OrangeVerse XXXVI: Midterms (1)

The president had himself a little press conference Wednesday. It was 90 minutes or so o pure joy, or pure hell, or something purely in between. It's going to take a while to get through it, so bear with me. 

Here's an example; seems like an easy question: What's your message to suburban women voters? 

Well, Ex-cuse Me!

Excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me.

A fantastic man who was down

on the polls And everybody was

talking about this person that

was so great. 

And I went up there and

I did a rally and

 they have now a 

great governor - you're

going to have a great governor 

in Ohio for hopefully

a long period of time. 

But for four years. And

Mike DeWine is a fantastic person.

Um, the question was, "What's your message to suburban women voters?"  

Why Did I Do It?

And I went up there for two reasons:

because I felt that his

opposition was not a good person - 

and we know a lot about him - 

and I felt that Mike

was a fantastic person.

And he won.

And not only 

did he win

he won easily.

What. Is. Your. Message. To. Suburban. Women. Voters?

I'm Not Opposed to Addition

So add that

to Florida, and add that

to Georgia and add that

to all of the other races

we won - outside even of the

Senate races which were the

biggest of all. Because

these were races

that - and Mike Pence

can tell you, and 

some folks over here can tell you - 

there were races that 

were going to be unopposed.

We were not going to oppose

certain of the people running - 

certain Senators. 

They said they couldn't 

be beaten. They said Heidi

couldn't be beaten. 

"Please don't do it."

Please don't do it. 

Wondering on Wednesday (v140)

Have your phone calls been taped lately? Are you fighting with your former lawyer? If yes, you're just like the president!

I'm wondering how much attention we should be paying to a very short, garbled conversation about a deal between a con man and his lawyer, unless and until we know for sure whether anything illegal transpired?

I mean, we can spend all kinds of time talking about Trump's alleged year-long fling with a Playboy 'model' a decade before the election - but we shouldn't. We can spend all kinds of time talking about how the president lied or presented facts unsupported by any evidence, but we shouldn't - because that happens several times a day, on average, according to the Washington Post. We'd be better served, on the whole, if we spent hours talking about it when Trump tells the truth. That would seem significantly more newsworthy.

We could spend time, I guess, talking about whether Trump's former 'fixer' Michael Cohen is working harder trying to get a deal from the US attorneys in New York, or a pardon from Trump. And I wonder, if he does get a deal from the Feds, wouldn't that make him a better deal-maker than the president?

I wonder if Ivanka thought about turning her clothing line over to her brothers, the way her dad turned over the family business to them? Wouldn't that be better than throwing the whole thing out so she could focus on her work in Washington?  And speaking of Ivanka, I wonder if anyone's seen Jared lately?

We learned late today that Russian President Putin's invitation to the White House this fall, which I swear was supposed to align with Trump's military parade $12,000,000 publicity stunt, has been 'delayed' until sometime in 2019. So, I wonder if they realized that $12,000,000 is a pittance, a mere pittance I tell you, for a military parade especially if you're trying to impress a dictator?  Or is it really what National Security Advisor John Bolton said today.

The president believes that the next bilateral meeting with President Putin should take place after the Russia witch hunt is over, so we've agreed that it will be after the first of the year.

Or, I wonder, is it because it would be silly to have the Supreme Ruler here before the midterms and that the initial invitation was just not well thought out, as aren't many of the things that Trump tosses out like pitches at batting practice? 

And I have to wonder, is that carefully worded 'Putin's not coming' message really a message of another kind? You know -- to Mueller to wrap things up, or else?  To Rod Rosenstein to end Mueller's probe? To Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III to get ready to fire Rosenstein if he doesn't pull the plug on Mueller?  I wonder....

What was the name of that old tale, the Saturday Night Massacre? And this fall will mark 45 years from that fateful October day. And Trump is POTUS #45. And on the blog Sacred Scribes Angel Numbers, Joanne Walmsley tells us that

Angel number 45 is a message from your angels to put your efforts towards the things in your life that embrace and enhance who you truly are, your lifestyle choices and your life in general. Be prepared to make necessary changes that will bring auspicious opportunities to advance you along your path. Trust that these changes will bring 'better' into your life in all aspects.

How can I not wonder?

Size Really Doesn't Matter, Mr. Trump

Dear President Trump,

We know you think size matters, bigly.

We know you have yuge hands, and we know that there's no trouble down there in the nether regions - because you told us so yourself, and you also told us you'd never lie to us, so it must be true.

We know you're a billionaire ten times over, you have the biggest pile of money, because you told us so.

We know that you have yuge ratings, because you told us so, when you tweeted to let us know that the TV show that brought you to prominence got better ratings when you were on it than it does with the new guy.

We know you have a yuge ego, because even though you're the executive producer, you had no qualms about bashing your own product to let us know how much better it was when you were there than it is now that you're President.

We know your movement like nothing anyone in the world has ever seen is yuge, because you told us so, and that anyone or anything that disagrees with you is fake news, because you've let us know repeatedly that all news you don't like or doesn't like you is fake news.

We know the problems of our country are so huge, and so horrid, that only you can fix them, because you told us so, repeatedly.

We know the crowd at your inaugural is the biggest one ever, because you told us so. We know the TV ratings for your inauguration was the biggest one ever, because you told us so.

We know that the whole world is conspiring against you to make it look like everything you think is bigly yuge is not, because you told us so.

We know that everyone who disagrees with you is bigly over-rated, yugely not funny, biglyyugely not as big as you in whatever way they might think they're bigger or you might think they're smaller.

We know that you're not the bigly most unliked president ever inaugurated, because you told us the polls lie, like the election was rigged until you won, and then it was the best biggest most impressive election ever and there was no rigging. We get that, because you said so.

Yes we know all of this because you show and tell us, every day, often many times a day, bigly, and yugely, like David Gest telling us how he was beaten by Liza Minelli over and over and over.

We get it -- size matters to you. Bigly.

But you know what really matters?

You are the freaking President of the United States.  

You are no longer the host of the Celebrity Apprentice. You are no longer the darling of the Access Hollywood Bus. You are no longer the Talk of the Town. You are no longer a great guest on the Howard Stern Show.

It's time to get your big hair and your big hands and your big tie and your big ego and your big ratings and your big popular vote loss and your big electoral college win focused on being the leader of the free world - no matter how many people aren't watching.

Stop worrying about your goddam ratings and who draws bigger crowds.

Get over it, already.

Immigrant Data, Bigly

Lots of news out there about the POTUS-elect maybe implementing a Muslim registry.

You may recall he talked about this almost a year ago, back in the day when he was stumping in Iowa, when even he probably thought there was about a Trumpzillion-to-one chance of being elected.

I would certainly implement that (a database Muslim tracking system), absolutely. There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases. We should have a lot of systems. 

He noted that even American Muslims would "have to be - they have to be" legally obligated to sign into the database; he also refused to explain how what he was suggesting differed from Germany's actions towards Jews under the Nazis, which is the most frequent comparison. And then, like so many of his pronouncements, he walked it back.

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Fast forward to this week, and we have Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach talking about the registry again. Kobach, a key advisor to the Trump transition team, worked in the Dubya administration and helped create the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, or NSEERS, after 9/11 which required fingerprinting and interrogation on arrival from a high-risk country, as well as a requirement for some men to check in periodically - sort of like being on parole.

The registry goes along with the 'extreme vetting' plan that Trump has been promoting ever since he softened his stance on a total and complete shutdown on Muslims. We don't yet know what form the extreme vetting will take, but we do know that it's going to be more extreme than today's process, which takes up to two years in some cases before entry.

My guess is that it will take between four and eight years to get in, but perhaps I'm being overly cynical.

In addition to Kobach, there's Carl Higbie, a former Navy SEAL and current talking head, who babbled Wednesday about the constitutionality of a registry.

It is legal. They say it'll hold constitutional muster. I know the ACLU is going to challenge it, but I think it'll pass. We it during World War II with the Japanese, which, you know, call it what you will.

So, ignoring the dark period where we rounded up American citizens and shipped them off to camps to protect us from, you know, Americans, would this be legal and constitutional?

Yes, it would, if done correctly. The NSEERS program, for example, was used for a decade after 9/11, applied to only certain people from only a couple dozen countries that coincidentally happened to be predominantly Muslim -- and North Korea - and was deemed OK. From the Vox article:

So when the government designates people from particular countries for special treatment, according to Kevin Johnson of University of California Davis, "those are the kinds of things the courts are likely to say have foreign policy implications and should be in the hands of the federal government and the executive branch. 

In other words, it might not be constitutional for the government to single out Muslim immigrants for particular treatment But it's another thing for the government to single them out on a country-by-country basis  - "to say, 'I'm going to ban migrants or Muslims, even, from Yemen,'" Johnson says. 

A court challenge was rejected, and the program stayed in place.  Although no longer used, the framework is apparently still there, as are some redundant data-gathering tools, which is why the Obama administration removed the 25 countries from the NSEERS program.

A new program, some kind of registry, may never materialize - as with so many things we've heard the POTUS-elect say, or threaten, or promise, we have no idea -  and frankly I'm not even sure he has any idea what he's going to do.

Those of us who did not support him and are waiting for a sign that he's going to coalesce his many statements, policy changes, Tweets and teams into something cohesive and defined and supportable or at least not horror-inducing, were told after he won the election that we needed to wait and see.

We needed to see who he surrounded himself with, those "good people" we heard so much about, and to give him a chance to get his act together.

I'm still waiting to see how that's going to work out - but while I wait, I think it's important to pay attention to this last word from the Vox article:

A lot of people didn't know about NSEERS when it was in effect. That's not a reason not to care now. It's a reminder that when policies are actually implemented, they're rarely as crude and legally dubious as a politician like (the POTUS-elect) makes them sound - and that makes it harder for them to be challenged either in court or in the public eye. 

Care.

Care deeply about whatever direction this administration takes us.

I Am Not Ready to Move On, Thank You

To all the people who have told me, repeatedly, that I need to get over it or move on or accept it or unite or join together to help Make America Great Again, I ask you to bear with me as I paint over you with the same broad brush you have used to paint over me.  I’m not trying to offend you, I’m really not.

Let me throw you a bone: I acknowledge that Donald Trump is the president-elect and will become President at noon on Friday, January 20, 2017.

I have previously admitted that I was in the #NeverTrump camp, and provided my reasons for that, based on my opinions of his policies. You can read those if you’re interested, they’ve been publicly posted. I was also firmly in the #NeverTrump camp based on his actions, and his words, during the course of his campaign, because I found so many of both – actions and words – to be personally offensive.

As a woman with a big nose, a fat ass and small boobs, I know I am not a 10 in your candidate’s book – and I could not be prouder.  

I cringe each and every time I see the commercial of your candidate mocking a disabled person. If you think it was funny, tha’s your choice. I found it -- and find it – disgusting. I found your candidate’s questioning an American-born judge’s heritage, and therefore his integrity, honesty and fairness on the basis of his last name, insulting.

I did not consider your candidate’s comments about his actions towards women and our vaginas humorous. As someone with personal experience on this subject, I can assure you, without question, it is not.

It is frightening, horrible, gut-wrenching, and unforgettable.  So yes - laugh, if you like, while I fight the urge to vomit.

As you tell me, repeatedly, to accept and unify, I remind you that as it stands now, your candidate received 47.5% of the vote, and his opponent received 47.7%, or some 280,646 more votes. And while your candidate will be President, and his opponent will not, it’s more than slightly presumptuous on your part to assume that everyone who did not vote for your guy will shut up and toe the line on YOUR schedule.

I find myself compelled to remind you that it was not until September 16, 2016 that your candidate accepted the legitimacy of our current president.  Let me say that again: it was less than two months ago that your candidate finally acknowledged that our current President was in fact born in this country. 

Our current president has 70 days or so left in his second term; I hope the irony that you’re asking me to accept our President-elect less than 48 hours after he lost the popular vote is not lost on you. It’s certainly not lost on me.

One more thing about our current President: if you refer to him as Barack Hussein Obama, and pretend that when you do so “you’re only using his real name”, let me know when you’re ready to accept him as your president.  Similarly, I’ll look forward to you always referring to our President-elect by his full real name, too – or won’t that be necessary?

Come inauguration day next January, I will be mourning my father on the 10^th anniversary of his passing. Hopefully, I’ll be able to tell him that your candidate did something – ANYTHING – to convince me he’s not the person that he presented himself to be, over and over and over, during his campaign.

The ball is his court, not mine. And not yours.

Wondering, on Wednesday (v53)

So, New Yorkers went to the polls, and voted in a primary that mattered. There's still much thinking and talking going on, but I'm mostly wondering.

For example, we all heard from the Sanders folks - campaign people and supporters alike - about the closed primary and the Independents being 'disenfranchised' because we only allow people who are willing to commit, to vote.  But I wonder why we didn't hear anything from the Green Party, and the Working Families Party, and the Conservative Party and the rest complaining about their disenfranchisement? They weren't allowed to vote for anyone either.

Hillary won cities: NYC, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, and Sanders won everything else. Which is bizarre, simply bizarre. That said, it still appears that Hillary can lose, and lose big to Bernie in the remaining contests, and handily win the nomination.

One figure I saw was 29% -- she only needs to get 29% of the vote each of the remaining contests from now until this blissfully ends in June, and she'll still win. I'm not sure what the Sanders campaign's plans are, but I wonder if they truly believe there's a path to victory come the convention?

More importantly, I wonder when Sanders will start telling his supporters that they are committing political suicide, and setting back any hope of progressive legislative victories under any future president if they don't vote for Clinton in the general election?

Because if all of the BernFeelers stay home, the chances of having a Republican president seem to increase, which means that, say, the likelihood of having the next few Supremes chosen by Republicans is high. And the chance of rolling back changes in voting laws, or reducing student loan debt, or expanding the Affordable Care Act (much less replacing it with something more Sandersesque) are slim to none for the duration.  I can't help wondering if it's really beneficial for all of these folks to cut off their noses, or shoot themselves in the foot, or whatever other body-damaging analogy works here?

And if Sanders himself doesn't address this and encourage sanity, what happens if he endorses Clinton, as he surely will, as he must? Do the Berners turn on him as well, I wonder?

On the Republican side, His Hairness won the entire state with the exception of a handful of voters who put John Kasich on top, in that one teeny little part of the map that wasn't Trump red. I don't know about you, but I wonder if anyone thought, last June with the infamous escalator ride, that Trump was riding into this kind of success?  Did even Trump picture this?

Kasich and Cruz, Cruz and Kasich. How do they pull together to stop Trump - or, I wonder, does Trump stop himself?  Talking today with friends at work, and one questioned whether Trump really even wanted to be president, or if instead he really just wanted to influence who becomes the nominee for the Rs. He wondered how Trump could really walk away from his company, and his luxury, and his travel and open schedule and all of that, and actually perform the duties of the POTUS. Others, professionals in the political arena, have suggested that this was done on a lark, and Trump had no clue now how to get out.  I wonder, is that really the case? And who will come to his rescue?

Finally, I wonder on this Wednesday as I have before, what my Dad would say about the Empire State and her voters, about this campaign. I don't have a clue.