Posts Tagged ‘Michigan’

Trump Wins MI, MS, and Hawaii. Why? “I’m a Unifier.” No Brag. Just Fact?

March 9, 2016

Fliped-Off-600-LALast night, American Entrepreneur and Businessman, Donald J. Trump, won 3 out of the 4 Republican Primaries by securing victories in Michigan, Mississippi, and Hawaii. Senator Ted Cruz won in Idaho, with John Kasich and Marco Rubio being shut out.

Per usual, Trump was exuberant following his victories.

Realclearpolitics.com reports that

At a press conference held after his victories in the Michigan and Mississippi Republican presidential primaries, Donald Trump called on the Republican party to come together and unify behind him.

“Given your statement to Major [Garrett] about how easy it would be to beat Hillary Clinton do you agree you’re going to need to get mainstream Republican politicians, the establishment as it has been labeled behind you? And if so, what do you say to them tonight, given so many are pouring their money in to trying to beat you?” FOX News’ Campaign Carl Cameron asked Trump.

“I say let’s come together folks,” Trump said Tuesday night. “We’re going to win. I say let’s come together. Carl, the answer is not 100 percent but largely I would say yes. Some people you are just not going to get along with. It’s okay.”

“I am a unifier,” Trump said in Jupiter, Florida tonight. “I unify. You look at all of the things I built all over the world. I’m a unifier. I get along with people. I have great relationships. I even start getting along with you, right? Campaign Carl. But, no, I get along with people. And I really say this, Carl, I think it’s time to unify.”

CARL CAMERON, FOX NEWS: Given your statement to Major [Garrett] about how easy it would be to beat Hillary Clinton do you agree you’re going to need to get mainstream Republican politicians, the establishment as it has been labeled behind you? And if so, what do you say to them tonight, given so many are pouring their money in to trying to beat you?

DONALD TRUMP: I say let’s come together folks. We’re going to win. I say let’s come together. Carl, the answer is not 100 percent but largely I would say yes. Some people you are just not going to get along with. It’s okay.

But largely I would like to do that and believe it or not, I am a unifier. I unify. You look at all of the things I built all over the world. I’m a unifier. I get along with people. I have great relations. I even start getting along with you, right? Campaign Carl. But, no, I get along with people. And I really say this, Carl, I think it’s time to unify.

We have something special going on in the Republican party. And, unfortunately, the people in the party, they call them the elites or they call them whatever they call them. But those are the people that don’t respect it yet. We have millions and millions of people, I’ve discussed it before. We have millions and millions of people coming up and voting, largely for me.

It’s a record. It has never happened before. In 100 years what is happening now to the Republican party has never happened before.

Now, before you dismiss Trump’s claim to be a unifier, look at what he is accomplishing and how it is happening.

  1. In order to be an effective President, you have to build a Coalition. The most effective President in my lifetime did.

On July 27. 2012. John Heubush, Executive Director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, wrote the following op ed for The Daily Caller about the succerss of Ronald Reagan’s Presidency:

…How in the world did Reagan do it? Experience.

Matching wits with Jack Warner (of Warner Brothers) as head of the actors’ union and Jesse Unruh (speaker of the California State Assembly) as governor taught Reagan to come to the bargaining table prepared. “I’d learned while negotiating union contracts,” Reagan wrote, “that you seldom get everything you ask for.” (Years later, the press asked him about negotiating with Gorbachev. “It was easier than dealing with Jack Warner,” Reagan shot back.)

Although the Democrats were in a tough position after the Carter years, their big trump card was that nothing would get done unless Reagan won over a substantial number of them in the House. It’s no wonder that O’Neill was so full of braggadocio.

Somehow Reagan had to build a coalition.

The strategy to get the Economic Recovery Act passed by a conflicted Congress had two major parts.

First, Reagan would use his tremendous skills as a communicator by making repeated televised appeals to Congress and the American people. “Every time he spoke,” Reagan Chief of Staff Jim Baker recalled, “the needle moved.”

Second, the Legislative Strategy Group led by Baker and Ed Meese “did the grunt work” of inviting Democrats to the White House, while the president worked the phones. “I spent a lot of time in the spring and early summer of 1981 on the telephone and in meetings trying to build a coalition to get the nation’s recovery under way,” Reagan wrote. At the time, he even noted in his diary, “These Dems are with us on the budget and it’s interesting to hear some who’ve been here ten years or more say that it is their first time to ever be in the Oval Office. We really seem to be putting a coalition together.

2.  In order to become President of the United States, you must garner more votes than the other party’s candidate. This cannot be done simply by relying on the votes of your own poltical party.You must have ‘crossover votes”.

Back on August 15, 1984, Mark Green, in an article written for the New York Times, titled, “Reagan, The Liberal Democrat”, wrote the following…

…If Ronald Reagan holds to this path, he may soon end up back among the Americans for Democratic Action, which he fled and renounced in the 1950’s.

Not surprisingly, ideological fellow-travelers such as the commentators William F. Buckley Jr. and Pat Buchanan have expressed dismay over their champion’s apostasy. Mr. Buchanan worries that by flirting with the idea of a summit meeting, the President ”is playing with the national security of the U.S.”

Mr. Reagan’s election-year liberalism appears designed to win over those political independents and weak Democrats who might otherwise recall him as the man who has opposed all but one of the major civil rights laws and nuclear arms control pacts of the past two decades.

Will it work? Only if these constituencies believe his reversals to be principled and permanent – and that seems unlikely. To conclude now that Ronald Reagan has suddenly become pro-environment, pro-arms control, pro-food stamps and pro-regulation is to believe that a sow’s ear can become a silk purse merely by declaring itself so.

Besides, swing voters faced this fall with the equivalent of two Democratic tickets may just as well decide to vote for the real McCoy rather than the imitation brand.

Sound familiar?

Every day, on Political Websites and Facebook Political Pages, Conservatives and Liberals, alike, are arguing from dust to dawn, whether Trump can actually win the presidency.

One of the oft-repeated arguments that they present is a modern version of the final argument that Mark Green made in his article:

Why should Liberals vote for Trump, when they can vote for Clinton or Sanders?

The answer to that is as obvious as Kim Kardashian’s brunette roots (if you actually noticed them in the two “nekkid [that is when you are sans clothes and you’re up to something] selfies” that she just released).

The Democrat Candidates STINK ON ICE.

Would you vote for them?

The indisputable fact of the matter is that, in “Open” Primaries, Trump is doing even better than he is in those primaries in which only Republicans can vote.

Trump is building a Coalition.

Americans are fed up with the Washingtonian Status Quo.

We are tired of professional politicians empty promises and their failure to properly address the issues facing America, in any way, except a self-serving one.

While I would never equate Trump with Ronaldus Magnus, they do have this much in common: Like Reagan, Trump is unabashedly America and an advocate for American Exceptionalism.

Trump speaks of “possibilities” and is offering a view from outside of the Washington Beltway.

The reason Trump is winning so many votes, including those of Democrats?

He is offering the possibility of a brand new “Morning in America”.

And. voters are desperate to wake up from this Long National Nightmare.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Santorum/Romney: The Country Mouse and the City Mouse

March 1, 2012

I’m sick and tired of reading posters on Conservative websites and hearing from contributors on the Cable News Channels, including Fox News, pushing the idea that the Republican Primary is done, Mitt Romney is the winner, and there is no need for any more states to participate in the Republican Primary.

Rush Limbaugh (per usual) had a spot-on take on this on his Wednesday program:

…Oh, no, no, no. It’s not time to put a stop to it, anoint anybody and say that we’re done. Newt’s not getting out. He’s gonna stay in through Super Tuesday. That’s where he’s got all of his money banked. This thing could go on as far as May. Santorum’s not going anywhere. Santorum doesn’t have a lot of money even now. Romney outspent Santorum six to one in Michigan. I mean just some facts about Michigan. Romney won by nine points in 2008. He won by three points last night but got more votes last night than he did in 2008. But the percentage of his victory in 2008 was nine. It was three points last night. Santorum — and this is preliminary, I’ve gotta double-check this all, but this is what I have now — Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties.

As of now, Santorum, who lost the popular vote, won because of the way delegates are apportioned. Seven of the 14 congressional districts, Romney has won six. So that’s seven and six, a total 13 out of 14. One is still too close to call. Now, according to what I’m told, the 28 delegates, of those 28 delegates in Michigan, Santorum will either win 14 or 15, something like that, the way things get apportioned because of the number of delegates and counties, districts, so forth and he won in Michigan. So it’s not winner-take-all. So when you ask me if I should pronounce it over, it’s not my job to do that anyway.

I think the weakness that Romney has is not the conservatives won’t show up in November. They will. They want Obama out, and that will override everything. The problem is with the Reagan Democrats, the white working class that Obama lost in 2008 by I think about eight or ten points. You’ve gotta win that by 20 points, and you can do that. Some of the Republican candidates in theory could do that. Romney is weak with that segment. He knows it. That’s why he tries to do the everything and he keeps tripping over himself. If he wins that constituency, he wins the presidency, but that’s where he’s gotta work.He is just not all that good a candidate. So here are the numbers: Romney won by nine in 2008; he won 41-38 or three points last night.

Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. That’s an incredible percentage, and it reminds me of the map of the United States, red and blue by county, when you look at that after a presidential race. The whole country is red (signifying Republican) except LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Miami, Washington, New York, Boston, Chicago and Detroit. The Republicans win 80% of America’s counties and lose the White House. Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. And, as of now, Santorum, while losing the popular vote, has won seven of the 14 congressional districts; Romney won six; there’s still one at least right now (earlier this morning it was one) still too close to call. This means that, of those 28 delegates, Santorum will either win 14 (if the last district goes to Romney) and 16 if Santorum wins the last district.

So the delegate count from those 28 will be either a 14-14 tie or 16-12 Santorum.

The way that the state of Michigan was divided between the two candidates is a metaphor for the political blood bath currently going on between Conservatives and “Mitt Romney supporters” (which seems to encompass everyone from “Fiscal Conservatives” to Ron Paul tin foil hat wearing nutjobs) .

This whole primary battle reminds me of Aesop’s Fable  “The Country Mouse and the City Mouse”:

There once was a mouse who liked his country house until his cousin came for a visit.

“In the city where I live,” his cousin said, “we dine on cheese and fish and bread. Each night my dinner is brought to me. I eat whatever I choose. While you, country cousin, work your paws to the bone for humble crumbs in this humble home. I’m used to finery. To each his own, I see!”

Upon hearing this, the country mouse looked again at his plain brown house. Suddenly he wasn’t satisfied anymore. “Why should I hunt and scrape for food to store?” he said. “Cousin, I’m coming to the city with you!”

Off they went into the fine town house of the plump and prosperous city mouse.

“Shhh! The people are in the parlor,” the city mouse said. “Let’s sneak into the kitchen for some cheese and bread.”

The city mouse gave his wide-eyed country cousin a grand tour of the leftover food on the table. “It’s the easy life,” the city mouse said, and he smiled as he bit into a piece of bread.

Just as they were both about to bite into a chunk of cheddar cheese, In came the CAT!

“Run! Run!” said the city mouse. “The cat’s in the house!”

Just as the country mouse scampered for his life out of the window, he said, “Cousin, I’m going back to the country! You never told me that a CAT lives here! Thank you, but I’ll take my humble crumbs in comfort over all of your finery with fear!”

Conservatives, like myself, can identify with the Country Mouse.

We would rather hold on to our ethics and values, than compromise and elect a Left-leaning Moderate who will “reach across the aisle” to shake hands with Liberals.  

We feel that, if we elect a Conservative candidate, we won’t have to spend time worrying about the knifes that the Liberals are holding behind their backs with the other hand.

What Happened to “Mr. Inevitable”?

February 18, 2012

It’s seems like, just the other day, that Mitt Romney supporters, known on Conservative websites as “Mittbots” were insisting that the Nomination of Mitt “The Legacy” Romney as the Republican Presidential Candidate was a fait d’accompli.

Things have changed.

Reuters.com has the story.

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s struggles in Michigan are fueling speculation that Republicans might have to resort to a doomsday scenario and launch a frantic search for a 2012 savior at their nominating convention in late August.

Rare in the modern age of U.S. politics, a “brokered convention” could result in Republicans ditching their current crop of candidates and turning to someone else who they feel would have a better chance of defeating Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

How did Republicans get to this point? Romney’s failure to get conservatives fully behind him and put down yet another challenger in the party – this time it’s Rick Santorum – is causing angst in the party.

Many senior Republicans do not think Santorum, a social conservative caught up in the U.S. culture wars over issues like abortion and contraception, has a chance to beat Obama if he wins the party’s presidential nomination.

When he ran for re-election as a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania in 2006, Santorum lost by 18 percentage points. But, nevertheless, he is exposing Romney’s weaknesses in Michigan, where Santorum leads polls ahead of the big Midwestern state’s February 28 primary.

A Romney loss to Santorum in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor, would only intensify the talk about a weak Republican field and feed demands for someone else as the party’s candidate to challenge Obama.

“It’s hard for me to see how Romney rights the ship if he loses Michigan,” said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak. “There is no level of spin that can overcome that disaster.”

Michigan will set the table for “Super Tuesday,” the March 6 jackpot when 10 states hold Republican nominating contests. A loss for Romney in Michigan would raise serious doubts over whether he can rally enough support to have a big day on Super Tuesday and make a big move toward clinching the nomination.

The candidates are engaging in a state-by-state battle to become the Republican nominee. The party will officially pick a nominee at its August convention in Tampa, Florida.

Why is Romney losing in what was once his “home state”, a state where his own father, George Romney, was once Governor?

L.Z. Granderson, in an article published on CNN.com, has a possible explanation:

One very clear reason why Mitt Romney is far from a lock to win the Michigan primary, despite his ties to the state, is that he’s not really tied to the state.

He was born here, he lived here. But he’s not family. Not anymore.

That’s why the characterization of Rick Santorum polling well in Romney’s backyard is a bit misguided. The truth is, many of us disowned that two-faced liar years ago. We remember how, back in 2008, Romney came home promising to do all he could to save the auto industry. And we believed him and voted for him and he won the primary here. Then, after he dropped out of the race, he wrote a New York Times op-ed that carried the headline “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”

The opening sentence: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”

What the he@@?

I thought he said he was one of us.

Later in the piece, Romney talks about why we should let the auto industry go bankrupt. Although he lays out some very sound reasons for this — including an anecdotal story of when his father, George, took over American Motors — at the end of the day he fails to mention the most important thing. Us.

He forgot about the people back home who depended on the auto industry to put food on the table, pay mortgages, send the kids to college. He greeted us like family when he needed our votes, but when he left town he treated us like strangers.

If Romney didn’t think a bailout was the best way to help the state, he should have said that when he came here looking for delegates and let the people at his rallies decide if they agreed with him. Instead he pandered, then kicked dirt in our faces on his way out the door — an all too familiar pattern with Romney.

The reason Santorum is gaining votes in Michigan isn’t because he’s so liked here, though his social conservative rhetoric plays well in the western side of the state. But it’s because we’ve been burned by Romney before. He tells the people in front of him what they want to hear. But when he sets his sights on a new shiny object, he changes the script to fit his new needs.

Unfortunately, for The Legacy, other Americans besides Granderson and the Michiganders have figured out his Karma Chameleon nature, also.

According  to pollster Scott Rasmussen:

…Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum has now bounced to a 12-point lead over Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters finds Santorum with 39% support to the former Massachusetts governor’s 27%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich follows from a distance with 15% of the vote, and Texas Congressman Ron Paul runs last with 10%. Three percent (3%) like some other candidate in the race, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Now, I’m just an average American, sitting here outside Memphis, Tennessee (Detroit South) in the Northwest Corner of Mississippi, but it seems to me, as I’ve said before, that average Americans, especially Conservatives here in the Heartland, are a stiff-necked people.

We tend to stand up on our hind legs when someone tries to force something (or in this case, someone) upon us that we really don’t trust, or care for.

For an example, please watch a certain Supreme Court Case coming in a few months, concerning the Constitutionality of forcing everyone in America to buy Health Insurance in order to participate in a Federal Government-run bureaucratic nightmare of a Healthcare System, that the overwhelming majority of Americans remain opposed to, but was shoved down our throats, anyway.

By the way, where did Obama and his Administration ever find a state-run Healthcare System to model Obamacare after?

Oh, yeah.  Romneycare.

You know, that might have something to do with Romney’s campaign tanking, as well.

What do YOU think?