Thursday Daily Delawhere [7.23.15]
Wilmington. Photo by xzmattzx.
Wilmington. Photo by xzmattzx.
“Republicans almost universally acknowledge that, over the long-term, their Party needs to increase its appeal to Latinos in order to win the White House. The first step down that path is to talk about immigrants from Latin America in a respectful way and to marginalize prominent politicians who attack immigrants.” “However, what is good for the Party over all is not necessarily good for individual candidates. One can laugh at Trump and his absurdities, but it’s wrong to say that he doesn’t matter. He has exposed and exploited the Republican Party’s two great weaknesses: the fact that many of its voters don’t agree with Party leaders on immigration and the fact that the Party is powerless to do much about it.”A conscious choice has to be made. Courageous Republican party leaders need to cut the rope to that anchor dragging them down. That means standing up to their base, and not supporting candidate who play up to the base's racism. But that means losing elections after election, and control of the House and Senate and State legislatures. It means giving up power. The only thing giving Republicans the opportunity for power right now is the laziness and fecklessness of Democrats and Independents in off year elections.
Home again, by Mike Mahaffie on Flickr.
“They said they believed that unemployment would be the lowest it has been during an election since George W. Bush and Al Gore faced off in 2000, when it stood at 3.9 percent. The median forecast for the unemployment rate when voters go to the polls in November 2016 was 4.8 percent (which would be down from 5.3 percent last month). They saw only a 15 percent chance of a recession starting by next Election Day. Interest rates, inflation and gasoline prices should all be a bit higher than they are now, they said, while staying quite low by historical standards.” “On its face, all of that points to an election with dynamics similar to 1988 or 2000, when the nominee of the incumbent party (George H. W. Bush in 1988 and Mr. Gore in 2000) could promise continued prosperity. That bodes well for the Democratic nominee, though as Mr. Gore’s loss despite winning the popular vote shows, even a favorable economy doesn’t assure victory, given the workings of the Electoral College.”Al Gore also ran AWAY from the Clinton Presidency when he should have embraced it with both arms and legs, while at the same time, George W. Bush pretended that there was no difference between him and Gore (and given an assist by the evil Nader voters) with his "Compassionate Conservative" pitch. So that makes 2000 an outlier in my mind. In 2016, you are going to have Hillary Clinton embracing the Obama record, and the GOP candidate will do everything he can to run away from Obama and push an extremist and radical agenda. And that all benefits Hillary.
Entering the Harbor of Refuge, by Mike Mahaffie on Flickr.
We had hoped to pay no attention to the Trump sideshow. But that became harder to do when he jumped to the top of the recent USA TODAY/Suffolk and Fox News polls of Republican voters. Then, over the weekend, Trump's big mouth became, not surprisingly, impossible to ignore. [...] Like meteors that flash across the sky and burn out, flawed candidates have a way of self-destructing. That’s one of the few benefits of our endless, grueling presidential campaigns. The classless attack on McCain might or might not turn out to mark the end of Trump's presidential ambitions. This much is assured: The mouth will keep moving, and one day it will open wide and swallow his candidacy whole.I will be curious to see if Trump's attack on John McCain this Saturday (which by the way was just like the entire Republican Party's attack on John Kerry in 2004, so it is ok to attack a veteran and question his service so long as that veteran is a Democrat) affects his poll standing at all. Right now, Trump still leads.
Photo by Skyjack.
Photo by Photojack