Hillary Clinton

The Key To A Majority Of Democrats In House Of Representatives: Gains In New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Illinois, California

Five “Blue” States for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats have a total of 42 seats of Republicans in the House of Representatives—New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Illinois, California.

All of these states, except Illinois, presently have Democratic Governors, with Bruce Rauner in great trouble in trying to win reelection in Illinois, including the possible Democratic challenger being Chris Kennedy, one of the sons of Robert F. Kennedy.

Five out of nine in New York; four out of five in New Jersey; four out of seven in Virginia; four out of seven in Illinois; and eight out of fourteen in California—these are the vulnerable seats, a total of 25, with the Democrats needing 24 seats to gain majority control of the House of Representatives.

Not all will be won, of course, but some of these Republicans have decided not to seek reelection, which makes their seats even more likely to switch. Altogether, 25 of the 42 seats that are presently Republican in these five states are in play.

of course, there are many other vulnerable seats for Republicans, but if a high percentage of these seats in the five “Blue” states go Democratic, then it is assured that the Democrats will gain majority control in November 2018.

Arizona, Florida, and Pennsylvania also have contested seats that could go Democratic, so the real battleground is the five “Blue” states and these three states that went to Donald Trump.

The Obsessive Donald Trump Hatred Of Barack Obama And Hillary Clinton A Clear Cut Sign Of Serious Mental Illness

We have never seen such hatred and obsessiveness by any President against a predecessor or successor in the Oval Office or a presidential rival as we see with Donald Trump’s attitude toward Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

There have been other rivalries that existed, as for instance:

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson;

John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson;

Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft;

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson;

Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt;

Harry Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower;

Harry Truman and Richard Nixon;

Richard Nixon and Nelson Rockefeller;

Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan

as the major cases, but none of these rivalries were on the level of Donald Trump with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

None of these was a situation of such vehement, long lasting venom, and the manufacturing of lies and accusations that are clearly paranoid and vicious to an extreme, with no possibility of being resolved.

Some of the above rivalries were long lasting, including JQ Adams and Jackson, TR and Wilson, and Hoover and FDR, but the rest ended up with reconciliation and eventual communication between the two parties involved.

That will never happen with Donald Trump, and it is a sad commentary that teaches the wrong lessons to children and to all of us, that no matter what differences one has, they can be overcome with a real effort and commitment.

The difference is that Donald Trump, unlike past Presidents, is clearly a person with a serious mental illness, which undermines the possibility of cooperation among and unity of the American people.

Is Our Future Leadership Our Past Contenders, And “Old” Leaders (Those Over 70 In 2020)?

At a time when many observers would say we need to look to a new generation of leadership for America. instead the potential for our past contenders or “old’ leaders to end up competing for the Presidency in 2020 is very clear.

On the Democratic side, we could have Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont (age 79 in 2020); former Vice President Joe Biden (78 in 2020); former 2016 Presidential nominee and First Lady and New York Senator Hillary Clinton (age 73 in 2020); and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts (age 71 in 2020) all announcing for President.

Some rumors even put retiring California Governor Jerry Brown (82 in 2020); former 2004 Presidential nominee, former Massachusetts Senator, and former Secretary of State John Kerry (77 in 2020); and former 2000 Presidential nominee and former Vice President Al Gore (72 in 2020) also in the mix.

On the Republican side, we could have President Donald Trump (74 in 2020) and former 2012 Presidential nominee, Massachusetts Governor, and future likely Utah Senator Mitt Romney (73 in 2020), announcing for President.

The question that arises is whether the voting population would be turned off to “Baby Boomers” and some born even before 1946, with Sanders, Biden, Brown and Kerry born between 1938 and 1943, being the competitors who make it to the final stage of the election campaign.

It is certainly likely that at least some of this above list is in the mix, but the likelihood still is that a Senator or Governor of a younger generation will be, at least, the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2020, and a slight chance that such would be the case in the Republican Party.

The Never Ending Nightmare Of Donald Trump, Who Has Disgraced, Undermined, Tarnished, Stained, And Harmed The Reputation Of The Presidency!

As we see the end of the first year of the Donald Trump Presidency, it is clear that it is a never ending nightmare visited on the American people.

Donald Trump has disgraced the office of the Presidency.

Donald Trump has undermined trust and faith in the law, the Constitution, and American democracy, and demonstrated lack of respect for freedom of the press.

Donald Trump has tarnished the reputation of America as the leader of the world.

Donald Trump has stained the concept of decency, dignity, and concern of the leader of the nation for those less fortunate, or facing historic discrimination.

Donald Trump has harmed the reputation of the Presidency as an office which promotes basic moral and ethical values.

Donald Trump has affected the relationships between men and women, boys and girls, in a deleterious manner, which will harm the nation long term.

Donald Trump has manufactured and promoted more lies than any American politician in American history, and undermines the ability of Americans to respect the office and the person who holds that position.

Donald Trump has damaged America long term in just one year, as with the long term effects of his lower court appointments, and his selection of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, who seems short term to be further to the right politically than Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, and maybe even the man he replaced, Justice Antonin Scalia.

Donald Trump has left a legacy of environmental damage that will not be easily reversed, and of harm to labor and consumers that will set back the dwindling middle class and the working class for decades.

Donald Trump has also given us the worst set of cabinet members ever, far worse already than Richard Nixon, Warren G. Harding, or Ulysses S. Grant.

Donald Trump has left already an indelible mark on America, and is on the way to the worst four year term in history, bar none, and with the danger of two wars being started, if he lasts into the end of the second year–against North Korea and Iran.

We should all hope that Donald Trump is forced out of office soon, although the prospect of President Mike Pence is a ghastly thought at this point.

What the Russians did has succeeded, destroying our presidential election, and giving us horrifying alternatives in Pence, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, and Senate President Pro Tempore Orrin Hatch, when clearly, Hillary Clinton won an election that was stolen from her!

America A Land Of Pro Life For Fetuses, But Not For Born Human Beings

The hypocrisy of the Pro Life movement is that they are obsessive about every fetus that is conceived being born, but once born, no concern about the quality of the length of life of human beings.

We have 13 million people now cut off from health care under Obama Care by the action of the Republican Congress in their just enacted tax cut which benefits the wealthy and corporations.

We have 8.9 million children cut off from the CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) by lack of funding by the Congress. The program was created and promoted by First Lady Hillary Clinton 20 years ago.

These two actions mentioned above are a repudiation by Donald Trump and the Republican Party of programs on health care enacted into law under Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, respectively.

Additionally, we have a Congress and President who ignored the anniversary of the Sandy Hook Massacre of 2012, where 20 children and six teachers were murdered, and on that day last week, Donald Trump had Wayne La Pierre, the head of the National Rifle Association, at the White House, an obscene action. Meanwhile, there were 33,000 gun deaths in 2016, sure to rise in 2017, and more massacres by people with firearms, so much so that it has made many such events basically ignored, unless there are a very high number of deaths, as at Las Vegas, but still no action to deal with the largest number of firearm deaths in any nation in the world.

US drug overdoses in 2016 hit an all time high as well, 63,600, and likely much higher in 2017, and nothing is being done about the opioid crisis. Opioids now kill more people annually than breast cancer, and also more than motor vehicle accidents, the peak of HIV?AIDS deaths, and total deaths in the Vietnam War.

We are a nation that has no regard for quality of life or longevity of life, only forcing women to avoid abortions whenever possible, and preventing people who are dying to have a death with dignity through assisted suicide to cut suffering.

In all cases, profits and government intrusion in our private lives are the emphasis, not protecting and promoting health of those born, who are not wealthy or privileged.

Kirsten Gillibrand And Other Women Senators Wrong To Force Al Franken Out Of Office Without Ethics Investigation And Clear Cut Evidence Of Sexual Harassment

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and other women Senators were wrong to force Senator Al Franken out of the Senate, without having an ethics investigation first, with clear cut evidence of sexual harassment and abuse by the Minnesota Senator.

Kirsten Gillibrand acted like a bully in leading the charge in such an aggressive manner, and it will harm her in her quest to become the 2020 Democratic Presidential nominee, which she clearly is desirous of becoming.

This blogger has been skeptical of Gillibrand before, and in 2008, the idea that she would be appointed to the US Senate by New York Governor David Patterson to replace Hillary Clinton, who was becoming Secretary of State, was astounding, as she did not have the best Congressional record of the various people named as contenders for the appointment.

Gillibrand had a very conservative record in her upstate NY district, and then suddenly became very liberal, a situation which seemed suspicious to this blogger.

Although this author said back in 1998 that Bill Clinton should have resigned in the sex scandal which led to his impeachment that year, it was not proper 19 years later for Gillibrand to say that Bill Clinton should have resigned, and in so doing, smacking Hillary Clinton in the face.

It adds to the image of Kirsten Gillibrand as an opportunist, who cannot be trusted to be President, but the possibility of her being the nominee always seemed a long shot.

Now it will be less likely, with her mercenary attitude, and rush to judgment, denying us a Senator, Al Franken, who was one of the stars of the Democratic Party, and helped to cause Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself from the investigation of Donald Trump, which led to the appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

The Growing Likelihood Of A Democratic Woman Presidential Nominee In 2020: Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar

With the failure of Hillary Clinton to become President, and with the growing misogyny of Donald Trump and the Republican Party, the likelihood of a Democratic woman Presidential nominee in 2020 has multiplied.

One would think that the failure to elect the first woman President would make it less likely that another woman would come along and challenge in a serious manner, but a large percentage of women clearly want such an eventuality.

There are four potential women Presidential candidates as the situation now exists: Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, California Senator Kamala Harris, and Wisconsin Senator Amy Klubuchar.

Their ideological bent is in that order, with Warren the most progressive and Klobuchar more to the moderate center.

Only Warren is well known at this time, but she tends to engender more fierce opposition, while also being, by far, the best debater.

Gillibrand has been a leader on sexual harassment in the military, while Harris has the least time in the Senate, but was formerly Attorney General of California, and reminds many of Barack Obama as she is mixed race with parents from India and the island of Jamaica. She has brought notice for her tough questioning and aggressiveness in just a few months in the Senate.

Klobuchar has been in the Senate longer than the other three, and much more effective at working across the aisle, and to try to accomplish legislation without dramatics. She comes from the Midwest, so might be better able to appeal to the Rust Belt. But she is not “exciting” in her personality, as compared to the other three women.

Trying to guess which would have the best chance, it would seem that Warren or Klobuchar, at the opposite ends of the Democratic Party from Left to Centrist, would have the best opportunities, but impossible to know.

Somehow, this blogger finds Amy Klobuchar interesting, and not to be ignored, but we shall see what develops.

Time To Move Against Electoral College Distorting Popular Vote, Through National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Agreement

The issue of the Electoral College having failed to elect the popular vote winner of the Presidency for a total of five times now, and twice in the last 16 years, continues to plague us, particularly when the present incumbent of the White House lost the popular vote by the biggest margin yet, 2.85 million votes.

There is no other political election in America where the person with the most popular votes is not the winner of the election.

The Founding Fathers might have seen the Electoral College as a necessary bulwark against mass popular control at the time, but once we began having popular votes in the 1824 Presidential election, it was an advancement of democracy, and the idea that a popular vote loser would win the Presidency was appalling.

It happened in 1824 in a four person race, but then, it occurred in 1876 with a two person race, and then in 1888, again with a two person race.

Since it did not happen again for more than a century, it was assumed to be flukes that would not happen again, and over the years of my teaching career, I was often asked whether it would happen again, and I responded, that while it could happen, it was highly unlikely that it would.

And then came the Presidential Election of 2000, where George W. Bush won with Supreme Court intervention stopping the recount in the state of Florida, winning that state over Al Gore by 537 votes out of six million cast, and therefore barely winning the Electoral College, despite a 540,000 popular vote lead nationally of Al Gore.

In 2016, the situation was even worse, as Donald Trump won by very small margins in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, and lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton nationally by 2.85 million popular votes, so five and a half times the popular vote lead for Clinton over Trump as compared to Gore over Bush in 2000, but Trump winning the Electoral College, but only 12 national elections with a smaller electoral vote majority out of a total number of 58 national elections.

The problem is trying to end the Electoral College by constitutional amendment is dead upon arrival, as it requires a two thirds vote of the House of Representatives and a two thirds vote of the Senate, followed by a majority vote in both houses of state legislatures (except in the one house of Nebraska) in three fourths of the states (38 out of 50). Clearly, that will never happen, particularly with Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, and four of the five times that the Electoral College failed, the ultimate winner was a Republican, and the loser each time was a Democrat.

But the alternative is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Agreement, developed in recent years, with 10 states and Washington DC with 165 electoral votes agreeing by legislation that they would support the popular vote winner nationally, instructing their electors to do so. The problem is that the 10 states and DC are clearly, at this point, Democratic or “Blue” states—California, DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington State.

Once states with 105 additional electoral votes agree to pass such legislation, it would go into effect, but that is the more difficult matter. At this point, 12 states with 96 electoral votes have had one house of the state legislature agree to such a law—Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, New Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma,and Oregon. Also, two other states have had committees in the state legislature approve it unanimously, with these two states—Georgia and Missouri—having 27 additional electoral votes.

So if all these states that have taken partial action completed the process in the next few years, we would have 24 states and DC, with a majority of the total popular vote and population, being capable of awarding the Presidency to the winner of the national popular vote, and this would end the idea of a popular vote loser becoming President.

Republican reliable states—Arkansas, Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Missouri—are part of this group, but the question is whether they will take the steps to put it into effect.

While there is no certainty this will ever happen, there is optimism that it will eventually occur, as otherwise, the possibility of a return of 2000 and 2016 is highly likely in the future, and not just once.

If this were to occur, it would promote a truly national Presidential campaign, instead of the present focus in recent decades on 12-15 states, and ignoring the clear cut “Blue” and “Red” states in favor of the “Purple” or “Swing” states alone.

The Year Of Democratic Women On The Ballot Coming In 2018: Ten Incumbents And Two Seeking Election To The US Senate

In the midterm Congressional elections of 2018, a total of 12 Democratic women will be on the ballot for the US Senate, with 10 coming up for reelection and two making major challenges against Republicans in Arizona and Nevada.

Altogether, there are 16 Democratic women in the US Senate in 2017, so all but six are facing reelection battles.

This includes women in Trump won states—Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Debbie Stabenow in Michigan, and Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin.

Additionally, in Hillary Clinton won states, the following Democratic women are up for reelection–Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts. Kirsten Gillibrand in New York, Diane Feinstein in California, Mazie Hirono in Hawaii, Maria Cantwell in Washington State, and Amy Klobuchar in Minnesota.

Jacky Rosen is competing for the Nevada Senate seat against most endangered Republican Senator Dean Heller, and Kyrsten Sinema is trying to win the Senate seat of Jeff Flake, who is not running for reelection in Arizona.

The odds for both Rosen and Sinema are seen as good, and could tip the balance of the US Senate, but only if the other women, particularly in Trump won states, are able to overcome their disadvantage.

Therefore, while all of the Democratic women except Heidi Heitkamp are backed by the pro choice Emily’s List organization, it is important NOT to have a litmus test for Heitkamp, who while supportive of Trump about 51 percent of the time, still supports many Democratic Party goals, although she is not truly pro choice on abortion. If we want purity, then the Senate will be lost, as such a Senator as Joe Manchin of West Virginia, also running for reelection, is not any more pro choice than Heitkamp. The party needs to be more inclusive if it is to win and keep control of the US Senate in the future.

Time For Donald Trump To Be Held Accountable For Sexual Crimes

In the midst of all of the revelations about sexual harassment and sexual abuse of a multitude of Hollywood figures, and people involved in politics, journalism, and the business world, Donald Trump has gained a free pass.

His supporters did not care about his sexual escapades which were numerous over the years, and he did not care about exposure of such exploits, but he has continued to say that all the women who have claimed abuse and exploitation are liars, even after the Access Hollywood tape that nearly derailed his candidacy in October 2016, until FBI head James Comey announced and then backed away from a further investigation of Hillary Clinton, which took attention off that Trump scandal.

There is so much evidence by his own public statements that Donald Trump is a master at exploiting women, probably more so than Bill Clinton, and possibly more than many others who have been exposed, but still managing to avoid accountability.

Now, in the midst of this scandal of powerful men exploiting women, is the time for a full prosecution in court of the claims of the multitude of women against Donald Trump.

And since Bill Clinton was impeached, partially for his sexual exploits and lying, so should the same situation await Donald Trump.

One of the impeachment charges against Donald Trump should be his lack of moral and ethical rectitude, and if Bill Clinton is to be dredged up after facing impeachment and disbarment, so should Trump meed the same fate.