Kamala Harris

State Of the Union: Lowest Watched In A Generation, Teleprompter Speech Soon To Be Forgotten, Except For Anti Immigration Pitch, And Exaggeration Of Trump Economic Accomplishments

Donald Trump’s State of the Union Address was the lowest watched in a generation, a teleprompter speech soon to be forgotten, except for his anti immigration pitch.

He said he would grant Dreamers under DACA the allowance to remain and a path toward citizenship, which will infuriate nativists.

But in exchange, family of all immigrants beyond immediate family would be barred from migration, ending what Trump called chain migration or family reunification. Immediate family is only spouses and minor children, and parents, siblings, and adult children of immigrants would be barred, as he calls them “distant” relatives. This has nothing to do with if any have committed criminal acts. This statement of Trump led to a noticeable reaction of boos by Democrats, and rightfully so.

How heartless and uncaring Trump displays himself to be about family members! This is clearly the work of racist and nativist aide Stephen Miller.

What native born American would feel that this is proper, to deny family the right of migration?

This is the true Donald Trump, a nativist, racist, who has no compassion or conscience, such as the case of the Detroit, Michigan 40 year old immigrant, brought to America when he was ten years old, having committed no crimes while here, and now deported away from his wife and children, and sent back to Mexico, a nation he has not seen since thirty years ago, and having no connections or friends in that nation. What kind of person with any principles does not have humanitarian, and compassionate exceptions to any rule, when it destroys families?

Trump’s attack on MS-13, an international gang formed in Los Angeles that commits murders and other crimes, was a vast exaggeration of that group, and Senator Kamala Harris, who prosecuted gang members as California Attorney General, appropriately attacked Trump for scapegoating and fear mongering to justify the hard line proposal on immigration and family.

Additionally, Trump exaggerated the economic revival, which was NOT due to him, but to the steadily improving economic situation under Barack Obama, who came in with a massive economic collapse on his door, occurring during the George W. Bush Presidency. Obama created the greatest economic revival since Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, and did it without a major war.

So Trump inherited a great economy, and the job growth, unemployment rate and stock market improvements did not match what Obama had done in previous years, but Trump continues to lie and deceive about how the wealthy gained most of the tax cut that the Republican Party forced through without any input or bipartisan attempt by Trump.

Cory Booker And Kamala Harris Appointments To Senate Judiciary Committee A Boost To Their Predicted Presidential Candidacies In 2020

The appointment of New Jersey Senator Cory Booker and California Senator Kamala Harris to the Senate Judiciary Committee is a boost to both legislators, both considered likely Presidential candidates a year from now.

Booker is African American, and Harris is mixed race with a parent born in Jamaica and a parent born in India.

Both have exceptional credentials, with Booker having bachelors degree in political science and masters degree in Sociology from Stanford; a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford, where he earned an honors degree in American history; and a law degree from Yale Law School. He served on the Newark City Council from 1998-2002; as Newark Mayor from 2006-2013, and has been in the US Senate since 2013. He has also served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee; and the Environment and Public Works Committee. He is an impressive orator and highly intelligent and qualified.

Kamala Harris graduated Howard University in Washington, DC, and Hasting Law School of the University of California. She worked in the San Francisco District Attorney’s office and the City Attorney’s Office, and then was elected and served as San Francisco District Attorney from 2004-2011, followed by election and service as California Attorney General from 2011-2017, and was elected to the Senate to serve beginning in 2017. She serves on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs; Budget Committee; and Intelligence Committee; as well as her recant appointment to the Judiciary Committee. She is highly regarded for her oratory and intellectual brilliance.

Having had the excellent experience of Barack Obama in the Presidency, we now have the possibility of another person who is not white being a future President, and very possibly over time, both of them, with Harris being 56 and Booker 51 in 2020, so the long range potential is clearly present, if not in 2020, for a future President Booker or President Harris or both over time!

Oprah Winfrey For President? Absolutely Not!

We have entered the silly season, when Democrats, who are desperate for someone to replace Donald Trump or Mike Pence in 2020, have decided that Oprah Winfrey is the person to nominate and elect President.

This author and blogger has no issue with the significance of Oprah Winfrey to the entertainment community at large.

Oprah has had a wonderful and inspiring career, and has spoken up for much that is good and decent.

It is not an attack on her virtues to say that a speech at the Golden Globes Awards ceremony, while inspiring, is not a justification for her to be running for President.

Of course, she can run if she chooses to, but that does not mean America should elect her, or Mark Cuban, or Dwayne Johnson, or Mark Zuckerberg, or any other successful entrepreneur or entertainment star to the White House.

We should have learned from Donald Trump that being successful in entertainment or business does not qualify you to be the leader of the free world, far from it.

All of the above, including Trump, lack EXPERIENCE, KNOWLEDGE, EXPERTISE in GOVERNMENT and FOREIGN POLICY, and in this complex world, one needs to have had a career in government, as a US Senator, a US House of Representatives member, a Governor, or a Mayor, or possibly a significant cabinet officer, such as Secretary of State, Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, or Attorney General.

One needs a record of accomplishment and involvement in the domestic and foreign policy issues that matter.

Such a person, just one example, is former Vice President Joe Biden, who if not for his age, would be seen as the best person for 2020, but the answer is to use Joe Biden’s great credentials, combined with the idealism and progressive credentials of a Joe Kennedy III or Chris Murphy or Amy Klobuchar or Cory Booker or Eric Garcetti or Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom or numerous others as a Vice President.

Have Joe Biden agree to one term, followed by the likelihood of one of these government leaders succeeding, in theory, for two terms.

Any of the above and even others in government would be far better than a celebrity, such as Oprah Winfrey by vast margins!

Historic Number Of Women In US Senate Tomorrow When Tina Smith Of Minnesota Replaces Al Franken

Tomorrow, January 3, 2018, will mark an all time record of the number of women who have served in the US Senate.

When Tina Smith is sworn in by Vice President Mike Pence on Wednesday, she will be the 51st woman to serve in the US Senate, and the 22nd presently to serve in that august body.

Tina Smith will replace Al Franken from Minnesota in the Senate, and this will be the first time that four states have had two women Senators representing them at the same time—California, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Washington, with all eight women being Democrats.

17 of the 22 Senators on January 3 are Democrats, and 5 are Republicans.

17 of the total of 51 will have been Republicans, and 34 will have been Democrats.

18 states are presently represented by women Senators, and 29 have had women Senators historically.

North Carolina and New Hampshire have had a woman Senator succeeded by a woman of the other party, and had both parties represented by their women Senators concurrently in the case of New Hampshire.

The following 5 states have had 3 women Senators in history—California, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, and New Hampshire.

The following 11 states have had 2 women Senators in history—Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Washington.

The following 13 states have had 1 woman in the Senate—Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin.

11 of the total of 51 have served by appointment or had brief terms, with Tina Smith having the upper hand to keep the Minnesota seat since she was Lieutenant Governor when chosen to hold the seat for a year, facing an election in 2018.

The likelihood is that we will see more women in the Senate in the next few years, with several women competing for Senate seats in a number of states, and with Democrats still greatly outweighing Republicans in the Senate by a ratio of more than 3-1.

Additionally, we are likely to have four women Senators, all Democrats, seek the Presidential nomination in 2020, an all time record if that occurs. This would include Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Kamala Harris of California, and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

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.

In Midst Of Democratic “Morass”, Could Jerry Brown Come To The Rescue At Age 82, And Unite Democrats In 2020?

In the midst of Democratic Party “morass”, stirred up further by Donna Brazile”s new book, and the lack of leadership and a new agenda, other than to wait for Donald Trump to implode, it is alarming those who want an aggressive approach to revive Democratic fortunes.

The clear need for a new generation of leadership is clear cut, but at this point, some are starting to notice that the Governor of the largest state is actively on the attack against the Trump Administration on the issues of the environment, immigration, gun regulations, and more. He is the great progressive star. Who are we referring to?

We are talking about Jerry Brown, who is 79 years old, and will leave the Governorship a year from now at age 80.

Some are wondering could a 82 year old four time Governor of California, at age 36-44 and then 72-80, actually mount a Presidential campaign for the fourth time, after trying in 1976, 1980 and 1992–so 44, 40 and 28 years ago?

It seems crazy to imagine it, but it also demonstrates how weak the Democrats seem to be, as we start to consider Presidential candidates in 2020 for the Democrats.

All one can say is IF we are to even think about Jerry Brown, then we cannot dismiss Joe Biden (78 in 2020), or Elizabeth Warren (71 in 2020), and even Bernie Sanders (79 in 2020).

But this blogger still feels strongly that a new generation in the 40s, 50, and early 60s is the best route to travel, and would include such leaders as Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles, Senator Kamala Harris of California, likely future California Governor Gavin Newsom, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and others not often mentioned.

March 3, 2020 Becomes Key Presidential Nomination Day: Could Help California Democrat To Become Presidential Nominee

More than ever, “Super Tuesday”, March 3, 2020, will be THE most crucial day in the Presidential primaries for the 2020 Presidential campaign.

As things now stand, only Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina will continue to be the first states to hold primaries or caucuses before March–with a multitude of states holding their primaries the first Tuesday in March.

In 2016, New Hampshire and South Carolina held primaries, and Iowa and Nevada held caucuses. Eleven states held contests on the first Tuesday in March, which was March 1, with nine holding primaries and two holding caucuses.

Now, however, California has moved its primary from June to March 3, 2020, and being the biggest state in population, it will have a far greater impact than it has had in June, when the nominations of both parties had already been settled earlier.

It should make the Democratic nominee more likely to be to the left of center, rather than centrist, and the Republican nominee to be more likely to be centrist conservative than a right wing conservative.

The pressure for earlier declarations of candidacy and for more campaigning throughout 2019 will be great.

On first thoughts, it would seem that any of three California Democrats might have the edge for the Presidential nomination, and that the three–Senator Kamala Harris, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, and presumed Governor Gavin Newsom, presently Lieutenant Governor of the state–would have a battle royale as to which would be the strongest and most likely challenger.

But also, someone like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders might also have the edge, as things stand now.

The Republicans would probably, assuming Donald Trump is not in the White House, have a good opportunity for a John Kasich or Jon Huntsman, the two most moderate conservative candidates in 2016 and 2012 respectively, to have an edge.

But, of course, trying to project two and a half years from now is a pure guessing game, but fun to speculate about!

Hillary Clinton’s New Memoir: Will It Destroy A Possible Future Candidacy Or Promote It?

Hillary Clinton’s new memoir on her Presidential campaign is out, and the question is whether it will destroy a possible future candidacy for President, or promote it.

Clinton certainly blames herself for some of the actions and statements that doomed her, but also places a lot of blame on others, including former FBI Director James Comey; her rival for the nomination, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont; Today Show Host Matt Lauer, who moderated a debate that she feels was poorly handled by him; and of course, Donald Trump.

She points out her belief that there was definite Russian collusion for Donald Trump; makes clear her disgust at Trump’s tactics during the campaign; makes clear her belief that Trump was and is totally unqualified on experience and judgment to be our President; and tells us she is not going anywhere into the distance, but will continue to speak up on issues and personalities, including on Donald Trump.

Clinton recognizes that millions love her and voted for her, and gave her a 2.85 million popular vote margin, but that millions others hate her with a passion, and that sexism played a major role in her defeat, along with disgust by many at her husband, Bill Clinton, even though millions of others admire and support her husband and his Presidency in the 1990s.

Clinton informs us that while she will continue to be part of public discourse, she will NOT run for President again, which seems totally sensible and rational.

While she has run twice already, there is no desire to match Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan, who ran and lost three times; or Thomas E. Dewey and Adlai Stevenson, who ran and lost two times.

It is indeed time for fresh leadership, and so the idea of Bernie Sanders at age 79 in 2020 running for President is a terrible idea, and even Joe Biden, who this blogger loves, and believes that he would have defeated Donald Trump had he been the nominee, running again at age 78 in 2020, is not a good way to go.

Rather, we need YOUNGER leadership, such as Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut; Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti; Senator Kamala Harris of California; Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey; Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro of Texas; Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom of California (running for Governor in 2018); Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York; Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon; Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York; Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado; Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio; Senator Mark Warner of Virginia; Senator Al Franken of Minnesota; Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia; and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, among others.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is also talked about, as with Sanders and Hillary Clinton, but being in the 70s by 2020 makes her NOT a good choice, and she is also extremely controversial, and would be unlikely to gain any more support in the proper places and states to be elected President, because if anything, she is more vehement and more controversial to many than Sanders or Clinton.

Again, we need NEW leadership, with a preference for the YOUNGER part of the above group.

California Politics: From “Senior Citizens” To “New Generation” Heirs Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, And Eric Garcetti: Potential Presidential Candidates

California, one out of eight people in America, is finally seeing a political turnover, with the retirement of Senator Barbara Boxer (age 76)in 2016, and the future retirement of Governor Jerry Brown (age 80) at the end of 2018.

Now it is urgent that Senator Diane Feinstein, who will be 85 in 2018, decide NOT to run for another six year term. The best choice to replace her is Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.

“Senior Citizens” in their late 70s or 80s should not be running for office, although many have, but it is time for California to set the standard, and already they have Senator Kamala Harris to replace Senator Boxer, and the likelihood of Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom succeeding Jerry Brown as Governor.

Having leadership in their late 40s and early 50s would be a sign that the Golden State is looking to the future, and interestingly, all three–Harris, Newsom, and Garcetti—would be potential Democratic Presidential candidates in 2020, 2024, or beyond.

Fresh, young blood is desperately needed to deal with the issues of the 2020s and beyond, and no matter how good a record some may think Diane Feinstein has had, it is time to retire, Diane! Do you get it?

The Need For A Real “Newer” Generation Of Leadership, Age 47 To 60 In Election Year 2020!

With the victory of Emmanuel Macron as President of France, it draws attention to the need for a real “newer” generation of leadership in America to move the nation forward in 2020 and beyond.

So although age alone should not decide who should be President, or Presidential candidates, there is an argument for a big drop in age of the next President, similar to what happened when Dwight D. Eisenhower left office at age 70 in 1961, and was replaced by 43 year old John F. Kennedy.

The same situation arose when George H. W. Bush left office at age 68 in 1993, and was replaced by 46 year old Bill Clinton.

So if age is an issue, then the following are those potential Democratic Presidential candidates who should be in the forefront:

Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, age 47 in 2020.

Los Angeles, California Mayor Eric Garcetti, age 49 in 2020.

Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, age 51 in 2020.

Future California Governor (heavily favored in 2018) Gavin Newsom, age 53 in 2020.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, age 54 in 2020.

Senator Kamala Harris of California, age 56 in 2020.

Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, 60 in 2020.

With Donald Trump, if still in office in 2020 being 74, this would mean a drop in age of 27 down to 14 years if any of the above seven named possible nominees were to emerge as the next President.

This group includes three women (Gillibrand, Harris, Klobuchar); two African Americans (Booker and Harris who is multi racial); one Jewish and Mexican American (Garcetti); and two White Anglos Males (Murphy and Newsom). We would have three California contenders (Garcetti, Newsom, Harris); three from the NY, NJ, Connecticut metropolitan area (Gillibrand, Booker, Murphy); and one from the Midwest (Klobuchar). Two will be in their 40s (Murphy, Garcetti); four in their 50s (Booker, Newsom, Gillibrand, Harris); and one just 60 years old at that time (Klobuchar).

If this blogger were to forecast his sense of what “may” happen, I would think the ones to watch are Murphy, Garcetti, Newsom, and Klubuchar, but just an educated guess!