LATE NEWS - it seems all media have agreed that D Trump will announce Indiana Governor Mike Pence as his running mate. The following is still an appraisal of the factors DT must have (or should have) taken into account. Whether or not picking Pence is a wise move on Trump's part has little to do with whether Pence will help get more voters to support the ticket (he won't.) What simmers below is which group has "deep leverage" with Pence -- the Murdochian party masters or Trump himself. If it is the former, then Pence is likely to betray Trump, either before the election... if they are losing badly... or after, if (GF!) they win.
As a writer of thrillers and sci fi, I would envision DT asking his finalists "are you willing to tell me something embarrassingly scandalous that I could then hold over you, to guarantee your good behavior?" (Or go into the next room for pictures.) Do you find that "sensationalist"? Really? Knowing how eager Pence was, for the pick... and how determined Trump is, to avoid betrayal? ....
Back to the main posting.
=========
First... here's your run-down on those chosen to speak at the GOP convention in Cleveland, including SIX people named "Trump." An entire evening will be devoted to Benghazi, despite there having been ten much worse terrorism lapses (one of them giga) under President GW Bush. (Can you name them? Ah, what a difference constant drum-beating can do, for memory!) And there will be an entire evening devoted to the sexual misadventures of Bill Clinton! Ah, like Donald can preach.
So much for policy emphasis and the high road.
Okay but on to the Veep Derby. So the news reports that Trump has narrowed the field to Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, with the bookies surging on Pence. I earlier used Gingrich as a strawman for comparison against Trump's highly unusual set of needs. Gingrich was the felow who fit every important category, including the vital one of not being likely to betray Trump before the election, or to serve as "impeachment bait" after.
Christie also fits, but DT knows that Christie will not do him a scintilla's good on the campaign. Pence and Sessions are wholly-owned shills of Rupert Murdoch useless politically but above-all, sure to betray Trump at first chance, before or after the election. Guaranteed. Though Pence is a master-flatterer...
Following up on Gingrich. He has strong positives from DT's point of
view, and a couple even from yours! Yes, Newt upped culture war in his time... OTOH he supports space
and writes sci fi!
And Newt paused in culture war for one year to be the only GOP congressional leader since 1980 to actually negotiate in good faith with a DP president, getting some real bills passed. Sure, the Hastert/DeLay (both now convicted criminals) +Boehner/Ryan cabal punished Gingrich severely for daring to actually try to govern a bit. But that gives him a grudge... which in turn makes him potentially attractive to Trump! It means Newt won't be tempted - when the election goes sour - to betray Donald. Or to help impeach him if (GF!) they win.
Finally, lest we forget, Gingrich's Contract With America was one of the most brilliant maneuvers in US politics in living memory. I keep urging the Dems to do something like it! Moreover, the "Contract" was only 2/3 hypocrisy and theater. The other 1/3 was at least sincere stuff, if not my top priorities. (And Newt's participation in the banishing of the House's Office of Technology Assessment - in my mind - consigns him to a special place for traitors. Still, at least he's not uniformly a useless, dogmatic traitor. Give him that.)
If DT chooses NG you can bet Gingrich will flounce a new Contract on us, reprising his glory days! A pity because the dems then won't use the tactic... and I deeply believe they should.
No, Newt fits every single check box for Trump... except obsolete ones like "ticket balancing". Which is why I am betting Trump'll swing in another direction altogether! Longshot: a regular female GOP governor, one firmly in Roger Ailes' and Rupert Murdoch's pocket. Or else... sigh... the master-flatterer Pence. Why? Alas for The Donald. Because I do not think he thinks things through.
== Perspective! ==
Renowned UC Berkeley cognition professor George Lakoff suggests that the deep down difference between progressives and conservatives has little to do with so-called “left vs right” - not when open and fair markets do vastly better under democrats and they even do more deregulating. Instead, he offers evidence that the difference can be understood in terms of of moral worldviews that are encapsulated in two very different common forms of family life: The Nurturant Parent family (progressive) and the Strict Father family (conservative). See Lakoff's book: Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate.
As a writer of thrillers and sci fi, I would envision DT asking his finalists "are you willing to tell me something embarrassingly scandalous that I could then hold over you, to guarantee your good behavior?" (Or go into the next room for pictures.) Do you find that "sensationalist"? Really? Knowing how eager Pence was, for the pick... and how determined Trump is, to avoid betrayal? ....
Back to the main posting.
=========
First... here's your run-down on those chosen to speak at the GOP convention in Cleveland, including SIX people named "Trump." An entire evening will be devoted to Benghazi, despite there having been ten much worse terrorism lapses (one of them giga) under President GW Bush. (Can you name them? Ah, what a difference constant drum-beating can do, for memory!) And there will be an entire evening devoted to the sexual misadventures of Bill Clinton! Ah, like Donald can preach.
So much for policy emphasis and the high road.
Okay but on to the Veep Derby. So the news reports that Trump has narrowed the field to Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, with the bookies surging on Pence. I earlier used Gingrich as a strawman for comparison against Trump's highly unusual set of needs. Gingrich was the felow who fit every important category, including the vital one of not being likely to betray Trump before the election, or to serve as "impeachment bait" after.
Christie also fits, but DT knows that Christie will not do him a scintilla's good on the campaign. Pence and Sessions are wholly-owned shills of Rupert Murdoch useless politically but above-all, sure to betray Trump at first chance, before or after the election. Guaranteed. Though Pence is a master-flatterer...
Following up on Gingrich. He has strong positives from DT's point of
view, and a couple even from yours! Yes, Newt upped culture war in his time... OTOH he supports space
and writes sci fi! And Newt paused in culture war for one year to be the only GOP congressional leader since 1980 to actually negotiate in good faith with a DP president, getting some real bills passed. Sure, the Hastert/DeLay (both now convicted criminals) +Boehner/Ryan cabal punished Gingrich severely for daring to actually try to govern a bit. But that gives him a grudge... which in turn makes him potentially attractive to Trump! It means Newt won't be tempted - when the election goes sour - to betray Donald. Or to help impeach him if (GF!) they win.
Finally, lest we forget, Gingrich's Contract With America was one of the most brilliant maneuvers in US politics in living memory. I keep urging the Dems to do something like it! Moreover, the "Contract" was only 2/3 hypocrisy and theater. The other 1/3 was at least sincere stuff, if not my top priorities. (And Newt's participation in the banishing of the House's Office of Technology Assessment - in my mind - consigns him to a special place for traitors. Still, at least he's not uniformly a useless, dogmatic traitor. Give him that.)
If DT chooses NG you can bet Gingrich will flounce a new Contract on us, reprising his glory days! A pity because the dems then won't use the tactic... and I deeply believe they should.
No, Newt fits every single check box for Trump... except obsolete ones like "ticket balancing". Which is why I am betting Trump'll swing in another direction altogether! Longshot: a regular female GOP governor, one firmly in Roger Ailes' and Rupert Murdoch's pocket. Or else... sigh... the master-flatterer Pence. Why? Alas for The Donald. Because I do not think he thinks things through.
== Perspective! ==
Renowned UC Berkeley cognition professor George Lakoff suggests that the deep down difference between progressives and conservatives has little to do with so-called “left vs right” - not when open and fair markets do vastly better under democrats and they even do more deregulating. Instead, he offers evidence that the difference can be understood in terms of of moral worldviews that are encapsulated in two very different common forms of family life: The Nurturant Parent family (progressive) and the Strict Father family (conservative). See Lakoff's book: Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate.
I have my own hypotheses having to do with a streak of Romanticism that runs through portions of American life and psych back to the Confederacy and beyond. And recent advances in brain science also seem to apply. Still, as usual, Lakoff’s insights are worth reading. Even if you disagree, you’ll blink several times and go huh!
== HC and BS ==
22 years of Clinton bashing-and-accusations and the most relentless scrutiny -- amounting to $100 million dollars plus -- ever focused on a couple - including when G.W. Bush focused every resource he could apply as president, seeking to finding a smoking-gun, even diverting agents from anti-terror duties, during the 6 months before 9/11. And after all that? Dis is all dey got? See: Republicans' Benghazi goose chase comes up empty. If you were scrutinized and accused for 22 years by screamers spending $100 million dollars+, who came up with zero actionable evidence - nada, nothing, zip - might you demand the bastards either put up or shut up?
Here’s the growing list of big-name Republicans supporting Hillary Clinton. It includes Richard Armitage, Henry Paulson, Brent Scowcroft, former George W. Bush administration officials who have announced that they are supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016. Many prominent businessfolk are endorsing Hillary Clinton. “Take Jim Cicconi, the senior executive vice president at AT&T. He served in both the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations and donated $10,000 last year to Jeb Bush's Right to Rise superPAC. But he says he's voting for Hillary Clinton in November.” Cicconi says: "Hillary Clinton is experienced, qualified, and will make a fine President. The alternative, I fear, would set our Nation on a very dark path."
Alas this will do little good. It will convince many Bernites that HC is selling them out. When in fact what it reflects is not just disgust with Donald Trump but a rising realization among smart businessforlk that 30 years of GOP mythologies like Supply Side “Economics” are threatening to kill the (middle class) goose that lays their golden eggs. The smartest – the tech billionaires and Warren Buffett – have known this for ages and are almost all (excepting some libertarians) democrats. For fellows like Cicconi to wise-up took a shock. A slap across the face called Donald. Interesting article.
And no, Bernie fans, all it means is that people can see there are no “sides” to a sinking lifeboat. Smart business types are realizing what Joe Kennedy did, when he “betrayed” the other moguls and supported FDR: “I’d rather sacrifice half my wealth to help raise the middle class than lose all of it and maybe my life, to revolution.”
Bernie Sanders just pointed the way to what he’ll be doing, till the November election… stumping for democratic candidates for Congress and even state offices, using his star power to draw young folks into political engagement and action, in some ways even more essential than the presidency, since today’s Congress is the most lazy and worthless in the last century. This is how Bernites can change the nation and world - and learn skills for their next rounds.
I've long held that disappointed Sandersites can change the world by concentrating on Congressional races. Opportunities abound.
Example?
Dems used to run hopelessly lefty cases against my own local congressman, the notorious dogmatist, feudalist and cheater Darrell Issa (49th CA Congressional District). What a dumb idea. Most GOP reps are from districts whose voters are inherently at least a bit conservative. So Dems should in such districts run not a Santa Monica liberal but a DNC-style moderate who likes science, believes in equal rights and climate change and limiting money in politics... but maybe is a bit stronger on defense and free enterprise than a lefty might like! BFD. Go for the win.
Example?
Dems used to run hopelessly lefty cases against my own local congressman, the notorious dogmatist, feudalist and cheater Darrell Issa (49th CA Congressional District). What a dumb idea. Most GOP reps are from districts whose voters are inherently at least a bit conservative. So Dems should in such districts run not a Santa Monica liberal but a DNC-style moderate who likes science, believes in equal rights and climate change and limiting money in politics... but maybe is a bit stronger on defense and free enterprise than a lefty might like! BFD. Go for the win.
Have a look at this guy running against Issa now! Central casting could not have done better. Doug Applegate: A retired Marine colonel and prosecutor... who also pledges to work for "good-paying jobs, affordable college, and fighting for the middle class." ... also "gender pay and healthcare equality.... End Wall Street’s bribery of Congress...a fully integrated renewable energy program... supporting the 2013 bipartisan immigration bill, and ending the Hastert rule...Americans have the right to sustainable farming and the right to know what's in the water and GMO food we eat..."
And you'd sniff at such a fellow because he's a former member of the U.S. officer corps? The 3rd best-educated clade in American life? Grow up! All we need is forty of these folks and Paul Ryan can go boohoo. The nation's business will be done again.
And sure, then yell and argue with this fellow over your differences. Watch. He'll yell back and argue... and buy a round and negotiate with you. Like a grownup.
Be grownups too. The republic needs them, desperately. So do the planet and our grandchildren. And hopes.
