Tag: Nomination

Trump By A Landslide!

There are some that feel that we should just accept the fact that Trump will win in 2024….I am not one of those….but that aside the landslide I am referring to is that on the GOP nomination….some think that part of the process is over….

When former President Trump confirmed on Sunday that he would be skipping this week’s Republican debate, he cited a new CBS News poll reaffirming that he has a big lead in the race. Trump was not exaggerating the point. His lead over the Republican challengers has only grown as his legal troubles have expanded:

  • Not a close second: Trump is at 62%, with Ron DeSantis in second at 16%.
  • The others: Everyone else is in single digits; Vivek Ramaswamy (7%), Mike Pence (5%), Tim Scott (3%), Nikki Haley (3%), Chris Christie (2%), Doug Burgum (1%), and Asa Hutchinson (1%).
  • Back off: A whopping 91% of respondents in the poll of likely GOP voters say the non-Trump candidates should not attack the former president in Wednesday’s debate and instead focus on making the case for themselves.
  • Belief: 77% say the best explanation of the most recent indictment of Trump—allegations that he attempted to illegally overturn election results in Georgia—is that it is “politically motivated.” Only 8% think the claim is true, and the rest think it’s a little bit of both.
  • Biden: Most GOP voters say Trump has the best chance to unseat President Biden. Trump at 61% is followed by DeSantis (35%), Scott (20%), Ramaswamy (18%), Haley (14%), and Pence (14%).
  • Not so fast: The Atlantic takes note of a different survey suggesting that Trump’s legal troubles might yet cost him support among Republican voters. The premise is that the standard way most polls ask the question leads to answers biased in Trump’s favor.

Predictions are dire for this country….but how can the GOP find a good candidate for the country?

New Hampshire’s Republican governor, Chris Sununu, is not running for president this year, but he has some blunt advice for most of the GOP candidates not named Donald Trump: Get ready to drop out soon. For instance, anyone who doesn’t qualify for the first two debates should exit the stage, he writes in a New York Timesessay. Ditto for anyone still polling in the single digits around Christmas. The governor, who opposes Trump’s reelection, says the former president is a lock to win the nomination if the field remains large. Specifically, Sununu says it must narrow to three or four candidates after Iowa and before his own state’s primary.

“Provided the field shrinks by Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Trump loses,” writes Sununu. “He will always have his die-hard base, but the majority is up for grabs. Candidates who seize on the opportunity and present a clear contrast to the former president will earn the votes.” As for all those national polls showing Trump with a seemingly insurmountable lead, Sununu calls them “meaningless” at this stage. “It’s a reflection of the national conversation, name ID, and who is top of mind—not where the momentum is headed.”

Read the governor’s full essay

Can Trump be put in his place?  Can the GOP really find an alternative to the hatred and bile of another Trump candidacy.

I think he can be beat but it will have to take someone stepping forward and showing some guts….is that possible?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Biden Nominates Another Hawk

I have watching and writing about the nominations within the Biden admin….so far I have seen nothing that would lead me to believe that our interventionist policies will NOT change.

He has tapped Samantha Power, a hawk, to run USAID…..

Joe Biden announced that he will nominate Samantha Power to head the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Power served as ambassador to the UN for President Obama from 2013 to 2017. Before that, she worked on Obama’s National Security Council, where she played an instrumental role in pushing for US intervention in Libya in 2011.

Power argued in favor of US intervention in Libya under the guise of protecting human rights and preventing genocide. She was joined in her crusade by then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and Susan Rice, who served as the UN ambassador at the time.

Reports from 2011 say the pressure from Power, Rice, and Clinton is what led Obama to intervene militarily in Libya, even though his other top advisors were against it. Then-Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates would later say that in a “51 to 49” decision, Obama decided to bomb Libya.

The US-NATO intervention in Libya that led to the brutal murder of former Libyan ruler Moammar Gaddafi was an absolute disaster. Destabilizing Libya turned the country into a haven for al-Qaeda-linked militants, resulted in targeted killings of black Africans, sparked a refugee crisis in North Africa, and even led to the creation of slave markets.

For her efforts in convincing Obama to destroy Libya, Power was promoted. As the US ambassador to the UN, Power advocated for US intervention in Syria and stood by as the Obama administration backed the Saudis in their brutal war against Yemen’s Houthis.

While Powers has since taken a public stance against the war in Yemen, she omitted her early role in supporting the vicious war from her memoir that was published in 2019. In the book, Power defended her decision to intervene in Libya and argued that more intervention in Syria could have prevented some of the war’s atrocities.

While it’s not exactly a national security position, Power will have a lot of influence on foreign policy from her future role as the head of USAID. The agency is often used to fund US regime change efforts. For example, in September 2019, USAID announced it would be providing $52 million to Juan Guaido, who the US recognizes as president of Venezuela, despite the fact that Nicolas Maduro holds the office. Earlier in 2019, the US supported Guaido in a failed coup attempt.

(antiwar.com)

So far I am unimpressed by the picks of Biden….but none of it was a surprise to me.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Biden’s State Department

Since I am a foreign policy geek and we have a new president it means I need to check out the secretaries of defense and state that Biden wants to nominate.

Biden has said that we need to return to the “table”….an interesting slogan but what does it mean…..

The president-elect has said repeatedly that his primary goal abroad is to put American back at “the head of the table” because “the world won’t organize itself.” But the shape of that table has changed profoundly. A global pandemic has laid bare the limits of globalization and multilateral diplomacy and accelerated the demise of the liberal international order that America created and that sustained its primacy; it has also exacerbated preexisting trends toward renewed geopolitical competition and heightened sensitivities about national sovereignty on issues from border security to the economy and health care. A powerful China and a declining yet still determined Russia have conspired successfully to oppose Pax Americana.

So how can Biden create a foreign policy that is both effective and designed to meet the new world realities he’ll confront? The new administration should focus on three objectives.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/19/joe-biden-foreign-policy-iran-china-438276

I have given my thoughts on Biden’s top choice for SecDef, Michele Flournoy…..https://lobotero.com/2020/11/19/will-michele-be-the-new-secdef/

Now I want to look at the top contender for SecState,

Joe Biden has apparently settled on his secretary of state nominee. As reported by outlets including the AP, CNN, the New York Times, and Bloomberg, sources say Biden will name Antony J. Blinken, a longtime aide and his closest foreign policy adviser. Blinken, 58, launched his career at the State Department while Bill Clinton was president; during Barack Obama’s administration, he served as deputy secretary of state and deputy national security adviser. Biden’s incoming chief of staff said Sunday that the president-elect will start announcing members of his cabinet Tuesday. He is expected to nominate Jake Sullivan, also a close aide, as national security adviser. (The AP explains why other top secretary of state contenders could have been “thorny” to get confirmed.)

The beat goes on for the war hawks…..

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Supreme Court Drama

The hearing for the newest nominee for the Supreme Court is being held as I type…..I also thought that a small idea of the theatrics might be amusing for my readers….(this may be the only post I do on this silly game)….

The day went something like this….

The actual questioning of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has begun on Capitol Hill. However, Barrett is following the tradition of nominees not answering questions about how they might rule on key issues—in this case, ObamaCare and abortion, notes Politico. “If I give off-the-cuff answers, then I would basically be a legal pundit,” she said. “I don’t think we want judges to be legal pundits. I think we want judges to approach cases thoughtfully with an open mind.” Some highlights:

  • No deals: Barrett insisted she didn’t discuss ObamaCare with President Trump or anyone in the White House. “Absolutely not,” Barrett said in response to a question from the GOP’s Charles Grassley, per the Washington Post. “I was never asked. And if I had been, that would have been a short conversation.” Democrats fear Barrett will help the court undo the Affordable Care Act. A key case is on the docket in November.
  • Abortion: After Democrat Dianne Feinstein asked Barrett her views on two landmark rulings establishing a woman’s right to an abortion (Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey), Barrett declined to offer her views of them, per the Hill. “If I express a view on a precedent one way or another, whether I say I love it or I hate it, it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a pending case.” Feinstein said it was “distressing” not to get a better answer. “I have no agenda to try to overrule Casey,” said Barrett. “I have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come.”
  • Abortion, II: Barrett declined to say whether she agreed with mentor Antonin Scalia that Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided. “I don’t think that anybody should assume that just because Justice Scalia decided a decision a certain way that I would, too,” she said. “I can’t pre-commit or say, ‘Yes, I’m going in with some agenda,'” Barrett added. “I have no agenda.”
  • More on agenda: The AP highlights this quote: “Judges can’t just wake up one day and say I have an agenda, I like guns, I hate guns, I like abortion, I hate abortion and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world.”
  • Election: Barrett declined to say whether she would recuse herself from any election-related case involving Trump, reports the Hill. Democrat Patrick Leahy pressed her on the issue, saying recusal is necessary “where impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” But Barrett wouldn’t go there: “It always happens after consultation with the full court, so I can’t offer an opinion on recusal without short-circuiting that entire process.”

The Dems are still playing to the camera….they do not have the votes to block this silly pathetic endeavor so their acting is moot.

 Yet Another topic that I have strong opinions about……https://lobotero.com/2020/09/23/dems-need-to-buck-up/

Image

Even her colleagues think she should step back…..

October 10, 2020

Dear Judge Barrett,

We write to you as fellow faculty members at the University of Notre Dame.

We congratulate you on your nomination to the United States Supreme Court. An appointment to the Court is the crowning achievement of a legal career and speaks to the commitments you have made throughout your life. And while we are not pundits, from what we read your confirmation is all but assured.

An Open Letter to Judge Amy Coney Barrett From Your Notre Dame Colleagues

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The Confirmation Wars

When Judge Ginsberg missed a day of court and the media and the president was preparing for her to leave the court I thought about the confirmation wars and had to open up about the situation.

Just before the midterms we had a knock down and dragged out confirmation process for a new judge for SCOTUS….surely you remember the name Kavanaugh, right?

It was Dem vs Repub and that is where this silliness is at now….the judgeship is a political appointment with all the trappings of a campaign with ads and all……and then Ginsburg, RBG, missed a day from the court and the media and right wing pundits have her about to retire and even die…..they so badly want our president old what-his-name to put another radical conserv on the court meaning the country will be f*cked for a generation maybe longer……

A judge should not be picked based on their politics….their record of decisions means less than their stands on certain social issues….we can thank the dullards in the Federalist Society et al for this bastardization of the judicial process.

This needs to end and end now…..our process is turning into a joke and that is not what the Founders had in mind…….we need to end the confirmation wars for good.

With the courts, perception is just as important as reality. The judiciary relies on the public’s faith in its role as a fair arbiter of disputes — without that legitimacy, why would citizens or officials feel obliged to follow court orders?

If one is concerned about the Supreme Court as an institution that can safeguard against constitutional overreach by the other two branches, the bare-knuckles politicking over recent Supreme Court nominees is incredibly shortsighted.

As this most recent (and awful) confirmation saga finally comes to its end, one unsettling consequence surfaces: The legitimacy of the Supreme Court is undermined by the U.S. Senate and its current confirmation process.

Before we try to claw our way out, let’s take a moment to see how we got here. Spoiler alert: No one has clean hands.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/410897-how-do-we-end-the-cycle-of-confirmation-wars

Of course there will be people that agree but then the process will NOT change any time soon…….agreement in principle is what we Americans do but actual change is not something we are capable of doing at any time.

The media is still pushing the story that RBG is getting closer to retirement…..it is pathetic how blatant the MSM is being about RBG…..

SCOTUS Failures

As we wait for the Congress to return after Labor Day and get to work (sound raucous laughter)…….

Oh goody….Our Dear Leader gets to nominate another ankle grabbing conserv for SCOTUS….but over the years there have been a few unsuccessful attempts to become a judge on the highest court of the land…..(side note:  It use to be a noble institution now it is nothing more than the politicians and business controlling the nation through rulings)

Most of us old farts remember Bork and that woman that GW Bush, Rosemary “something”, put up and then withdrew…..but how far back does this sort of thing go back in our nation’s history?

Surprise…..Surprise….it goes as far back as the very beginning….

Since it was established in 1789, presidents have nominated 162 people to the Supreme Court, but only 125 have been confirmed. Turns out, there’s a long history of fights over who gets on the bench, Ayers says.

“As you know, the two-party system is in turmoil. People … simply aren’t going to give the other guys a chance to make something,” he says. “And of course, we all know this is such outsize importance because it’s for life. And so, as ugly as other fights are, there’s nothing quite like a Supreme Court justice fight.”

http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/07/05/failed-supreme-court-nominations-history

There is the rub…..the nomination is more about ideology than it is independence of the Judiciary……it is who gets to do what…..the nation is seldom in the equation.

The fight for the confirmation is nothing new and the history of SCOTUS shows us that people failing to meet the requirements of the nomination process is nothing new.

Class dismissed!

Turn The Page!

Rand Paul: It’s All Show!

Mike Pompeo was narrowly approved by the Senate in a close vote…it was Rand Paul that put him over and after Paul had strolled out and told the media that he was not gonna be a poster child for Trump and his vote could not be counted on……and then as usual he voted affirmative and joined the Trump-ites…..

CIA Director Mike Pompeo is on track to become the next Secretary of State after the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to approve him, 11-9. All Republicans voted in favor, and Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) voted “present.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) was the real deciding vote, having switched sides after opposing Pompeo. Democratic Sen. Coons has also initially voted no, but changed to present as a courtesy because Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) was not present, and voted by proxy. Isakson’s vote would’ve made it 11-10, but only 10-10 among present voters, which would’ve forced Iskason to drive back.

Paul’s change was a surprise to almost everyone.

(antiwar.com)

The media tells us that this move by Paul unexpected after his diatribe against the Trump nominee…..that is pure crap!

Paul has done this on numerous occasions…he comes out in opposition and then when the vote is taken he follows the lead of the rest of the GOP.

Paul is all show….he is just another GOP toady….this was not his first time to pretend to be a maverick……the problem is the media falls for his crap every time and he gets his mug on the TV screen as some sort of maverick….that he is not and will never be…a maverick.

Just keep in mind if all goes to crap and we waltz into another war then we can point the finger at the coward Rand Paul for being all smoke and NO fire…..

How Neocons Helped Create The Bogey Man

2016 has become the weirdest election in many years….we had a run at the Dem nomination by a “socialist” and we have the most disliked Dem nominee ever and now we have a Trump as the GOP nominee…..

Many are asking just how is it possible that a person with so little conserv credentials could have made through the primary process and become the GOP nominee…..for that I have no answer….I could speculate….but why there is enough of that to go around……

A great question and I may have found the answer that so many are searching for to explain this phenom…..

Prominent neoconservatives, led by Bill Kristol, have played leading roles in trying to block Trump’s nomination or repeal it somehow. They’ve lined up fellow-neocons to sign letters opposing his election and/or declining to serve under him should he actually make it to the White House. Some, albeit a relatively small minority so far, have gone so far as to publicly endorse Hillary for president, if only as the lesser evil. Among the most outspoken in the latter group are Bob Kagan, Max Boot, Bret Stephens, and Eliot Cohen. Indeed, it’s very difficult to find a neocon at the moment who publicly supports the Republican candidate.

As I wrote previously, the reasons are many: fear of “America First” isolationism and all it implies for U.S. foreign policy and alliances; the bromance with Putin; the crudest kinds of nativism, racism, and misogyny expressed at his rallies (and the fear that anti-Semitism can’t be far behind); authoritarian tendencies (to say the least); shocking ignorance; lack of self-restraint; hyper-narcissism—all valid points with which I can’t find much fault.

Source: How Neocons Helped Create Trump « LobeLog

So if you want to know who made this all possible then look NO Further than your own party….

Neocons helped create candidate Trump and now they are running scared…..I guess there is some truth in the old saying…”careful what you wish for….you might get it”……

Kasich: King Maker?

Believe it or not there are 4 GOP candidates…..we do not hear much about Kasich in the media….I mean a candidate that is NOT running anymore has more delegates than Kasich…that would be Rubio who has since gone the way of the do-do.

All the talk these days in the media is that it is looking like a contested GOP convention in Cleveland….the possibility is that none of the remaining candidates will have the prescribed amount of delegates to get the nomination on the first vote……and the media is jerking off with glee….there could be a convention that is NOT as boring as watching paint dry.

Political junkies and history buffs have spent weeks dreaming about the unlikeliest possible scenarios that could determine the 2016 election: contested conventions, third-party bids, a cross-party ticket. But here’s one prospect they probably haven’t thought of: There’s a legally sound scenario in which John Kasich could single-handedly pick the next U.S. president. And it’s all thanks to a federal law that’s been on the books since 1887.

It’s a far-fetched outcome, to be sure, but here’s how that could happen—and why Congress should consider revising that 130-year-old law.

Source: 2016: The 130-Year-Old Law That Could Determine Our Next President – POLITICO Magazine

Wonder what kind of deal he will make for his delegates?

What do you guys think?

Is Hillary’s Nomination ‘Political Suicide’ for Dems?

The news is that Clinton has a large lead in delegates…..but that lead is from those cowards that are called “Super Delegates”…….without those people then the race for the Dem nomination is close……

With Bernie’s popularity could the nomination of Hillary Clinton be a suicidal act on the part of the Dems?

I read an interesting take on the possibility of a Clinton/Trump mash-up that appears to be in the winds of the election……

In a well-reasoned feature article, and again during the Feb. 29 airing of the BradCast,* Nathan J. Robinson, editor of Current Affairs, forcefully argues that a Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump “matchup is highly likely to be an unmitigated disaster.”

Every one of Clinton’s (considerable) weaknesses plays to every one of Trump’s strengths, whereas every one of Trump’s (few) weaknesses plays to every one of Sanders’s strengths. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, running Clinton against Trump is a disastrous, suicidal proposition.

Source: Is Hillary’s Nomination ‘Political Suicide’ for Dems? – LA Progressive

Personally, I cannot think of a worse match-up for the American people……can you?