Electoral College

Virginia State Leaders All Democrats For First Time Since 1969 State Election: Harbinger Of Future In South!

Ronald 6 Comments

It is now official. Virginia has the first all “blue” state government, with the top three state officials–Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General being Democrats–since the 1969 state election, 34 years ago!

And the state has gone Democratic twice for Barack Obama, and its two US Senators are Democrats.

With the northern Virginia suburbs going Democratic, and the seat of Republican Congressman Frank Wolf, a moderate Republican now open in 2014, due to the retirement of Wolf after 34 years, it is clear that Virginia is becoming more clearly “blue”, a harbinger for the South, as the Hispanic-Latino population continues to grow.

Over the next few years, we will see more of this growing trend toward “blue” in the South, with Georgia next, and soon after Texas, and once that happens, the chances of the Republican Party winning Presidential elections, the ability to win the Electoral College, will be a dim memory, particularly with the growing right wing trend of the GOP.

The Republican Party is committing suicide before our eyes, and if the Tea Party succeeds in defeating sitting traditional conservative Republicans in primaries in 2014, the acceleration toward “blue” will multiply!

PS A correction needs to be made. All three state officials plus the two US Senators are Democrats for first time since 1969, but in 1989 the Democrats won all three statewide elections for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General, and had one Senator (Chuck Robb), while the other Senator was John Warner, a Republican. Just wish to clarify this matter and I thank Engineer of Knowledge for making me aware of the need to modify this entry!

The Case For A New Generation Of Democrats For The Presidential Election Of 2016!

Ronald 7 Comments

As the Presidential race begins, and it has started already, like it or not, it is clear that Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 in 2016, and Joe Biden, who will be 74 in 2016, are the frontrunners, and that Hillary is using up most of the oxygen in the room, way ahead of Biden in polls, with other potential Democratic candidates in single digits.

But despite the confidence and optimism about Hillary and even Joe as a backup, there is a growing case for the argument that the Democratic Party should bypass both Hillary and Joe, no matter how much one may love or admire either of them, and go for a new generation of Democrats, as was done in 1960 with John F. Kennedy, in 1976 with Jimmy Carter, in 1992 with Bill Clinton, and 2008 with Barack Obama!

All of these successful Democratic Presidential winners were young–43, 52, 46, and 47 respectively at the time of the inauguration. All were younger than their GOP opponents, although Richard Nixon was only four years older, but represented a continuation of Dwight D. Eisenhower, our oldest President at the time when he retired in 1961!

But Jimmy Carter was eleven years younger than Gerald Ford; Bill Clinton 22 years younger than George H. W. Bush; and Barack Obama 25 years younger than John McCain!

The fact is ONLY three Presidents were inaugurated at age 65 or older—William Henry Harrison at age 68 and dying a month later; James Buchanan at age 65 but only 50 days short of age 66, and rated by many historians the worst President in American history; and Ronald Reagan, inaugurated at just weeks before his 70th and 74th birthday, and judged by many to have deteriorated mentally, with early Alzheimers in his second term of office!

And we have seen Bob Dole defeated at age 73 in 1996; John McCain defeated at age 72 in 2008; and Mitt Romney, defeated at age 65 inn 2012, but also about 50 days short of age 66 if he had been inaugurated, the same exact age as Buchanan was when he won in 1856!

Meanwhile, the Republican Party future is clearly in the hands of young politicians, including Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and others, with these candidates being mostly in their 40s and 50s, and all younger than Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden!

Historically, in most elections, the younger candidate wins, and the party of the President usually does not do well if it utilizes someone connected with the administration leaving office, no matter what level of popularity reigns when that President leaves office, as witness:

Richard Nixon lost after Eisenhower
Hubert Humphrey lost after Lyndon B. Johnson
Gerald Ford lost after Richard Nixon
Walter Mondale lost after Jimmy Carter
Al Gore lost after Bill Clinton

If Hilary Clinton runs, she represents Obama’s foreign policy record, for good or for bad, and also brings back the good and the bad of the Presidency of her husband, Bill Clinton.

If Joe Biden runs, he represents what happens to a Vice President under a President, that the negatives of that President harm the Vice President, as with Nixon, Humphrey, Ford, Mondale, and Gore.

Only George H. W, Bush was able to overcome this hex, and succeed Ronald Reagan in 1988, although then losing reelection in 1992, the greatest percentage loss of any President in American history, except William Howard Taft in 1912!

It is reality that Democrats will be heavily favored in the Electoral College in 2016, no matter who runs, but it would be easier for a “New”, younger Democrat to be the Presidential nominee, such as Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo, KIrsten Gilllibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, Mark Warner, John Hickenlooper, or Elizabeth Warren, all of whom are much younger than Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, with the exception of Warren, who would be 67 in 2016, which makes her a less ideal candidate based upon age!

It is important for Democrats to think carefully before they decide for a continuation of the Obama Presidency through Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, as nominating someone younger and separated from the Obama Administration would be preferable, and easier for the grueling campaign ahead!

Ted Cruz Repudiates His Canadian Citizenship In Ambition To Be President!

Ronald 7 Comments

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, the bull in the China shop in the Republican Party, who has grand ambitions to be President of the United States, has taken quick action to trash his Canadian heritage, having been born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada in December 1970.

While technically a citizen of both Canada and the US, due to his mother’s American citizenship, Cruz has now declared that he has no interest in remaining a dual citizen, because he knows that could cause him grief as he seeks to take over the Republican Party. He has already made enemies in the GOP establishment with his vicious attacks on other Republican Senators, as well as the opposition Democrats, the news media, and higher education, including his Harvard Law School background, calling the faculty there a bunch of Marxists, reminding us of Senator Joseph McCarthy, who he, ironically, greatly resembles in appearance, demeanor, and behavior!

Cruz represents the calling card of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain and other malcontents,who wants to take the Republican Party to the extreme far Right, and will take no prisoners!

It is clear by his action on his Canadian citizenship that Cruz is running for President without announcing it this early, and that he will do anything and everything to destroy any GOP opponent, and at this point, his key rival seems to be Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the son of former Congressman Ron Paul, who inherits the allegiance of many young people who see the father as a god like figure with his libertarian beliefs.

Both Paul and Cruz have the allegiance of the Tea Party Movement, but Cruz cannot be called a libertarian, and the holy war that will ensue between the two will, at this point, likely favor Cruz over Paul.

So at this point, it seems a good bet to believe that Cruz will overcome Paul and also, his fellow Cuban, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, and that he will be the Republican Presidential nominee in 2016, at age 45.

His candidacy will draw a lot of attention and controversy, and Cruz will not care how many enemies he makes on his road to being the opponent of Hillary Clinton, his most likely opponent, or any other Democrat who might emerge, including Joe Biden.

And when one looks at the Electoral College math, it is clear that Ted Cruz is likely to be the GOP Presidential nominee, but his chances of becoming our 45th President are next to zero, and that Clinton, Biden, or whoever the Democratic nominee in 2016 is, will win a landslide victory, greater in electoral votes than Barack Obama in 2012!

And part of that great Democratic victory in 2016 will likely include Texas, as the state is moving toward “Blue” status, and it is ironic that Cruz, easily elected in Texas in 2012, will help create the Democratic majority by his personality, confrontational attitude, and refusal to understand that if one insults Mexican Americans, woman, African Americans, labor supporters, environmentalists, and gays, there is no way that his party can ever win back the White House!

So after a smashing defeat, Cruz will be history as a loser, and the GOP will finally, if it has any common sense, return to the moderate mainstream center, or else it will finally be in the dustbins of history after 2016!

The Death Of Vice Presidents In Office, And Vice Presidential Resignations

Ronald Leave a comment

America has seen 47 Vice Presidents, all a heartbeat away from the Presidency, and nine of them—John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Chester Alan Arthur, Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Gerald Ford—have succeeded to the Presidency during their term, and the fifth through eighth of these nine being, subsequently, elected to the Presidency.

What has not been investigated, studied, or thought about much, is the record of Vice Presidents dying in office, since most Vice Presidents have been in the shadows, relatively unknown and forgotten.

But when one investigates the issue of the death of Vice Presidents in office, one discovers that a total of seven Vice Presidents have died in office, beginning in 1812 and finishing precisely one century later in 1912. So no Vice President has died in office for the past hundred years.

The list of Vice Presidents who died in office, and the President they served under follows:

1812—George Clinton under James Madison
1814—Elbridge Gerry under James Madison
1853—William King under Franklin Pierce
1875—Henry Wilson under Ulysses S. Grant
1885—Thomas Hendricks under Grover Cleveland
1899—Garret Hobart under William McKinley
1912—James Sherman under William Howard Taft

The most interesting case is Hobart, who, if he had not died, likely would have run with McKinley in 1900, and succeeded him in the Presidency in 1901, instead of the very famous and influential Theodore Roosevelt!

Also notable is that both King and Hendricks died in the first year of the Presidential term, leaving no Vice President to succeed for the remainder of the term, with Gerry dying in the second year of the Presidential term, and and Wilson and Hobart in the third year of the Presidential term. Only Clinton and Sherman died in the last full year of the Presidential term, with Sherman dying just weeks before the election defeat of Taft, and his name being replaced on the Electoral College ballot by Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler, for the measly eight electoral votes of Utah and Vermont, which Taft won, as the worst defeated President running for another term in American history!

Also of interest is that only Madison lost both of his Vice Presidents in office!

So this is the record of Vice Presidents who died in office, with also mention to be made that John C. Calhoun and Spiro Agnew are the only Vice Presidents to resign from the Vice Presidency, in 1832 and 1973, during the administrations of Andrew Jackson and Richard Nixon!

The Future Democratic Party Majority On The US Supreme Court

Ronald 3 Comments

When one looks at the Supreme Court in recent decades, it is clear that it has been a conservative Supreme Court, dominated by Republican appointments, and it has shown in such decisions as the Citizens United Case of 2010, and the partial repeal of the Voting Rights Act in 2013, along with numerous other such cases tilted to the right side of the political spectrum.

So for progressives and Democrats, it has been a difficult time, wondering how the Supreme Court can be returned to the glorious era of the Warren Court and Burger Court from 1953-1986.

But there is the reality that the Supreme Court’s future for the Democratic Party and progressivism is very bright over the next decade, assuming what seems highly likely, that Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or some other Democratic Presidential nominee will have the electoral college advantage for 2016, and likely for the following 2020 Presidential election.

If indeed the Democrats keep the White House beyond 2016, time and age will turn the Court into a majority Democratic Party appointed Court for sure!

History tells us this fact: If a party keeps control of the White House for an extended period of time, the Court becomes more than ever reflective of that political party.

So, for example, from 1933-1953, we had 20 years of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman in the White House, and a total of 13 Supreme Court appointments, all by these two Democratic Presidents, helping to shape the future Court, with a few “liberal” appointments by Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Earl Warren and William Brennan), insuring a continuation of that trend.

But it can be said that from 1953-2013, sixty years of history, the Republicans held the White House for a total of 36 years to the Democrats’ total of 24 years.

In those 60 years, the Republican Presidents made 18 appointments to the Supreme Court, to the Democratic total of just 8 appointments, more than a 2-1 majority. While Republican appointments included Warren, Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and David Souter, all quite liberal appointments, even so it still meant that 12 Republican appointments were quite conservative or VERY conservative, so the Supreme Court represents a strongly Republican flavor.

But now, we have four aging Supreme Court Justices–Ruth Bader Ginsberg (80 this year), Antonin Scalia (77 this year), Anthony Kennedy (77 this year), and Stephen Breyer (75 this year), and to believe that by 2020, that any or all of these members of the Court will be still serving, seems quite unreasonable, as they would be ranging between 82 and 87 by the year 2020!

And Justice Clarence Thomas, although claiming he will stay on the Court for 43 years, until age 86, would be 72 in 2020, and Samuel Alito would 70 in 2020.

No one is saying that either Thomas or Alito will have left the Court, but if the four elderly Justices have left, they would all be Democratic Party appointments if the Democrats keep the White House, highly likely, and that would mean SIX of the nine members of the Court would be Democratic appointments, including Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Only Thomas, Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts would be Republican appointments in the year 2020 under this scenario!

So, for Democrats and Progressives, there is hope for a very different Court over the next decade and beyond!

Defunding ObamaCare Demonstrating Cracks In Republican Party And Its Final Demise!

Ronald 25 Comments

It looks more than ever that a full scale civil war is erupting in the Republican Party in Congress, with 60 Tea Party radicals in the House and 12 Senators joining together to create a new budget and financial crisis with President Obama and the Democrats, unless defunding of ObamaCare is accomplished, but facing vehement opposition from the majority of Republicans in the Senate, and leaving Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, trying to avoid the crossfire and save his own seat in next year’s midterm elections!

The Tea Party is a bunch of anarchistic lunatics, and prominent Senators, including Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Marco Rubio of Florida, by allowing themselves to associate with this extremist group, are setting up. not only a political donnybrook among their own competing desires to be the GOP Presidential nominee, but insuring a conflict of massive proportions with “Establishment” Republicans, and even, fellow conservatives, who see what they are attempting to do to destroy funding of ObamaCare as suicidal, giving the Democrats a fantastic platform which could help to wipe out the Republican majority House of Representatives, and any chance of the GOP to gain six seats and control of the US Senate!

Among the Republicans who have denounced any move on defunding ObamaCare, while not agreeing with the program, are:

Tom Coburn of Oklahoma
Ron Johnson of Wisconsin
John McCain of Arizona
Roy Blunt of Missouri
Richard Burr of North Carolina

Mitch McConnell is trying to stay out of the crossfire, and so is Speaker of the House John Boehner, who is facing pressure from Michele Bachmann and other Tea Party House members.

The more rational Republicans listed above, while certainly strong conservatives, see the GOP being portrayed as reckless and being run by the inmates of an insane asylum, if they were to create a new fiscal crisis, at a time when they desperately want to have the possibility of Republican control of both houses!

Can one just imagine now what it will be like when the ambitious Tea Party Presidential seekers compete against each other, and face the Establishment types in the caucuses, primaries, and national convention three years from now?

It will be great entertainment, great political theater, and we will all be able to watch and witness the disintegration, the dissolution, the crumbling, and the destruction of a once great political party, insuring what will happen anyway, due to the Electoral College math—the election of a Democratic President and a stronger Democratic Party in the future!

The Republican Party is fighting against demographic change and the tides of history, and they are insuring their vanishing from American politics if they continue their destructive path, which seems like an ongoing tornado that cannot be stopped! They MUST stop listening to FOX News Channel and conservative talk show hosts, who have no concern about the future, other than their own financial gains and notoriety!

Presidents Who Could Have Had Third Terms In Office

Ronald 3 Comments

Anyone who studies American history knows that our only President who had more than two terms (eight years) in office was Franklin D. Roosevelt, who actually was elected four times, and served a total of 12 years and 39 days before dying in office in 1945.

But there were others who could have had more than eight years in office, were it not because of their own decision not to seek another term, or due to constitutional limitations via the 22nd Amendment!

These potential cases of Presidents who could have had more than eight years in office include:

Andrew Jackson (1829-1837), who would have won a third term had he chosen to run, but instead his Vice President, Martin Van Buren, ran and won the Presidency.

Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909), who served seven and a half years after succeeding William McKinley six months into his second term, and then chose not to run in 1908, backing William Howard Taft who won, and then challenging Taft in 1912, on a third party line (Progressive Party), but lost to him. Despite the loss, TR won six states and 88 electoral votes, the best third party performance in American history.

Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929), who served five and a half years in the Presidency, after succeeding Warren G. Harding after two and a half years in office, and decided not to run in 1928, and instead, we saw Herbert Hoover win the Presidency.

These three Presidents mentioned above were popular enough to have won another term, and in each case, would have ended up serving more than eight years in office, as FDR did!

And then there are four Presidents since the 22nd Amendment limitation of two terms or ten years in office if succeeding to the Presidency with less than two years left of the term when they became President, all of whom could have been elected to another term, had there been no such limit!

Dwight D. Eisenhower could have won and run a third term in 1960, as could Ronald Reagan in 1988, and Bill Clinton in 2000, while Lyndon B. Johnson, had he not dropped out in 1968, likely would have beaten Richard Nixon, since his Vice President, Hubert Humphrey, came close to doing so, and did not have the fact of being President to help him win the election!

It is interesting that in all cases mentioned except three—Eisenhower, Johnson, and Clinton–the party of the President who did not run for reelection won the election. Eisenhower saw Richard Nixon lose a close election, despite much evidence of a fixed result for John F. Kennedy in 1960, and Johnson saw Humphrey lose to Nixon in another close election, where LBJ would likely have turned the tide! And Al Gore lost in 2000, despite a popular vote majority, due to the intervention of the Supreme Court in 2000, giving the Presidency to George W. Bush!

So instead of one President with 12 years and 39 days in the Presidency, we could have had, additionally, Andrew Jackson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton with 12 years in office; Theodore Roosevelt with 11 and a half years in office; and Calvin Coolidge with nine and a half years in office and Lyndon B. Johnson with nine years and two months in office!

And Martin Van Buren, William Howard Taft, Herbert Hoover, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush might never have been President if the Presidents before had sought or been able to seek a third term in the Presidency!

PS Another thought that has come to me, belatedly, is that Grover Cleveland (1885-1889, 1893-1897), the only President with two nonconsecutive terms, actually won the popular vote in 1888, but lost in the Electoral College. Had the result been different, Cleveland, in theory, might have run in 1892, anyway, and could have been a three term President, and Benjamin Harrison would never have been President!

The Beginnings Of The Republican Field For The Presidency In 2016 Start To Emerge: More Circus Like Than 2012!

Ronald 11 Comments

Anyone who is clear headed knows that the GOP Presidential field of 2012 was a circus, with such horrible, embarrassing candidates as Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, and Newt Gingrich, all having the effect of making Mitt Romney the LEAST horrible candidate for the White House!

But already, in July 2013, we can see the likely Republican field for the Presidency in 2016 emerging, and if anything, it is more circus like than 2012!

It begins with the two “Ricks”, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry, both true embarrassments to themselves and to others, but both believing that God is behind them, and that they will emerge as the next President of the United States, despite the reality that they both represent regressive, mean spirited, and reactionary views out of tune with the changing American electorate!

Then, there are the following potential candidates, all of whom have major flaws and shortcomings that insure they will have a rough time becoming the nominee of the Republican Party for President:

Ted Cruz
Rand Paul
John Thune
Paul Ryan
Scott Walker
Bob McDonnell
John Kasich
Bobby Jindal

Then, there are the potential candidates who would have some appeal to the mainstream, but likely will self destruct due to their catering to the Tea Party Movement, or their refusal to do just that, including:

Marco Rubio
Jeb Bush
Chris Christie
Jon Huntsman

Also, do not dismiss the concept of a Senator Liz Cheney, daughter of the former Vice President, running for President if she wins the Wyoming Senate seat coming up in 2014!

But in the end, the Republican battle for the Presidency is a lost cause, as it is clear that Hillary Clinton, or any other Democrat, will have the Electoral College edge for the Presidency, along with the popular vote edge in a nation moving away on a long term basis from the Right Wing message that the Republican Party seems bent on perpetuating, at its own destruction!

Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill Endorses Hillary Clinton For President, Even Though Hillary Has Not Announced!

Ronald 9 Comments

Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill has startled many observers by coming out today for Hillary Clinton for President, the earliest endorsement of a Presidential candidate, long before she even announces her intentions for the White House!

Interestingly, six years ago, McCaskill was one of the first public figures to come out for Barack Obama for President, angering Bill and Hillary Clinton.

McCaskill, herself fortunate to have retained her seat, due to a moronic Republican opponent, Todd Akin, is a moderate Democrat, and despite the fact that her state did not back Barack Obama in either 2008 (although close) and 2012 (by a big margin), Missouri did back Bill Clinton twice, and this could be a step toward insuring that Hillary Clinton, if she runs, could count on Missouri, further insuring a massive victory in the Electoral College over any Republican Presidential nominee in 2016!

The Coming Battle For The GOP Presidential Nomination: Marco Rubio Vs. Ted Cruz, With Rand Paul As Wild Card!

Ronald 86 Comments

It is becoming increasingly clear that the battle for the GOP Presidential nomination in 2016 is going to be between Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, with Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky being a “wild card”!

The possibility of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, or Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan to be the nominee seems very distant.

So it will be two Hispanic (Cuban) Senators battling one another, one trying to work with Democrats on an immigration reform bill, and the other on the warpath against all Democrats, as well as Rubio himself, unwilling to make any deals or promote any cooperation with the “enemy” And hoping to benefit from the battle between Rubio and Cruz is Rand Paul, who with his libertarian bent, will have a major problem attracting many conservatives, including the neoconservatives and the Establishment Republicans of Wall Street.

In the end, it will not matter, as no Republican can overcome the Electoral College advantage of the Democrats, as outlined yesterday in a blog entry.

And the concept that Cuban American Senators, who represent three and a half percent of Hispanics and Latinos, will be able to convince large numbers of Mexican Americans, who are 65 percent of all those with Spanish heritage, to vote Republican, is laughable.

So it will be an interesting sideshow, the battle among Rubio, Cruz and Paul, but at the end, we are likely to have Hillary Clinton as our next President!