July 17, 2018--Trump's Presser

In case you missed it, here's a transcript of President Trump's presser with Vladimir Putin--

Q: Mr. president, did you confront President Putin about Russia's hacking Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 election?

A: Server, server, server . . .  no collusion, no collusion, zero collusion . . . Server, server, server, server . . . Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton . . . No collusion, no collusion, no collusion . . . Obama, Obama, Obama, Obama . . . Server, server, server, server.

Q: Thank you Mr. President. 

October 27, 2016--Wisdom from Robert Kennedy

As we are within the last two weeks of one of the nastiest, most divisive presidential elections in history, it is not too soon to think about what kind of nation will remain after the ballots are cast, counted, and a new president is selected.

The day Martin Luther King was murdered in Memphis, against the best advice of his aides who feared for his life, Robert Kennedy, seeking the nomination of his party, on the night of April 4, 1968, ventured into the flaming ghetto in Indianapolis and delivered these words. Words that almost equally could stand for a statement about our divided circumstances and point to a future of reconciliation.

I have added the italics.

Martin Luther King dedicated his life to love and to justice between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it's perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. For those of you who are black . . . you can be filled with bitterness, and with hatred, and a desire for revenge.

We can move in that direction as a country, in greater polarization -- black people amongst blacks, and white amongst whites, filled with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King did, to understand, and to comprehend, and replace that violence, that stain of bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand, compassion, and love.

For those of you who are black and are tempted to be filled with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man. 

But we have to make an effort in the United States. We have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather difficult times. 

My favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote: 

Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget

falls drop by drop upon the heart
until, in our own despair,
against our will,
comes wisdom
through the awful grace of god.

September 20, 2016--Trump Is A Jerk II

In early June, not long after winning the Republican nomination, with a head of post-convention momentum, after delivering a decent acceptance speech that suggested he was about to pivot from outrageous-entertainer-candidate to become something resembling a more-or-less-serious, more-or-less-responsible general election candidate, Donald Trump revealed himself to be out-of-control without the temperament to be taken seriously as a potential commander in chief much less president when he attacked the Mexican-American judge who was presiding over the Trump University fraud case, slandering him repeatedly by mocking him as "that Mexican judge."

That's when I wrote my first Trump-Is-A-Jerk piece.

There was talk that Trump should either step aside and let Paul Ryan take his place (Ryan as a result tried to put on a presidential showcase) or be deposed by the Republican National Committee, turning the nomination over to Cruz, or Rubio, or even Jeb Bush.

This of course did not come to pass and Trump made attempts, with some success, to clean up his act and act presidential. He began speaking from TelePrompTers and it seemed that his genuinely-smart-and-savvy daughter, Ivanka, was writing his speeches and had him under a version of control.

For example, last week in the ballroom of the newly renovated hotel Trump Washington, or whatever it's called (the construction work also directly overseen by the now ubiquitous Ivanka) The Donald delivered a reasoned speech about his plans to revive the economy. Paul Krugman predictably took it apart but for a Republican it was a reasonable, less-draconion plan than, say, Paul Ryan's or either of the Bush president's.

A couple of days later, he delivered an even more responsible talk about child and eldercare. In regard to the latter, his, amazingly, is more generous than Hillary Clinton's since I can find no evidence that she has a plan for taking care of older adults who need assistance. She has hundreds of other plans but, as modest as Trump's is, none of this type.

National polls began to show Trump at least even with Hillary and in key states such as Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, and Florida that he was either within the margin of error or in the lead.

To boot, Hillary in public view on 9/11, collapsed allegedly from pneumonia which did two things--caused undecideds to think again if she is healthy enough to live through the unspeakable stress of serving as president (she has had a number of blood clots); and, related to that, since she tried to cover up whatever was ailing her, this contributed to the narrative that the Clintons are at a minimum not transparent and, to the conspiratorial-minded, fundamentally dishonest and crooked.

And, with rare political finesse, Trump said nothing much more that wishing her a speedy recovery and return to the campaign trail.

His numbers as a result continued to improve. Even the partisan New York Times began to have to report that his chances of actually being elected rose from single digits to perhaps 25-30 percent. Discounting the paper's political bias this more likely meant that the race was now a tossup.

But then Trump again blew it--

On his own momentum, with Barack Obama's favorables comfortably above 50 percent and Trump at the same time doing better with young voters of color, he stepped again into the Birther thing, declining when asked to pretend to be exasperated with the whole thing--"Of course he was born in America. Can we now turn to more important things such as growing the economy and providing childcare assistance to low-income [read, minority] families?"

Instead he let it sit and fester politically for a couple of days before finally appearing to be exasperated, saying, "Yes, he was born . . ." And then made matters worse when he tried to blame the whole Birther issue on Hillary.

No one any longer was talking about his plans for the economy or children. It was Birther 24/7.

Doubling down on outrageous talk, when trying to claim that Hillary Clinton would try to ignore or repeal the Second Amendment, he in effect cracked, "If she's so anti-gun, why not take the weapons aways from her Secret Service detail and see what happens."

This reminded commentators and voters of an even more outrageous, borderline felonious incitement back in August about letting "Second-Amendment people take care" of Hillary.

And this reminded me what a jerk he ultimately is and for this reason among others is unfit to be our president.

Sigmund Freud would have a field day with Donald Trump.

September 13, 2016--The "Deplorables"

Candidates for the presidency should stay away from private fundraisers.

Or if they do attend (and they all seem to feel the need to) they should not make comments but just go around the room and say thank you a lot.

First of all, these bundler-sessions are not private. Anyone running for the highest office in the land who doesn't know that with smart phones nothing is private is not qualified to be commander in chief where at least a few things should be secure from Russian hackers.

Second, when hobnobbing in 15,000-square-foot houses with fellow one-percenters, they are prone to utter what they really think. And telling this kind of truth can be fatal to one's aspirations.

Hillary stepped in it last week at a Manhattan big-bucks fundraiser just as Mitt Romney did in 2012 in Boca Raton and Barack Obama did before him in 2008 in Beverly Hills where among like-minded folks he thought his remarks about average people "clinging" to their guns and religion were off the record.

Romney did him one better when he opined about the "47 percent" of Obama's supporters who were "takers," "dependent" on the government for their sustenance, while the well-oiled Floridians and of course Mitt himself were the "makers."

And now Hillary will forever be associated with her comments that "half" of Trump's supporters fit into "a basket of deplorables"--a presumably unwashed species of the "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic--you name it."

Those who shelled out $10,000 a pop to see her, the New York Times reported, applauded and laughed.

A few things to take away from this--

When will we hear equivalent outrage from the same progressives who justifiably condemned Romney for his 47-percent calumnies?

I think of my colleague progressives as fact-based thinkers who also strive to be openminded and fair. If I have that right, after they get over how to think about Hillary Clinton's alleged pneumonia and why she didn't tell the truth about it for 48 hours (when she was contagious, by the way), what will they have to say about her castigating "deplorables"? I suspect, alas, not very much.

Also, will they have anything to say about what the "clinging," "47-percent," and "deplorables" comments have in common? About how when members of the elite condescend and look down their noses at the underclass it makes those pt-upon people crazier and motivates them to embrace Donald Trump even  more fervently.

Then, as a matter of political strategy, candidates should be careful not to too lightly turn adjectives into nouns--

I suppose unsavories and amorals and obtuses work in some clever circumstances, but transmuting deplorable into deplorables can lose one the election.

August 10, 2016--Stray Current

"Here's one for you," George said.

"Not another one like the one about the rhumb line?" He knew I was attempting to be amusing. I loved his rhumb line story. Even wrote about it.

A hint of a smile confirmed I was about to hear another of his shaggy parables.

"You know I was in the Coast Guard, right?" I did know that. "Well, do you know about stray currents?"

We were at his house where he and Fran were hosting a lively dinner party. George had waited until I had too much to drink before springing this one on me. "Not that much."

"I don't want to repeat what you already know so . . ."

"In fact, I never heard of stray currents. So I'm all yours." He liked that.

"Say you're below deck and there's a little standing water down there."

"Doesn't sound good to me."

"Well, it is and it isn't."

"I'm assuming this is about when it isn't. So get right to it. My ability to follow you is limited. I was fine until you started pouring lemoncello, which, by the way was delicious."

"Let's say that one of the electric lines down there is a bit frayed or corroded. It shouldn't be. We pride ourselves on exceptional maintenance. It's the Coast Guard." As if that was supposed to say it all. "And at one end of the line there's a tear or rupture."

"Doesn't sound good."

"So some current gets loose, is stray," he winked, "and starts moving around in the bilge water. It's seeking some place to get to, to ground itself. That may not be its only option. Before reaching ground, it could leap to the other side and complete a circuit. If that happens you don't want to be standing there with your shoes all wet."

"I can imagine," I said, not really fully able to. In fact I'm not even sure I'm remembering this correctly, I don't know my electricity, except that seeking and reaching ground is much the preferable.

"Why are you telling me this?" I was puzzled more than I usually am with his stories, which sometimes feel like non sequiturs. This one about stray currents for example.

"Well, this one's a political story. Related to all the political talk tonight." There had been quite a lot of that.

"Think now about Donald Trump's supporters. Earlier you proclaimed them shearing away. As the result of how he abused the Kahn family. Of their remarkable son. You mentioned that many of your conservative friends here, Trump supporters, are beginning to have second thoughts."

"I have been noticing that. I think it's over for him. For Trump. But what's the point of your stray current story?" It was getting to be past my bedtime. What with all the wine, the intense talk, the ribaldry, I was happily done in.

"The story might be thought to be about the ungrounded rogue current."

"That's it?" I said.

"That's it," he said.

"That's it?" I asked.

June 13, 2016--Narcissism

In an insightful column in Friday's New York Times, "The Unity Illusion," David Brooks gets it right.

He argues that there are two fundamental reasons why it is unlikely (he feels impossible) that Donald Trump will be able to, perhaps have a genuine interest in seeking unity with mainstream Republicans. Those, anyway, such as Paul Ryan, who are more or less true conservatives.

First, because Trump is not a conservative since conservatives, to Brooks, unlike Trump--

. . . believe that politics is a limited activity. Culture, psychology, and morality come first. What happens in the family, neighborhood, houses of worship and the heart is more fundamental and important than what happens in a legislature.

Ah, if only true, I would consider becoming a conservative Republican. But then I would have a problem with Republican-dominated legislatures interfering, when self-interested or pandering, in the private lives of women, minorities, low-income, and gay people. But this subject is for another time.

More interesting and persuasive is Brooks second point-- that

. . . Trump by his very essence, undermines cooperation, reciprocity, solidarity or any other component of unity.

This is because, psycho-history time, he is afflicted with a  personality disorder--alexithymia, clinical narcissism. This means that Trump is unable--

. . . to identify and describe emotions in the self. Suffers have no inner voice to understand their own feelings and reflect honestly on their own actions. 

Unable to to know themselves, or truly love themselves, they hunger for a never-ending supply of admiration from outside. They act at all times like they are performing before a crowd and cannot rest unless they are in the spotlight. 

To make decisions, these narcissists create a rigid set of external standards, often based on simple division--winners and losers, victory or humiliation. They are preoccupied with luxury, appearance or anything that signals wealth, beauty, power and success. . . . 

Incapable of understanding themselves, they are also incapable of having empathy for others. They simply do not know what it feels like to put themselves in another's shoes. Other people are simply to be put to use as suppliers of admiration or as victims to be crushed as part of some dominance display. 

This all derives from Christopher Lasch's 1979 book, The Culture of Narcissism, which presciently argued that much of American culture was trending in this clinical direction. Nearly 30 years later we see all around us the living proof of that. Not just among nominated and elected officials.

May 31, 2016--Midcoast: At Moody's Diner

Down at the end there were two seats at Moody's counter. Moody's in Waldoboro is a Maine diner legend. In season, a slice of their blueberry pie is worth a detour.

And so is the turkey salad, at least according to Rona. I agree as long as we also order some well-done French fries.

It was perfect timing, therefore, to find ourselves in the vicinity when in the mood for a turkey salad on rye and maybe a slice of pie.

"Let me make room for yuh," a bulky man who looked about 45 said, "I'll move down one seat and cozy with Shauna here. My lady," he winked.

Excited just to be there, I uncharacteristically said, "No need for that. It's chilly out and you look like someone good to cozy with."

"You mean I'm fat?" he said, pretending, I happily saw, to be offended.

"No, only . . ."

"It's OK. I just playin' with yuh," he said to assure me, deciding to stay perched on the stool next to where I lowered myself. "Truth is, I am fat and a lot older than I look." He pulled his tee shirt up to show me his considerable belly. "Shouldn't be eating this corn bread." He held it up for me to see, crumbles falling onto the countertop. "But they give it to yuh if you order the chili. Which I recommend."

"We're here for the turkey salad," Rona joined in with an extra-friendly smile.

"And the French fries," I said.

"And a slice of blueberry pie," Rona added to make sure he understood we weren't dieting and that he wasn't the only one eating a lot.

"I know what you're thinking," he paused then added, "A grease monkey."

"No, I . . ."

"That's OK. No need to pretend with me. 'Cause that's what I am. No shame in that." He held up his hands so I could see the full extent of the grease that covered his hands and forearms like a second skin.

"Workin' on his transmission," he said nodding toward another over-size person at the very end of the counter. He too was woofing down a huge bowl of chili and didn't look up in acknowledgment. He kept stirring the bowl to distribute the corn bread he had crumbled on the chili as a topping.

"Where you guys from?"

"From three places really," I said. But for the next five months we have a place down at the Point, Pemaqud Point."

"Nice out there," he said, "What about the other two?"

Rona looked at me as if to say, "You need to be talking about this over-privileged lifestyle to someone who's an auto mechanic?"

Picking that up, I stammered, "Well we . . . I mean . . ."

"I'm cool with that," he said with a wave, "Shauna and me are thinkin' about our version of the same thing. I'm doin' pretty well and we have a nice house here in Nobleboro and a little place not far from the water--a lake actually--in Kissimmee."

"Florida?" I said, "Not that far from Orlando."

"Right you are," he said, and slapped me hard on the back. "For the winters. It gets real cold up here and I have no love for snow. Never did, never will. But all my family's here. Been here nine generations. One of the first families. I mean of white people. When my great, great, great whatever showed up from England there were plenty of other families around. But not white ones, if you get my meaning."

"I do," I said, "There were lots of Indians around. From what I've read, they had no problem with feeding themselves what with giant oysters that you needed two hands to lift and, standing on the shore, fish you could scoop up out of the water. No need for nets or anything."

"There are lots of stories about that that were passed down in my family. Some been written down in dairies from the early 1600s. One so extensive and detailed that it's down there in the Smithsonian collection."

"Wow," Rona said.

"Pretty good for a grease monkey," he said thumping his now puffed-out chest. "And if you're wonderin', there are two governors, Maine governors in my family--Benjamin Ames and Joshua Chamberlain. You wouldna guessed that about me, would yuh?"

"I wouldn't have thought that about anyone," I said, feeling good about taking what he said in stride and not stereotyping him. "I mean, how many people have two governors in their families?"

"Mitt Romney's kids, for example," he said, "And to be fair and balanced, Mario Cuomo's."

"And that dopey Brown family in California," the fellow at the end of the counter mumbled, still shoveling in his chili. "Governor moonbeam."

"I guess it's not so rare," I said.

"You're being silly," Rona said, "Even though these are good examples it's still very unusual."

"No need to give him a hard time, ma'am. We're just getting to know each other. By the way, my name's Dana," he said, thrusting his right hand at me. As I reached to take it, he pulled it back, "Look at me, covered all in transmission fluid and I'm thinkin' to shake hands with you who are about to eat a sandwich." He began to wipe his hand on his shirt. I kept my hand extended toward him and finally he took it and we shook hands, smiling broadly at each other.

"I guess that makes us friends," he said looking me straight in the eye.

"I'm Steve," I said, "And this is Rona."

She reached across my chest with an extended hand and without hesitating Dana took, saying, "Nice to be your friend, Ro, Ro . . ."

"Na, Rona," she said.

"Like Jaffe and Barrett?" he asked.

"Yes, but hardly anyone knows them anymore," Rona said.

"The novelist and gossip columnist," he said. "I seem to remember readin' some of her stuff. Rona Jaffe, I mean. Wasn't she ahead of her time? Wrote a lot of racy stuff from a female perspective?"

"I'm ashamed to say," Rona said, looking down, "that I've never read anything of hers. But, yes, I think you're right. Sort of a Helen Gurley Brown type."

"I think better than that," he said, "She was a real writer. More like an Erica Jong."

"Sounds right," Rona said.

"Changin' the subject," he said, "You folks followin' the election?"

By then our sandwiches and fries had arrived and rather than risk spoiling our lunch and the thus-far warm conversation, not wanting to get into a harangue or argument, we both took big bites to fill our mouths so we couldn't be expected to talk.

"Minimally, whatever you think, it's been entertainin'. Seems these days no one pays attention to anythin' serious unless it's entertainin'. I mean Trump, hate 'em or love 'em, is fun to follow. I mean, to tell you the truth, I'm more in the 'hate 'em category,' but almost every night when I tune in to Fox and MSNBC he's good for some laughs."

Releived, still with a full mouth, I nodded.

"He's like one of those fools in Shakespeare. He speaks his mind and because no one in the media at least take him seriously but  have to admit that some of what he says is true, politically incorrect, he gives folks permission to laugh at things they don't feel comfortable saying out loud or in public. It's kind of embarrassed laughter. You feel a little guilty admitting you are paying any serious attention to him but can't help yourself and laugh at what he has to say. Which I suppose is what a lot of entertainment is about. Comedy at least."

"I agree with all of that," I said after swallowing my half-chewed turkey salad, "So, who . . ."

"Can't say I have a dog in that fight. At least not yet. Maybe never. Sad, but I'm feelin' I don't trust any of 'em. I mean, you can't believe a word Trump says. He sometimes contradicts himself twice in the same sentence. I've seen him do that. And, he's not wrong to call her Crooked Hillary 'cause that's what she is. I mean she's smart and all that and has a big resumé but tell me one thing she's said about herself that you believe?"

"She does have that problem," Rona said.

"Forget all the stuff when she was the First Lady. That's old news, though there's plenty of smoke from that time. I'm talking about where her and Bill's money comes from. Goldman Sachs? Give me a break. And all that hanky-panky with their foundation--forget her continuing to put up with his philandering--and the email business. To me that's a big deal. A very big deal. Everyone knows she's lyin' about that. She knew what she was doin' and put a whole lot a people at big risk. Then I fear if she wins she'd be looking' for an opportunity to show how macho she is once she's commander in chief. I have problems with all of that. Also what Trump would do with the military really scares me. So . . ."

"So what about Bernie?"

"Another liar. Different kind. I agree with him about the rigged economy and government but the lies he tells are about not being able to carry out any of his policies if by some miracle he gets nominated or, God help us, wins. He knows practically nothin' about the world. Less than Trump, and there is no chance of getting Medicare for all through Congress much less free college tuition. First of all the federal government doesn't have any power to tell the Univeristy of Maine what to do and even if he could get all he wants it would, what, double the deficit. I'm not antigovernment like most of the knuckleheads around here, like old Jim over there, but I do care about controlling spending and worry about the deficit. What is it, 19 trillion?"

Jim had finished his chili and was now listening to what Dana had to say.

"So, like I say, I have no one to vote for. If Ralph Nader was running' maybe . . . But he's jerk. 'Cause of him we got George Bush. W, not HW. That puppy has a lot to atone for."

"At the moment, I'm with you," I said with a shrug and sigh, "At the moment, I'm not planning to vote in November. Maybe that'll change. Maybe there'll be a real miracle and Hillary will be indicted and someone like Joe Biden would get in the mix and somehow get nominated and . . ."

"Now you're talkin'," Dana said, "He's my man! Flaws and all. He can also be a jerk. But that sort of makes him authentic. And wasn't he right about the Middle East? Iraq for example? Let it become three separate countries? But that's for another day. Got to get back to Jim's transmission. Next time we're all here, I'll tell you about my meetin' Ronald Reagan."

"Really? Where?" I really wanted to hear about that.

"At the White House."

"Fantastic!"

"I was among a group invited there to get our Silver Stars from the president. I told you I'm older than I look. It was one of the highlights of my life. Not that I thought that much about Reagan. Irangate and all that. Hey, I'd love to hang out more with you guys but a transmission awaits. I'm here with Shauna every day. Down at the end of the counter. So if you and Miss Rona want to stay friends, you know where to find me."

With that, he hoisted his considerable body off the stool and shuffled toward the cashier. Rona and I got up as well and ran after him so we could get in a couple of more handshakes.

May 6, 2106--Mea Culpas

With Donald Trump the almost certain GOP nominee many are twisted in knots.

First among them are leaders in his party such as Paul Ryan who worry that he will bring about the apocalypse--not the biblical apocalypse the crazies on the right are awaiting but the more immediate, secular one that means difficulty getting reelected or fear that unpredictable Donald will mean that there will be no more business as usual and thus it will be the end of their prerogatives and lobbyist and consultant cash flow.

Also pulling out their hair and offering mea culpas are the political journalists who got it wrong, who until almost the last minute proclaimed (read hoped) that someone, anyone other than Trump would be nominated.

Nate Cohen, who writes the "Upshot" column in the New York Times, a political-junkie, numbers-guru of sorts yesterday wrote a confessional article whose title said it all--"What I Got Wrong About Donald Trump."

It easily could have been a one-word column--"Everything."

The most important thing missing, what is really at the heart of his and many others' problem, is his failure--acknowledged by David Brooks--that he spends all his time in New York or Washington, hooked up to the Internet, and thus has not talked to actual Trump supporters. Especially those who do not fit the conventional algorithms.

I just spoke with one yesterday morning--a friend from Maine who is a lifelong liberal and feminist who whispered on the phone, "You know, he makes a lot of sense."

Cohen's data do not capture people like my friend who do not fit the familiar paradigm, and do not show up among the demographic categories in most of the suddenly obsolete polling formats.

He should be talking to her and asking her why Trump makes a lot of sense to her. Then he'd have something insightful to write about.

Having mentioned David Brooks, though he got it right when he confessed that he and his media colleagues need to emerge from their cultural cocoons and talk to their metaphorical neighbors if they want to understand what is roiling the electorate, he too has some more confessing to do.

Having fessed up to his own social isolation, he needs to deal with the fact that he's another pundit who proclaimed that there is one thing he can guarantee in this confounding political year--that "Donald Trump will never be nominated."

This suggests he is still living within the Beltway.

Maybe for the general election he'll get out more. If he doesn't he may miss the next chapter's storyline--though Trump as of right now is trailing Hillary Clinton by 10-12 percentage points, back last June/July among the 17 GOP aspirants, he was at two percent.  Forty percent now must be looking pretty good to him.

My take on the general election campaign that has already broken out is that Trump will do much better than expected among women; he will manage to dramatically expand his base by getting many more white men than usual to vote--thereby enlarging the demographic pie chart of voters; and if he names someone like Susana Martinez, Republican governor of New Mexico, to be his running mate (Wiki her to see how compelling she might be) as a result, as well as by throwing in a few pivots, if he attracts 30-35 percent of Hispanic voters, come November things could look pretty complicated.

Oh yes, then there's the Washington Post's Dana Milbank, who said he'd "eat" his column if Trump is nominated. He is now soliciting recipes for how to roast, stew, or fry newsprint.

Seeking Recipes

February 1, 2016--The Emotional Culture of America

The day before the evening caucuses in Iowa--the first time in 2016 that actual votes will be counted--it feels timely to pause, reflect, and predict.

I'm being advised by some friends, including one of my best friends who is wicked smart and well informed, to stop paying so much attention to Donald TRUMP. The implication loud and clear is that by doing so--even with a critical or satiric edge to my writing--I am aiding and abetting his candidacy. That it's obvious he's dangerous and needs to be defeated.

Perhaps my friends are right. I should step back and think about what they are counseling. Not necessarily come to agree with them, but take seriously what they are saying.

We go back and forth for a few rounds and then someone claims that TRUMP is dangerous because of what they see to be his fascistic inclinations.

If TRUMP is a fascist, what else is there to say? Except that hopefully the America of 2016 is not the Italy of 1922.

All of this aside, as I pause to think about the current state of the presidential race, to wonder if I have been showing too much favor to TRUMP and his candidacy, I should ask myself how I think he and others are doing, what can be learned from that, and who am I inclined in November to support.

I have been arguing here that TRUMP has tapped deep chords in current American consciousness and has exploited or resonated with them (take your pick) with astonishing effect.

As a candidate he was initially thought of to be a "clown," an impostor, someone only interested in enhancing his "brand" and, once he accomplished that, he would drift away and return to his literally gilded tower.

But, unlike other Republican political comets, from Michele Bachmann to Herman Cain to Sarah Palin, he has not flamed out but has lingered at the top of the polls now for more than seven months. No other first-term candidate in 100 years has done so so consistently for this long. Not even ultimately popular candidates such as Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, or John F. Kennedy in 1960.

In the face of friends' criticisms I have tried to insist it's important to understand as fully as possible TRUMP's success, and successful he has been, so we can better root it out, defeat him, and--most important to me--learn as much as we can about what it means about today's America. To continue to mock him, write him off, assume he will implode will not get that job done. So, it has been my view that we had better be sure we do not continue to ignore the forces undergirding his appeal and energizing his candidacy and in that passive way be of unintended help to him..

As examples of these views, here are excerpts from a few of the emails I have sent to friends in an attempt to explain my posture--

TRUMP and the other spawn of reality TV, talk radio, and Fox News have seized control of the process. Maybe of reality.

And, they are no longer beholden to the forces that launched them or the people who bankrolled them . Interesting, isn't it, that we haven't heard much lately from the Koch Brothers or Sheldon from Las Vegas. 

What I mean to say is that politics is now operating in a parallel universe of its own. 

I am eager to see if (1) TRUMP maintains his refusal to participate in Fox's debate Thursday night and (2) if he doesn't show up what, if anything, will be the consequences. 

We can already hear the whiners saying that he's afraid of someone wearing a skirt (Megyn Kelly). How can someone who fears a WOMAN be trusted to stand up to really bad guys such as Putin, the Ayatollahs, or ISIS. (Roger Ailes of Fox News already said literally that.) 

It may be that Donald is a political Frankenstein, more powerful than his creators. And, to them, more dangerous. If so, they deserve him.

*  *  *

The case for TRUMP is that more conventional, better prepared and experienced candidates and presidents have been dangerous disasters. Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and George W. Bush come to mind. 

But it may be that he has just the right temperament for the job that now needs to be done. In my view, he is so threatening to the status quo that the array of forces, worried about their prerogatives, are lining up against him. From Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity at Fox News, to the Rush Limbaughs, to the Republican establishment Koch Brothers, to the Wall Streeters, to the professional bureaucrats, and of course all the liberals and movement conservatives. For me, this is an attractive list of opponents and enemies.

*  *  *

I'm concentrating now on both the process and on what what is happening reveals about the political and emotional culture of America. For that, for me, the TRUMP phenomenon is as important as it gets. I think there is a great deal to study and I'm trying to see and learn as much as I can. 

Next stage--after some dust settles (I think Hillary and TRUMP will win in Iowa, Bernie and TRUMP in NH, and then Hillary and TRUMP in SC, with Hillary and TRUMP then on inexorable paths to the nominations) for me then it will be time to try to understand what kind of presidents they might make.  

It may be true that TRUMP could be dangerous, but I do not until there is more actual evidence join in that feeling. And to me also, because Hillary is so full of personal ambition and inner demons, she also frightens me. 

My fantasy since I can't see myself voting for either TRUMP or Clinton-- 

Hillary gets indicted or censured for the email mess and Joe Biden and/or John Kerry enter the race. The Bernie people would go crazy, of course. But Biden and Kerry are the only two people I feel good about. To me either of them would be good presidents.

Otherwise, Hillary wins it all in a walk.

October 16, 2015--Hillary

Unless there is something that the FBI will uncover in Hillary Clinton's emails that is indictable, after Tuesday's Democratic debate, not only will she waltz to the nomination but a year from November she will be elected president.

Bernie Sanders might have been an old fashioned gentleman when he said "enough about these damn emails," but politically, for all intents and purposes, that ended this line of questioning.

He is not privy to what the FBI is rooting about in, and there is more than a small chance that they will uncover a smoking gun. That would change everything. But as things stand, I stick by my prediction.

Clinton was so impressive that Joe Biden now will decide to stay out of the race. Maybe he even feels relieved. He had little chance of upsetting her. And he knows now that she is capable of roughing him up as she did to Sanders in regard to his record about guns and his naivety with world affairs ("With all due respect, senator, the United States is not Denmark"). Does Joe need to go through any of this in a losing cause?

He'd go from being the potential savior to spoiler. As of now there is nothing to save.

But above all here is why I am feeling so certain that the nomination and president is hers to lose--

Women.

Pretty much all the women I know have been planning to vote for Hillary. I mean even before the debate. To some it was a hold-you-nose thing. Yes, she's flawed. Deeply. But she is no worse than any of the others and . . . she's a woman.

Being female was the decider.

After Tuesday, checking in with a number of politically active women, I found they are now enthusiastic supporters. They are feeling that she excelled (admittedly the other four candidates were quite weak--I am trying to be kind) but she stood more than a little above them.

It was easy to imagine her back in the White House. This time as the president she always wanted to be.

So, they will not only vote for her, they now plan to contribute money and become active supporters. They will do  everything they can to encourage others to vote for her as well as become volunteers in her campaign.

And if this morning's rumors are true that she will select Julian Castro to be her running mate, it's all over. He is the former mayor of San Antonio and currently secretary of Housing and Urban Development. And, of course, is Mexican-American.

He they are together--

June 22, 2015--TRUMP & Clinton

Not that Clinton but Bill. They have much in common--Bill and The Donald.

I continue to find it difficulty to stop making fun of Donald TRUMP. I can't resist referring to him as The Donald, his first wife Ivana's charming and prescient name for him, or capitalizing his last name since he insists on doing that when he affixes his name in faux-gold to TRUMP Tower, TRUMP Plaza, TRUMP City, TRUMP Casino, and his line of TRUMP menswear and perfume.

But ask any other Republican presidential candidate and they are no longer laughing at his outsized ego and birds-nest hairdo. The are not laughing since he has soared into the lead on all credible national polls. Leading Jeb Bush by at least two percentage points--16% to 14%--is typical.

And he has surged into the lead after what media savants thought was a fatal gaff--questioning, worse, mocking John McCain's service record.

McCain, though a mediocre presidential candidate, is a genuine hero, having been shot down over North Vietnam and held for six years in the hellacious Hanoi Hilton prisoner of war camp. He even elected to remain in captivity after the Vietcong offered early release a year before the Paris Peace Accords called for prisoner exchanges.

When confronted about his swipes at McCain and pressed to talk about his own war record he doubled down on criticizing McCain and then casually said he had a number of student deferments (five), then a medical condition (he couldn't remember just what), and he didn't support the war anyway.

This should have doomed his candidacy since it appears that a disproportionate percentage of his supporters are military hawks. But it didn't. His numbers actually rose. And thus his rivals consternation.

He even got in potential trouble last week in Iowa among evangelical Christians.

He is admittedly not a worshipful guy and was never born again. In fact, he has had three wives and many affairs. All on the record. He even said in Iowa, when discussing his romantic life (if I can call it that), that if his daughter Ivanka wasn't his daughter he would be dating her. Rather than getting booed off the stage, the huge audience of Iowans guffawed with guilty pleasure.

They appear to love him the more outrageous he gets. And thus far he hasn't spent very much of his own money on his galloping campaign.

What then am I suggesting about Bill Clinton?

He was another larger-than-life personality and supplied the public with daily doses of salacious gossip from canoodling Gennifer Flowers to Paula Jones to Monica Lewinsky.

Like TRUMP, the more he got tangled in his own lies and the more scandalous the news that oozed out, the more popular he became. When he left the White House, impeached and nearly convicted and thrown out of office by the Senate, his approval ratings rose to an astonishing 73 percent.

The public likes cartoon-like figures and is as interested in being entertained by its leaders as well led. Perhaps more so. People have given up on political and government effectiveness. They see most of our problems to be too big to solve. Poll after poll shows this.

Who better then than a TRUMP or a Clinton to keep us titillated and amused? Jeb Bush? Hillary? Scott Walker? That's an easy one--the Teflon Kids.