Trump losing favor among Fox watchers

Jonah Goldberg, a Fox News contributor and also a once "Never Trump-er," has written a column about Trump's slide in the polls, even among Fox watchers.  He quotes poll numbers from Suffolk University/USA Today in June, October, and this week:

Trump's favorable rating among people who trust Fox News the most:
   June             90%
   October        74%
   December    58%

That is dramatic !

Blue wave could overtake Ted Cruz too

NBC political analyst Jason Johnson drew the parallel between Roy Moore and Ted Cruz -- not accusing Cruz of sexual misconduct but of both being difficult people for fellow elected officials to deal with.   Johnson said:

"Look, everybody dislikes Ted Cruz because he's a know-it-all and he's obnoxious.   Roy Moore is like Ted Cruz with a Bible."   Johnson is not the only one to see the link.   Former San Antonio mayor and former Obama cabinet member Julian Castro tweeted out this message following Doug Jones' stunning win on Tuesday night:
   "Be afraid, Ted Cruz.  Be very afraid."

So what's this about?  MoveOn.org  has some stats:
   1.  "Donald Trump won Alabama by 28 points.  He won Texas by only 9 points.

   2.  "Trump's approval rating in this week's Alabama exit polls was 48%.   In Texas, it's 45% - and Cruz's approval rating among Texans is even worse -- 38%.

3.  "Jones was a first-time candidate, while Cruz's opponent [Beto O'Rourke] is a popular congressman who is already running neck and neck in the polls and keeping pace with Cruz in fundraising."

The MoveOn memo continues:
"Even before Tuesday, Texas Republicans were worried about Cruz's re-election.   Last month, Governor Greg Abbott's top adviser sent a memo to top donors worrying about a "blue wave" that could sweep away Texas Republicans who usually win easily.

"If they were worried before, they should be in full-on panic mode now. . . . Cruz has been called the most hated man in the Senate.  A lot of Republicans still haven't forgiven him for not endorsing Trump at the Republican National Convention.   And he shares Roy Moore's extremist views on just about every issue.

"If we can win back the Senate, it will cripple the Trump Republican agenda.  And replacing Ted Cruz with a progressive like Beto O'Rourke would make it all the sweeter."

With the Alabama seat flipping, Democrats need to flip only two more senate seats.   Good prospects are Jeff Flake (Arizona) and Dean Heller (Nevada),  Then there's Bob Corker, whose retirement leaves an open seat.   John McCain is not up for reelection, but his health may force him out.

Some are now saying that the senate is a toss-up for 2018.   It should be easier, but the oddities of who is up for re-election make this a terrible year for Democrats who have many more seats to defend than do Republicans.

But that was a powerful blue wave that swept over Alabama.   It wasn't just Roy Moore's scandal and ineptitude.   It was also Trump and the Republican Party itself.

Ralph

Two Trump appointees blocked by Judiciary Committee as unqualified

Two of President Trump's nominees for life-time, federal judge appointments have been blocked by the Senate Judiciary Committee.   The reason?   They were both deemed unqualified.

Initially, the American Bar Association's vetting committee had given them both a "not qualified" rating.   One is the man I wrote about before who has practiced law for only three years and has never tried a case in court.   It later turned out that he had not disclosed the fact that he is married to the chief of staff for President Trump's chief White House Lawyer, Don McGahan.

The other one has a rather checkered past, having conducted a blog that extolled the "first KKK," supposedly one that had a good purpose before they turned bad.  There were other unsavory factors like this, which didn't seem to have any offsetting strengths as a legal scholar or a judicial expert.

Does the Trump administration not vet these people?   Or do they just not care, as long as they can pass the test to vote the Trump way?   I think that field day is over.  After Alabama, the declining approval ratings, the infighting, and the Mueller investigation -- things are going from bad to worse.   And some of the senators are not willing to keep playing the Trump game.

Ralph

The battle over trans military recruits

One of the Obama administration's later accomplishments in its last year in office was the lifting of the ban on transgender people serving in the military services.   So, of course, ideology aside, President Trump would be compulsively driven to overturn the overturn of the ban -- i.e., he issued an executive order reinstating the ban.

It was almost comic in that Trump's first "order" was actually a tweet.  And it was months before he got around to actually issuing the executive order.   In the meantime, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs responded to questions about their ignoring it by saying something to the effect of:    'a tweet is not an order.'

Then, when the formal order finally came, the Secretary of Defense Gen. Mattis sort of slow-walked it, saying that they would need some time to do an assessment and give the president their best recommendations on the matter.   You see, the military had already dealt with whatever resistance they initially had -- and they were really fine -- based on their own experience -- with accepting transgender troops.

 Someone sued the government over Trump's ban.   Two federal courts have already ruled against it, and [here's what's new] on Monday a federal court in Seattle refused the government's request to place a stay on the execution of the ban, while the lawsuit goes forward to an appeals court.   Refusing to put a stay on an order being appealed usually indicates that the judge doesn't think the appeal would likely win in the end.

Just to be clear, because of all the double negatives:   Obama lifted the ban on trans in the military.   What's being litigated is Trump's attempt to reinstate the ban.   Two courts have so far said No to Trump, and a third court said No to a temporary ban while it's being appealed.   The score thus far:   Trans troops and Obama 3;   Trump and ban 0.

A Pentagon spokesman then promptly announced that it would honor the January 1st date specified for accepting new transgender recruits, even while appeals go forward.  This is a big win -- and another defeat for Trump's efforts to rev up his base.

Ralph

Trump on Moore's defeat: "I was right!"

Donald Trump never admits to being wrong . . . about anything.   Having gone all out for Roy Moore in the senate race against Democrat Doug Jones, how was he going to handle another defeat that shows he has little political clout?   Here's how.  It came in a pre-dawn tweet.

"I said Roy Moore will not be able to win the General Election. I was right!  Roy worked hard but the deck was stacked against him!"

Duh.   From the wording, this quote has to be from the Republican Primary, when he was supporting Luther Strange against Roy Moore.    If Trump said that when he was supporting Moore as the Republican nominee in the General Election, why would he have said "in the General Election"?  And why would he have lent his presidential clout to backing someone he knew "couldn't win"?

Trump just can't say "My candidate lost."   But he backed Strange in the Primary, and lost.   He backed Moore in the General, and lost.  And he had previously backed Ed Gillespie for governor of Virginia;   Gillespie lost.

Loser.  Sad.   [irony intended].

Ralph

PS:  This is all part of the same psychodynamic that leads Trump to have (or to be) the greatest, biggest, or even the worst . . . of everything.  He's even tried out the line, regarding Mueller's investigation:   "It's the 'greatest' witch hunt against a sitting president in history."

Tillerson "ready to talk with North Korea without preconditions"

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has set a new tone in saying the US is ready to begin exploratory talks with North Korea "without preconditions"  -- except for one:  talks would begin "only after a period of quiet" without any new nuclear or missile tests from North Korea.

This is a marked shift from President Trump's beligerent tone and rhetoric, in which he denounced and demeaned the North Korean leader and vowed to completely destroy his country if they attacked us.  And they would have to commit to full disarmament before diplomatic talks could begin.

Whether Trump has changed, or whether this is "bad cop/good cop" strategy, or whether Tillerson is going rogue without the president -- remains to be seen.

But, what a relief it feels.   That at least there is one important voice in this matter that seems to value talking, diplomacy, and negotiations.

I like Tillerson's laid back style.   Here's what he said:  "We are ready to talk anytime North Korea would like to talk.  We are ready to have the first meeting without preconditions.   Let's just meet . . .  It's not realistic to say we are only going to talk if you come to the table ready to give up your program.  They have too much invested in it. . . .  Let's just meet and . . . talk about the weather . . . or whether it's going to be a square table or a round table if that's what you're excited about."

Tillerson did add that full disarmament is the ultimate goal and that containment is not workable with North Korea, because they would sell off their nuclear weapons to raise money for their impoverished economy.   Tillerson has been having talks  with China on long range plans to handle these and other matters with North Korea.

Ralph

PS:   A spokesman for the White House National Security Council told Reuters:  "Given North Korea's most recent missile test, clearly right now is not the time" to open talks.  So are Tillerson and the White House just not communicating?   Or is this good cop/bad cop tactics?

I'm not sure they are really far apart.   Tillerson says there would have to be "a period of quiet" before talks begin;  and he didn't specify how long that had to be.   So they could patch this up if they choose.   Or, if Trump wants to use it as an excuse to fire Tillerson -- we all, the whole world, will be the losers.    Tillerson's not my first choice for Sec. of State;   but he sure comes in ahead of Donald Trump.

A stunning win for Doug Jones in Alabama

It was a nail-biter kind of evening watching Steve Kornacki, with his magic digital board of election returns, calling the Alabama race for U.S. senator on MSNBC.    Guest and former New York Times editor Howell Raines speaking from his home in Alabama, said watching Steve was like watching the broadcast sportscaster of an Alabama Crimson Tide football game.  Yes, it was that exciting.

Jones took an early lead but was soon overtaken by Roy Moore, as the rural counties began to come in.   Then as returns from the college towns and then the big cities began to trickle in, Jones edged up -- until finally, with 98% reporting -- Jones took the lead with a margin of about 11,000.    When it became apparent that the still outstanding vote totals were in the urban areas of Jones' strength, the networks called the race for Doug Jones.

Throughout the evening, Kornacki's number-crunching showed Moore under-performing his own last statewide race which he only narrowly won.  This was true throughout the state.

Moore has a loyal following for whom he could do no wrong.   They see him as "a fine Christian man" who would not do what he is accused of doing by women who were teenagers when he allegedly dated or sexually assaulted them.  He has denied it.   His base say they are lying.

Many other Republicans "held their nose" and voted for him anyway;  because, for them, it was better to send a child molester than a Democrat to represent Alabama in the US Senate.   That vote for Supreme Court justices and anti-abortion legislation overrides anything else, for them.

This was an exciting result of a campaign by a good man running against a man who was unqualified to serve in congress, even if the women's accusations were not true.  (And I believe they are true.)

Moore was twice removed from his elected position as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court for refusing to obey a federal court decision -- where he put his own religious beliefs above the US Constitution and Supreme Court.  The first time was about separation of church and state, having to do with his Ten Commandments monument he defiantrly had installed in the Supreme Court building.   The other had to do with instructing the county clerks not to obey the US Supreme Court -- i.e., not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples following the Court's landmark ruling that recognized gay marriage.  He claimed at the time that the US Supreme Court did not superceed the Alabama state laws.

The losers?    Roy Moore, of course.   Steve Bannon, who is largely responsible for getting Moore the Republican nomination and has promised to remake congress by "primary-ing" any Republicans who are not loyal to Donald Trump.   And then Donald Trump, who endorsed Moore, campaigned for him, and recorded a robo call.   It was a stinging repudiation of the president, who won the state by 28% just one year ago.

The winners?    Doug Jones ran a campaign where they did everything right.   Few people thought he could win, but he did it right, helped by the scandal that apparently did hurt Moore.   Beyond that, the campaign tone was right, the message was good -- especially where a progressive Democrat was running for an office that had not elected a Democrat in 25 years in one of the reddest states that Trump won by  26   28 points just a year ago,

The turnout was the key, especially in the African-American community, which initially was not that energized.   The campaign won them over, and they turned out in bigger numbers than they did for Hillary Clinton.    The national party also played it right -- giving behind the scenes help and funneling money -- but not having a very visible presence in the state.   Alabama strategists know that their people don't like to be told what to do by "outsiders."

Jones' win reduces the political balance in the Senate to 51 to 49, although Mitch McConnell has already declared that Luther Strange, the temporary senator, will remain in office until the new term begins in January.   Which means that they will still have that vote for the tax bill they plan to vote on before the Christmas break.    That's probably legal, because the election vote has to be certified by an election commission before he can be seated, and Republicans are in charge of that, although some special elections have led to the winner being seating the next day.

This election also excites the Democrats with a can-do conviction that they can win again.   We have become so beaten down in spirit by the constant flood of Trumpism, the daily drumbeat of some disaster he has done or said or provoked.  Hey, we won in ALABAMA.   If we can win there, nothing is beyond trying.

And just for the sheer joy of winning again.   Of good and right triumphing over the lies and hypocrisy, and of stopping the destruction of the norms of our civic life.

Congratulations to Doug Jones, a good man who can make Alabamians proud again.

Ralph

North Korea signals that it's ready to talk

The Guardian newpaper reported last week that "North Korea is open to direct talks with the US over their nuclear standoff."   Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly passed this message on to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

Lavrov was the visiting foreign minister who, along with the Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak, visited Donald Trump in the Oval Office, where they seemed to have a jolly good time with their ? old friend ? the president.   Who, incidentally, told them that the "Russia thing" had been weighing on him, and he was relieved to have it lifted.

It seems to be reasonable, given that White House connection, that the North Koreans would see Lavrov as a good person to convey this message.   This is a delicate time.  E J. Dionne, writing in the Washington Post, says that we are closer to war than we've been in this conflict with North Korea.   Let's hope that there's someone left in the State Department who knows North Korea, and that Tillerson and Kelly and McMasters can convince Trump not to mess it up.

Ralph

United States UN ambassador says women accusing Trump have a right to be heard

Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley is emerging as one of the best members of the Trump cabinet.    She has developed some influence and power at the U.N., and she seems to have earned Trump's confidence as well -- even when she has not always totally matched his words in speaking about issues.   She's rumored to be the likely replacement as Secretary of State when Tillerson leaves.

On Sunday's "Face the Nation," she was asked about the women who have come forward to accuse their powerful bosses of sexual violations.   She spoke about the cultural shift that has changed the conversation;  and, specifically about the women, she said she applauded them:   "I'm proud of their strength.  I'm proud of their courage."

And what about the women who have accused the president, they asked her how people should assess the president's accusers?   Her answer, according to a Reuters report:   "The same.   Women who accuse anyone should be heard.  They should be heard and they should be dealt with;  and I think we heard them prior to the election.   I think any woman who has felt violated or felt mistreated in any way -- they have every right to speak up.   I know that he was elected, but women should always feel comfortable coming forward and we should all be willing to listen to them."

Haley is threading a delicate needle here.   The White House line is that this was "litigated" during the campaign, and the people elected Donald Trump despite these allegations.   So -- the implication is -- that should settle it.    They've been heard, and the American people still preferred Trump.

Well, no they didn't.    Three million more of us voted for Hillary Clinton.   Trump may have won the electoral college vote to make him president (whether he had help from the Russians is another question.)   But that is not a measure of what the American people want on any other issue.   The electoral college does not decide decency, integrity, and truth.

The fact is, though, Nikki Haley has her job at the pleasure of Donald Trump.  She left a little wiggle room by mentioning the election -- without using it as the dodge that Trump team is doing.   But she was taking some risk.   Good for her.   Let's see what happens.

Ralph

Trump stumps for Moore

President Trump is endorsing Roy Moore, telling a rally crowd that they should vote for Moore.   He also recorded a robo call to be sent out on Monday, saying:  "We need Roy voting for us and stopping illegal immigration and crime, rebuilding a stronger military and protecting the Second Amendment and our pro-life values.

Protect the primitive, undeveloped embryo . . . but not the 14 year old girl she might become, huh?

On a Sunday talk show, Alabama's Republican Senator Richard Shelby said that "Alabama deserves better" than Roy Moore.   He said he voted a write-in candidate and encouraged others to do the same.

Playing "dress-up" with the Middle East

You know how little kids play "dress-up," pretending to be grown-ups and acting out their fantasies of how grown-ups act.   Fortunately, they don't have the power to actually make these things happen . . . which is the main difference that makes our White House's Middle East actions so dangerous.    Donald Trump and Jared Kushner, are like those little kids playing dress-up, thinking they know what to do in the Middle East -- the difference being they have the power to set the whole place on fire.   Real fire.  As in rockets, bombs, and guns.

The Guardian has just posted online an article by Moustafa Bayoumi, an Arab-American writer of "Being Young and Arab in America."

*     *     *     *     *

". . . .  In his role as the president's special advisor, [Jared] Kushner seems to have decided he can remake the entire Middle Ease, and he is wreaking his havoc with his new best friend, Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, the 32 year old who burst on to the international scene by jailing many members of his country's ruling elite, including from his own family, on corruption charges.

"Days before Salman's unprecedented move, Kushner was with the crown prince in Riyadh on an unannounced trip.  The men are reported to have stayed up late, planning strategy while swapping stories.  We don't know what exactly the two were plotting, but Donald Trump later tweeted his "great confidence" in Salman.

"But the Kushner-Salman alliance moves far beyond Riyadh.  The Saudis and Americans are now privately pushing a new "peace" deal to various Palestinian and Arab leaders that is more lop-sided toward Israel than ever before.

"Ahmad Tibi, a Palestinian parliamentarian in the Israeli Knessdet, explained the basic contours of the deal to the New York Times:   no full statehood for Palestinians, only 'moral sovereignty.'  Control over disconnected segments of the occupied territories only.  No capital in East Jerusalem.  No right of return for Palestinian refugees.

"This is, of course, not a deal at all.  It's an insult to the Palestinian people.  Another Arab official cited in the Times story explained that the proposal came from someone lacking experience but attempting to flatter the family of the American president.  In other words, it's as if Mohammed bin Salman is trying to gift Palestine to Jared Kushner, Palestinians be damned.

"Next came Donald Trump throwing both caution and international law to the wind by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel."

*     *     *     *     *

Let me interject here for emphasis.   Jared Kushner is an observant, orthodox Jew whose family has known Israeli president Benjamin Netanyahu since Jared was a small boy and Netanyahu visited them in their home in New Jersey.   Mohammed bin Salman is the crown prince of the powerful Arab nation, Saudi Arabia, which practices a conservative branch of Islam, Wahhabism.  This contributes to their rivalry with the Shia majority nation of Iran.

So a deal cooked up by Kushner and Salman -- a conservative Jew and a conservative Muslim -- might seem to have the blessing of both Israelis and Palestinians.   Far from it.

The Kushner/Netanyahu alliance would be selling out what many Israelis -- and most Palestinians, as well as the international community -- want to see as the eventual two state solution.

To add to the complexity religion brings in the region, the Arab Saudis are more closely aligned religiously with the Sunni Palestinians than with the non-Arab, Shia Iranians, but they still have religious differences.   Wahhabism began as a reform movement within the Sunni sect, advocating a return to a purer form of Islam.  Hence, although the Wahhabi Saudis and the Sunni Palestinians have Shia Iran as a common enemy, they are not natural religious allies either.

In short, who is looking out for the interests of the Palestinians?  This complexity seems borne out in the comment above that the Kushner-Salman  plan is "more lop-sided toward Israel than ever before."

Bayoumi goes on to discuss the Saudi's brutal war against Yemen, which has been brought to the brink of humanitarian disaster.  And now the Saudi's are participating with the Emiratis in the blockade against Qatar, which is having a devastating effect on that country's economy.   Bayoumi asserts that the Saudis and Emiratis believe that they have the tacit approval of the Trump administration, even though Trump very belatedly and half-heartedly criticized the blockade.

The Trump-Kushner tilt toward Saudi Arabia -- and these actions of the Saudis -- begin to look like Trump may be encouraging a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which backs some of the rebel forces in Yemen and Qatar.

The point for us here is that we have two young men in their thirties, with little knowledge or experience in the complex geopolitical and religious history and culture, who seem to be in charge of a concerted effort to bring peace to the region.   In Bayoumi's inimitable phrase:  ordinarily this "would be the time to bring in the State Department."

But no.   Because, under Donald Trump and Rex Tillerson, the State Department has been hollowed out of the knowledgeable people that would ordinarily be intimately involved in such advisory and negotiating roles.   Trump has not yet appointed ambassadors for:   Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, or Qatar.   The vital post of assistant secretary for Near Eastern affairs is vacant.  No one has been nominated for those positions.

Tillerson himself has been shut out of all of these negotiations that Kushner seemingly is carrying out for his assignment to "bring Middle East Peace."   Even if he were involved, however, Tillerson no longer has the expert under-secretaries  to advise him, as John Kerry and Hillary Clinton did.  Not that Jared Kushner does either.

It's way past time to bring back the adults, to benefit from the experience and knowledge of career diplomats who know the region and its problems.   But Donald Trump likes to play dress-up and pretend to be an adult.   A year ago, the voters recklessly gave him the adult power to go with the dress up role.  He passed some of it on to his son-in-law, just as an aging Saudi king gave a favored young prince the adult power over his kingdom. 

So we are at the mercy of the children . . . . in a complex problem that has evaded even the best of the expert adults.  

Ralph

Ponder this. Or just chuckle.

Reddit has site by Lee Moran called "Shower Thoughts" that invites people to submit those odd, pithy thoughts that come to you while you're showering -- or any activity that allows your mind to run free when you're separated from your digital devices.    Irony is prized.  Here's my favorite of their "year's best" list.

"If it's a silent night and you sing Silent Night

 it's no longer a silent night."

Republicans "forced" to cut social network spending to pay for tax cuts.

Only the naive or willfully ignorant are surprised.  After all, didn't candidate Trump promise not to touch Social Security and Medicare?

But . . .  isn't this the same Donald Trump who is proven to be one of the world's great con men?  So much so that no New York bank would lend him money any more.

And, of course, it was part of the Republicans' plan from the beginning.   Give tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy -- aka "job creators" --  plus a few cosmetic cuts for middle class to make it look generous to all.   And then: "oh-my-gosh, look at the deficit."   Well, we'll just have to cut all those entitlement programs (Social Security and Medicare) to reduce this terrible deficit.

In an article in the Washington Post, Heather Long gives us the numbers.  Just with the proposed tax bill itself:  "Most Americans making less than $86,000 would be worse off, according to a new report by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank."   And that's even before they try to pay for the tax cuts.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin's argument that the tax cut would completely pay for itself through economic growth has not been backed up by any independent research, according to Long;  and, in fact, Mnuchin never did release the report he promised from his "hundreds of staff working night and day" to analyze the proposal.    Of course this is true.  It's exactly what they planned.

So now what?   Heather Long continues:   "Trump and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) have indicated they plan to take a hard look at welfare spending and other safety-net programs for potential trimming."

Exactly.  That's step 2 in the plan.   You're forced to look for savings.   Perhaps the social safety net can be trimmed of waste, eliminate the fraudulent payments, close the loopholes;  get people off welfare.    But . . . 

"The Tax Policy Center warns in its 'Winners and Losers' report released Friday that paying for the tax cut by reducing programs that help the poor and lower middle class would leave many Americans in the bottom 60 percent in a worse spot than they would have been without the GOP tax bill. . . .  

“In other words, they will lose more from the financing mechanisms than they will gain from the tax cuts themselves."

The Tax Policy Center analyzed the figures using three different scenarios:  (1) each household pays the same amount to fund the tax cuts;  (2) each household pays the same percentage of its income to fund the cuts;  and (3)  each household pays in proportion to its taxable income.   Their conclusion:   the three scenarios produced similar results for the Senate tax bill.  "These results emphasize that there are no free lunches in tax reform."

Arguments from the White House Economic Adviser, Gary Cohn, and from most Republicans, emphasize the nebulous idea of "growth stimulus," with wild predictions for economic growth that are disputed by droves of economists.  If you really want to stimulate the economy, it's been proven again and again:   give the money to people who will spend it;  not the people who will invest it or save it or buy real estate -- give it to people who will buy things, thus increasing demand, and thus stimulating growth.   The other way is for the government to spend money on things like infrastructure, thus creating jobs.

But Republicans still cling to their precious trickle down economics that just does not work.    And they're trying it . . . once again.     It all exposes their real purpose in this "tax reform:"    Tax cuts for the very very rich.

Ralph