Dynamic Duo: Trump and Tillerson

An Unlikely Choice for Secretary of Statetillerson

I agree with very little that President-Elect Donald Trump says or does. I have to admit though, I am very intrigued by and almost agree with his proposed choice for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil Corporation.

Before anyone can get too excited either way, Tillerson will have to face Senate confirmation, and he will be a tough sell. Already, Democrat as well as Republican Senators are expressing their strong disapproval of the multi-millionaire and “friend” of Vladimir Putin. For many of them, his association with Putin is the first strike against him, followed by his lack of formal foreign policy experience. Of course, Donald Trump is considerably deficient in this area and he managed to win America’s top job, so anything is possible.

With Trump’s consideration of experienced candidates like Mitt Romney, John Bolton and General David Petraeus to fill this top cabinet position, Rex Tillerson is an unlikely choice. It seems more prudent to select someone who has a background in foreign policy to fill the void in Trump. Additionally, rumors of Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin have been problematic for him throughout the campaign, so why choose someone who has such close ties to Russia? Almost anyone else he selected would be less controversial and more likely to win Senate confirmation. What is Trump thinking?

During his lifetime career with Exxon, Tillerson has worked very closely with Russia. In fact, before becoming CEO, his position was managing the company’s Russia account. In 2011, as chairman and CEO he negotiated a partnership with Russian Oil Company, Rosneft. Vladimir Putin attended the signing ceremony. In 2013, Putin awarded Tillerson the Order of Friendship, one of the highest honors Russia grants to foreign citizens.tillerson-and-putin

What Tillerson lacks in formal experience, he more than makes up for in “on-the-job” training, and because of his long-standing business associations, he has a definite feel for the geopolitics of the region. He is well acquainted with foreign leaders in dozens of countries and no stranger to brokering successful negotiations with them. Having this real-time knowledge and understanding of the area is most likely his appeal to Trump. Russia poses the biggest threat to our national security, and their influence in the Middle East is without question. Our relationship with Russia will be pivotal in most of our foreign relations, especially in defeating ISIS. Having a Secretary of State with an inside track to Vladimir Putin is right in line with, “keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”

Tillerson has a firm grasp of the importance of the oil industry to Russia, China and throughout the Middle East. This makes him uniquely qualified to understand their perspective and their economy, and to use that to our advantage at the bargaining table.

Donald Trump is first and foremost a businessman, so he would naturally be comfortable working closely with Tillerson. They would speak the same language and have similar negotiating styles. It is a given that Trump will find bureaucratic Washington a nightmare, and he will be looking for people who are accustomed to cutting through red tape and moving things along. Rex Tillerson is a man that gets things done.

I am encouraged by Tillerson’s support for free trade and minimal government regulation. In view of Trump’s repeated threats of tariffs and other protectionist measures, I think Tillerson will provide a good balance.

Whether or not Rex Tillerson can sway the Senate on his behalf remains to be seen. I wish him luck. One thing is certain; the bar is low when it comes to Secretary of State. After Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, there is nowhere to go but up.

Two Sides of the Same Coin

trump-and-clinton-latest

Well, the media has not been left wanting for new material this past week. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have been featured in a steady stream of controversial emails and tapes which reinforce the fact that both candidates have serious character deficits and are wholly unfit for the presidency. Of course, most of us already knew that, but MSM (mainstream media) and FNC (Fox News Channel) manage to stay busy jockeying to prove which candidate is most unfit. It’s a full-time job.

The humor in this, if there is any, is that so many seem surprised by it, especially Republicans. I’ve lost count of how many Trump surrogates I’ve seen interviewed who rail against the media for releasing all this information so close to the election. I’m pretty sure that’s Politics 101. The term “October surprise” comes to mind, and there’s no shortage of dirt on either side. The big question is: who will emerge as the least bad candidate? That’s a pretty sad state of affairs in a presidential election, in my humble opinion.

Anyone who has been on the planet within the last 30 years knows that Hillary Clinton is an abysmal human being. The scandals behind Hillary are legendary. Enumerating them would be time consuming; especially if you include those associated with husband Bill, her partner in crime. Notably, she lied about the situation in Benghazi that led to the death of four Americans, and she was just investigated by the FBI for failing to protect classified information when she served as Secretary of State. Wow! That’s kind of relevant when contemplating giving her the most powerful position in the free world.Wedding

Donald Trump is the other side of the same coin. Of course, he’s never held public office so we can’t fault him on his record, but he has a plethora of personal and business issues that haunt him. Again, it’s a long list. The highlights (or lowlights) are that he’s an admitted sexual predator (see Howard Stern tape) who is currently facing a civil suit for rape, numerous allegations of sexual assault, and will stand trial for fraud and racketeering charges associated with Trump University. Again, wow! Not a great resume for a presidential candidate.

I can still remember a time when Divorce was the nail in the coffin for someone with political aspirations. As a country, we would be absolutely giddy if that’s the worst thing our presidential candidate had in his closet. Think: Ronald Reagan. Those were the days.

As I’ve stated before, I voted for Marco Rubio in the primary. Of course, he sinned by working alongside the Democrats to try and improve the immigration process in our country. Like Reagan before him, he was under the misguided notion that we send people to Washington to actually try and get things done. That cost him the nomination. Apparently, some voters are more comfortable with their representatives refusing to give an inch to the Democrats, so they can later accuse them of accomplishing absolutely nothing while they’re in Washington. Or, they like the Ted Cruz types, who pontificate on the purity of their conservatism and perform fake filibusters on national television while they read their children’s favorite bedtime story, Green Eggs and Ham. It’s a slippery slope.

Let’s be honest. MSM is in the tank for Hillary Clinton and FNC supports Donald Trump. MSM played it smarter; they knew Trump was the weakest candidate against Hillary, so they propped him up throughout the primaries. They wanted him to win, so they did everything they could to help. Now that they’ve accomplished their goal of giving us the weakest GOP candidate, they’re busy dragging up anything and everything to convince voters what a horrible person he is. It’s not a hard sell.

FNC, on the other hand, legitimized Trump’s candidacy with unprecedented free media coverage. They presented him as a credible candidate when anyone with a modicum of common sense could see he was in over his head. Did you watch the debates? He didn’t understand most of the discussion, so he opted for juvenile stunts and insults. Roger Ailes helped lay the groundwork for a Trump campaign. He actually told his news hosts, “We’re finished with Rubio”. Now, after Ailes contentious departure from FNC, he’s a full-fledged Trump adviser. I guess dirty minds think alike.

I’m almost amused by Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and their ilk who are pre-blaming those of us not enamored of Trump for a Hillary Clinton victory. Well, the loss is on them. They ignored every poll which clearly stated Trump would lose to Hillary in favor of their vendetta against “establishment” Republicans. They wanted to stick it to the GOP, so they made Trump their man. Lesson: Don’t make important decisions from a place of anger. The best decisions are made in a calm manner, armed with knowledge and facts.image

Well, he can be their man, but he’ll never be mine. I like the conservatism of the late great Bill Buckley, and I resent Trump for making a mockery of it. He is definitely his own worst enemy in this race. His best chance of success is to keep his mouth shut, and his fingers off the Twitter feed.

My prediction is that Hillary Clinton will win. The Electoral map already favors her, and though Donald Trump did manage to tighten the gap for a while, she’s now back on top. This close to the election, with the numbers being what they are, it will take something close to a miracle to clinch this for the GOP. This is especially upsetting in a year when we had the gift of running against the likes of Hillary.

Since I don’t like either candidate, my conscience tells me to vote down ballot, and that is what I plan to do.I believe Jonah Goldberg said it best in a recent interview: “When given a choice between two crap sandwiches on different kinds of bread, I’ll skip lunch”.

 

 

It’s All On Them…

I Voted for Rubio…

Just Hannitybefore the presidential election of 2012, Fox News Contributor, Laura Ingraham, made the comment, and I’m paraphrasing, “If the Republicans cannot win this election with all the failures of the Obama administration, they don’t deserve to win.”

Well, I would say the same is true in the 2016 election, but even more so. The past eight years of the Obama White House has put the country on a fast track to hell in a handbasket. Aside from the abysmal failure of Obamacare, the weak economy, the amoral climate that we now find ourselves in, (courtesy of the liberal agenda) we have the Fast and Furious debacle, and the tragedy of Benghazi, where four Americans lost their lives. I could go on, but you get the point.

If there was ever a time when the incumbent party could be easily ousted, it would be now. The major difference we see in the 2016 election versus the 2012 election, is the caliber of our GOP nominee. Donald Trump is no Mitt Romney; not even close. Out of a fertile field of seventeen candidates in the primary election, the Republican electorate decided to saddle themselves with the absolute worst choice. Instead of selecting ANY of the intelligent, well-spoken and informed individuals in the running, they went with the least knowledgeable and most controversial. Further, they selected the one candidate who consistently lost to Hillary Clinton in every poll. never trump

Now, they expect those of us who have never supported Trump to fall in line behind him. Well, I’m not buying it. And Ingraham, a known Trump supporter, now tells us, “If Trump loses this election, it will be the fault of the “Never Trump” people”. In her opinion, our refusal to support the inept Trump guarantees Hillary’s victory, even if we don’t vote for her. Well, in my humble opinion, those who voted for Trump in the primary get to carry that burden. They saw the polls, they listened to his bombast, and they knew he had no substantive knowledge of government or foreign policy. They ignored all of it. Their vote was more about expressing their disapproval of the GOP, and less about the good of the country.

GingrichThere is no way that anyone with the political acumen of Newt Gingrich, Rudy Guiliani, Pat Buchanan, or for that matter, any of the commentators at Fox News, can honestly say that Trump is a qualified candidate. No way. If you watched even one of the debates, it was painfully obvious that the man had no idea what he was talking about. He could not argue intelligently with them about policy, so he went personal against them and their families. He made outrageous and erroneous comments in an effort to steer the dialogue away from the subjects about which he was unfamiliar and uninformed. Any viewer with even a modicum of political savvy could see right through his ploy.

But the media and many of those in the political arena, gave him a pass. Of utmost importance to them was sending the message that they were through with “establishment” candidates, and Trump delivered it perfectly.

Now, with the polls showing Trump trailing Hillary, they’re in damage control mode. They still sing his praises, and they overlook his constant self-immolation, but they lay the groundwork to cover themselves when he loses. They do not intend to take the fall or bear the guilt for their faulty thinking; they want to lay it squarely at the feet of those of us who saw through Trump from the first debate.

Well, sorry. I’m not having it. I won’t be their “out”. As the saying goes, “They made their bed…

 

Mitt’s Missed Opportunity

Mitt RomneyWith the presidential election less than three months away, I guess it’s time to give up on Mitt Romney entering the race. A year ago, early September to be exact, I kept a photo on the home page of my blog. It was side by side pictures of Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio, and the caption read: The Dream Team, Romney/Rubio 2016.  That was back when I was almost certain Mitt Romney would announce his candidacy for the 2016 election, and I couldn’t think of a better running mate than Marco Rubio.

Of course, Mitt never entered the race, but Marco Rubio did. I made it a point to learn as much as I could about Rubio, and in no time, he had my full support. His autobiography, “An American Son”, sealed the deal for me.

Fast forward to this past March, when Rubio suspended his campaign, and it looked like Donald Trump just might be our de facto nominee. Mitt Romney took to the airwaves soon after and publicly eviscerated Trump. He made a compelling argument for why Trump would be a disaster of a candidate, and I agreed with him. Of course, plenty of pundits castigated Mitt for his effort’s, but I admired the fact that he would as the so-called standard bearer of the GOP, speak his mind.

I was not the only one who thought it might signal his late entry into the race. I’ve never been a supporter of a third-party candidate, (I still resent Ross Perot) but if there was ever a year when it could work, it would be 2016. After Kasich and Cruz suspended, I kept waiting for Romney to jump in and save the GOP, but it never happened. It doesn’t appear that it will.

Governor Gary Johnson is making a bid, as is Evan McMillan, although it’s doubtful that McMillan will have an impact on the race. Governor Johnson is seeing an increase in his poll numbers that may garner him a podium at the presidential debates. However, his pro-choice platform will keep me from supporting his candidacy.

Of all the names tossed around over the last few months, Romney was really the only one who could have proven a threat to Trump. Candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich still have a future ahead of them in political office, so it would have been a huge gamble on their part to run third-party. If they didn’t win, to quote Charles Krauthammer, “the longest political suicide note” in history.

Mitt Romney on the other hand, is unlikely to ever seek political office again, so he had little to lose by getting into the race. He already had the name recognition, he is a thoroughly vetted candidate, and he can most certainly gather the financial backing necessary to be competitive. He would have made a wonderful alternative to Donald Trump, and I truly believe many in the GOP, as well as Independents, would have flocked to support him. I think he could have swayed those Democrats who cannot forgive Hillary Clinton for ousting Bernie Sanders, or those who just plain don’t like or trust her.

This could have been Mitt’s year. I am still not sure what kept him from throwing his hat in the ring, but like many who are never-Trump and never-Hillary, I wish he had decided differently.

A Contentious Trump

New TrumpDonald Trump’s latest “deal” is negotiating the conditions under which he will agree to debate Hillary Clinton. A nonpartisan group, the Commission of Presidential Debates, (CPD) scheduled the debates almost a year ago, and they are currently slated for September 26, October 9, and October 19. The first two debates are opposite NFL football games, and Trump is not happy. He claims to have received a letter from the NFL arguing that the times are “ridiculous” (although this is in dispute), and he argues that it will adversely affect the number of viewers. Actually, the two 2012 debates that fell on the same night as NFL games garnered the lion’s share of spectators.

Trump is using his usual “rigged” system approach, and made a tentative commitment to participate, pending a fair outcome in the negotiations. In contrast, the Clinton campaign has agreed to abide by whatever the committee decides and appears eager to engage in the televised debates. Presidential debates have historically benefitted the underdog candidate, and with Hillary Clinton leading the polls, Trump would reap the reward of a good performance.  This is vintage Donald Trump though; he is in his comfort zone when he wheels and deals, and his approach to the political scene differs little from his approach to big business.

However, the CPD seems immune to Trump’s efforts and intends to go forward with the established schedule. It’s not in Trump’s best interest to maintain his stubborn stance, and unfortunately for him, he cannot draw from his argument in the primary that his appearance equals high ratings. Debates are always a ratings draw, and many voters make their final decision on a candidate based on his or her performance.

Trump is a loose cannon, and anything is possible with him, but it would be ill-advised for him to take the debates lightly. Hillary Clinton is a formidable opponent, and Trump would be wise not to underestimate her. If he’s nervous at the prospect of facing her in a debate setting, he has every reason to be. His bombastic comments carried him through the primary debates, and took the focus off of his lack of knowledge, but in a one on one format, that will not be the case. If he’s smart, he’ll listen to his advisers and do the necessary prep work to improve his chances. Smarter candidates than him have failed miserably in these match-ups.

One thing is for certain, it will make for some great television viewing.

 

 

Open Letter to Donald Trump

How You Can “Make America Great Again”Donald Trump

Dear Mr. Trump:

Congratulations on your victory in the GOP primary election. Although I did not vote for you, I commend you for a successful campaign. As the late President Nixon once said, “Politics is not for the fainthearted”, and as a novice, you managed to overtake some serious and highly credible competition.

Despite my lack of support for you personally, I must admit your strategy was impressive. As most winners do, you played to your strengths. Your method of branding was sheer genius. What you lacked in substantive knowledge, you made up for in shrewd marketing.

You recognized what many politicians did not; the degree of anger among American citizens. You sensed their frustration with Washington and the machinations inside the Beltway. You knew they were disgusted with the climate of political correctness that is now pervasive in our society. You are a smart man. You seized the opportunity to be their deliverer.

As a businessman, you know the importance of advertising; of keeping your name and product in front of the consumer. You also know that the success of the media is dependent on ratings, and you used them to your advantage. They did the work for you, for free. All you had to do was be yourself and feed them a steady diet of grandiosity and they provided you with continuous news coverage. It was a really good plan and it worked.

It was soon apparent that the more outrageous your behavior and comments, the more attention you received. You gave the voters exactly what they wanted; the antithesis of the traditional politician, and they ate it up. You gave them a voice, and they gave you their undying support. They didn’t care about your deficits in the inner workings of government, or domestic and foreign policy. They didn’t care whether you could provide insightful answers in debates. They just wanted to be heard and entertained, and you did both very well. You are quite the showman.

You have now completed the first part of your task. You have managed to win the nomination to the highest and most prestigious office in the land, and you have done it without any political experience or qualifications. Again, congratulations.

You are poised now to fulfill your campaign slogan of “Make America Great Again”, but you still have one final battle and it will be the most difficult. You have to defeat Hillary Clinton. Can you do it? Every poll during the primary predicted you would lose in a match-up with Hillary. Your competitor, Senator Marco Rubio, actually had the best poll numbers against Clinton. Glenn Beck, who supported Senator Cruz, even predicted that Marco Rubio would “crush Hillary” and “make her look like she’s a 1000 years old”. Can you do that? The current polls still show you running behind Hillary. Some of the greatest political minds in the GOP are convinced you cannot win. Are you willing to take that chance? Do you want America to take that chance?

You know what a nightmare Hillary Clinton would be for America. It would be like Barack Obama all over again, and perhaps worse. Do you want that for our country? Since you are a successful businessman, you know when to make the deal and when to back off. You know all about good and bad risks. Do you think you’re a good risk? Would you stake your fortune on it? If not, then please don’t stake America’s. We cannot afford to lose this election. Our children and grandchildren need us to fix this country or they may never know the freedom and prosperity that we have enjoyed. The stakes are really high.

You can still be a winner. You can be the real hero of this election. You can go down in history as the man who “made America great”, but it most likely will not be as our President. The odds are against you. Can you pass the mantle of leadership to someone who can defeat Hillary Clinton? When you go to the podium Thursday night to formally accept the nomination, can you sacrifice your ego for the benefit of America and implore the delegates to award their votes to someone who can defeat Hillary Clinton?

Your supporters will follow your lead, no matter what. You have tremendous power right now. Please use it on behalf of America.

The Shaming of the GOP

RNC

A tweet this morning by pollster Frank Luntz did not sit well with me. “The GOP must unite before November 8th, or lose until (at least) 2020.”

Of course, Luntz is not the only one calling for unity. Today’s Twitter feed is brimming with demands for voters to rally behind Trump, and for former candidates like Ted Cruz and John Kasich to endorse him. Prominent members of the GOP are noticeably absent from this year’s convention, and the Trump supporters see it as a betrayal to the Party. I am quite certain that if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton in November, the GOP members who did not support his candidacy will be vilified.

My problem with all this is twofold. First, every poll since the beginning of the primary season has shown Trump losing to Hillary Clinton. He is not a strong candidate. If you nominate someone who is unlikely to win, you cannot blame others for the loss. His success in the primary is not the result of his exceptional knowledge of Government and domestic and foreign policy; he is actually seriously deficient in these areas. He won because, as a businessman, he recognizes the importance of “branding” and he did it very well. He gave himself an effective edge over the other candidates by harnessing the anger of the voters and giving them a voice. He played to his strengths; celebrity and grandiosity, and it worked for him. However, his strategic victory does not make him a more credible candidate or any more likely to beat Hillary Clinton. Some voters chose to ignore the polls and vote for him in the primaries, and they may very well pay the price in November.

Second, no one has the right to “shame” anyone into endorsing or voting for a candidate they loathe. As free citizens, we all have a right to our own opinion and our vote is just that, “ours”. Just because we identify with a certain political party doesn’t mean we have to like or support every candidate within the party. Trump’s disapproval rating ranks right up there with Hillary Clinton, and the #NeverTrump movement made it abundantly clear that many in the GOP were aggrieved at his candidacy. If you know there is strong opposition out there, then don’t be surprised by it. We are all called to follow our conscience, and that is ultimately the determining factor in how we choose to mark our ballot.

This primary season started off with seventeen candidates for the nomination. The voters had a plethora of talent to choose from, and in my humble opinion, they chose poorly.

 

 

Is All Hope Lost?

 

Can Trump Be Stopped in Cleveland?RNC

As the Republican National Convention draws closer, those of us not enamored of a Donald Trump candidacy wonder if the window of opportunity is closing to “dump Trump”. Now that Trump has secured the necessary delegate count to clinch the nomination, is there any hope of stopping him?

There is still plenty of noise in the news and on social media about efforts to unbind the delegates. Kendal Unruh, a Colorado delegate, is leading one group, and Steve Lonegan, former state director of the Cruz campaign in New Jersey, is leading another. In order for a motion to unbind delegates to be brought to the floor, a minority report would have to be issued by the RNC Rules Committee.

This committee is composed of 112 members; one man and one woman from every state and territory, including Washington, D. C. They meet together a few days before the official start of the RNC Convention. It takes only 28 votes from the committee to formally issue the report, but this move in itself is predicted to cause chaos among the delegates.New Trump

Polls since the primary season began have consistently shown Trump losing to Hillary Clinton, and the latest polls have her leading with double digits. Roughly one-third of Republican voters say Trump is unqualified for the presidency. Those leading the effort to unbind delegates see disaster ahead for the GOP should Trump be the candidate in November. Trump appears to be his own worst enemy, as he continues to make headlines with racist comments and to conspicuously demonstrate a general lack of knowledge on the inner workings of government and especially, foreign policy.

Party standard-bearer’s like Mitt Romney, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush and John McCain have all decided to skip this year’s Republican Convention in Cleveland, which does not reflect favorably on Trump, and his so-called status as a unifier.

In what the anti-Trump movement sees as an affirmation of their desire to unbind the delegates, Speaker Paul Ryan voiced his opinion that all delegates should be free to vote their conscience. Curly Haugland of North Dakota, a member of the RNC Standing Rules Committee says the practice of binding delegates did not begin until the 1976 Convention, when pro-Ford delegates passed the rule in an effort to deny the challenger, Ronald Reagan, the nomination. He concludes that the delegates are in fact free to vote their choice even on the first ballot.

Wisconsin Governor, Scott Walker, told the Associated Press, “I think historically, not just this year, delegates are and should be able to vote the way they see fit”. The Weekly Standard reported this week that John McCain agrees saying, “I think it’s up to every delegate to make up their own minds”.

Of course, this exercise is just academic without someone waiting in the wings to assume the mantle for the GOP in November. It will be difficult to stage much of a coup without an alternate candidate. Names like Ted Cruz and John Kasich have been tossed around, and both of the former candidates have declined to endorse Donald Trump. Trump commented in a recent interview with the New York Times that unless an endorsement is forthcoming, neither of them will be invited to speak during the convention. It’s doubtful either of them are unduly upset by Trump’s ultimatum.

And what about Mitt Romney? As the former GOP presidential candidate, he has been very outspoken in his disdain for Trump. His news conference last March, in which he gave a scathing review of candidate Donald Trump, was seen by some as “too little too late”, while others disenchanted with Trump pushed for Mitt to step in and save the Republican Party.

Chances are, this is all just a pipe dream and we will end up with The Donald, but it is something to think about. Of all the possible contenders, Romney would be among the most likely. At 69, it’s doubtful he will seek the nomination again so for all intents and purposes, this would be his last chance. He is already a thoroughly vetted candidate and has excellent name recognition among voters. His 47.2% showing against President Obama’s 51.1% in 2012, proves he can handle the pace of a general election. He could indeed be another “greatest comeback” like Richard Nixon in 1968. In my opinion, he has less to lose by jumping in than someone like Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio, who have a considerable political future ahead of them.

At the very least, garnering votes for a minority report will force a discussion on the binding of delegates that could impact future elections. Also, ending the practice of open primaries in those states that currently conduct them could preclude the GOP from facing another bizarre election cycle like 2016 has proven to be. One thing is for certain, our answers are less than a month away!

#Never Trump

WeddingThe Bane of the GOP

If you are enthusiastic about the candidacy of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, then this article is not for you. If you don’t find either candidate particularly appealing, but have decided to vote for one of them because “you have no choice”, then this article is not for you. If you are a registered Republican and beside yourself at the thought of casting a vote for Donald Trump, then you might want to read this article because misery loves company.
First, you are not alone. Actually, about half of the Republican voters in this country agree with you. Second, don’t give up hope. Even though Donald Trump is our “presumptive nominee”, the convention is still a few weeks away and there is a preponderance of discord within the party.
Some interesting facts:
1. Every poll since the beginning of the primary season has shown Donald Trump losing to Hillary Clinton.

2. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have the highest unfavorable ratings of any candidates in the history of polling.

3. Three out of Four women do not support a Trump candidacy. (Incidentally, women vote more often and have more influence over votes than men)

4. Trump has very low support among minority and millennial voters.

5. The GOP field was rich with 17 candidates when the primary season began, and the most inexperienced and vacuous among them is now our nominee.

When Donald Trump announced his candidacy back in June, most of us did not take him seriously. It appeared to be just another opportunity for him to grab the spotlight, but we obviously underestimated him. My favorite analogy of the Trump phenomenon comes from Greg Gutfeld of Fox News (also anti-Trump), “Donald Trump is like the guy in high school who tries out for the lead in the school play to impress a girl, never expecting to get the part.” The problem for many of us is, now that we have him, what can we do about it? The chances for a contested convention are off the table. With Cruz and Kasich out of the race, Trump will likely get the 1237 delegates he needs pre-convention.
The only real chance we have is with a third-party candidate, and historically this has not proven a winning situation. Most recently, in 1992, Ross Perot ran as an Independent and in so doing, managed to hand the election to Bill Clinton over incumbent George H. W. Bush. This is a risky endeavor, but the conservative movement is already at risk with Donald Trump at the helm of the GOP. Don’t kid yourself, he is not a conservative. Not now, not ever. Many Republicans fear that he will set the conservative movement back fifty years, if not destroy it completely. Trump will say what he thinks the conservatives want to hear, but at heart he is more moderate to liberal Democrat.
Remember, Trump contributed financially to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, to name just a few. Admittedly, he has also donated to Republicans, but more than half his donations have been to the Democratic Party, of which he was a recent member. Another fun fact, his adult children could not vote for him in this year’s New York primary, as they are still registered Democrats and New York has a closed primary. I think if an Independent could ever win, 2016 would be their best bet.
This idea of a third-party candidate is currently being researched by Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and outspoken critic of Trump. A few days ago, he met with Mitt Romney to float the idea and get Romney’s input on the viability of it as an option to Trump. Incidentally, Mitt Romney has said that at this point, he will not vote for either Trump or Clinton. He is not alone, either. Columnist and Fox News contributor, Dr. Charles Krauthammer, said on the O’Reilly Factor this last week that he has no intention of supporting either candidate. These people are highly-respected individuals who take the business of politics very seriously, so this is truly a contentious situation. Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, publicly stated his aversion to the Trump candidacy, and incurred the wrath of a lot of colleagues within his party.
Several months back, as Trump began to rise in the polls and was believed to be a legitimate contender for the nomination, a Twitter movement known as #Never Trump emerged. If you are not familiar with Twitter, the “hashtag” identifies a certain topic or subject matter to others who follow Twitter. “Never Trump” means exactly that. These people will not ever vote for Trump under any circumstance. The Never Trump movement took off almost immediately. Media pundits and politicos have spoken derisively of those who refer to themselves as “Never Trump”, but it is a force to be reckoned with. After Cruz left the race, and Trump became the de facto nominee, the media largely quelled the movement. They were premature though; Twitter is exploding with Never Trump tweets.
A majority of the population think we can do better than Trump or Clinton. They don’t feel well represented by either candidate, and they want another option. I am part of the #Never Trump movement because I cannot bring myself to vote for a man I consider vulgar, amoral, juvenile, bombastic, insipid, dangerous and totally inept in foreign policy and government. In my opinion, Trump is the antithesis of a commander in chief.
The fact that Hillary Clinton is every bit as distasteful does not make it any more palatable to vote for him. This is not a decision I make lightly. I love my country and I feel incredibly blessed to have the opportunity to vote. I consider it both an honor and a privilege. However, implicit in this honor is following my conscience and making a decision based on my best moral judgment. I cannot do that and simultaneously vote for Donald Trump.
Nebraska Republican Senator, Ben Sasse, also an outspoken Trump critic, talks of drafting “an honest leader” to run as a third party candidate. In a lengthy Facebook post, the Senator outlined his thoughts on the Trump/Clinton candidacies, and invited open discussion among disenfranchised GOP voters for an alternative.
Will it come to fruition? Hard to say. At this point, only one thing in this crazy primary season is perfectly clear: the #Never Trump movement is alive and well.

The GOP’s Misstep

Caving On TrumpNew Trump

 As I have said on multiple occasions, I do not like Donald Trump. I think he is a self-absorbed, pompous, obtuse and amoral narcissist. I could use a lot more adjectives, but you probably get the idea. The fact that he is the frontrunner in this election, and has managed to squeeze out the majority of the suitable alternatives fills me with angst.

When Trump announced his candidacy on June 16, 2015, I don’t believe anyone saw him as a serious contender. Irrespective of his outsider status and lack of political experience, he did not have the demeanor of a presidential candidate. He had a controversial past, multiple marriages and divorces, and a reputation for lewd and misogynistic comments. He was polarizing to say the least.

At the first debate, he refused to pledge his loyalty to the GOP by rejecting a third-party candidacy, and this set nerves on edge, mine included. Historically, independent candidates do not help the GOP win elections, and no one wanted to take a chance on that dynamic in 2016. Trump asserted that his allegiance to the GOP was conditional on fair treatment. Reince Priebus exacted a pledge from Trump, which was relatively worthless, but it served to assuage the GOP’s fears. My take at the time was that we needed to keep Trump within the party no matter what.

Boy was I wrong. We all know that hindsight is 20/20, and it certainly is in this case. I am sure many will disagree with me, but I think we would have been in a better position now if we had called Trump’s bluff and let him run third party. We could have used the full resources of the RNC against him without breaking Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment, “Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican”. The plethora of material at our disposal was staggering. Our debates would have been substantive, not to mention less chaotic, and Trump would have seen a lot less free media coverage.

I think his candidacy as an Independent would have been a shadow of what is has been as a Republican. I am convinced that he would not have the unwavering support that he has managed to gain by running as a “conservative” candidate. Make no mistake, Trump is not a conservative. As it stands now, he is shattering the GOP, and the Reagan Revolution will never be the same.

Trump has benefitted from over 2 billion dollars in free prime-time advertising courtesy of Fox News Channel, among others. Fox is the main culprit here, and they are complicit in his rise to power, because they have convinced many of their conservative viewers that he is one of them. They have validated his presence in the campaign, and hailed him as a “messiah” who will tear down the walls of the establishment and usher in a new and improved Republican Party. They are wrong.

In his endless appearances on Hannity, Fox and Friends and The O’Reilly Factor, they treat him with kid gloves, and avoid questioning him on any of the hard issues. They make him look good, and a lot of them have publicly voiced their support for his candidacy. I tuned into the O’Reilly Factor last night, and Bill was “coaching” Trump on how to look and act presidential. He schooled him in evading the provocation that will certainly come his way as he climbs upward to the nomination. It was ridiculous.

Then, instead of Bill hammering Trump on his policies, he asked him who his favorite president was. They discussed the character of Reagan and Lincoln, and then Bill asked him his opinion of John F. Kennedy. Really? (Coincidentally, O’Reilly has written books on all three) What bearing does that have on the election? It is called “filling time” and saving Trump from damaging his lead by saying something stupid. I was waiting for Bill to ask him about his favorite color.

Trump has backed out of the next debate citing his opinion that there have been too many, and he has won them all anyway. I think it is more a combination of not wanting to go head to head with Ted Cruz, who will be vicious on policy, and wanting to coast into the next primaries. Most campaign strategists agree that when a candidate is doing well, it is usually best to maintain the status quo.

Even now, or at the convention, I would love to see the GOP come up with a way to force Trump out of the party. He threatens, “rioting in the streets” if this happens, but we need to stop being afraid of Donald Trump. This is not the Mafia, and he is not the Godfather. Let him run as an Independent and take the nuts that support him right along with him. With Trump as the GOP candidate, we will lose anyway. I personally would rather lose with a good candidate who is representative of the true qualities of a conservative Republican, than see the party damaged by the likes of Trump.

I am currently reading a great book called, The Generals: Patton, MacArthur, Marshall, and the Winning of World War II. As I was reading last night, I came to a passage that gave me pause. The context is Patton discovering the atrocities committed by the Nazi’s, and his insistence that the civilian population in the nearby villages be forced to see what their government has been doing. It reads,Trump and Hitler

“They crawled out of their cellars and hiding places and looked around into a profound silence enveloping the entire nation. Many, probably most of them, terribly embarrassed and ashamed at what their leaders had put them through but, after all, they had initially voted Hitler and the Nazis into power. It was one of the most horrid mistakes a democracy had ever made and a powerful lesson for today and tomorrow.”

Scary stuff.