Democratic Party

Major Blunders: Bill Clinton’s Denunciation Of Bernie Sanders, And Madeleine Albright And Gloria Steinem Critical Of Young Women Who Support Bernie Sanders Over Hillary Clinton

The Democratic Presidential campaign is getting extremely heated, but the Hillary Clinton campaign is making major blunders that could reverberate on her chances to be the nominee of the party long term.

Husband Bill Clinton unleashing a denunciation of Bernie Sanders is totally unwise, and reminds us of how he helped to ruin his wife’s candidacy in 2008, when he bitterly engaged in what many thought was racism in his attacks on Barack Obama.

The best thing Bill Clinton could do is SHUT UP, and stay out of the campaign, and let his wife fight her own battles, as his involvement is counterproductive.

But also, the decision of former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright at a Hillary Clinton rally; and of feminist icon Gloria Steinem on Bill Maher’s show, to be critical of young women who are flocking to Bernie Sanders’s campaign, is also extremely counterproductive, as no young woman or young man or anyone has an obligation to support Hillary because she is a woman!

All these new developments are doing is make the chance 0f unity of Democrats for the Fall campaign far less likely, and the end result could be the Democrats could lose the national election to the Republicans, and condemn America to a right wing extremist government, that will have the ability to transform the Supreme Court to the far right, and lose a generation or more of reasonable constitutional law!

Small States’ (One House Member And Two Senators) Influence In Congress Since 1945

There are seven states that have had only one member of the House of Representatives, along with two US Senators, in the past 70 years. but despite their small populations, these states have had a massive impact on American politics and history!  In addition, for the first few decades since 1945, Nevada also had one House member until growth caused two, and then, three seats in the House.

The seven states are Vermont, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, and Alaska!

But North Dakota, South Dakota,and Montana had two members of the House until recent decades when reapportionment caused them to lose a second seat.

So only Vermont, Delaware, Wyoming, and Alaska (since 1959) stand alone as consistently having one House member and two Senators per state.

But look at their influence:

Vermont had George Aiken (R) (1941-1975) and has Patrick Leahy (D) for 41 years (1975 to Present) and counting now, and Bernie Sanders since 1990,  who  was the lone House member for 16 years before election to the Senate in 2006,making him the longest serving Independent in the history of both houses of Congress.  Also, Howard Dean, former Governor of the state, was a leading contender for the Democratic nomination in 2004, and then became head of the Democratic National Committee, and helped the rise of Barack Obama with a “50 state” strategy between 2004-2008.

Delaware had Joe Biden as Senator for six terms from 1973-2009, and now as Vice President.  He became one of the longest serving Senators of all time, and sought the Presidency in 1988 and 2008.

Wyoming had Dick Cheney as its lone Congressman for ten years from 1979-1989, before he ended up as Secretary of Defense under the first Bush Presidency, and Vice President in the second Bush Presidency.  Also, Alan Simpson served in the Senate from 1979-1997 as  a Republican, and Gale McGree from 1959-1977 as a Democrat.

Alaska had Ted Stevens in the Senate for 40 years from 1968 to 2009, the longest serving Republican Senator in American history.  Also, Sarah Palin , while Governor, was the Vice Presidential nominee for the Republicans in 2008.

And if one looks at the other states which had one Congressman at least for the last few decades, we have South Dakota and Senator George McGovern (1963-1981), the 1972 Democratic Presidential nominee; Montana, with Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D) (1953-1977) from 1961-1977; Nevada with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) (1987-Present) from 2007-2015; and North Dakota Senators Kent Conrad (1987-2013) and Bryan Dorgan (1992-2011).

So the “small” states have really had a major role in American politics, despite their small populations!

The Age Issue’s Effect On Hillary Clinton, But Also Possibly On Bernie Sanders, Against Younger Republicans in November!

The Iowa Caucuses results demonstrate a major problem that Hillary Clinton faces–the age issue.

A vast majority of young voters, those under 45, but even more so those under 29, supported Bernie Sanders, the oldest candidate ever to seek the nomination of a major political party.

Even John McCain (age 72)and Bob Dole (age 73) were not the same age at the time of the election campaign as Bernie Sanders.

Even Ronald Reagan (age 73) was “younger” when seeking reelection in 1984!

How is it that young voters, who flocked to Barack Obama, age 47 in 2008, now love Bernie Sanders, age 75 by the time of the election?

What is it about Hillary Clinton age 69) that makes young Democratic voters dislike her that much, when young voters back in 1992 liked her husband, Bill Clinton, age 46?

This is a serious issue, as it looks more likely that Hillary, the likely Democratic nominee, will face a much younger Republican candidate in Ted Cruz, age  45, or more likely, Marco Rubio, also 45 but five months younger than Cruz.  It means that the age difference would be almost 24 years.

The argument that either Cruz or Rubio are not “old” enough or experienced enough to be President is an argument that will not work, as John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and particularly Barack Obama, were accused of the same “weakness”, but all became President.

To have the Democratic nominee, either Hillary or Bernie (six years older) as the “old” candidate, against a young Republican such as Cruz or Rubio, is unprecedented in American history.

A difference of 24 years is not the all time difference, as John McCain was 25 years older than Barack Obama in 2008; Bob Dole was 23 years older than Bill Clinton in 1996; and George H. W. Bush was 22 years older than Bill Clinton in 1992, but in each case the Democrat was the younger nominee.

But if it was Bernie Sanders against Cruz or Rubio, the difference would be nearly 30 years!

This time, it will be the opposite, with the Democrat much younger than the Republican, and one has to wonder how it might affect the election results, particularly with younger voters in the Democratic Party gravitating to Bernie instead of Hillary, and possibly younger voters in general going for Cruz or Rubio due to youthfulness!

Bernie Sanders Finally Gains Secret Service Protection: Long Overdue And Essential With Extremist Rhetoric Circulating About Sanders!

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a democratic Socialist, not Communist in any fashion, is now receiving Secret Service protection, due to his rise in the polls; his basic tie with Hillary Clinton in the Iowa Caucuses; and his large crowds, second only to Donald Trump.

This has been long needed to do, as Sanders has already been labeled a Communist, a Marxist, a believer in social revolution; and is a major critic of Wall Street, who says what he thinks.

Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and others are starting the character assassination and smearing of a good man, who is no threat to America, but only to those who have no problem with the top one percent having total control of the American economy, as the middle class shrinks, and the “American Dream” is lost for future generations.

It is right wing hysteria, mixed in with Christian extremism, and anti Semitism and racism, that threatens Sanders, who would be the first Jewish Presidential nominee. were he to defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party nomination.

Let us hope that whatever happens to the Sanders candidacy, that Bernie comes out of it hale and hearty, with a continued good public image, whether one supports him or not for the White House!

The Comeuppance Of Donald Trump; And Hillary Clinton Barely Survives!

So the voters  in Iowa, the small percentage who actually voted, have made their judgment!

It is true that more Iowans participated in the caucuses than ever before, but still less than a quarter of eligible people voted.

But what they have wrought is stunning beyond belief!

Donald Trump got his comeuppance, and it will be interesting to see his public reaction and behavior during this week before the New Hampshire Primary.

Ted Cruz may have won, but he will be bitterly opposed by mainstream Republicans, who are likely to converge around Marco Rubio after New Hampshire, with only John Kasich seen as a possible challenger to Kasich for the mainstream, depending on what happens next week!

Hillary Clinton barely survived, and Bernie Sanders now has a direct challenge to her in New Hampshire, which he is favored to win easily, but the question is whether he can survive beyond that as a viable Democratic candidate.

The odds of Marco Rubio and Hillary Clinton as the party nominees, which this blogger predicted on December 31 on here, seems more likely than ever, with Ohio as the crucial battleground, and the reason why this blogger believes John Kasich and Sherrod Brown will be the Vice Presidential choices of the nominees this summer!

If Hillary Clinton Loses Iowa Caucuses, Full Panic Mode Is In Effect, And Joe Biden, John Kerry, Or Al Gore Might Enter Presidential Race!

If Hillary Clinton loses the Iowa Caucuses tonight, full panic mode is in effect, and one of the following might enter the Presidential race belatedly:

Vice President Joe Biden; Secretary of State John Kerry; Former Vice President Al Gore

It is claimed that Hillary will not be in panic mode if she loses tonight, but to lose tonight AND New Hampshire next week, if it happens, will be a major blow no matter what future states might do!

Bernie Sanders has great ideas, but despite polls that show him beating Donald Trump and other Republicans, it is hard to believe that will happen, as Sanders’ background as a democratic Socialist will be made to look as if he is a Communist, with the hammer and sickle emblem to be planted on all commercials and in all speeches by Trump or any other GOP Presidential nominee!

Sanders is, sadly, reminiscent of South Dakota Senator George McGovern, a wonderful human being with great ideas, who defeated Establishment favorite Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine in 1972, and then was smashed by a landslide of epic proportions, 49 states, by flawed President Richard Nixon, soon forced out of the Presidency due to the Watergate scandal.  But the Nixon campaign was able to make McGovern out to be an extreme leftist, and the Democrats went into eclipse, and moderation took over with Jimmy Carter in 1976.

It is very sad, but already Trump is labeling Sanders a Communist, and for the ignorant population of much of America, that will be enough to make it impossible for Sanders to win the White House!

And as said before many times, the Supreme Court future is at stake, so we may yet see other Democrats enter the race in the near future, IF Hillary has major troubles in the next eight days!

Major Mystery: The Lack Of Traction Of Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley’s Presidential Candidacy

As we await the beginning of actual voting next week and after that, a major mystery remains.

Why did former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley turn out to be a total dud as a candidate?

O’Malley was one of the best Governors in America during his eight years in that position, and he had the charisma, good looks, and youth, that one would have thought that he would be a serious challenger to Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and others of the “older generation.”

After the experience of the “younger generation” backing John F. Kennedy in 1960; Jimmy Carter in 1976; Bill Clinton in 1992; and Barack Obama in 2008, one would have thought that O’Malley would have similar appeal, and without being the first Catholic nominee; the first Southerner since 1848; a flawed candidate with a sex scandal from a small Southern state; and a mixed race African American with little national experience to deal with!

And yet, it was a candidate even older than Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden–Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont—with his declaration that he was a Democratic Socialist; was an Independent who only became a party member when he announced for President; and with a New York Jewish background (not necessarily a plus across the nation), who became the favorite of newer voters, younger voters (under 45), and those who would be thought to prefer someone closer to their age and from a larger and more significant state (Maryland) than Vermont represents.

The lack of traction of O’Malley remains a deep mystery, and one wonders if his run this year will give him an upper hand, despite it being a total flop, if the Democrats lose the Presidency in 2016.

Could it be the beginning of the rise on top of the disaster, if it occurs, of a Democratic defeat this year?

Certainly, no one in their right mind who is a progressive, wishes for failure this year to lead to success later!

But sometimes, repudiation now leads to success later!

Imagine A Three Way Presidential Race Of Three New Yorkers, And Possibly Two Of Them Of Reform Judaism Religion!

The scenario now exists that the Presidential Election Of 2016 could involve THREE New York residents competing against each other, an idea which seemed impossible to happen even with one candidate since the time of Thomas E. Dewey’s loss to Harry Truman in 1948.

We saw Nelson Rockefeller fail three times in the 1960s to be the GOP Presidential nominee; we saw Robert Kennedy’s tragic campaign come to an end in 1968 by assassination; we saw John Lindsay attempt a Presidential run in 1972 and fail badly; we saw Mario Cuomo flirt with the idea in 1992 and decide not to run; we saw Rudy Guiliani flop badly in 2008; we saw George Pataki also flirt with the idea of running, and when he finally did in 2015, totally flop; and of course, we saw Hillary Clinton fail to stop Barack Obama in 2008.

At the most, it looked like Hillary Clinton would run, as she has again in 2016, and would have a good chance to be the first New Yorker to run for President and actually be the nominee since 1948, but the idea that THREE candidates would all be from New York is amazing, considering the rise of the Sun Belt since World War II, and the slow decline of New York into political oblivion, although still even now the fourth largest state.

But now we have Clinton; we have Bernie Sanders, who is a Vermont Senator, but grew up in Brooklyn, and left for Vermont in 1968, but is still a New Yorker in the way he speaks; we have Donald Trump who is certainly a New Yorker through and through; and we have former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, originally from Boston, but a long time New Yorker, and Mayor from 2002-2014.

So the possibility of three New Yorkers running is very much alive, and if Sanders is the Democratic nominee and Bloomberg, alarmed by Sanders’ candidacy as well as Trump as a possible Republican nominee, does actually run on a third party or independent ticket, we would have two Reform Jews running along with Presbyterian Trump!

Potential Michael Bloomberg Independent Presidential Candidacy Complicates Election Outlook In Massive Way!

The revelation that former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (2002-2014) is considering entering the Presidential race of 2016 as an Independent complicates the election outlook in a massive way.

One could argue that an Independent candidacy will not succeed, as the best any independent or third party candidate has ever done is former President Theodore Roosevelt, running as a Progressive (Bull Moose) party candidate in 1912, ending up second rather than third, and winning six states, 88 electoral votes, and 27.4 percent of the popular vote.

But Bloomberg, the seventh wealthiest billionaire in America by 2015 statistics, and 13th wealthiest in the world with about $41 billion in assets, could upset the apple cart, and could have a real chance to win.

For one thing, as a former Democrat, then a Republican, and finally an Independent, Bloomberg proved he could govern New York City, arguably the second most difficult governing job in America next to the Presidency itself.

And as a social progressive, Bloomberg represents danger to the Democratic party and its reliable 18 “Blue” states, since a three way election could give Bloomberg the balance of power, and possibly lead to him winning some of those states, and denying Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders the Presidency, and indirectly aid the Republican nominee,  Donald Trump or whoever else it is.

And the scenario of no one winning 270 electoral votes is the nightmare, as if that happened, the House of Representatives, controlled by Republicans, and having more than 26 states with a Republican majority delegation, would have the final say on who the next President is, as in long ago 1800 and 1824!

The Bloomberg candidacy will be explored later by this blogger, with more detail and analysis, but this is NOT good for the Democratic Party!

The Democratic Presidential Debate Did The Nation Proud!

When compared to the Republican Presidential debates, last night’s Democratic Presidential debate was superb, and did the nation proud!

All three candidates—Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley—were exceptional in their performance.

All three were civil, intelligent, comprehensive, and compassionate in their domestic and social agenda.

All three were balanced, reasonable, knowledgeable and measured in their statements on foreign policy issues.

Any of the three would be an outstanding President in the Oval Office.

Having said that, it seems to me that Bernie Sanders, already ahead in many public opinion polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, probably gained the most by his performance last night.

Hillary Clinton, however, held her own, and Martin O’Malley, who in any other year would be a likely front runner, looked good, but still, it is clear that his quest for the Presidency is a lost cause for 2016.