Democratic National Committee

Democrats Only Gain 6 House Seats, 2 Senate Seats In 2016 Elections: Can They Recover In 2018?

Ronald 74 Comments

The Democratic Party, which looked on the edge of becoming the dominant party in America, at least on the Presidential level, now is faced with the possibility of a long term status as the party that can win the coast lines and the majority of the popular vote for President, but still lose the Electoral College again and again, with twice in the past generation, 2000 and now 2016.

By all estimates, in the long run, whatever that means, the demographic changes in America will insure that the Democrats will eventually have a tremendous advantage, but for now, the situation is gloomy, as the Democrats only gained 6 House seats and 2 Senate seats, and the loss of Russ Feingold in Wisconsin and Evan Bayh in Indiana, when both were heavily favored, was startling.

So the job is to recruit a future generation of leadership on the state level as well as the national level, and unfortunately, the Democrats on the national level have just shot themselves in the foot, by electing once again the same old team (all in their mid 70s) of Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and James Clyburn to leadership of their party in the House of Representatives.

And picking an African American and first Muslim in Congress, Keith Ellison of Minnesota, as the Democratic National Chairman, which now seems inevitable with Howard Dean withdrawing from the race, is not exactly the greatest choice either.

So can the Democrats recover in 2018? They likely would gain some seats in the House of Representatives, but not control, and the Senate will be almost impossible not to lose seats, as 25 of 33 seats up for election are Democratic seats, so the future is gloomy, as the situation now seems.

The Mystery Of 2016: Why Hillary Clinton Has Low Public Opinion Rating, And Bill Clinton Continues To Rate High In Public Opinion!

Ronald 25 Comments

As the Democratic National Convention begins in Philadelphia, there is much turmoil and rancor over the revelation of Democratic National Committee emails, apparently hacked by Russian state supporters, to harm Hillary Clinton by her connection to now disgraced Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

There is no debate that Debbie has run the DNC poorly, and shown bias toward Bernie Sanders, and it is right that she is not participating in the activities of the convention. She also faces a fight in the primary against a Bernie Sanders supported candidate in the Florida primary on August 30.

Despite that, I have met Debbie a few times, and always thought she was a decent, kind, and competent person, but her handling of the Democratic National Committee activities have besmirched her reputation permanently in history, a tragic development.

But beyond this controversy, the mystery continues to arise. Why does Hillary Clinton have such low public opinion rating, while her husband, former President Bill Clinton, continues to rate high in public opinion, and always has?

Hillary Clinton is one of the most qualified nominees for President in all of American history, but she is not a good politician, in the sense that she has trouble arousing supporters, and is not, as she even admits, the expert communicator that her husband, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, are.

Clinton has made mistakes, certainly, but so have all Presidential nominees and all Presidents. But much of the attack on Hillary Clinton is manufactured by right wing conservative forces and Republican nominee Donald Trump.

And she is blamed for her husband’s misbehavior, but somehow, that does not affect the popularity of her husband, so this is inscrutable!

There, clearly, is a anti woman mentality among many men, and even a large percentage of women, both of whom seem to feel that a woman is not qualified to be President.

However, the belief is that once Bill Clinton speaks at the convention on Wednesday that he will be able to boost the candidacy of his wife, and that once he goes on the campaign trail in the next months, that he will help to elect his wife to the Presidency.

Bernie Sanders On The Road To Being The Ralph Nader Of 2000! He May Bring Us Donald Trump And A Right Wing Supreme Court!

Ronald 26 Comments

It looks as if Bernie Sanders is on the road to being the Ralph Nader of 2000.

In so doing, he may bring us Donald Trump in the White House, which would condemn him in history, as Nader brought us George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina!

Sanders has failed to win more than a few primaries, mostly winning unrepresentative caucuses; is more than three million popular votes behind Hillary Clinton; and will not have more pledged delegates than Clinton, but he now says he will fight to change “super delegates”, who have pledged to Hillary Clinton, to switch loyalties to him, which will not happen. He is not lifelong Democrat, but rather a Socialist who was allowed to join the Democratic Party, and now is, seemingly, out to harm them for his own ambitions!

But what it means is that we will have division, dissension, and turmoil at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, rather than unity. Already, Sanders has demanded, which will not happen, to remove Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Congresswoman from Florida as the DNC Chair, and also to replace former Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut as leaders of the Platform Committee at the convention.

Bernie now comes across as a bitter, nasty, crotchety old man who seems not to care about whether the progressive agenda wins, but only whether his own ego is satiated!

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

Ronald Leave a comment

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!

Democrats Make Major Blunder In Scheduling Saturday Evening Debates!

Ronald 4 Comments

Something is seriously wrong with the Democratic National Committee, under Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, in their decision to schedule two of the Presidential debates on Saturday evenings, when most people are not watching television, and particularly the debate scheduled for this evening right before Christmas!

It is a denial of common sense to do this, and will make many think the Democratic National Committee is favoring front runner Hillary Clinton over her two rivals, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.

And only permitting a small total of six debates altogether is also a blunder!

More exposure in debates is to be preferred, not less, but apparently, despite protests, the schedule is set, and undermines the Democratic ability to get their message out to the voters!

Philadelphia The Site Of The Democratic National Convention The Week of July 25, 2016!

Ronald Leave a comment

So the Democratic National Committee has chosen Philadelphia, the “City of Brotherly Love”, the city of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention, the city of Benjamin Franklin, to be the host for the Democratic National Convention, which will nominate the next Democratic nominee for President of the United States.

The convention will be held in the last week of July, the week after the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio.

So therefore, there will be little time for a “bump” in the polls for the GOP Presidential nominee, and an extra month for the official campaign, which will now start in August, rather than around Labor Day in September.

This author had predicted that Columbus, Ohio, would be the site, and concedes that this time, unlike Tampa and the Republicans in 2012, that he turned out to have predicted incorrectly. The reasoning was that Ohio was in play as a “swing” state, while Pennsylvania is not really such.

However, Philadelphia is a great choice, and the general term “City of Brotherly Love’ actually fits perfectly, as the Democrats are the party of equal rights for gays and lesbians, while the Republicans, with a very few exceptions of office holders, still defy and oppose such equality, including marriage, although it is clear that the Supreme Court is about to declare this June that gays and lesbians may marry everywhere in the United States!

Final Decision On Democratic National Convention Due: New York, Philadelphia, Or Columbus, Ohio?

Ronald Leave a comment

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, will be announcing sometime this month where the 2016 Democratic National Convention will be held in the summer of 2016.

The finalists are New York City, Philadelphia, and Columbus, Ohio.

Many might say having the convention in the number one city in America (New York City), or in the city representing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention (Philadelphia), would be the best choice.

However, realize that both New York State and Pennsylvania are strongly “blue” states in Presidential elections, and therefore, nothing electorally is gained by choosing either city.

On the other hand, selecting Columbus, Ohio, the capital city of the Buckeye State, is a strategically very smart move, particularly with the fact that the Republican National Convention is to be held in Cleveland.

Ohio is the ultimate swing state, having been with the winner every election since 1964, and it is, certainly, one of only five truly “swing states” up for contention.

The Democrats could win the Presidency without Ohio, but with the GOP in Ohio, and the strong possibility that either Governor John Kasich or Senator Rob Portman could be the Vice Presidential running mate for Jeb Bush or others, and that Kasich himself could run for President, it would be extremely smart and sensible to compete for Ohio in the convention situation, along with the Republicans in Cleveland.

So the Democrats should seriously make the decision to go for Columbus, and make Ohio a true rivalry for party support, and if Ohio went to the Democrats, it would clinch for sure the winning of the Presidency by any Presidential nominee, no matter who it was!

So my prediction is that the Democrats will see the reasoning suggested in this blog entry, and will choose Columbus, Ohio, over New York City and Philadelphia. We shall see how my prediction works out in the next month!

I remind my readers that I correctly predicted Tampa, Florida, as the convention site of the Republicans in 2012!

Three Rising Stars In The Democratic Party: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, And Julian And Joaquin Castro!

Ronald Leave a comment

As one looks ahead to the future beyond 2014, one can see some bright rising stars in the Democratic Party, who are seen as likely to move up in American politics beyond where they are right now in 2014.

One is Democratic National Chairwoman, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of South Florida, who has been speculated about as a future Speaker of the House, but is now considered a likely choice for the Democrats to challenge Republican Senator Marco Rubio in 2016, giving up her chance to accomplish her well known earlier goal. This would be a massive battle of two South Florida “giants” for the Senate seat of the third largest state in America!

Wasserman Schultz would be a “dynamite” figure in the US Senate, a younger version of Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, were she to be elected to the upper chamber.

But if not successful, Wasserman Schultz could be a cabinet member under the next Democratic President, whoever that might be, which is still a highly likely situation to have the Democrats retain the White House in 2016.

Additionally, the Castro Brothers of Texas, Julian and Joaquin, are definite rising stars, with the likelihood that Mayor Julian Castro of San Antonio, could be the Vice Presidential running mate of ANY Democratic Presidential nominee in 2016, being 42 years old by then. He is very impressive as the Mayor of the sixth largest city in America, and can assist in turning Texas “blue”, which is highly likely as the decade moves on.

Meanwhile, his identical twin brother, Joaquin, now a member of the House of Representatives, is seen as likely to challenge Senator Ted Cruz in 2018, and to have a good chance to defeat the highly controversial Senator. This would be the ultimate Latino vs Latino challenge, but with the reality that Mexican Americans in Texas and nationally far outweigh the percentage of Cuban Americans. so Castro being from a group that is about 17 times the size of Cuban Americans, such as Cruz and Marco Rubio, is not to be regarded as something that can be ignored.

So if fortune works out in a good way, we should have Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida and Vice President Julian Castro of Texas elected in 2016, and Senator Joaquin Castro of Texas elected in 2018. And we might see the demise of Senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas in 2016 and 2018 respectively!

Howard Dean’s Statement About Generational Differences Of Presidents We Elect Brings Up Interesting Point About 2016!

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Vermont Governor, 2004 Presidential competitor, and Democratic National Committee head Howard Dean was on MORNING JOE yesterday, and brought up an interesting point about generational differences of Presidents we elect to the Oval Office.

Dean said it is highly unlikely that we will see Hillary Clinton have no competition for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2016, because for the nation to go back a generation in birth from one President to the next is unusual—in this case to go back to a “Baby Boomer” born in the late 1940s after electing a President born in the early 1960s. Therefore, Dean states that he believed someone born closer to the birth year of Barack Obama would be more likely to be the nominee, a person such as Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley or New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as examples–with O’Malley one and a half years younger than Obama and Cuomo three and a half years older than Obama.

So Dean has brought up the age issue, just as Republicans have, with their numerous potential candidates in their 40s and early 50s–including Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul among others.

This statement by Dean caused this author to check out how often has America elected a President much younger than his predecessor, and has uncovered the following:

William Henry Harrison—nearly ten years older than Martin Van Buren
Zachary Taylor—eleven years older than James K. Polk
James Buchanan—thirteen and a half years older than Franklin Pierce
Ronald Reagan—thirteen and a half years older than Jimmy Carter

A few other Presidents have been a few years older than their predecessor, but these are the only four cases of “generational” differences of Presidents we elect, although not precisely a “generation”, which is described as twenty years.

If Hillary Clinton was elected, she would be nearly 14 years older than Barack Obama, more difference than even Buchanan or Reagan from their predecessors.

If Joe Biden was elected, he would be nearly 19 years older than Barack Obama, the greatest difference between two Presidents in American history, and literally a “generation”!

This is food for thought, and realize that Harrison and Taylor were elected for their war exploits as generals, and all the cases mentioned above were before the Civil War, more than a century and a half ago, with the one exception of Ronald Reagan.

The question is whether, and said in irony, is either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden another Ronald Reagan? Again, this is said with tongue in cheek by a writer who has never been a big fan of Ronald Reagan!

Virginia Republicans: Scandal, And Right Wing Extremism On Display

Ronald 3 Comments

The state of Virginia, the home of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, W H Harrison, Tyler, and Wilson is in political crisis as the state faces not only political scandal of its Governor, Bob McDonnell, but also of its gubernatorial candidate to replace McDonnell, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who makes McDonnell look “progressive” by comparison, due to his extreme right wing social views! This is not saying that McDonnell is less right wing, but less confrontational in his public statements than Cuccinelli!

McDonnell, who has Presidential ambitions, has been shown to have accepted major gifts from a corporation which does business with the Virginia state government, including large amounts of cash given to his wife and children. There are already calls for his resignation, and it seems likely that he will face criminal charges and the possibility of time in prison.

But Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli also has accepted gifts from the same corporation, although he denies any wrongdoing, just as much as McDonnell so declares! The fact of a denial means nothing, however, as that is standard for politicians of both parties who are accused of wrongdoing, and almost always are shown to be engaged in just that, wrongdoing!

Cuccinelli has also been extremely controversial with his anti gay, anti women, anti immigrant, anti science crusade, stronger in rhetoric and action than even Governor McDonnell!

This gubernatorial nominee has abused his power as Attorney General, and called for the criminalization of private sex acts between adults, along with doing everything he can to insure that ObamaCare is never instituted in the state of Virginia. He has also worked to intimidate all immigrants of Hispanic-Latino ancestry in Virginia. He has also campaigned against the promotion of environmental standards on global warming, declared war on science, and attempted to intimidate various state university faculty who promote such standards. And he is a leader in taking away the rights of women to their own reproductive lives!

To top it off, Cuccinelli’s running mate for Lieutenant Governor, an African American minister named E. W. Jackson, has made statements that make him seem even more extreme than Cuccinelli himself, Jackson has said that the Great Society programs of the 1960s under Lyndon B. Johnson were worse than slavery had been for African Americans! He also has declared that homosexuals and Planned Parenthood are worse than the Ku Klux Klan ever was, and that Barack Obama has Muslim tendencies!

These crazy lunatic statements have made the team of Cuccinelli and Jackson extremely right wing, and with the corruption surrounding both McDonnell and Cuccinelli as well, it has made Virginia a center of controversy and embarrassment that can only be ended by the hoped for victory of Democrat Terry McAuliffe, former head of the Democratic National Committee, who would be in the tradition of former Democratic Governors Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, who now grace the two Senate seats from Virginia!