December 30, 2020--Georgia On My Mind

Next Tuesday is Election Day again in Georgia. For just two races. 

Both senatorial seats are up for grabs and who wins or loses is uncommonly consequential. The majority leadership of the Senate is the actual big prize.

If the Republicans win just one of the seats they will retain control of the Senate and Mitch McConnell will continue as Majority Leader.

If the Democrats manage to win both they will take control and Chuck Schumer will replace Mitch.

Pundits see each race to be a tossup but with the GOP candidates perhaps likely to win the two.

But if my arithmetic is correct, the Democrats can still take control, even if they lose one seat.

Here's how--

If a sitting GOP senator decides that he or she is no longer a Republican and, like Bernie Sanders and Angus King, switches parties, becoming an Independent and, again like Sanders and King, who are Independents, caucuses as they do with the Democrats.

The Senate would then be deadlocked at 50-50 wth vice president Kamala Harris casting all tie-breaking votes. Including who will serve as Minority Leader.

A long-shot? Yes. But there is a plausible way for this to happen--Mitt Romney becomes the third Independent-Democrat.

Our politics has become unpredictable and stranger things have already happened, starting with the implausible Trump becoming president.

So stay tuned. 

December 5, 2019--Wither Kamala Harris

A friend asked me to repost this, thinking there were a few insights that might have been overlooked when it first appeared in July--

It began so auspiciously. Kamala Harris's campaign for the Democratic nomination. 

20,000 turned out in Oakland for her announcement ceremony. Millions in cash and pledges poured in with promises of more to come. Hollywood gazillionaires have deep pockets.

Then there was The Debate. She took frontrunner Joe Biden down in a preemptive strike by attacking him face-to-face on the most vaunted part of his legacy--his record of support for civil rights. 

Harris knew that Biden's core constituents are African Americans, especially African-American women, and unless she could attract some to support her candidacy it was doomed. So she went after him. Almost calling him a racist by saying she didn't think he was a racist. She just let that hang in the air. And it seemed to work.

For a week after the debate things were looking good for her. No matter that she slammed Biden for his position on court-ordered school bussing, which though designed to reduce segregation all evidence shows was a disaster for blacks as well as whites. Schools were no more integrated and neighborhoods were shredded by White Flight though some individuals such as bussed second-grader Kamala, by her account, benefited.

Harris's poll numbers rose five to 10 points while Biden's plummeted by similar amounts.

But then something seemingly surprising happened--her campaign appeared to stall. She began to slip in the polls and contributions to her campaign went from flow to trickle. 

And on Monday of this week an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Harris slipping to fourth place in head-to-head competition with Trump, trailing still frontrunner Biden (who led Trump by nine points) by eight points, trailing second-place Sanders by six points, and third place Warren by five.

Well within the margin of error, unlike the other three who did well in the poll, Harris led Trump by just one percentage point.

None of this is good news for Harris.

What happened?

I suspect over time underlying race and gender issues are coming into fuller play.

Too many Democratic voters were turned off by the overly-aggressive way in which Harris raked Biden over the coals. She was perceived to be more angry than assertive. It was too much a beatdown than a disagreement about ideas and policies. And too many women as well as men, white as well as black, think of this as you will, felt she was acting in an emasculating manner. Instead of confronting his political history she was attacking his manhood.

Biden came away from the confrontation looking like a punished child.

As I did, on YouTube replay the confrontation to see if she crossed some of these tripwire lines. 

We should probably be beyond these kinds of reactions in our public discourse. But sadly we aren't and it may be costing Kamala Harris a potential path to the nomination. We are not yet that enlightened to be OK with a black women taking down a 70-plus year-old white man. We still have a long way to go.

December 4, 2019--From Hillary

Within a hour of Kamala Harris ending her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination, a campaign that got off to such a brilliant and promising start, Hillary Clinton, who knows a thing or two about having one's presidential aspirations thwarted, tweeted--

To all the candidates, staff, and volunteers who have worked their hearts out for presidential campaigns that have ended—remember that fighting for what you believe in is always worth it.

If this generous Hillary had shown up in 2016, we would be living in a very different, more hopeful America.

I know she is desperate to come up with a way to get into the race, but . . .

November 25, 2019--Move The Goalposts

It's time for Democrats to move on from impeachment. 

Considering Trump's many crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment is the constitutional right thing to do--impeach Trump in the House of Representatives and initiate a trial in the Senate.

But there's the rub. With Republicans in charge of the Senate there is no chance, I repeat, no chance, zero likelihood, that Trump will be voted out of office.

Rather than witnessing an impartial trial, we will experience an attempt to portray Trump as an innocent victim of the Democrats, persecuted by a Dark State "witch hunt," aided and abetted by the "enemy of the people"-- the press.

Senate Majority Leader, Moscow-Mitch McConnell will be in charge. He will make and promulgate the rules (to be fair, as did Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi in the House) and people such as Lindsey Graham--chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee--will be in flagrant political ecstasy.

We won't be hearing more from Fiona Hill or anyone like her. Rather it will be left to Devin Nunes to whine to the Senate how Trump was railroaded in the House. Adam Schiff will be assigned by Mitch a small desk by the men's room.

As good as it felt the past two weeks to see young bureaucrats put their careers and perhaps lives at risk to tell the truth about how Trump led the effort to undermine the stirring of democracy in Ukraine to advance his own political agenda, that's how bad it will feel when Chief Justice Rogers gavels the trial to commence. We will hear nothing but conspiracy theories 24/7 even on MSNBC. It will be as if it had morphed into Fox News.

And at the end of the day, Trump will still be in office, his favorabilities will have risen, and the Democrats will be viewed by an increasing number of voters as politically-motivated obstructionists. Defeating Trump next Election Day will be considerably less likely. Reelecting a majority of the new class of Democratic House members will also be more difficult. 

This is why since 2018 when the Democrats gained control of the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi resisted the move to impeach Trump.

But there is a relatively easy way for the Democrats to get out of this pickle and actually gain political standing--move the goal posts from impeachment to censure. 

Get the House to condemn Trump's behavior and move on. Take impeachment off the table. Censuring a sitting president is a big deal and would demonstrate to moderate voters that the Democrats are capable of behaving decisively and moderately.

They can do this as it is possible for one house of Congress on its own to censure colleagues and members of the administration, including the president.

It would also free up the Democratic senators who are seeking the presidential nomination--Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar. As impeachment "jurors" they would be like hostages in the Senate for at least a month during the height of the primary season. Mitch McConnell will relish muzzling them. And Lindsey will launch investigations into everything from the Bidens to Hillary Clinton's server.

Spare us.

September 10, 2019--Jack: Elizabeth Warren

A quivering Jack slid into the banquette next to me.

"You seem all excited this morning."

"Why shouldn't I be," he said to me. Rona had her head buried in the Times.

"Because the hurricane didn't strike Alabama?"

"I can't believe people are still talking about that," Jack said, "What's the big deal?"

"It shows Trump as either geographically challenged or unhinged."

"Could be both," I added with a snicker.

"Or maybe as you wrote," he turned to face me squarely, "That he's trying to nudge Alabamans to replace their Democratic senator with a Republican."

"A sexual predator no less."

Ignoring that, he said, "Look, I only have a minute. Let me get to what I want to talk with you about."

"What's got you all excited?"

"The latest CBS poll. I read about it this morning and raced right over to see you."

"I didn't see it yet," I said, "Enlighten me."

"It has Poca . . . I mean Elizabeth Warren in the lead. About one point ahead of Biden. But still in the lead."

"I thought you were ignoring polls," from behind the paper, Rona said, "It's too early blah, blah, blah. The polls don't capture Trump's people accurately, blah, blah, blah."

"This one's a little different," Jack said, "It tallies . . ."

"To save you time, let's agree that you're now interested in polls because they contain news you like."

"I'll acknowledge that," he said, smiling, "But let me tell you what this one shows."

"Go on," Rona sounded weary.

"It projects the delegate count. How delegates to the Democratic convention will vote for the various candidates. It shows Warren with slight leads over Biden and Bernie. What's interesting is that Biden's and Sanders's numbers are holding steady while Warren is picking up delegates from other candidates' supporters. Candidates like Kamala Harris and Beto O'Rourke who are slipping further and further behind."

"This whole thing feels bogus to me," I said, "As far as I know no one yet knows who the delegates are going to be. So how can they be polled?"

Jack didn't respond, so I asked, "What else do you have on your mind? There must be more than this flimsy material."

"I'll admit this polling business is a little technical for me, but you have to agree that Warren is doing better and better."

"It does look like that. But why this sudden interest in Warren? I assume she's not one of your favorites."

"It means if she somehow holds on and wins the nomination get ready for four more years of The Donald."

"My recurrent nightmare," Rona said, still using the paper as a scrim.

"Don't be so gleeful," I said, "Polls still show Biden with pretty good leads. Of likely voters not fictitious delegates. In fact, in the early primary states--Iowa and South Carolina among others--Biden appears to be increasing his lead. And they show him trouncing Trump."

Jack said, "But if Warren wins the nomination Trump gets reelected. After Hillary do you think this country's ready for a woman?"

"I do," I said, "And polls, again polls, show that."

"But this woman? Warren wants Medicare for all, the end of private health insurance, student loan forgiveness--a trillion dollar item--free college--another trillion--open borders, including free food stamps and health insurance for even illegal immigrants. And more trillions, I think it adds up to three trillion, for climate change. I could go on. If she wins the nomination I can hear Trump saying, 'Thank you, thank you. There is a God,'"

"Be careful what you wish for," Rona had folded and put down the paper. "She was supposed to get killed when she first ran for the Senate in Massachusetts but won overwhelmingly. And now we're seeing her rising in the polls and doing very well when it comes to raising money for her campaign."

"Speaking of that," Jack said with a toothy grin, "Also in that paper of yours, on the front page," he tapped it where it lay on the table, "there's a story about how though she says she rejects the practice of going after wealthy donors she has been doing that for years and as a result has tens of million stashed away in her campaign war chest. What a hypocrite. I can't wait until the Republicans and the media get their hands on that."

"Funny, about that," I said, "I come to a totally different conclusion."

"I'm all ears."

"It shows me she's pragmatic. Not just an ideological policy wonk. She's in it to win it. That she's willingly to do what she has to do to gather the resources she needs to prevail. Even if it makes her vulnerable to the charge that she's 'just another politician.'"

"Like you're socialist friends you live in dreamland. I live in the real world where things are not so clear."

"And I live in a world," I said, "where Trump's approval ratings are slipping below 40 percent."

Jack had slid out of the booth and, without a goodbye, headed for the door.

August 21, 2019--Biden's Women

I'm trying. Trying to get enthusiastic about supporting Joe Biden. But he doesn't make it easy.

It's not just that he's a gaff machine. Most can be written off as a version of charming. Biden being Biden. Like the other day when he mixed up Burlington Vermont and Burlington Iowa.  

Though even with that, benign as it is, and though the contest for the nomination is not "Jeopardy," it also leaves the lingering concern that these kinds of mixups are not just innocent slips of the tongue but are symptoms of, OK I'll say it, old age. He is 76 and at that not a young 76. 

More concerning is the kind of thing he said the other day at a gathering in Iowa of mainly minority voters when talking off the cuff about the academic potential of at-risk children. He said that "Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids." 

What is one to make of that? This is more than a slip of the tongue. 

But according to Monday's CNN/SSRS poll it didn't put a dent in black voters' support for him. His numbers in fact have risen since June, especially among white women, particularly older white women. They love Biden and appear to be wiling to stick with him almost no matter what.

I am not saying they are like the Trump people who would stand by him even if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue. Actually, maybe even more would vote for him if he did. Biden's supporters appear to be quite locked in. It seems as if they will remain committed to him almost no matter what.

Some of this increasing support for Biden is the result of women coming to his defense as they see him attacked by the other leading candidates. Especially, counterintuitively, the female candidates. 

(See the results of the CNN poll which show Biden increasing his lead over his closest rivals--now up by 15 percent over Sanders and 14 percent over Warren, while Kamala Harris has the support of just 5 percent of potential Democratic voters.)

The response to Harris is the clearest example of women coming to Biden's rescue  She challenged, some said attacked, some say disrespectfully took on Biden, Barack Obama's vice President, during the first debate. Her poll numbers blipped up for a day or two as did her campaign contributions, but since that time they have trended downward. Recently they have been plummeting.

Perhaps because as they thought about it, potential Democratic voters perceived her to be more angry than passionately engaged with the issues. 

Some of this may be the result of gender bias--what behavior is considered to be appropriate for a woman when confronting a man--some of it may be Harris's hard-charging style, but some of it is Democrats who want to win in 2020 seeing in Biden the candidate most able to defeat Trump. Still the overarching concern of most Democratic voters no matter their demographics and ideology. And thus his people are quick to protect him.

In a political environment where the conventional wisdom does not apply, some of the familiar realities still pertain--especially about race and gender. We are by no means a post racial society nor are men and women running for public office regarded equally. 

It is ironic that much of this is being played out through Joe Biden's candidacy, considering his history when it comes to women and minorities is far from without blemish.

August 12, 2019--Jack: Women

Jack was waiting for us at the Bristol Diner. It was not as if we had an appointment to meet. In fact, I had been avoiding his texts and phone messages. I was trying to spend less time and energy thinking about, talking about Trump. There would be plenty of time for that, I thought, after Labor Day. It would still be more than a year until the election. Plenty of time for political talk. Yes, I had relapsed into Trump Fatigue. 

We were tempted to ignore Jack's patting on the banquette, signally he was holding two places for us. I whispered to Rona, "Maybe let's go to Crissy's. I'm not in the mood for Jack."

"I know what you're thinking," he said with a smile, "I promise not to keep you more than half an hour. Come, sit with me for a while."

And so reluctantly we shuffled over to him and slid into the booth.

"I'll just have coffee," I said to Sarah, "We can't stay very long today." Rona said the same.

Without so much as a hello Jack launched into his latest rant.

"I know you and your people care only about who can beat Trump. You're putting aside your concerns about where candidates stand on health care or immigration. You're whole focus is denying him a second term."

"That pretty much sums it up," I said, "Almost everyone I know is thinking about the election that way. There will be time for debates about policy after a Democrat is elected. I agree with Tom Friedman about that. He warns, if we want a revolution and Trump wins we will have a revolution not of our liking when, for example, he gets to appoint two more Supreme Court justices like Kavanaugh and Gorsuch."

"Though one thing," Jack said, "does show up on the screen with a lot of you guys."

"This I'm interested in hearing,"I said.

"With six women seeking the nomination, many of you this time around not only want to nominate a woman, but unlike with Hillary who turned out to be a terrible candidate, you want to elect one. Most realistic, considering the poll numbers, only two have a real chance of being nominated, with winning another story. Forget Gillibrand and Klobuchar. The only two who have a chance are Warren and Kamala Harris. At the moment they're the only ones close to Biden in the polls."

"That could be true," Rona said, "But I continue to wonder if America is open to having a woman as president. They tell pollsters that they are but I'm skeptical. Among other things by what he says and how he behaves Trump sanctions not only racism and white supremacy but also sexism. And in so doing exposes how extensive it still is."

Rona continued, "Even Trump's female supporters--and there are more of them than any liberal would like to acknowledge--can in their own way be quite sexist. Why else did so many of them vote for him rather than for the first woman to be the nominee of a major party? And don't tell me it was because Hillary was such an ineffective candidate or won the popular vote. The country's just not ready for a female president. Though with Biden unravelling because of gaffs, there could be a woman next in line."

I was surprised that both Rona and I were so easily drawn into political talk. Our fatigue was clearly not that deep seated.

"Let me give you an example," Jack said, "of why I too don't think you can elect a woman.

"I'm listening."

"So there was this terrible shooting in El Paso. And what happened? Joe Biden, Cory Booker, and that mayor from South Bend whose name I can never remember all gave major speeches about it. Booker even gave his from the pulpit of the church in South Carolina where there had been another massacre four years ago. Where a white guy targeted black people and where Obama spoke and sang 'Amazing Grace.'"

Jack paused and peered at us. "I see you're not getting it."

"Getting what?" I asked.

"What's missing from this picture?"

"Enlighten me."

"Women."

"Women?"

"Yes, Democrat women candidates."

"They spoke out," Rona said, "Among other things they accused Trump of being a racist and, even more seriously, a white supremacist. Which he is. I think you're splitting hairs. I felt they were very forceful. Very effective."

"But none of the women gave a speech. A big picture, presidential-style speech, one in which they put all the pieces together. About the history of racism in this country, about how various ethnic groups have been treated. They missed the opportunity that most of the leading male candidates--Sanders excepted--seized. To show how they would act if president and incidents of this kind occurred. As they surely will. These men not only made speeches of this kind but they also showed how they would behave as mourner-in-chief."

"I hate to agree with you," Rona said, "But, thinking about it now, I must admit the women may have missed an opportunity. My guess is that they didn't want to be stereotyped as emotional women by making a speech of this kind. That they didn't want to be perceived as being soft in a situation that calls for toughness."

"It calls for both," Jack said. "For sure it's a tricky line to straddle when a woman wants to show she can be both compassionate and tough-minded. Look at how Hillary got all tangled up in whether or not to vote for the war with Iraq. She eventually voted for it in large part to show she had cajones."

"Along with most other Democratic senators," I said, "Half of whom were thinking about running for president, she botched this and paid the price."

"So this wasn't so bad after all," Jack said.

"What wasn't?" I asked.

"Spending a little quality time with me." He laughed. "When was the last time we agreed about anything?"

Rona said, "I'm not sure we're agreeing now."

"Let's order some food," I said. "Sarah."

July 18, 2019--Wither Kamala Harris?

It began so auspiciously. Kamala Harris's campaign for the Democratic nomination. 

20,000 turned out in Oakland for her announcement ceremony. Millions in cash and pledges poured in with promises of more to come. Hollywood gazillionaires have deep pockets.

Then there was The Debate. She took frontrunner Joe Biden down in a preemptive strike by attacking him face-to-face on the most vaunted part of his legacy--his record of support for civil rights. 

Harris knew that Biden's core constituents are African Americans, especially African-American women, and unless she could attract some to support her candidacy it was doomed. So she went after him. Almost calling him a racist by saying she didn't think he was a racist. She just let that hang in the air. And it seemed to work.

For a week after the debate things were looking good for her. No matter that she slammed Biden for his position on court-ordered school bussing, which though designed to reduce segregation all evidence shows was a disaster for blacks as well as whites. Schools were no more integrated and neighborhoods were shredded by White Flight though some individuals such as bussed second-grader Kamala, by her account, benefited.

Harris's poll numbers rose five to 10 points while Biden's plummeted by similar amounts.

But then something seemingly surprising happened--her campaign appeared to stall. She began to slip in the polls and contributions to her campaign went from flow to trickle. 

And on Monday of this week an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Harris slipping to fourth place in head-to-head competition with Trump, trailing still frontrunner Biden (who led Trump by nine points) by eight points, trailing second-place Sanders by six points, and third place Warren by five.

Well within the margin of error, unlike the other three who did well in the poll, Harris led Trump by just one percentage point.

None of this is good news for Harris.

What happened?

I suspect over time underlying race and gender issues are coming into fuller play.

Too many Democratic voters were turned off by the overly-aggressive way in which Harris raked Biden over the coals. She was perceived to be more angry than assertive. It was too much a beatdown than a disagreement about ideas and policies. And too many women as well as men, white as well as black, think of this as you will, felt she was acting in an emasculating manner. Instead of confronting his political history she was attacking his manhood.

Biden came away from the confrontation looking like a punished child.

As I did, on YouTube replay the confrontation to see if she crossed some of these tripwire lines. 

We should probably be beyond these kinds of reactions in our public discourse. But sadly we aren't and it may be costing Kamala Harris a potential path to the nomination. We are not yet that enlightened to be OK with a black women taking down a 70-plus year-old white man. We still have a long way to go.

July 1, 2019--18.1 Million

A number of friends have given me grief recently, accusing me of being too "gloomy" and obsessed with what I have been writing about the Democratic candidates seeking the 2020 nomination.

I will admit to being obsessed with this, an endlessly long seven months before the Iowa caucuses. Not necessarily a good thing, but since it is urgent that we nominate someone who has the best chance to unseat Trump I feel it is none-too-soon to, well, be at least a little obsessed.

If Biden is the one, so be it; if now after Thursday's debate Kamala Harris is the one, even better.

My gloom, though, has been that neither they nor any of the other frontrunners thus far--for example, Elizabeth Warren (a rising star) or Bernie Sanders (a waning star)--lift my spirits when I imagine them going toe-to-toe with Trump.

But then there were the 18.1 million who watched the debate live Thursday night--the Harris-Biden night--which make me feel less gloomy.

Conventional wisdom suggests that the public has the good sense not to pay serious attention to national elections until after Labor Day just two months before the actual voting. And so to have a record number tuning in to the debate two months before the first of the two Labor Days  prior to the voting suggests an inordinate level of interest in the Democratic campaign on the part of the electorate.

As a result I feel my gloom lifting.

If you add the 15.3 million who watched the first half of the debate (let's call it the Warren half since most observers feel she won) that means a total of 33.4 million watched both halves, easily surpassing the record 24 million viewers who looked in on the first of the Trump debates on Fox in 2016 as his popularity was peaking.

This is significant since pollsters say that most important when attempting to predict voting outcomes of those voters most likely to actually turn out to vote are the number of "engaged" or enthusiastic voters. One measure of this is who pays attention and who gets involved early in the process. By this measure it may in fact be looking better for Democrats than I have been fretfully speculating.

I promise to try to cheer up and even write a few more happy pieces at the request of my friend John. Pieces, he urges, not about politics. And so for Tuesday I will try to finish a piece I'm working on about when as a 10-year-old I turned my family's East Flatbush apartment into a sweatshop.

Kamala Harris

June 28, 2019--Winners & Losers

Picking winners and losers from this week's Democratic debate is easy--

There was one big loser. Joe Biden. Forget what he had to say (which is easy to do). Just look at him. He's OLD. Very old. And an old 76 at that. Expect his numbers to plummet. People like me desperate to find someone who can as assuredly as possible defeat Trump need to move on.

There were three big winners--

The third place winner was Elizabeth Warren. It was not that hard to imagine her in the Oval Office. At least there would be someone there with knowledge and energy. 

The second place winner was Kamala Harris. Not the biggest winner. Her takedown of Biden will live in debate history.

The biggest winner, though, was Donald Trump. 

This is because whichever Democrat wins the nomination will lose because they all lemming-like, by raising their hands in assent, saddled themselves with impossible to defend commitments they made to illegal immigrants (that they deserve free healthcare as soon as thy cross the border and that the crossing itself should be decriminalized) and to the medically uninsured-- there will be Medicare for all, paid for by phasing out private health insurance. 185 million Americans have private insurance and for the most part like it. 

Also, in the new frontrunner's case, Kamala Harris, it appears that she is calling for a return to forced bussing to reduce segregation in public schools.

The only good news--it's early, very early. Seven months until the Iowa caucuses. These folks, though, need to get their act together.

March 19, 2019--Two Predictions

For the Democratic presidential nomination I predict it will come down to three finalists--

In third place, Kamala Harris; the runner up will be Bernie Sanders; and the winner--Joe Biden (assuming he cuts out the rapidly wearing-thin coy act and gets in the race).

Biden will select Harris to be his running mate and they will go on to defeat Trump or Mike Pence.

Can we vote now?

Second prediction--

The Mueller report is about to land and, as a courtesy, the special counsel informed Trump's attorneys that he and members of his family are about to be indicted. Trump as an un-indicted co-conspirator.

The FBI will not break into Eric's, Don Junior's, or Jared's homes because as big-game hunters the sons' places are likely armed to the teeth with elephant guns. They will thus be invited to turn themselves in by the end of the month.

So Trump will be faced with pressure to pardon them and perhaps Paul Manafort and others while he's at it. To obviate this, we will learn that Mueller has referred their cases and turned over the evidence he has amassed to the pardon-proof prosecutors of the New-York-City-based Court of the Southern District of New York.

These impending arrests have Trump crazed, off his pins, and thus he has been launching a record number of vitriolic tweets, including two this weekend again about John McCain and five about suspended Fox News personality, Janine Piro. In total, a clinically-concerning 50. 

Further evidence of his desperation is the fact that he and Melania went to church last Sunday.

If there is a just God, that will not help.

March 15, 2019--BETO: Born to Run

Here's my quick initial impression of BETO O'Rourke's long anticipated announcement that he is running for president--

I begin with a confession:

I want to fall in love with this guy. I want to be convinced that he can beat Trump in 2020. I want to believe he has the chops as well as the obvious buzz and charisma. I want to find he's not just sizzle. That there is also steak.

I've been hoping to see these qualities in Kamala Harris, but she thus far seems more surface than substance. And as of now I see it as unlikely that she can successfully take on and unseat Trump. That is all I care about. Defeating Trump.

Then there is the Democrats' Hamlet--Joe Biden. 

To run, or not to run. That is the question. 

This soliloquy is not working. His tease of a dance makes it look as if he, at 76, doesn't have the energy or stamina to take on the rigors of a national campaign. This public coyness, this flirtation is already wearing thin. He feels out of gas even though he hasn't really started!

Bernie or Warren could win the nomination but would struggle to find a strategy to challenge Trump in the general. He's already half figured out how to get under their skin. And wouldn't he relish running against a socialist. He'd make that equivalent to competing with a terrorist who snuck into the United States across the Mexican border in a cargo container.

So then, what about BETO?

Get out your copy of Vanity Fair magazine. By an amazing coincidence the latest issue, with him on the cover, dropped just a day before he announced. What remarkable timing. As I said, amazing.

Take a close look at the photos. How surprising is it that they were taken by glamorizing celebrity photographer Annie Leibowitz and that the subtitle of the accompanying article is, "Man, I'm Just Born To Be In It."

This notion of his natural right to run laid out in VF with Annie's perfect pictures is too bicoastal. It doesn't sound like Rust Belt. It would be better to have been written about in some Wisconsin magazine, if any still exist.

In sum, BETO's problem appears to be a certain tone deafness. It's as if he can't wait to get into the spotlight and out of El Paso.  

He has time to get it right, but in the meantime I need to figure out how to fall in love with Kamala.

February 15, 2019--National Emergencies

Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell unintentionally just set the agenda for the Democrat who will be elected in 2020 to succeed Trump as president.

He was good enough to set both the programmatic and the strategic agenda. With the latter being about how to govern.

Thank you Mitch.

Mitch did this when attempting to discourage Trump from declaring, in his case, a phony emergency.

Do not declare a national emergency, he urged Trump, to get your way with the border wall because if you do you will set a precedent for future presidents. Like the Democrat who will come after you in less than two years. A progressive who might use your precedent to declare emergencies involving gun "rights" and the climate.

When it comes to Trump, McConnell is whistling in the wind because for Trump there are no precedents. A precedent is something that applies to the future, but with Trump there is no such thing as the future. He is all about the now, caring only about himself, ignoring who or what comes next; and thus he will declare an emergency this morning to allow him to reap political credit from his base (meaning Ann Coulter, who two days ago called him a "weenie,"  and Sean Hannity) for building, or pretending to build the wall.

But for a normal person who might become president, governing by the strategic use of national emergencies in an era where nothing can be enacted by a broken and hyper-partisan Congress may make sense and to declare at least two emergencies--one to deal with the scourge of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of murderous people and the other for another genuine emergency, global warming--sounds like a plan for Kamala Harris or Joe Biden or Amy Klobuchar.

February 12, 2019--The One Person Who Can Defeat Trump

I spent much of the weekend agitating about the 2020 election. 

Two more aspirants formally announced that they are seeking the Democratic nomination. Neither was unexpected--Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar. The latter without hat or gloves declared her candidacy in a blinding snowstorm. That image more than what she said proclaimed I'm ready to run no matter the obstacles. 

And then, waiting in the wings was Beto O'Rourke who held a counter-rally in El Paso last night at the same time as Trump's.

With respect for these three who joined at least seven others and after that perhaps there will be ten more candidates, none make me feel they can beat Trump, assuming by Election Day he's not deposed or imprisoned. Though like other popular candidates such as Ron Reynolds from Texas, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump, running from Sing Sing, wouldn't manage to find a way to win. Such is the fervor of his dead-ender 35 percent. 

There is, though, at least one heavyweight already in the ring, Kamala Harris, who might find a path to 270 electoral votes, and one more-- the ever-coy Joe Biden, who, if he wasn't 100 years-old, could be nominated and win. 


But the passion among Democrats and Independents is tipped to the progressive, youthful wing of the party. What else explains the excitement about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? Or, for that matter, Beto. The good news, at only 29, AOC is constitutionally too young to serve as president. Otherwise, heaven help us, infatuated Dems might suicidally nominate her.


There is though a solution to our search for a winning candidate who also, to quote a popular TV commercial, knows a thing or two. Also, how to go high and low.

Michelle Obama.

I know, she says no way. But I say, let's get to work drafting her. Let's get a petition drive going with a target of at least 10 million signatures. That could attract her attention.

On a personal note, she has seen the Obama legacy largely obliterated from changes in the Affordable Care Act to the abandonment of the nuclear treaty with Iran. She has also seen devastating attacks on the environment (remember the Paris Agreement?) and as a Harvard Law School graduate has witnessed equally ferocious challenges to the rule of law itself. And don't overlook what she must feel about Trump and the birther business.

Her book, Becoming, has thus far sold nearly three million hard-cover copies (an all-time record for a First Lady memoir) and all polls show her by far to be the most admired American woman (she is most admired by 15% of the population, three times higher than number two, Oprah), who if she ran would sign up in a second to be her media advisor and spokesperson. 

(Also helping, husband Barack is most admired by 19% while Trump languishes at 13%.)

If Michelle would agree to run all Democratic money would flow to her and she could early next year begin to measure the Oval Office for new drapes. (Anything but gold.)

The one concern--complacency.  Look what happened to Hillary as she waited around for the coronation that never happened. But Michelle is smarter than that and appears to actually like people.

January 31, 2019--Go Figure

In response to my prediction yesterday that Kamala Harris will either win the Democratic nomination for president outright or wind up on Joe Biden's ticket, a friend wrote--

Biden/Harris? Never going to happen. I don't see anyone under 40 voting for Biden at all.

Then I wrote--

It's not always easy to figure out who will vote for whom. 

Who would have thought that Trump would get 42% of the female vote and 52% of the white female vote. Or 39% of the 25-29 year old vote or 40% of the 30-39 year olds. Much less 50% of 39-50 year olds. 

Not me. 

And so I wouldn't confidently predict how many and who might vote for Biden or Biden/Harris. My guess is that he'd do quite well with everyone. But maybe not enough to win the nomination much less the election.

In response, another friend chimed in--

Let's not forget Bernie-loving folks my age and younger, and he's nearly 80.

January 30, 2019--Kamala's Got the Goods

My early impressions had not been positive. I got the appeal but not the substance. The sizzle but very little steak.

As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee she participated a couple of weeks ago in the interrogation of Robert Barr, Trump's nominee to replace Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. It was a star-turn opportunity and so I tuned in hoping to be impressed but came away disappointed.

She spoke too much from notes and did not light up the room with her smarts or tenacity. A ho-hum performance  Not much evidence of fire in the belly. She seemed already too much a member of the Senate club after having been there a scant two years.

But, for me, Sunday changed all that. 

After informally announcing she was running for president two weeks ago while interviewed by Rachael Maddow she organized a rally in her home town, Oakland, CA, where she offered a full-throated declaration she was running for the highest office in the land.

With crowd size an important metric in assessing the strength of candidates (remember Trump's obsession with how many showed up for his inauguration?) it was impressive that at least 20,000 turned out for Harris. To organize such a massive rally is no mean trick, especially so early in a national campaign.

And then there was the speech itself. Unlike other candidates (think Hillary Clinton) who struggle for up to two years on the campaign trail to offer a convincing answer to the classic Roger Mudd question, the one back in 1979 he popped on Ted Kennedy who was seeking to unseat Jimmy Carter: "Why do you want to be president?" Kennedy effectively lost any chance of securing the nomination after struggling to offer a coherent answer.

With a nod to rhetoric at times used by Barack Obama, Senator Harris at the Sunday rally kept it simple and eloquent.

She concluded-- 

“We are here because the American dream and our American democracy are under attack and on the line like never before. And we are here at this moment in time because we must answer a fundamental question: ‘Who are we? Who are we as Americans?’ So, let’s answer that question to the world and each other, right here and right now: ‘America, we are better than this.’’’ 

As they say, the crowd went wild and her polling numbers a day or two later soared--Biden had it all his way in the polls until then. His numbers lingered comfortably in the high 20 percents, hers languished at 5 percent or less. 

But as of now they are in a statistical deadbeat. Yes, it is still very, very early but this suggests Harris is tapping into a powerful vein of national aspiration. 

People are still longing to be optimistic, to have hope for a better future.

Further, she was radiant. Unlike so many others who on the trail feel as if they are campaigning begrudgingly, Kamala Harris seemed totally in her element and appeared to be having a deeply-felt joyous time. A star was being born.

And so, an early prediction--

Kamala Harris will win the nomination or wind up as the vice presidential candidate on Joe Biden's ticket. Far out on a limb I see the former to be more likely.

January 22, 2019--Democrats: How's It Looking So Far?

How's the 2020 campaign shaping up for you now that five or six of the 35 Democratic candidates who will eventually join the race are announced, sort of announced, are out and about in Iowa, or haunting CNN and MSNBC?

I just listened to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand who was being interviewed by Jake Tapper. He popped the Roger Mudd question--the one in which Mudd asked candidate Teddy Kennedy, "Why do you want to be president?" Kennedy's stumbling response ended his candidacy on the spot. 

Gillibrand said, she's a mother of young children and wants all children in America to have the same opportunities as hers. So she's the Mommy Candidate.

Earlier in the week Chuck Todd asked former HUD secretary Julián Castro the same question. He said he wanted all Americans to have the same opportunities he had. He has children and wants the same for them. So he's the Daddy Candidate.

Beto O'Rourke is on some sort of Jack-Kerouac stream-of-consciousness road trip from which he occasionally sends out videos. One was while he was having his teeth cleaned. Another where he said he's doing this to "clear my head." Explitives included. I guess he's the Existential Candidate. 

Let's see, who else? Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown got a new, very kempt-looking haircut. His signature tousled mop some consultant must've convinced him didn't look presidential. Senatorial? Fine. But Oval Office? Not so much, especially considering the hair mess currently occupying it. So he's looking lean and all moussed up.

Three candidates last week who are on the Senate Judiciary Committee--Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, and Kamala Harris--had opportunities to demonstrate gravitas when questioning Attorney General designee Robert Barr during his confirmation hearing.

Each had prepared written questions and mumbled them, not able to look up from their papers and pretty much all failed to make eye contact. So he came off feeling more presidential than they.

Then poor Bernie Sanders is under pressure not to run--he had his turn, some are saying, and should turn his supporters over to 69 year-old Elizabeth Warren, who wasn't impressive last week while trying to look comfortable away from the Harvard Faculty Club when out in Iowa hanging with "ordinary" Americans. 

Bernie was forced to be in Vermont for three days of confrontational meetings last week about how his campaign is apparently riddled with sexual abuse. That should finish him off especially since, oblivious, he seemed to be hearing about this for the first time.

I don't know about you but thus far I am not impressed. 

Am I missing something? Does 100 year-old Joe Biden feel like our best option? Or will this gaggle of undistinguished candidates encourage John Kerry, Al Gore, and Hillary to jump into the race? That way there could be a subset of geriatric candidates while Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) and her gang of Furies (too young to run) bop around the Capital in search of Mitch McConnell. I know he's looking forward to hosting them. At the moment, though, he's hiding from them and Trump.

November 7, 2018--The Economy, Stupid

Briefly since I was up all night listening to the election results--

First, I did pretty well with my predictions. 

Beto O'Rourke did lose by about three points (which for a Democrat in Texas is remarkable) and one would think that would end any talk about his president possibilities in two years, but last night on MSNBC there was chat about his running and in this morning's New York Times speculation about his potential candidacy.

Then, by far the biggest headline from the evening's results was the Democrats winning control of the House of Representatives. By a somewhat bigger margin than predicted by most. Adam Schiff, who will become chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, essentially announced that in January there will be wide-ranging investigations of Trump and his minions, including demands that they have access to his tax returns. 

The takeover of the House by Democrats will also assure that Mueller's eventual report will see the light of day. Even if Trump fires everyone associated with the investigation Schiff and his colleagues will have the power to subpoena it and make it public. 

And, one bonus from Schiff's ascension, is that we won't have to pay attention anymore to the departing chairman, Trump funky Devin Nunes.

On the Democratic side there did not appear to be any stars waiting for 2020 to be born. Perhaps Gavin Newsome, who will become California's governor might turn out to be credible. I know nothing about him (all talk about California presidential candidates have thus far centered around Senator Kamala Harris), but as my father would point out if he were still around--he has "presidential hair."

Finally (and then back to bed) though James Carville's insight when it comes to national elections is that it's always the economy, stupid, that was not true last night. It was about healthcare, healthcare, healthcare and immigration, immigration, immigration. And, yes, concern about Trump's abhorrent behavior. A full 30 percent said to vote against him was a major reason why they turned out.

Thinking about going forward, it will be important to see how many white women and young people voted, for whom, and by what numbers. Because by 10:00 am today the 2020 election moves to center stage.