How the GOP Congress and President Obama became the #1 Problem in America and Made Trump the #1 Solution January 15, 2016 Vol. IX, No. 1 10:13 am NOTE: As I begin my ninth year writing the John Davis Political Report (30th year as a North Carolina political analyst), it’s important for you
[More…]
How the GOP Congress and President Obama became the #1 Problem in America and Made Trump the #1 Solution
January 15, 2016 Vol. IX, No. 1 10:13 am
NOTE: As I begin my ninth year writing the John Davis Political Report (30th year as a North Carolina political analyst), it’s important for you to know that I do not do any work for candidates or partisan groups. My income is solely from this report, speeches and advising political investors on likely winners. My goal is accurate forecasts. I have no professional interest in whether the winners are Republicans or Democrats. Let me know if you need an objective speaker or consultation on a candidate’s potential. Thanks for reading. JND
Lincoln: Get a barrel of Grant’s whiskey for all my generals!
Last year, January 13, 2015, my first report, Misinterpreting the Mandate: Consequences of the Most Common Mistake Political Majorities Make, was about a Gallup study revealing that the most important problem on the minds of American voters for 2014 was “government leadership — including President Obama and the Republicans in Congress.”
One year later, the problem is the same. On January 4, 2016, a new Gallup study concluded that for two consecutive years, the Most Important Problem facing the country is “Government.”
We have lost all faith in the establishment in Washington DC, especially the Republican-led United States Congress. According to Gallup’s December 2015 national survey on Honesty and Ethics in the Professions, members of Congress are the last professional group to be trusted.
- Congress has the worst “Low/Very Low” rating (64%) on honesty and ethics
- Only 8% of Americans give Congress a “High/Very High” honesty/ethics rating
Where did the Republican-led Congress go wrong? They put ideological purity ahead of problem solving. And by failing to get the job done, they became the #1 problem.
They were forewarned. Only 16% of voters in a November 2014 CNN survey said that the new GOP majorities in the Class of 2015-2016 in the U.S. Senate and House were a “mandate for GOP policies.” A solid 74% said the GOP majorities were a “rejection of Democratic policies.”
The survey clearly showed that voters wanted Republicans in Congress and President Obama to cooperate more. Fifty-seven percent (57%) said Obama was not cooperating with the GOP enough. Sixty-eight percent (68%) said the GOP was not cooperating enough with Obama.
It’s no wonder that today’s Congressional “job approval” is a disastrous 13.4% (Real Clear Politics), with President Obama’s “job approval” under water at an anemic 45.7%. They have become the #1 problem facing the country today.
But here’s the rub: you can’t get rid of the U.S. Congress. According to Charlie Cook, Cook Political Report, about 95% of the current members of the U.S. House are in safe districts; about the same percentage of the U.S. Senators are in safe states. Odds are the GOP will keep the majority in the U.S. House. They are slightly favored to hold the majority in the U.S. Senate.
So, what are you going to do? The historic level of early interest in the presidential campaign indicates that voters have concluded that their best hope is a new President who has the negotiating skillset and leadership temperament to get disparate ideological factions in the Congress to work together with the White House to solve problems.
It is my judgement that Americans are not likely to put someone in the Oval Office who is a member of the U.S. House or U.S. Senate. Remember, they are the #1 problem. They put the “dys” in dysfunction by not cooperating within their own caucus to solve the great problems of the day; they lack the leadership skills to build consensus with those with opposing views.
Ultimately, the GOP presidential nominee is more likely to be one of the three governors, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush or John Kasich, all of whom have executive timbre but have struggled to gain momentum thus far, or Donald Trump. Trump may be a renegade Republican billionaire with no government experience, but he has mastered the art of channeling the anger of Americans who see a rigged and dysfunctional government as the number one problem facing the nation.
Trump’s appeal reminds me of why President Lincoln liked General Grant.
Long before Ulysses Grant became the legendary Civil War general, he was a ne’er-do-well with a serious drinking problem. Failed in business. Failed at farming.
At the age of 32, while serving as a Captain in the army, Grant was given an ultimatum to resign or face a court-martial because of his chronic drunkenness on post. He resigned.
Then came the Civil War. Brigadier General Ulysses Grant was so successful in winning battles despite his problem with alcohol that President Lincoln is said to have proclaimed, “Find out what brand of whiskey Grant drinks and send a barrel of it to each one of my generals.”
That’s Donald Trump’s appeal. He may be arrogant and crude, but an ever-growing number of voters believe he will get the job done; solve the nation’s #1 problem: government. Further, Trump has built a global financial empire at a time Americans are looking for someone who can solve the #2 problem: the creation of jobs and wealth in the new world economic order.
For two consecutive years, the #1 problem facing the country is “Government.” Trump’s voters believe he is the #1 solution because, unlike the current Congress or president, he is someone who values problem solving over trivialities like ideological and political correctness.
Someone who understands the art of principled compromise. The art of the deal.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Political Marketability Favors the 2016 Reelection of North Carolina Republican Governor Pat McCrory He has a record, a plan, money, likeability, and urban appeal December 2, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 18 10:13 pm What’s the “politically marketable” reason to change our governor? On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, North Carolina’s Republican Governor Pat McCrory
[More…]
Political Marketability Favors the 2016 Reelection of North Carolina Republican Governor Pat McCrory
He has a record, a plan, money, likeability, and urban appeal
December 2, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 18 10:13 pm
What’s the “politically marketable” reason to change our governor?
On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, North Carolina’s Republican Governor Pat McCrory announced his decision to run for a second term. The presumptive Democratic gubernatorial nominee is Attorney General Roy Cooper. Finding a politically marketable argument for denying Republican McCrory a second term is the greatest challenge facing Democrat Cooper.
Granted, Cooper has the usual litany of liberal complaints against McCrory; complaints well aired by the Moral Mondays protestors. However, the Moral Mondays outrage was met with a near universal shrug and a “pffft” by North Carolinians.
The most significant political value of the Moral Mondays movement is that it galvanized Republicans and Independent conservatives behind McCrory and the GOP leadership in the General Assembly.
The race for governor of North Carolina will not be about Roy Cooper and the Democratic agenda, it will be a referendum on Pat McCrory’s first term. The fact is, the state is well into recovery from the worst recession since the Great Depression. And, economic recovery has provided McCrory the means to make many politically marketable improvements.
McCrory’s accomplishments to date are among the five influential factors that in my judgement give him a political marketing advantage at the starting gate of the 2016 race for governor. The five are: 1. Fundraising potential; 2. Record of accomplishment; 3. Visionary plan; 4. Personal likability; 5. Urban crossover appeal.
Fundraising Potential
Money defaults to power. In North Carolina, Republicans have the lion’s share of the state’s political power. They have the Governor (Executive), super majorities in the state Senate and House (Legislative), and majorities on the state Supreme Court and Court of Appeals (Judicial).
Republicans have also taken over hundreds of state boards and commissions, controlling the direction of everything from Acupuncture, Agriculture, Alcohol and Auctioneers to Banking, Transportation, Tobacco, Teachers, Universities, Utilities, Veterinary, Wildlife and the Zoo.
The power and influence of state government Republicans is greatly enhanced by their ten-member advantage in the state’s 13-member delegation to the U.S. House, as well as the two Republican U.S. Senators. All are members of Republican majorities in the U.S. Congress.
Granted, Roy Cooper’s mid-year report to the State Board of Elections shows him with $3.4 million in receipts to only $2.2 for McCrory. But, McCrory was battling the legislature and the news media the first six months of the year. He got a late start filling the till.
Furthermore, a Republican incumbent governor in a Southern state with an improving economy is in a far greater position to parlay his power and influence into a financial advantage than a Democratic challenger.
The loss of standing and competitiveness of the Democratic Party during President Obama’s administration is almost unbelievable. As Adam Edelen, Democratic state auditor of Kentucky who lost reelection last month told the New York Times, “In terms of governors, legislators and constitutional officers, the bench has been eviscerated during his [Obama’s] tenure. It will have very long-term consequences.”
Those consequences will be felt by Democrats in North Carolina, like Roy Cooper, as they struggle to maintain a competitive campaign war chest for their races in 2016.
Record of Accomplishment
After all was said and done during the 2015 budget battles between Governor McCrory and the Republican leaders in the General Assembly; after all of the inane huffing and puffing about McCrory being the “irrelevant,” “Mayor of North Carolina,” McCrory got most of what he wanted. More than enough marketable line items to make his case for a second term.
First and foremost, McCrory’s leadership on the budget endeared him to most Republicans and Independents who lean Republican. Second, and equally important, McCrory’s leadership on the budget gives him plenty of talking points for a strong appeal to undecided Independent voters.
Here are a couple of politically marketable highlights:
- Reduced unemployment; created jobs
- Reduced the personal income tax below most of our neighboring states
- Reduced the corporate income tax rate, on track to be the lowest in the U.S.
- Paid off NC’s $2.5 billion unemployment insurance debt to Federal Government
- Increased the natural disaster reserve fund to over $1 billion
- Initiated transformative changes in use of digital technology in state government
- Launched a $2 billion bond campaign targeting repairs, renovation and expansions for community colleges and universities, along with state parks
- Education items include pay raises for teachers and keeping teacher assistants
It is my judgement that the action on the state budget this year by Governor McCrory and the General Assembly was politically savvy, allowing Republicans to break many of the arrows in the Democratic Party’s quiver that otherwise would have been used against them in 2016.
Important Note: Anything politically marketable that was not taken care of in the budget this year will be taken care of during the 2016 Short Session.
Visionary Plan
Take a look at Governor McCrory’s 25-year transportation infrastructure plan, Mapping Our Future, and you can see the skill he brings to the development of politically marketable state government initiatives. Every division of his administration either has been or will be the subject of long-range planning and reorganization.
In his February 4, 2015 State of the State speech, McCrory outlined his administration’s commitment to the future in five areas:
- Jobs/Economy: “Ensuring everyone who wants a job can find a job.”
- Education: “Ensuring every child/adult obtains skills to be productive citizen.”
- Connectivity: Linking small towns/commerce centers with highways and internet
- Health/Safety: “Improving quality of life and public safety for NC’s families.”
- Government: “Efficiencies in our budget and improving government services.”
On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, McCrory formally kicked off his campaign with a speech in Kernersville at a printing company. Once again, he touted his “five point plan.”
The redundancy and simplicity of McCrory’s “five point plan” for the future is what gives it political value. Most politicians complicate their vision for the future with too much explanation. McCrory has the skillset to transform his visionary passion into a simple list of steps that help him make the case to the average voter that his goals can be achieved. That’s political marketability.
Personal Likeability
Governor McCrory announced his decision to run for a second term by way of a moving video posted on social media. The video, seeking to show empathy with those struggling to make ends meet, opens with McCrory recounting, “Long before I was elected governor, one of the hardest things I ever had to do in my life was to come home after my job was eliminated and tell Ann I didn’t have a job anymore.”
The video also seeks to give voters hope for a brighter tomorrow based on accomplishments to date and plans for the future. It ends with an image of McCrory hugging a child as he says, “I’m running for governor because our comeback story is not over.”
Pat McCrory is as good a retail politician as there is in America. He looks you right in the eye when he talks. His smile is genuine and welcoming. His handshake is firm and confident. His ability to make everyone from all walks of life feel like they have the governor’s ear; that he really cares about what they care about, is one of his greatest strengths.
But his greatest strength is that he really does care. His ability to empathize with those who have walked a more difficult path to their dreams comes from the fact that he has walked that path.
That’s political marketability at its best.
Urban Crossover Appeal
One of the biggest mistakes McCrory’s critics have made is to devalue his 14 years as Mayor of Charlotte. Dealing with political and public policy enemies in a city that is larger than Detroit, Seattle, Denver or Boston prepares you well for political and public policy enemies in Raleigh. Experience in navigating the petty jealousies, the greedy opportunists, the cheats, the egos, the territorial bureaucrats … for seven terms in a county that is larger than the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware, Alaska, Vermont or Wyoming … prepares you well for the petty jealousies, the greedy opportunists, the cheats, the egos, and the territorial bureaucrats in Raleigh.
Granted, the budget is far more complicated at the state level than the city and county levels. And it has taken McCrory two cycles to gain budgetary competence. However, leadership comes from experience in dealing with the human side of politics. And that is where devaluing McCrory’s 14 years as Mayor of Charlotte is a mistake.
Politically, it is also important to respect the value of McCrory’s experience as Mayor of Charlotte for his ability to appeal to urban voters. McCrory understands city issues. He knows that urban quality of life depends on government investment in streets and public transportation; centers for the performing arts and sports arenas; city parks and recreation. Public safety.
North Carolina is fast becoming an urban dominant swing state where metropolitan voters are more moderate than conservative, more pro-government than antigovernment, more socially diverse and tolerant.
Seven terms as Mayor of the City of Charlotte has seasoned Pat McCrory well to lead an urban dominant swing state. He understands urban voters. He is fluent in their language. He has an opportunity unique as a Republican to successfully market his message to the normally Democratic-leaning undecided voters in the fast-growing urban areas of North Carolina.
Conclusion
The race for governor of North Carolina is a referendum on Pat McCrory’s first term. Thanks to an improving economy, McCrory is in a position to make it very difficult for Roy Cooper to find a politically marketable argument for denying him a second term.
If McCrory does seize the upper hand in fundraising, as I expect he will, he will be able to sell his accomplishments and vision for the future and gain an early lead. At that point, all he has to do is pour on the coal and keep the train on the tracks until Election Day, November 2016.
His detractors will be using every available resource to derail McCrory’s campaign train with allegations of legally questionable actions by the governor, his team and contributors. In today’s political environment, all candidates have to become adept at fending off accusations of improprieties throughout the campaign.
Fortunately for McCrory, a 50-page complaint with 400 pages of exhibits filed in January with the State Ethics Commission by the liberal organization Progress N.C. Action was dismissed in November after no probable cause was found that the governor had violated state laws.
If similar allegations against McCrory meet with the same fate, then his fundraising potential, his record of accomplishment, his visionary plan, personal likability and urban crossover appeal will give him a decisive political marketability advantage that virtually assures him a second term as Governor of North Carolina.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Sunday, Nov. 8: Politico Owes Ben Carson an Apology for False Claim Politico had it wrong. A Politico story claiming that Ben Carson admitted to lying about a scholarship to West Point was grossly misleading. I referenced the story in my report last Friday, November 6, 2015, after seeing the “Carson lied about West Point”
[More…]
Sunday, Nov. 8: Politico Owes Ben Carson an Apology for False Claim
Politico had it wrong. A Politico story claiming that Ben Carson admitted to lying about a scholarship to West Point was grossly misleading. I referenced the story in my report last Friday, November 6, 2015, after seeing the “Carson lied about West Point” reported by credible sources like Financial Times, CBS News, The Guardian, MSNBC and the Christian Broadcast Network.
Politico has since removed the words “admitted fabricating” from their story. In reference to the story, the Washington Post concluded, “The Politico story seemed to mischaracterize a small but key detail in the way Carson has told the story,” that he never claimed he applied to West Point. CNN Money refers to the incident as “a major black eye for Politico.”
Politico should apologize to Carson for such an irresponsible mischaracterization.
What follows is my revised report.
History Says Trump, Carson and Fiorina are History; No Elective Office or High Military Rank, No White House.
November 8, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 17 REVISED 11:13 am
Trump, Carson and Fiorina are History
On Tuesday, November 10, 2015, beginning at 9 o’clock EST, while you are watching GOP presidential frontrunners Trump, Carson and Fiorina during the Fox Business/Wall Street Journal debate from Milwaukee, remember this fact: only two presidents in United States history won with either no prior experience in public office or high military rank … like Trump, Carson and Fiorina.
The last president with no previous elected-office experience was President Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961). However, he was a five-star general in the U.S. Army who served as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during World War II. Eisenhower led the Normandy Invasion and the coalition that defeated Hitler. He was a qualified executive.
In 1928, Republican Herbert Hoover won the presidency despite having no elected-office or military experience, although he had presidential timbre after serving as Secretary of Commerce under Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. Hoover, along with President William Howard Taft (1909-1913), are the only two U.S. Presidents with the dual distinctions of having no elected-office experience or high military rank … like Trump, Carson and Fiorina.
Most GOP Contenders will Drop Out by March 15
The following states and territories will make Republican presidential decisions by March 15, 2016, North Carolina’s new primary election day: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, Guam, Florida, North Carolina, Illinois, Missouri, Northern Mariana Islands, Ohio.
Trump, Carson and Fiorina will likely be out on or before March 15, 2016. Carson will go down first due to a growing realization that he lacks executive credibility and has few defensible solutions for the most important problems facing the nation. Fiorina will soon follow because she will continue to struggle to raise money, grow her base and otherwise demonstrate electability.
Trump will drop out as soon as losses are imminent. If he can’t win it all, he will parlay his presidential notoriety into even greater wealth. The best billionaire ever!
As I concluded in my report on August 19, 2015, Trumped-Up Political Credibility will be Undermined by Sobering State/National Concerns:
Look for Trump to hire every available political operative in the country to swarm the early caucus and primary states to keep the perception going that he is a serious presidential contender. It’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars in free advertising world-wide benefiting his casinos and resorts.
As Trump told Fortune, “It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”
Ted Cruz will Inherit the Anti-Establishment Voters
Ted Cruz, the quintessential antiestablishment (Government Shutdown 2013) candidate among the Republican contenders, will likely inherit the Trump/Carson/Fiorina voters. Cruz will combine his surge in popularity among antiestablishment Republicans with his impressive war chest and create an enthusiastic army of evangelical and Tea Party conservatives who will help him take the lead by Super Tuesday, March 1, 2016, and solidify his lead on March 15, 2016.
Cruz is the #1 fundraiser on the latest list (10/16/15) of Republican campaign fundraisers, as opposed to those candidates, like Jeb Bush, who have more money in allied super PACs.
According to OpenSecrets.org, the candidates with the largest campaign war chests are:
- Ted Cruz campaign: $39 million; his Super PACs have raised $27 million
- Ben Carson campaign: $31 million; his Super PACs have raised $7 million
- Jeb Bush campaign: $25 million; his Super PACs have raised $103 million
- Marco Rubio campaign: $16 million; his Super PACs have raised $17 million
I fully expect the Jeb Bush A-team to parlay their $100 million Super PAC into a full recovery for the son and brother of U.S. Presidents. There is simply too much knowledge and too many resources in the Bush corner to rule him out. Bush will likely reemerge as a viable establishment candidate and battle with Ted Cruz all the way to the GOP convention in Cleveland.
Bottom line: only two presidents in United States history won with either no prior experience in public office or high military rank … like Trump, Carson and Fiorina. And that fact is not likely to change in 2016.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Most Consequential 10 Days in Clinton’s Candidacy: Shallow Theater, Naked Partisanship, Institutionalized Incompetence October 23, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 16 3:13 pm “If you’re among the growing number of independent voters drifting away from the two parties—you probably don’t care about the [Benghazi] hearing. You know what you missed: shallow theater, naked partisanship, and
[More…]
Most Consequential 10 Days in Clinton’s Candidacy:
Shallow Theater, Naked Partisanship, Institutionalized Incompetence
October 23, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 16 3:13 pm
“If you’re among the growing number of independent voters drifting away from the two parties—you probably don’t care about the [Benghazi] hearing. You know what you missed: shallow theater, naked partisanship, and institutionalized incompetence.” Ron Fournier, National Journal, October 23, 2015
Ten days ago, October 13, 2015, the John Davis Political Report, Clinton Email Controversy Now Fruit of a Poisonous Tree after Republicans Seen Rigging Hearings, stated that Hillary Clinton would win the argument on the Benghazi email controversy during the Democratic presidential debate that evening because most voters believed “U.S. House Republicans rigged the Benghazi hearings to weaken Clinton’s campaign for president.”
Sure enough, when the poll results started coming, a large majority of Democrats agreed that Clinton had won on that and every other issue in the CNN/Facebook-sponsored Democratic presidential debate. For example, CNN’s national survey of registered Democrats who watched the Democratic debate revealed that 62% of the respondents believed Hillary Clinton won the debate; 35% said Bernie Sanders.
The perception that the Benghazi committee was a partisan political assault force was solidified on September 29, 2015, when Republican House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy told Fox News host Sean Hannity, “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” A foolish statement.
Fast forward to October 22, 2015, immediately after Hillary Clinton’s 11-hour grilling by the House Special Committee on Benghazi; another foolish statement by yet another Republican leader. Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Benghazi committee’s chairman, replying to a reporter, stated that he could not name a single important piece of new information his committee had uncovered about the 2012 terrorist attack on a U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya.
A good accounting of the exchange between the reporter and Gowdy was written by Alexis Simendinger, Real Clear Politics, Inquiry Does Little to Trip Clinton’s 2016 March.
Key Simendinger Thought: Partisan Aim. “Chairman Trey Gowdy, the Republican inquisitor leading a special House Benghazi panel, had something tougher to swallow. He could not point to anything gleaned by his team that refuted Democrats’ charges that Republicans took aim at the former secretary of state for political reasons.
‘I don’t know that she testified any differently than previous times she testified,’ he blurted out to reporters afterward. The concession by Gowdy — appearing sweaty and exhausted at 9 p.m. — that Clinton spent a long day telling Congress what she’d already told Congress underscored the challenge for Republicans. It was also evidence that preparations by her and committee Democrats to paint the drama as partisan had struck a nerve.”
Ten days ago, Hillary Clinton won the first Democratic presidential debate in great part because the Republican-led Benghazi committee had produced nothing that could be used against her by her Democratic opponents. Despite her victory, she still had high unfavorable numbers.
The same CNN’s national survey of registered Democrats who watched the Democratic debate that showed Clinton as the clear winner, also showed that more Americans had an “Unfavorable” opinion of Hillary Clinton (50%) than “Favorable” (46%).
Now, thanks to Republican overreach during the Benghazi investigations and the unproductive 11-hour Select Committee on Benghazi hearing, next week’s polls will show that more Americans have a “Favorable” than “Unfavorable” view of Hillary Clinton.
On October 13, 2015, Hillary Clinton won the CNN/Facebook Democratic debate. On October 22, 2015, Hillary Clinton “won” the Benghazi hearings. Ten consequential days.
Thanks to Republican leaders like Rep. Kevin McCarthy, House Majority Leader, who admitted that the House Select Committee on Benghazi was created to discredit Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president, and Rep. Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi who admitted that his committee had not produced any new information discrediting Hillary Clinton’s handling of the Benghazi attack, those ten days have been the most consequential of her candidacy.
The consequences of Republican “shallow theater, naked partisanship, and institutionalized incompetence” are a clear path to the nomination and a growing consensus that Hillary Clinton is a tough, seasoned leader with the strength of character to serve as President of the United States.
End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Clinton Email Controversy Now Fruit of a Poisonous Tree after Republicans Seen Rigging Hearings October 13, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 15 2:13 pm Fruit of a Poisonous Tree Tonight, during the first Democratic presidential debate beginning at 8:30 EST on CNN, what would have been a politically explosive issue regarding the use of a
[More…]
Clinton Email Controversy Now Fruit of a Poisonous Tree after Republicans Seen Rigging Hearings
October 13, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 15 2:13 pm
Fruit of a Poisonous Tree
Tonight, during the first Democratic presidential debate beginning at 8:30 EST on CNN, what would have been a politically explosive issue regarding the use of a private email server by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be defused by the perception that U.S. House Republicans rigged the Benghazi hearings to weaken Clinton’s campaign for president.
In politics, perceptions are the only reality.
Tonight, during the debate sponsored by CNN and Facebook, Clinton will win the argument on the email controversy, saying she has taken responsibility for her decision to use a personal account, that the use of a private email account was allowed under State Department rules, that nothing she sent or received was marked classified, and that she provided all of her work-related emails to the State Department.
She will win because the Republican-led Special Committee on Benghazi obtained the email controversy under false pretense. The fruit of a poisonous tree.
The committee was supposed to be investigating the terrorist attack on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in 2012 during which our ambassador and three other Americans were killed. And, up until Tuesday, September 29, 2015, only Democrats suggested that the Benghazi committee was a partisan political assault force.
However, on that September day, Republican House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy, in line to succeed John Boehner as Speaker of the House, told Fox News host Sean Hannity, “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”
The integrity of the Benghazi committee was shattered by McCarthy’s foolish statement implying partisan political intent behind the panel’s investigations. He poisoned the tree, and along with it he tainted the fruit of the tree, Hillary Clinton’s private email server controversy.
In 1961, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Mapp v. State of Ohio that incriminating evidence obtained by way of an illegal search could not be used in state courts. That’s analogous to what’s happened here … in the court of public opinion.
In the court of public opinion, evidence of Hillary Clinton’s potentially incriminating use of a private email server as U.S. Secretary of State cannot be used against her politically because it was obtained under false pretense by a committee perceived to have an ulterior partisan motive.
In politics, perceptions are the only reality.
Republican Staff Whistle Blower Fuels Perception of Political Aim
As if having the Majority Leader of your caucus discredit your committee’s work is not enough, now comes a story in the October 11, 2015, The New York Times, in which a former Republican staff investigator for the Benghazi committee, Maj. Bradley Podliska, alleges that the committee was engaged in “a partisan investigation” targeting Hillary Clinton.
Maj. Bradley Podliska, who also says that half of the committee staff was “surfing the Web all day long,” was fired by the committee in June of this year. A disgruntled employee? Obviously.
However, we are dealing in perceptions here. Podliska’s accusations undeniably add fuel to the flaming perception that the Benghazi Committee was targeting Clinton for political ends.
Clinton is scheduled to testify before the House Select Committee on Benghazi next Thursday, October 22. Thanks to a well-founded perception that the committee is on a witch-hunt, it’s the committee, not Hillary Clinton, who will be on the hottest of the seats.
Republican Overreach Key to Clinton’s Aspirations
On August 11, 2015, I wrote the following in the John Davis Political Report:
“She [Hillary Clinton] will survive all scandalous allegations for the same reason her husband survived impeachment relating to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal: Republican overreach.”
On December 20, 1998, the day after the Articles of Impeachment were passed by a Republican-led U.S. House, Democratic President Bill Clinton’s approval rating jumped 10 points to 73%, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Thanks to Republican overreach, Clinton’s approval rating soared to an all-time high while the favorable view of the GOP fell ten points.
That’s what is about to happen in 2016. Republican candidates for president piling on Hillary Clinton with vindictive hyperbole; fourteen Republican candidates, 13 of whom are men.
Tonight, during the first Democratic presidential debate beginning at 8:30 EST on CNN, Hillary Clinton will win the argument on the email server controversy because the Republican-led Benghazi committee is perceived to have rigged congressional hearings for political gain.
In politics, perceptions are the only reality.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Republican Zealots in Congress Paving the Way for Democratic Resurgence in 2016 September 30, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 14 7:13 am GOP-Led Congress: “Corrupt,” “Out of Touch,” “Sellouts” Republican zealots in Washington D.C. are paving the way for Democrats to hold the White House in 2016 and retake the U.S. Senate by making
[More…]
Republican Zealots in Congress Paving the Way for Democratic Resurgence in 2016
September 30, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 14 7:13 am
GOP-Led Congress: “Corrupt,” “Out of Touch,” “Sellouts”
Republican zealots in Washington D.C. are paving the way for Democrats to hold the White House in 2016 and retake the U.S. Senate by making the same mistake the Democratic zealots made after they were given control of the legislative branch in 2009. Namely, insisting that partisan priorities, like abortion, gay rights and immigration, are more important than the priorities of most voters: personal income and a federal government rigged in favor of the wealthy.
Evidence of the declining value of GOP stock at the federal level can be seen in the just-released (September 24, 2015) NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey:
- 29% of Americans have a “Favorable” view of GOP; 45% unfavorable (-16 pts)
- 42% of Americans have a “Favorable” view of the Democratic Party, significantly higher than the 35% “Unfavorable” (+7 pts)
Important note: The NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey was conducted by both Peter Hart, a respected Democratic pollster, and Bill McInturff, a respected Republican pollster.
Gallup’s new annual Governance poll, conducted September 9-13, shows that 8-in-10 Americans believe that the GOP-led Congress is “generally out of touch with average Americans.”
That near-record low finding for the nation’s GOP-led legislative branch is amplified by the 62% of Americans who believe members of Congress “care more about special interests than constituents.” Half (52%) of Americans think “most members of Congress are corrupt.”
Who are these out-of-touch, corrupt members of Congress who have sold out their constituents for campaign contributions from special interests?
- 247 U.S. House members are Republicans; 188 are Democrats
- 54 U.S. Senate members are Republicans; 44 Democrats; 2 Independents
Voters Elected New GOP Majority in 2014 to Fix Government
On November 5, 2014, the day after Republicans took over most state governments and both houses of Congress, Gallup released the results of a national survey asking voters what they wanted the new Congress to do. The number one response was, “fix itself;” “compromise to get things done.”
Second, after dealing with the highest priority of cooperating and getting things done, voters wanted the new Congress to create more jobs, lower the deficit and improve healthcare.
Later that month, on November 23, 2014, a CNN/ORC poll showed that only 16% of Americans said that the Republican victories were a mandate for Republican policies. An overwhelming 74% said the GOP victories were a rejection of Democrats.
How are they doing? Today’s (9/30/2015) Real Clear Politics average job approval rating for the Republican-led Congress is 15.2%, with a whopping 75.6% disapproving.
Why? They put their Republican priorities, like abortion, gay rights and immigration, ahead of the voters’ priorities of fixing how the government operates by cooperating to get things done, like creating jobs and improving healthcare.
Nothing Will Get Done until Government is Fixed
The problems of deficit spending and sovereign debt cannot be fixed until government is fixed. The problem of unsustainable entitlements cannot be fixed until government is fixed. The problem of an unsustainable healthcare system cannot be fixed until government is fixed.
Government is the problem.
The problem of abuse of the welfare system, especially corporate welfare, cannot be fixed until government is fixed. The problem of the permanent underclass resulting from an addiction to government dependency cannot be fixed until government is fixed. The problems associated with assimilating 11 million undocumented immigrants cannot be fixed until government is fixed.
The problem of a globally uncompetitive K-12 education in America’s public school system cannot be fixed until government is fixed.
Government is the problem. Government is the problem because government is rigged. Rigged by those in power to benefit those who help them get reelected.
Democrats have rigged the government to benefit their constituencies so they can stay in power. Republicans have rigged the government so they can stay in power.
The United States needs a president who understands both the creation of private wealth and how the government is rigged. One who is temperamentally suited for principled compromise in the pursuit of solutions to problems of inadequate personal income and a rigged government.
Republican zealots in Washington D.C. are paving the way for Democrats to hold the White House in 2016 and retake the U.S. Senate by making the same mistake the Democratic zealots made after they were given control of the legislative branch in 2009. Namely, insisting that partisan priorities are more important than the priorities of most voters.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John N. Davis
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … John Kasich, Republican of Ohio Since January, this series of reports on the likely next U.S. President has unfolded by process of elimination. It concludes today, Labor Day, September 7, 2015, with my forecast. September 7, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 13 10:13
[More…]
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … John Kasich, Republican of Ohio
Since January, this series of reports on the likely next U.S. President has unfolded by process of elimination. It concludes today, Labor Day, September 7, 2015, with my forecast.
September 7, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 13 10:13 am
The United States needs a President who is experienced in both the creation of private wealth and the distribution of public wealth through government. One who is temperamentally suited for principled compromise as the best hope of solving the two most important problems of the day, according to Gallup, not enough income and too much government.
The nation does not need a belittler-in-chief, nor does it need a soft-spoken neurosurgeon with an inspiring personal story but lacking in experience in important problems of the day.
The nation does not need a leader elected just because of their race, ethnicity or gender. It does not need a leader who thinks that sticking to your beliefs even if it means shutting down the government is more important than principled compromise.
The United States needs a wise government leader. One who knows that private sector prosperity is the financial wherewithal for public sector progress. Nothing grows out of an estrangement and distrust between business and the White House but hundreds of billions of dollars in un-invested surplus private funds, stagnant wages and an $18 trillion sovereign debt.
The nation does not need a leader from a political dynasty. There are simply too many incestuous relationships with family insiders who aided and abetted in the creation of today’s major problems. Income. Government. Insiders with failed ideas and self-serving agendas.
The United States needs a great government leader. One who knows government at all levels well enough to identify the thousands of opportunities to fix the problems with the effective distribution of public wealth without making things worse. One who understands the dynamics of private sector wealth formulation from small retailers to globally competitive manufacturers.
One who has the know-how to stimulate real personal income growth for all Americans.
Finally, the nation needs a leader who inspires the best in each of us. An optimistic sense of unlimited potential. Personal and national. Compassion for the less fortunate.
Republicans begin the 2016 presidential race with a major structural advantage, the fact that American voters do not give the party in the White House a third term. The only exception to that since the post WWII Truman administration was the 1988 election of Republican President George Herbert Walker Bush following the Reagan administration.
Democrats also have structural advantages, including the number of loyal Democratic states and national demographic trends favoring minorities and younger generations of voters. According to an analysis in Politico, Democrats have a lock on 247 of the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win. Republicans can count on 206 Electoral College votes from GOP-friendly states.
After carefully weighing all structural advantages and the nation’s most important problems against the backgrounds, temperaments, political strengths and weaknesses of all current Democrats and Republicans running for president, I have concluded that John Kasich, Republican Governor of Ohio, is most likely to be the next President of the United States.
John Kasich, from McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania
John Kasich was born and raised in McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania.
He is a small-town Republican who won a second term in 2014 as Governor of Ohio, the 7th largest state in the country, with 64% of the vote, including blue-collar Democrats.
He is experienced in both the creation of private wealth (Lehman Brothers) and the distribution of public wealth through government (Member of Congress 18 years; two-term Governor of Ohio).
His many bipartisan legislative successes in Washington and Columbus make him temperamentally suited for principled compromise, the best hope of solving the problems of income and government.
He chaired the U.S. House Budget Committee in 1997 that balanced the federal budget. As Governor of Ohio, he erased the state’s $8 billion shortfall, reformed education and created a $2 billion rainy day fund.
Yes, I am aware of his “prickliness.” But his record of bipartisan support in a swing state that voted for Obama twice speaks well to my point that he is temperamentally suited for principled compromise.
There is no greater personal leadership quality desired by voters today than authenticity. Someone who speaks their mind. Someone who can be trusted, even if they are a bit prickly.
Here are some highlights of his story from Wikipedia:
- John Kasich was born May 13, 1952, and raised in McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania, a working-class suburb of Pittsburgh
- Father delivered mail; Mother worked at the post office
- Both parents were killed in an automobile accident by a drunk driver
- Ohio State University, BA in Political Science, 1974
- Elected to the Ohio Senate in 1978 at the age of 26; youngest ever
- Only Republican in the U.S. in 1982 to defeat an incumbent Democrat for Congress
- Served 18 years in the U.S. House from 1983-2001
- In 1996, he introduced the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which reformed the nation’s welfare system
- As chair of the U.S. House Budget Committee in 1997, Kasich was the architect of the first balanced federal budget since 1969
- Lehman Brothers Investment Banking Division Managing Director 2001-2008
- Hosted Fox News’ Heartland with John Kasich; guest-hosted for Bill O’Reilly
- Elected Governor of Ohio, November 2, 2010
- Reelected in 2014 with a 30-point margin (64% landslide)
- Won 86 of 88 counties in a swing state carried twice by President Obama
- Eliminated Ohio’s $8 billion budget shortfall; increased rainy day fund to $2 billion
- Has big name endorsements like New Hampshire’s John Sununu, Mississippi’s Trent Lott; Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley; NBA great Charles Barkley
Also-Rans include Good People with Inspiring Personal Stories
It is regrettable that someone as good and inspiring as Ben Carson must be included on the list of Republicans likely to be among the “also-rans” in the race for the GOP presidential nomination. However, a neurosurgeon’s skill is not what is needed in the Oval Office at a time when personal income and the federal government are the nation’s biggest problems.
Carson, among the early frontrunners in the polls, has no experience with managing the complexities of large governmental agencies, no experience with building principled compromise among feuding legislative factions, no experience with the creation of private wealth on the national and international levels, no experience in working with foreign governments to manage delicate differences without resorting to war, and no experience with managing a necessary war.
Carson would certainly agree that it took an extraordinary level of competence gained from decades of experience for him to successfully separate conjoined twins without creating a problem greater than the original challenge. Fixing a complex and deeply flawed government successfully also requires a steady hand and surgical precision that can only come from decades of experience in government at all levels.
Carson is a good man, a brilliant neurosurgeon with an inspiring personal story. That’s not enough. The problem with government today was created by good men and women who were very intelligent and gifted orators, most with inspiring personal stories.
Also-Rans likely to include the U.S. Senators, the Perennials, the Scandal-Plagued and the Belittler-in-Chief
With all due respect, any candidate whose legislative and executive governmental experience is as limited as that of President Obama’s will not likely to be president. Fitting that profile are those serving their first term in the U.S. Senate with no other executive or legislative governmental experience like Ted Cruz from Texas and Rand Paul from Kentucky.
Like Obama, both are passionate orators and very smart. Cruz is a Harvard lawyer. Paul is a Duke ophthalmologist. They have great ideas. But American voters have concluded that every politician has great ideas. That great ideas are a dime a dozen.
Cruz and Paul have little to show for their service in the Senate, at a time when America needs an accomplished legislative and executive leader. The reason they have so little to show is because they do not believe in principled compromise.
Anyone who devalues principled compromise will not even make the VP short list.
Also-rans will likely include perennial candidates like former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, along with Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who would have been on the short list of the most promising contenders, will be tripped up politically for years due to the fallout of the Bridgegate scandal. Although he has not been implicated in criminal wrongdoing, the investigations opened up a can of worms of other allegations of misuse of power.
Donald Trump, the current frontrunner for the GOP presidential nod in most polls, will likely make the “also-rans” list. Trump certainly has the experience with the creation of wealth and income growth at the national and international levels. But the biggest problem is government.
Trump is not temperamentally suited to building principled compromise among those charged by the voters to solve the problem of big government responsibly. Our problems are too great to be entrusted to a Belittler-in-Chief.
Carly Fiorina definitely makes the potential VP short list. She is a confident, scrappy combatant, and has thoughtful answers to policy questions. However, her lack of government experience is a major problem. A brilliant government leader with no business management experience could not run a Fortune 500 company. Likewise, a brilliant Fortune 500 executive with no experience in the intricacies of government is incapable of managing Washington DC.
U.S. Senator Marco Rubio is Kasich’s Ideal Vice Presidential Pick
First-term U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, who won in 2010 with a 19-point advantage, does have legislative experience. He served in the Florida House from 2000 – 2008; Speaker 2006-2008.
That legislative experience, in a major swing state, the 3rd largest state in the U.S. with a $77 billion budget, along with his Hispanic heritage, his youthful enthusiasm and intelligent answers to policy questions (J.D. degree cum laude U. of Miami), puts him high on the potential VP list.
A Kasich-Rubio ticket would be very powerful, bringing two large swing states into the GOP Electoral College fold.
In my next report, I will write about how a Kasich-Rubio ticket would solve the biggest problem faced by Republican nominees for president in the past twenty years, namely, the inability to persuade voters who were struggling financially that they cared about them.
I will also write about how a Kasich-Rubio ticket would break through the Democrats blue wall of defense, those predictably friendly states and the nation’s demographic trends.
Meanwhile, I would like to conclude today with this thought: If government is the problem, as Gallup’s research has shown all year, and 535 principled Members of Congress plus one principled president have failed to solve the problem, then just another cohort of principled leaders in Washington will not change anything.
A lack of principle is not the problem with government, a lack of principled compromise is the problem. Who is temperamentally suited to principled compromise? Kasich-Rubio.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John Davis
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination Part 8: Trumped-Up Political Credibility will be Undermined by Sobering State/National Concerns This is a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will unfold by process of elimination, interlocked with trends analyses, and conclude with
[More…]
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination
Part 8: Trumped-Up Political Credibility will be Undermined by Sobering State/National Concerns
This is a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will unfold by process of elimination, interlocked with trends analyses, and conclude with my forecast for the next president on Labor Day.
August 19, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 12 6:13 am
“Moron,” “Bimbo,” “Dummy,” “Loser,” “Stupid”
The United States needs a great leader; a transformative consensus-builder. Are these the words of a great consensus builder: “moron,” “bimbo,” “dummy,” “loser,” “stupid?” Foolishness is why Donald Trump has no future in the presidential race.
Trump’s political credibility is fool’s gold. A superficial resemblance to great leadership. In time, trumped-up political credibility will be undermined by sobering state and national concerns.
Meanwhile, political foolishness is Trump’s modus operandi. Insults are a campaign tactic.
“Sometimes, part of making a deal is denigrating your competition,” writes Trump in The Art of the Deal, his 1987 bestseller. Here are several recent examples of Trump on the attack taken from an August 14, 2015 story in Politico magazine by Michael Kruse titled, The 199 Most Donald Trump Things Donald Trump Has Ever Said:
- George Will is a “moron.” (Twitter, April 17, 2015)
- Chuck Todd is a “moron.” (Twitter, Aug. 9, 2013)
- Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel: “Obvious moron.” (Twitter, Aug. 23, 2014)
- Megyn Kelly is a “bimbo.” (Twitter, Aug. 7, 2015)
- Michelle Malkin is a “dummy.” (Twitter, Oct. 25, 2012)
- Brian Williams is a “dummy.” (Twitter, March 6, 2013)
- “Karl Rove is a total loser.” (Twitter, Feb. 7, 2013)
- Republican pollster Frank Luntz is a “total loser!” (Twitter, Aug. 3, 2014)
- John McCain is “not a war hero. … He is a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured, OK?” (Ames, Iowa, July 18, 2015)
- “Truly weird Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain.” (Twitter, Aug. 10, 2015)
- “I just realized that if you listen to Carly Fiorina for more than ten minutes straight, you develop a massive headache. She has zero chance!” (Twitter, Aug. 9, 2015)
- Rick Perry “put on glasses so people think he’s smart. … People can see through the glasses.” (Bluffton, S.C., July 21, 2015)
- Rick Santorum? “I have a big plane. He doesn’t.” (Des Moines Register, April 8, 2015)
- “Jeb Bush has to like the Mexican Illegals because of his wife.” (Retweeted and then deleted on Twitter, July 4, 2015)
Polarization is America’s Greatest Impediment to Progress
Donald Trump says he wants to make America great again. How can he make America great again unless he inspires greatness? Personal insults only inspire polarization. Isn’t polarization the greatest impediment to solving the problems faced by our state and nation?
- $18.4 trillion national debt and unsustainable entitlement programs
- Shockingly inept means of funding healthcare
- Underemployed forced to feed their families with federal food stamps
- Neglected investments by the states in infrastructure, an economic development imperative
- Globally uncompetitive K12 educational system
Sobering state and national problems like those listed will, in time, undermine polarizing candidates with trumped-up political credibility. Likewise, sobering state and national problems will undermine the candidacies of polarizing partisan and ideological purists.
Ironically, today’s political leaders have not made sufficient progress towards solving state and federal problems because they are polarized by partisan and ideological purists who value principle over compromise solutions to problems. The hard-right/hard-left Donald Trump/Bernie Sanders ideologues are outraged over the results of the very problem they created: polarization.
Is Donald Trump’s priority to make America great, or is it to make Donald Trump great? Is Trump in the race to promote Trump Entertainment? Consider Trumps own words, again from the August 14, 2015 story in Politico magazine by Michael Kruse:
- “It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.” (Fortune, April 3, 2000)
- “One thing I’ve learned about the press is that they’re always hungry for a good story, and the more sensational the better. … The point is that if you are a little different, or a little outrageous, or if you do things that are bold or controversial, the press is going to write about you.” (The Art of the Deal, 1987)
- “Sometimes it pays to be a little wild.” (The Art of the Deal, 1987)
- “Controversy, in short, sells.” (The Art of the Deal, 1987)
In time, sobering state and national concerns will lead American voters to choose a consensus builder for President of the United States. Someone who can end the polarization of ideological factions, not someone who thrives on “denigrating your competition” with words like “morons,” “bimbos,” “dummies,” “losers,” “stupid people.”
Meanwhile, look for Trump to hire every available political operative in the country to swarm the early caucus and primary states to keep the perception going that he is a serious presidential contender. It’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars in free advertising world-wide benefiting his casinos and resorts.
As Trump told Fortune, “It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John Davis
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination Part 7: Trump the Naked Streaker. Bush vs Cruz in Cleveland (like Ford/Reagan 1976); then Bush/Clinton/3rd Party (1992 Rematch). This is a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will unfold by process of elimination, interlocked
[More…]
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination
Part 7: Trump the Naked Streaker. Bush vs Cruz in Cleveland (like Ford/Reagan 1976); then Bush/Clinton/3rd Party (1992 Rematch).
This is a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will unfold by process of elimination, interlocked with trends analyses, and conclude with my forecast for the next president on Labor Day.
August 11, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 11 2:13 pm
On Saturday, August 1, 2015, I had the pleasure of moderating a conversation with James Carville and Mary Matalin at the Carolinas Associated General Contractors event in Greenville, South Carolina. Married for 21 years, they live in New Orleans with their two daughters.
Carville and Matalin met during the 1992 presidential campaign, a race won by his Democratic candidate, former Arkansas governor Bill Clinton, with only 43% of the vote. Her Republican candidate, incumbent President George H. W. Bush, lost with 38%. A 3rd party spoiler named Ross Perot garnered 19% of the vote, most of which would have gone to Bush.
A Bush/Clinton/3rd Party rematch could happen in 2016: maybe Bush/Clinton/Cruz.
Bush has a lock on mainstream, establishment Republicans. Cruz has the superior political intellect, communication skills and an anti-establishment record as a conservative hard-liner to be one of the last two standing in Cleveland at the GOP National Convention July 18-21, 2016. If so, he will inherit all of the religious right and Tea Party Republicans from early contenders.
If Bush beats Cruz in Cleveland (Ford/Reagan 1976), Cruz will be forced by his formidable and outraged supporters, fueled by billionaire-backed super PACS, to run as an independent.
Pummeling by White, Male Republicans is Key to Clinton’s Hopes
There is no doubt in my mind that Clinton will be the Democratic Party nominee. She will survive all scandalous allegations for the same reason her husband survived impeachment relating to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal: Republican overreach.
On December 19, 1998, after a year of Republican congressional investigations and testimony riddled with salacious details of White House extramarital encounters, the U.S. House voted along partisan lines to impeach President Clinton. The next day, December 20, 1998, Clinton’s approval rating jumped 10 points to 73%, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll.
Restated for emphasis: The day after the Articles of Impeachment were passed, Clinton’s approval rating soared to an all-time high, higher than President Ronald Reagan’s highest approval rating. At the same time, the favorable view of the Republican Party fell ten points.
That’s what is about to happen in 2016.
Fifteen Republican candidates for president piling on Hillary Clinton. Fifteen Republican candidates throwing red meat to the Hillary haters. Fifteen Republican candidates, 14 of whom are men, pummeling Hillary Clinton with vindictive hyperbole.
Then, add all of those white male-led Republican committees in Congress piling on with their investigative hearings on Benghazi and State Department emails.
Hillary Clinton will invite any and all opportunities to be pummeled by white male Republicans because she knows it’s her key to the Oval Office.
Trump’s Real Reason for Running
The pieces of the 2016 presidential puzzle are beginning to fit. The most important piece is dissatisfaction with government, for too long an outrage shared by most Americans, liberals, moderates and conservatives.
Political outrage with government will drive the politics of 2016 at all levels.
Outraged voters do outrageous things. Ergo, Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have zero chance of becoming President of the United States. Everyone knows that. They are merely the pre-game entertainment.
Trump is like the streaker during pre-game warmups at the Super Bowl, egged on by his buddies to do what they would not dare do. Run naked out onto the field on national TV. Outraged conservatives have egged Trump on to say what they would not dare say.
Trump is only in the race to promote Trump Entertainment. He has received hundreds of millions of dollars in free advertising world-wide benefiting his casinos and resorts. Trump boasted at the Fox GOP Debate last week about exploiting bankruptcy laws for business gain. In time, he will brag about using presidential politics for business gain.
As a promoter, like P.T. Barnum, Donald Trump is brilliant. However, he has 0% chance of being president, and he knows it. Which is fine by him. That’s not why he is running.
Bush vs. Clinton and 3rd Party Conservative in 2016
I am well aware of ballot access issues at the state level for independent candidacies, as well as issues relating to the election of electors who elect the President, not the voters. But what is different about 2016 is that billionaires can spend an unlimited amount of money to hire the best election law attorneys to set up a “Plan B” to keep their candidates for president in the running.
Religious and Tea Party economic conservatives were pushed aside in 2014. Mainstream Republicans ran over them; disrespected them. The establishment defeated the hard-liner conservatives in every significant primary battle. They were humiliated. Not again.
In 2016, hard-liner conservatives are going to push back with a vengeance. The Republican National Convention must elect a conservative who can appeal to moderates, not another moderate who can appeal to conservatives, or the hard-liners will bolt and back an independent candidate.
If hard-liners bolt, it will be 1992 all over again: A Bush, a Clinton and a well-funded independent candidate. A match made in heaven for Democrat James Carville; Perot’s votes would have gone to Bush. A nightmare for his future wife, conservative Republican Mary Matalin.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report John Davis
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination Part 6: The Five Safest Incumbents in 2016 American Politics are the Female Members of the North Carolina Council of State This is the sixth in a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will
[More…]
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Next President of the United States … by Process of Elimination
Part 6: The Five Safest Incumbents in 2016 American Politics are the Female Members of the North Carolina Council of State
This is the sixth in a series of reports on the race for U.S. President. The series will unfold by process of elimination, interlocked with trends analyses, and conclude with my forecast for the next president.
July 14, 2015 Vol. VIII, No. 10 2:13 pm
18 Wins; 0 Losses Vanquished Males: 16
What was former five-term (2001-2011) Democratic Mayor of Raleigh Charles Meeker thinking when he announced last week that he was going to challenge four-term Republican Commissioner of Labor Cherie Berry in her race for a fifth term in 2016?
Doesn’t Meeker know that the five women on the North Carolina Council of State have a win/loss record of 18 and 0? Doesn’t he know that all 16 men who dared to challenge them since 1996 have been defeated?
Sixteen men. Vanquished, one and all. A NASCAR legend, a state senator, the incumbent State Auditor, prominent attorneys, wealthy businessmen, school board chairs, and a former speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives.
Not only have the five women on North Carolina’s Council of State never lost a Council of State race, they are all historic state leaders as significant as any founding father.
- Elaine Marshall, D-Harnett, Secretary of State, the first woman elected to a statewide executive office (1996) in North Carolina history
- Cherie Berry, R-Catawba, first woman elected Commissioner of Labor (2000), and the first female Republican to serve on the North Carolina Council of State
- June Atkinson, D-Wake, first woman elected Supt. of Public Instruction (2004)
- Beth Wood, D-Craven, first woman elected State Auditor (2008)
- Janet Cowell, D-Wake, first woman elected State Treasurer (2008)
Combine the likely female voter registration and turnout advantages for the female members of the North Carolina Council of State with their legendary political battlefield successes, and you can see why they are arguably the five safest incumbents in 2016 American politics.
Legendary Political Battlefield Successes
The women on the North Carolina Council of State share a win/loss record of 18 and 0.
Secretary of State Elaine Marshall has 5 wins 0 losses for her seat on the Council of State, defeating 6 men along the way, three in 1996. Those men include NASCAR legend Richard Petty, a Republican, along with Libertarian Lewis Guignard and Natural Law Party candidate Stephen Richter. She defeated Petty by a comfortable margin of 53.5% to 45.2%.
Marshall has defeated all Republican challengers handily, including state Sen. Harris Blake (2000) and Jack Sawyer (2008). In 2012, Marshall defeated her Republican challenger Ed Goodwin by 54% to 46%, spending $692,000 to his $104,000.
Marshall heads the National Association of Secretaries of State.
As the first woman elected to a statewide executive office, Marshall’s service to the state of North Carolina is historic. Her political battlefield successes are legendary.
Labor Commissioner Cherie Berry has 4 wins and 0 losses for her seat on the Council of State, defeating 3 men along the way. She defeated Democrats Doug Berger and Wayne Goodwin in 2000 and 2004, and won a fourth term in 2012 by defeating her Democrat challenger John Brooks by 53% to 47%, spending $176,000 to Brooks’ $18,000.
Berry honed her leadership skills in the world of business serving as president of a manufacturing company, LGM, in Maiden. Berry began honing her political skills in 1992 when she won the first of four terms in the North Carolina House.
In 1996, under her leadership as Co-Chair of the House Welfare Reform Committee, Berry, along with fellow committee Co-Chair Rep. Julia Howard, a Rowan County Republican, were arguably the first women in the North Carolina legislature to wield enough raw political power to successfully pass a major piece of controversial legislation despite strong opposition from the male leaders of the state Senate and House, and over the protestations of Democratic Governor Hunt.
“We were the Thelma and Louise of the North Carolina General Assembly,” Berry said of her relationship with Howard during the 1996 Welfare Reform debate.
As the first female Labor Commissioner, Berry’s service to the state is historic. Her political career is legendary. Having her picture in every elevator in the state for 15 years has even inspired young people to write songs about her. Check out Cherie Berry Wow.
Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson, has 3 wins 0 losses for her seat on the Council of State, defeating 3 men along the way. Those men include Bill Fletcher in 2004, a former Chairman of the Wake County School Board, and Richard Morgan in 2008, a former Republican Speaker of the North Carolina House.
Atkinson won a third term in 2012, defeating Republican John Tedesco, also a former Wake County School Board Chairman, by 54% to 46%, spending $320,000 to Tedesco’s $85,000.
Atkinson demonstrated her political prowess during her first campaign when she won the last undecided 2004 race in the United States. Atkinson finally prevailed on August 23, 2005, when a historic joint session of the North Carolina General Assembly elected her Superintendent of Public Instruction along partisan lines over Wake County Republican Bill Fletcher.
The last time the North Carolina legislature decided the outcome of a statewide race was in 1835. The law establishing the procedure for the state legislature to decide the outcome of the race also prohibits an appeal of the decision to any state court.
As the first female Superintendent of Public Instruction, Atkinson’s service to the state is historic. Her political battlefield acumen is seasoned by three successful campaigns.
State Auditor Beth Wood has 2 wins 0 losses for her seat on the Council of State, beginning in 2008, when she defeated Republican incumbent State Auditor Les Merritt. In 2012, Democrat Beth Wood defeated her Republican challenger Debra Goldman, a member of the Wake County School Board, by 54% to 46%, spending $461,000 to Goldman’s $26,000.
Beth Wood is tough. She grew up on her family’s tobacco farm in Craven County. She put herself through East Carolina and became a CPA.
It’s that toughness of personal character that has allowed Wood to stand strong behind controversial audits of state agencies. Most recently, Wood discovered abuses in the Office of Medicaid Management Information Systems Services (OMMISS) within the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Her audit disclosed $1.6 million wasted through excessive wages and commissions, unjustified overtime, and holiday pay to ineligible employees.
As the first female State Auditor, Beth Wood’s service to the state is historic. She has been recognized nationally as one of the Top 25 most powerful women in accounting. She has saved the state tens of millions of dollars. Her political battlefield successes are likely to grow in 2016.
State Treasurer Janet Cowell has 2 wins 0 losses for her seat on the Council of State, defeating 5 men along the way. Those men include Democrats Michael Weisel and David Young in the 2008 Democratic Primary, and Republican Bill Daughtridge in the 2008 General Election.
In 2012, Democrat Janet Cowell defeated primary opponent Ron Elmer. She went on to defeat her Republican General Election challenger Steve Royal by 54% to 46%, spending $1.2 million to Royal’s $13,736.
Cowell, who manages $90 billion in pension investments, is a graduate of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Under her leadership, North Carolina is one of only nine states to earn a AAA bond rating by all three rating agencies.
As the first female State Treasurer, Janet Cowell’s service to the state is historic. She has earned the state tens of millions of dollars with smart investment decisions, and is recognized internationally as one of the Top 25 public fund investors in the world.
Her political battlefield successes are likely to grow in 2016.
Hillary Clinton for President Factor
The women on the North Carolina Council of State share a win/loss record of 18 and 0.
In North Carolina, there are 3,396,342 female voters (54.4%) to 2,852,510 male voters (45.6%). In 2012, the gap between the number of female and male voters in North Carolina’s presidential race was over 490,000 out of 4.5 million votes cast.
If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States in 2016, gender pride will ensure that the gap between the number of female and male voters will be even greater than it was in 2012.
The female voter registration and turnout advantage, coupled with the power of gender solidarity in 2016, bodes well for the five women on North Carolina’s Council of State; arguably the five safest incumbents in 2016 American politics.
Male challengers beware.
– End –
Thank You for Reading the John Davis Political Report
John Davis