100,000 and to demonstrate his faith in the treatment and filtering. The sip came after he met for about 90 minutes with local, state and federal officials about the water crisis, according to a pool report from the meeting. 'Filtered water is safe and it works,' he said at the event... 'Generally I haven't been doing stunts, but here you go,' before taking a sip." -- Akhilleus (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... President Obama's full speech is here.
Jessica Silver-Greenberg & Michael Corkery of the New York Times: "The nation's consumer watchdog is unveiling a proposed rule on Thursday that would restore customers' rights to bring class-action lawsuits against financial firms, giving Americans major new protections and delivering a serious blow to Wall Street that could cost the industry billions of dollars. The proposed rule, which would apply to bank accounts, credit cards and other types of consumer loans, seems almost certain to take effect, since it does not require congressional approval." -- CW
Wingers for Garland. Leigh Ann Caldwell of NBC News: "Hours after Donald Trump became the likely GOP nominee, the conservative website RedState urged the Senate to confirm President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland. Site managing editor Leon Wolf argued that Trump can't beat likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton -- and warned that she would chose somebody more liberal than Garland. 'Republicans must know that there is absolutely no chance that we will win the White House in 2016 now. They must also know that we are likely to lose the Senate as well. So the choices, essentially, are to confirm Garland and have another bite at the apple in a decade, or watch as President Clinton nominates someone who is radically more leftist and 10-15 years younger, and we are in no position to stop it.'" -- Akhilleus (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... BUT. Lauren Fox of TPM: "Mitch McConnell is going to keep blocking President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland even if that means Donald Trump ultimately gets to fill the court vacancy. In a statement to reporters Wednesday morning, McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said ... McConnell still plans to wait to 2017 to allow the Senate to vote on a Supreme Court nominee." -- CW ...
... Alexander Bolton of the Hill: "... Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced Wednesday night that he will back Donald Trump as the presumptive nominee, declaring he can stop 'a third term of Barack Obama.'" -- CW
North Carolina Discrimination Bill Deemed Illegal: Jim Morrill of the Charlotte Observer: "U.S. Justice Department officials rebuked North Carolina's House Bill 2 on Wednesday, telling Gov. Pat McCrory that the law violates the U.S. Civil Rights Act and [suggested] that it could jeopardize the state's federal education funding. The department gave state officials until Monday to address the situation 'by confirming that the State will not comply with or implement HB2'.... North Carolina could lose millions in federal school funding. During the current school year, state public schools received $861 million in federal funding." --Akhilleus (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Emma Brown of the Washington Post: "A group of Illinois students and parents sued the Obama administration Wednesday over its stance on transgender students' access to school bathrooms and locker rooms, arguing that the U.S. Education Department is illegally forcing local authorities to let children use facilities that correspond to their gender identity." -- CW
Tiny Trigger Fingers. Jack Healy, et al., of the New York Times: "With shootings by preschoolers happening at a pace of about two per week, some of the victims were the youngsters' parents or siblings, but in many cases the children ended up taking their own lives.... In 2015, there were at least 278 unintentional shootings at the hands of young children and teenagers, according to Everytown's database." -- CW
Annals of Journalism, Ctd. Chuck Todd, Chapter 25 (or so).
And already we see the normalization of Trump. In a couple of months when Trump is on with Upchuck Todd and starts spouting off about all the people Hillary has had killed, Todd will nod politely and ask Drumpf if he is still planning on nuking Syria his first day in office, all without blinking, acting as if this isn't the most surreal moment in television history. -- Akhilleus, in yesterday's Comments
Oops! Chuck beat Akhilleus to it:
Are we really going to be here for six straight months, six straight months of the two most unpopular people running for president, probably going down a low road, led by Trump -- Clinton probably feeling, doing the same thing, and it's sort of this race to the bottom? -- Chuck Todd, commentary on MSNBC's coverage of the Indiana primary results ...
... no: Hillary Clinton does not travel the same highway system as Donald Trump.... Trump travels a low road of his own plowing.... Here Todd was, drawing a low-road comparison between Trump and Clinton on the very day that the former ... cited a risible National Enquirer story linking Rafael Cruz, the father of his rival, to the JFK assassination. -- Erik Wemple, writer for the World Champion Both-Sides-Do-It Bezos-WashPo Consortium, but who still can't stomach Upchuck
** Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times: "Every election cycle brings questionable news coverage. (Remember the potential president Herman Cain?) But this season has been truly spectacular in its failings. It has been 'Dewey Beats Truman' on a relentless, rolling basis. The mistakes piled up -- the bad predictions, the overplaying of every slight development of the horse race to the point of whiplash, the lighthearted treatment of what turned out to be the most serious candidacy in the Republican field." -- CW
** Steve M.: "I still think Clinton will win -- but the press will keep the race close." Steve explains why & how.
CW: Watch for the media tricks Steve outlines. Remember, they want the race to be close. Nail-biters = Clicks. President Obama beat Mitt Romney 281-191 in the Electoral College vote, but on election night, even Mitt & Ann Romney, not to mention, "experts" like Karl Rove, thought Romney had won. Why? Because they believed the media's narrative (including, maybe, Peggy Noonan's scientific rich people's yard-signs poll).
Katherine Krueger of TPM: "A live microphone Tuesday night picked up MSNBC's Chris Matthews raving about Melania Trump's appearance after her husband, presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump, won in Indiana. 'Did you see her walk? Runway walk. My God is that good,' Matthews said, according to Variety. 'I could watch that runway show.'... It's far from the first time Matthews has made sexist remarks on the air. In 2011, he said rising Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin 'could not be hotter as a candidate,' called former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 'witchy' and said she only had a political career because 'her husband messed around.'" CW: Luckily, Donald Trump won't be the least bit offended by Matthews' remarks.
Presidential Race
Wilson Andrews, et al., of the New York Times: "If today's general election polling holds true, Hillary Clinton will easily defeat Donald Trump":
Jamelle Bouie of Slate: "Like Sharron Angle, Todd Akin, and Christine O'Donnell, Trump is tailor-made for a distrustful and angry plurality of the Republican Party.... Like his predecessors on the fringe, Trump is anathema to ordinary voters.... Donald Trump begins the general election with a huge deficit in head-to-head polls, deep unpopularity, and major demographic headwinds. Unless he wins unprecedented shares of black and Latino voters, or, barring any improvement with nonwhite voters, unless he wins unprecedented shares of white voters, he loses." -- CW ...
... BUT. Danielle Allen in a Washington Post op-ed: "Donald Trump has set a big, fat trap for Hillary Clinton, and so far she has stepped right into it. He turned his attacks against women against her. She is, he argued, playing the 'woman card.' And Clinton anted up, offering her supporters the chance to buy a 'woman card.'... If Clinton routinely responds to those attacks, Trump will turn her into the 'women's candidate,' and she will lose. She is already perilously close to being that candidate.... Polling shows that Trump has a problem with women, but CW
Lisa Lerer & Catherine Lucey of the AP: "With Donald Trump's remaining rivals bowing out of the race, clearing his path to the nomination, Hillary Clinton is looking for ways to woo Republicans turned off by the brash billionaire.... 'Let's get on the American team,' Clinton said, making an explicit appeal to independents and Republicans, in an interview with CNN on Wednesday." -- CW ...
Julian Hattem of the Hill: "A federal judge on Wednesday opened the door to interviewing ... Hillary Clinton -- as part of a review into her use of a private email server as secretary of State. Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia laid out the ground rules for interviewing multiple State Department officials about the emails, with an eye toward finishing the depositions in the weeks before the party nominating conventions. Clinton herself may be forced to answer questions under oath, Sullivan said, though she is not yet being forced to take that step." -- CW ...
... Cynthia McFadden, et al., of NBC News: "The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton's private email address is making a bombshell new claim -- that he also gained access to the former Secretary of State's 'completely unsecured' server. 'It was like an open orchid on the Internet,' Marcel Lehel Lazar, who uses the devilish handle Guccifer, told NBC News in an exclusive interview from a prison in Bucharest. 'There were hundreds of folders.'... When pressed by NBC News, Lazar, 44, could provide no documentation to back up his claims, nor did he ever release anything on-line supporting his allegations, as he had frequently done with past hacks. The FBI's review of the Clinton server logs showed no sign of hacking...." -- CW
Hillary Clinton, 1994. "Shoulda coulda woulda" press conference on Whitewater.... Hillary Clinton has never been truly vetted before. Particularly by the media. -- Katrina Pierson, Trump spokesperson
Yeah, except for maybe the college-era palling around with Saul-Alinksy thing, Whitewater, cattle futures, Rose law firm billing records, Vince Foster "murder," Travelgate, healthcare fiasco, fake Bosnian sniper attack, Benghaaazi!, corrupt Clinton Foundation donor-buddies, E-mailgate, Wall Street speeches. Other than that, mostly puff pieces. -- Constant Weader
Seth Masket in Vox: "The recent withdrawal of Ted Cruz and John Kasich from the Republican presidential nomination race makes Donald Trump the party's assured nominee for 2016. This represents the most colossal failure of an American political party in modern history.... Democrats are likely to rally to Clinton's side over the next few months, while Trump's ability to rally those Republicans not already in his corner is far from certain.... The Republican Party today is little more than an organization lying in service to Donald Trump, a candidate who owes it nothing." -- CW
Jordan Rudner of the Texas Tribune, in the Washington Post: "For the first time since his own presidency, George H.W. Bush is planning to stay silent in the race for the Oval Office -- and the younger former president Bush plans to stay silent as well. Bush 41, who enthusiastically endorsed every Republican nominee for the last five election cycles, will stay out of the campaign process this time. He does not have plans to endorse presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump, spokesman Jim McGrath told The Texas Tribune." -- CW
Thomas Kaplan of the New York Times: "Gov. John Kasich of Ohio ... ended his long-shot quest for the presidency on Wednesday, cementing Donald J. Trump's grip on the presidential nomination." -- CW (Also linked yesterday afternoon. Story has been updated.)
Patrick Healy of the New York Times: In a series of interviews, Donald Trump "has sketched out" his plans for the first 100 days of his presidency. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Maggie Haberman & Ashley Parker of the New York Times: "Donald J. Trump said on Wednesday that he expected to reveal his vice presidential pick sometime in July -- before the Republican National Convention in Cleveland -- but added that he would soon announce a committee to handle the selection process, which would include Dr. Ben Carson." -- CW
... Paul Waldman: "With Ben Carson vetting the prospective choices, what could go wrong?"
Steve M. is pretty upset & way surprised to learn Trump won't self-fund his general election campaign but instead will establish a 'world-class finance organization.' "This really is the day America lost its innocence." -- CW
Gail Collins takes a look at the new, presidential Donald Trump. CW: I maintain my view that the Trumpster is suffering from dementia. And I'm not kidding. What presidential-acting presidential candidate, on the day he clinches the presidential nomination, says, "We're going to win bigly, believe me"? -- One who can't remember actual adverbs connoting "large," that's who. One whose mind is going, going, but not quite gone. One's whose vocabulary has receded to the level of a two- or three-year-old who is experimenting with the intricate inconsistencies of the English language & whose sweet, logical little mind tells him that "bigly" should work.
Ben Mathis-Lilley of Slate: "Wednesday morning, Trump was on MSNBC's Morning Joe and the show's hosts asked him how he planned to frame his various controversial positions, including ... [his remark that women should be "punished" if they had abortions, if abortions were made illegal], now that he's the presumptive Republican nominee. His response ... is one of the most garbled sacks of nonsense verbiage that has been emitted in the history of human civilization." Includes video. Here's Trump's word-salad "answer" -- CW :
No, he was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and, asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer! But of course not, and I said that afterwards.
... CW: So Palin for veep, definitely. ...
... OR the Tailgunner. No Hard Feelings. Mark Hensch of the Hill: "Donald Trump on Wednesday said that he would consider making Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) his running mate." CW: It was only two days ago that Ted called Donald "'utterly amoral,' 'a serial philanderer,' 'a pathological liar' and even ridden with venereal disease." Now Donald says he "respects" Ted.
... Speaking of Scarborough, he is one tough, principled Republican. Nick Gass of Politico: "If Donald Trump maintains his hard-line stance on immigration and his call to bar Muslims from entering the United States in the general election against Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Republican nominee is in for a bruising defeat, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough said Thursday, remarking that he would not vote for him in November if he does not start turning away from his more extreme views." -- CW
... At least Dana Milbank has principles:
Senate Races
Eric Levitz of New York Magazine, adumbrates Confederates' Garland Conundrum: "...down-ballot Republicans face a pair of bad options: embrace Trump and pray that high turnout among Hillary-hating conservatives compensates for the backlash that six months of Trump's misogynistic ravings are bound to produce, or run away from him and pray that moderates turn out to vote for divided government. Thanks to Merrick Garland, Senate Republicans will have little time to choose." -- Akhilleus (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Beyond the Beltway
How to destroy the GOP in 3 steps. Thomas Geoghehan in The Nation: "It has become clear that the only way to deal with the most serious economic issues facing our country -- inequality, underemployment, wage stagnation -- is not just to elect a Democrat as president in the November elections but to completely destroy the Republican Party." --safari
Rebecca Rosen of The Atlantic: "As people move up the income ladder, they escape material shortages and consume more. They have 'things' -- goods, houses, and, most importantly, education -- to show for their higher earnings, but they do not have healthy finances....The failure to put a proper name on this dynamic is a part of a broader failure to understand it -- and to see it as a problem at all...In the absence of a good understanding of what is going on, people frequently disparage those who are suffering." --safari note: This article is in part a continuation of Neal Gabler's article linked here a while back.
Travis Gettys of the Raw Story: "A South Carolina tow truck driver [and Donald Trump backer] said God told him to leave a disabled Bernie Sanders supporter stranded along the interstate." -- CW
Way Beyond
Karen DeYoung of the Washington Post: "A new cease-fire arranged by the United States and Russia went into effect early Wednesday in and around the Syrian city of Aleppo, the State Department announced. While there were 'reports of continued fighting in some areas,' it said, there had been an 'overall decrease in violence.'" -- CW
Heather Stewart of the Guardian: "Speaking at a joint press conference at 10 Downing Street alongside his Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, [British Prime Minister David] Cameron said, having come through the tough primary process, Trump 'deserves our respect'...However, he added: 'What I said about Muslims, I wouldn't change that view. I’m very clear that the policy idea that was put forward was wrong, it is wrong, and it will remain wrong.'...Abe visibly smirked -- before rearranging his face into a serious expression -- when the idea of Trump gracing the table at next year's G7 summit was mentioned." --safari
Constanze Letsch of the Guardian: "The Turkish prime minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, has announced his resignation after 20 months in office, consolidating Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's position as Turkey's unrivalled political leader and highlighting concerns about the country turning increasingly authoritarian. The resignation...paves the way for President Erdoğan to appoint an even more loyalist party member Davutoğlu's successor, a move dubbed a 'palace coup' by critics and opposition politicians."--safari
London's First Muslim Mayor? Matt Ford in The Atlantic: "Britain is holding local elections this week on what some have dubbed 'Super Thursday,' but only one contest is worthy of the moniker: the race to succeed Boris Johnson as London's mayor...Labour's Sadiq Khan, a 45-year-old son of working-class Pakistani immigrants who fled the chaos of the partition of the Indian subcontinent in the 1940s, is poised to claim victory Thursday.... It would also usher in the first Muslim mayor of the European Union's largest city." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
...Akhilleus: One can only imagine the visit by a President Trump to London. He'd have to ask if there were any non-terrorist officials he could visit the strip clubs with.
News Ledes
AP: "A massive wildfire raging in the Canadian province of Alberta has grown to 85,000 hectares (210,035 acres) in size and officials would like to move south about 25,000 evacuees who had previously fled north. More than 80,000 people have emptied Fort McMurray in the heart of Canada's oil sands." -- CW
Guardian: "The local police investigation into the death of Prince is being beefed up with staff from the US attorney's office and the Drug Enforcement Administration, as a California doctor who specializes in prescription drug addiction revealed the singer's representatives reached out for urgent help the day before he died.." -- CW
Share Article
Reader Comments (23)
Not much that we haven't said here, but this time Edsall says it with charts:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/opinion/campaign-stops/the-great-trump-reshuffle.
Many of the comments are a RC reprise, too.
The jury is in about the death of Prince:
http://www.startribune.com/addiction-doctor-was-to-have-seen-prince-just-before-his-death/378051471/?
So very sad. It he had entered addiction treatment, he might still be alive today.
Marie, The Donald is just innovating, improving the language by expanding the adverbs available to citizens. It is all part of the plan. If "largely" and "hugely" can be adverbs, why not "bigly?" And the verb, of course, is "to embiggen."
Seriously, yes, I have fun observing my granddaughters (4 and 2) apply logic to the language. My favorite neologism the older produced was "whobody," as in "If somebody is making dinner, whobody is that?" Makes sense. If you're 2 years old.
Given trump's travails with venereal disease, HRC might dismiss anything he says as "clap-trap".
She needs to take his perceived strength and twist it against him, like shrub did to Kerry, and find pejoratives, like "Lyin' Ted". "Fake Don" sounds a bit like "fake tan", though he's not as orange as he was.
Cruz proved that trying to use facts, logic, reason is futile. Trumpoids don't care. They really don't care what he says or how he says it. HRC needs simple, piercing language (fraudster, two-timer, crook, shifty, godless, phoney) to hook accessible voters. Which is not her forte. She has to stoop elegantly, toss lightly and serve sparingly.
Who's for VP? I was plumping for Sherrod Brown, though I wish for someone younger. Now I'm thinking she needs Al Franken's wit and smarts.
Last night viewed clips from the Ross Perot, George Wallace and Pat Buchanan rallies. All these contenders were considered fringe candidates, but all got lots of voters rived up to sock it to the status quo. Perot, by the way, sounds similar to Trump when he says, "I put 60 million of my own money into this campaign in order to help bring back this country." But none of these men made it––the country as a whole shied away from these kinds of outsiders. I'm trying to understand when and how all this changed and I keep coming back to John McCain having to tell that ignorant woman at one of his rallies who said Obama was a Muslim that "no, ma'm, he isn't, he's an American, a decent family man..." and soon after ( or was it before?) Trump started the "birther" business. Polls showed that 44% of Americans thought Obama was a Muslim. So here we had the beginnings of Obama being illegitimate for the office and we had "Muslim" as the offending label. We of course had the Tea Party crowd (who we found out were not poor); we of course had Republican backlash for Obama in Congress and on the other side we had the Occupy Wall Streeters. But it wasn't until Trump started winning voters (who, I understand, are also not poor) that something changed. Here was someone who could actually unleash all that fear that this country is being taken over by those non white usurpers. His first hand waving speech about Mexicans must have triggered something like an electric bolt in many of his now followers––he speaks their language (just like many said about Sarah Palin) even though that language is garbled and nonsensical. So what I conclude here is that Trump's followers are not following the fella who follows the dream but following the fella whose scheme is to demean and possibly ruin not only the Republican party (what's left of it) but the country as a whole.
Former Rep.(R) Mickey Edwards, now at the Aspen Institute, has come out saying he refuses to vote for Trump–-says his principles more important than party loyalty. "I am an American first" and castigated those that denigrated Trump but will vote for him nevertheless.
There is a video out that features Cruz sitting on a sofa next to his mother, his arm around her telling us how his mother prays for him every day––there is a hesitation––then he adds, "For hours." Mom looks at him and smiles strangely.
And so it goes~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's not forget–-getting back to the disaster––that Trump's trial re: Trump University is coming up sometime in August.
Patrick,
Thanks for embiggening my vocabulary, something I hope I can samely do for you someday.
Seriously dude, I'm chompening at the bit to be alby to employable that wordification somewherely today.
Maybeley Trump is somehow relateabelish to Lewis Carroll and he has just sharpeninged his vorpal blade for the general.
Oh frabjous day, Callooh, Callay,
all mimsy are the borogoves
and Drumpf is on his way.
Hope you're all suitableastically embiggened.
I knowish I amly.
Gloria,
Ohhh god.....
"Clap-trap". Ambrose Bierce would have loved it.
But seriously...
I don't think there's an honest man's chance in the Republican House that the Gadarene swine will abandon Trump. They'll follow him right over the cliff. So I don't think it's in Clinton's interest, or America's, for her to try to woo them. Just consider the Trump supporter in NC, that son of a bitch tow truck driver who left a disabled woman on the side of the highway because she had a Bernie Sanders bumper sticker on her car. God told him to. Yeah, right. Trump told him to. It was an insult to the Glorious Leader, and he showed that sochulist broad what was what. This is the sort of person who votes for Trump and there is no saving idiots like that.
And I don't think it's a good idea for her to trade insults with him either. That plays into his strength as a schoolyard bully. The best way to fight Trump is with facts. Ignore the idiocy and keep up the body blows with facts. Just keep hammering them home. The swine won't listen, but so what? Other people will, and many of them are already predisposed to listen to the egregious litany of his negatives. His business failures, his shameless lies, his incessant self-promotion at the expense of everything else, even honor and ethics, his seamy misogyny, and his propensity for cheating (wingers think it's stupid to point out that Trump cheats at golf, but I think it's revealing. A guy who can't stand to look bad at anything and cheats while playing a game to make sure of that is not a trustworthy person). I'd hang his white supremacist buddies over him like a sandwich board.
Hopefully Hillary and her people have been doing the necessary oppo research on Trump. There's a lot there.
The Trump Terrane has detached itself from reality, along with most of the former Republican Terrane, and is now in search of another tectonic plate to glom onto. It's Clinton's job to make sure the thing collapses of its own weightred (if I can Trumpify that word).
And hopefully, along the way, she can handily avoid the "clap-trap".
Yeah, what she said.
This is good. WaPo/Greg Sargent notes a Clintonista ad against Trump, and refers to the "shredding machine" that will go after Digit:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/05/this-brutal-new-ad-shows-the-shredding-machine-that-awaits-trump/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
A couple of heartening things about this: (1) Clinton's crew is seeking to cut him from the get-go, wasting no time, and you can bet they will bullyrag him incessantly, trying to bleed him out and provoke him; (2) they are going after the Republican Party, not just Trump. And let's face it, the GOP is the real problem. Trump didn't create all this crap, he's just riding it.
How they will temper this assault over six months will be a problem. After a while, people get used to atrocities or at least learn to factor them into how they cope with the world. Incessant attacks will at some point be less effective, and could even cause many to wish a pox on both houses. People are perverse that way. On the other hand, they can probably count on Trump providing fresh material to work with.
Patrick,
I think you're correct about the need to temper the assault. Too much will turn people off. There's only so many times you can point at someone and laugh before people just ignore it. Just recall how, the media, especially, tired of the stories of George W. Bush's stupidity and fecklessness, to the point where they started making fun of Al Gore.
It can't just be about Trump. Hillary has to give him a few shots then get back to what she's all about.
She does need to stay on message about what a Trump presidency would be like, but it can't be all about that.
Whither the Confederacy?
Without incurring the wrath of any fickle and capricious gods of fate, I've been casually spinning the cogitation cogwheels contemplating the continuance of Confederate calumny into the future.
So let's say a thing happens here in 2016, and that thing is not the thing that thugs and KKK grand dragons are praying for. What next for the mouthbreathers?
First, it's not like the thugs are going anywhere. Confederate ideologues have been so successful at concocting their homemade hooch of hatred that there will still be a significant faction addicted to their brew.
But who will the new brewmeister be? Without a doubt, as in doubtless, Lyin' Ted will be back for another bite at the poisoned apple. Kasich might try it again. So too Scott Walker (if he's not in jail by then). But who else? By 2020, Paul Ryan will either have been booted out by the 'bagger zombies or will be so demonstrably neutered that no amount of pumping iron and stupid grinning will strengthen a presidential candidacy. The deep bench that winger pundits were salivating over a year ago has come a cropper and there are no new Confederate hee-roes in sight. Rubio? Maybe, if he can overcome his stage fright. Jeb is right out. He'll be writing his autobiography by then, trying desperately to secure some winger sinecure or other before receding into well deserved obscurity.
This doesn't mean the party is defunct. In '64, everyone pretty much expected LBJ to rout the "In your guts you know he's nuts" guy. But the GOP had both Nixon and Reagan waiting in the wings. And we all know how that turned out. Still and all, there are no Nixons and Reagans offstage at this time, waiting their turn. And most definitely, no Rockefellers or Doles.
At this point, Republicans have pretty much salted the earth. There's nothing growing in the usual spots. So they'll have to look elsewhere.
I'm sure the Kochs and party insiders are all out scanning the badlands for the next black hatted villain to foist on the American public, but I'm damned if I can figure out who.
Almost more importantly, I'm concerned that the Democrats decide to come up with a plan for the future. We need our own Powell memo of sorts, some kind of world-view, all encompassing strategy. If Elizabeth Warren is the Next Big Thing, someone needs to start that ball rolling now.
Today.
Because if the winter of Confederate discontent does not presage Democratic victory into the foreseeable future, we have only ourselves to blame.
Here's a small indicateral of what's to come at election time. My
partner's brother has been a dyed in the wool R his whole voting
life. He has vowed not to vote at all if he has to vote for Trump.
And he won't vote for HRC either. All of my relatives in East
Texas (R-Baptist), the ones who still speak to me that is, feel the
same. So maybe less Rs voting will be a good thingyer.
In a quote from a Charlie Pierce piece, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb) says a guy at the Walmart asked him: "What the heck is wrong with that city (* )where you work? Why can't they give us a normal person? Is it really so hard?" * Washington D.C.
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a44605/ben-sasse-trump-republicans/
I just want to get this off my chest. I was born in Washington, worked there much of my professional life, my father's side has lived there for generations. We native Washingtonians ARE NOT THE A$$HOLES WHO RUN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. Those are sent to us by those folks in the Walmart talking to Ben Sasse.
We, in turn, often wonder why the rest of the country sends us such poor material to comprise the government.
Thank you for your understanding.
Ak
I thought her car was disabled - not the woman. Forgive me if I've ruined your word play. Nothing worse than someone who tries to explain a joke...
Nevermind. I've used The Google and see she was disabled. But of course, I've missed the point - the point at which one half the country is at war with the other half of the country.
Can't wait until this guy winds up in the ER and the doc walks away because tow truck guy is a Trump supporter.
Haley,
Ba-dum-bum.
The salient point is that the little tow truck bigot who worships the Big Bigot, said, categorically, that had he known this woman was disabled, he still would not have helped her.
Whaddaguy.
Another exemplar of Confederate style Christianity. We won't help you unless and until you kowtow to our political affinities and bow to our warped, racist, misogynistic, hate-filled religio/political vision.
Doesn't the Bible make a lot of the Good Samaritan? I guess Confederate Christians need to be sure that whomever they deign to help, for any reason, is a crude, hard-hearted, bigoted chauvinistic douchebag, same as them.
The fact is that this is such a self-evident requirement, one would expect that no serious journalistic outlet worthy of the name would or could overlook this grossly obvious fact.
But they all will.
No one will call them on this. Or if they do, they'll invent some Hillary Outrage to meet it halfway.
Changing the subject. I am a bit embarrassed to be immersed in my drama of who to vote for in the Oregon primary, and want to turn to my friendly fellow commenters for some ideas and advice.
I realize the Republican schtick is ovah, so that does not concern me. However, my heart tells me to do as I planned and vote for Bernie--just so Hillary gets the idea that we Progressives don't go along with her flip-flopping and war-like ways. Will she honestly change with all of the pressure Bernie has pushed on her. I don't think so, but I do tend to be excessively hopeful.
On the other hand, my mind tells me to vote for Hillary (yikes, just the idea of it makes me want to arc a bean), in order to get this primary foolishness over with and done. I am getting bored with Bernie's constantly repetitive stump speech, and really do think he is too old to run. Hill is right on the edge--pushing 70.
Please, if you are willing, pass your always relevant thoughts on to me. I will be grateful and relieved to be able to make my decision, knowing that I have received excellent and thoughtful guidance.
Kate,
Bernie is in it to the bitter end. He's said so. And Bernie is not some Ralph Nader schmoe.
Vote your conscience, sister.
A blog I found a while back called Blue in the Bluegrass has this to say about your problem:
"A Yellow Dog Democrat is one who will vote for even a yellow dog if it is running as a Democrat. I can't claim to be quite that fanatically partisan, especially since quite a few candidates who run as Democrats in Kentucky are more Republican than a lot of Republicans I can name. But I do love the story Kentucky House leader Rocky Adkins never tires of telling about the old-timer in Eastern Kentucky who was once accused of being willing to vote for Satan if Satan ran as a Democrat. Spat back the old-timer: 'Not in a primary, I wouldn't!' Amen."
Nuff said?
@Kate: you have been reminding us from day one to concentrate on the Supremes––I even ran through the super market here shouting "remember the Supreme's" until someone hit me with a kumquat and told me to shut up. So we want a democrat to win and since that democrat appears to be Hillary and not Bernie we need to give her as many votes as possible and hope that Bernie's fans will rally round. I feel desperate here since Trump seems to be so many's savior in waiting. Hillary needs to concentrate on Trump and not have to juggle Bernie at the same time. It might feel good to vote your conscience, but this is a time to hold your nose and recognize the outcome.
But I sympathize with your dilemma.
Kate, I too would vote Bernie in your position. A shame there isn't preferential voting in the general. Progressives have the right to hammer their message home.
Ak, I agree with everything you say, and wasn't advocating HRC stoop anywhere near the poxy trump. She might catch something. She and her campaign need to give people words to associate with trump. They can forget about the trumpoids, certainly, but she needs hooks for unthoughtful voters who will decide, as they're about to vote, what the heck, they're both the same, let's go with an outsider. In an earlier comment, I suggested she should campaign as if he's not there, meaning not to engage him or let him set the agenda. As she did with that cringeworthy "reservation" statement - an own goal. But she can't rely on policies or detailed plans. I can't say enough, those people don't care. They need subliminal messages as to why they shouldn't vote for her humble opponent, who, after so many bankruptcies knows what it's like to be down and out.
I think Obama should threaten to withdraw Garland's nomination if he doesn't get a hearing by summer.
PD, Hillary has the nomination, she should embrace Bernie, not juggle or battle him, and campaign for the general, as she has started to already. I do believe, however, that the for too long silenced Dem progressives should have their votes counted. IMO.
Thank you brilliant RC commenting friends. I have made up my mind to "go with my conscience"--always a good idea--and vote for Bernie in the Primary. The General likely will be a different story, to be sure.
The article below speaks about my hesitancy to trust any platform changes to which Hillary agrees--especially with Big Dog in the background. And it solidifies my support for Bernie, who has followed a consistent humanistic path for many, many years. I still think he is too old, but that is probably because I am too old! (:
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36713-a-contested-convention-is-exactly-what-the-democratic-party-needs
This one is for you, Marie--a throwback to our days as NYT popular, but untrusted, commenters!
www.commondrreams.org/views/2016/05/05/thomasfriedmans-bargain-basement-punditry
Dean Baker (Common Dreams)
...."The amazing part of the story is that the establishment types pay no price for being wrong in really big ways in their areas of expertise. This is best exemplified by Friedman himself. He can be wrong on every single thing he writes, every day of his life, and it will not in any way jeopardize his standing as one of the country’s most respected commentators on policy and politics.
And he wonders why the public is angry."
Sorry~ Here is the correct link to Dean Baker's take down of Tommy Freedom!
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/05/thomas-friedmans-bargain-basement-punditry