First Blog

Looking only at one candidate, we can learn several lessons about all candidates.  Anyone following the current national reality show, which is Republican Presidential politics, is probably amazed at Jeb Bush’s precipitous fall in the polls.   On the ground, I imagine Jeb Bush is also amazed.   Indeed, it is amazing from a qualifications viewpoint.   Bush does have some impressive credentials complete with executive experience.      In the Bush camp, it is not a stretch to conclude that Donald Trump is viewed there as similar to the elder Bush’s nemesis, Ross Perot.   It cost the election for Bush in 1992.   So it was decided to attack Trump.   An attack was launched with his “Chaos candidate” remarks made at the last debate.   It has intensified.     Is it working?   Doesn’t seem to be.   Bush is now developing a last stand policy in Florida, seemingly ignoring Iowa and New Hampshire.   This strategy reminiscent of Rudy Giuliani’s similar Florida policy in the previous

I used to like Presidential candidate Carly Fiorina for her practical viewpoints on how to proceed to restore our nation to its former greatness. She seems experienced.   She seems knowledgeable.   She does make some great sound bites.    Yet she scolds, and even preaches to us, explaining mostly how she is the perfect choice to solve the big problems of our day, and also how she could confront delimit and then defeat Hillary Clinton.   She deprecates everyone, not just the democrats.      She talks to us as if we are ignorant and the government is doing nothing and can do nothing.   On security, she talks about applying big data algorithms as though she understands them, but she betrays her ignorance of the size of the data sets (zettabytes) she wishes to examine.   Her broad strokes on security are designed only for the masses and newscasts.  Let’s face it.   The Presidential job has become almost too large for anyone.    We, the country, may be seeking what we cannot ha

What is remarkable about this cycle of presidential political polling is that Donald Trump is well ahead, nationally at least.  His competitors, particularly the governors are trashing his every effort.  Cruz and Rubio are a bit more coy. The others get so little coverage its hard to say what they think.  Trump, it is said polls from the hard right, i.e. non-intelligent folks that believe hard right things.  But 41% is a number so high, it kinda defies understanding.  On the other had Hillary Clinton has been drifting to the left - to shore up support with the far left constituency (and money), and everybody expects her to drift toward the center after her inevitable nomination.  Good.  Hillary is doing what such folks do.  Predictable. The mystery is those confounded Republicans.  The governors and just about everyone else have maintained their political positions, not going left or right but by millimeters, just as they cast them months ago. They chastise the front-runner, but to

What concerns me about Republicans is that there seem to be candidates from moderate to far right all advocating courses of action, many contradicting the other.   Moreover, many seem to have a firm constituency that believes in the correctness of their proposals.   It is the lack of internal consensus that is of greatest concern.   All camps delight in extolling their virtues in equal measure to their opponents’ faults.   Another, most troubling concern, is that of the polls.   In this cycle, we see complete amateurs vying for the top spot, with essentially no records of achievement – except possibly with giving speeches.   Overall, there is so much internal dissent, it has become disturbing.  Pollsters, even the most honest, have little experience polling preferences among such a large group of participants.   They give percentages of error not sustainable even by elementary statistical methods.     Moreover, they have no method of accommodating newsworthy visibility.    Yet, po

It is clearly possible that the President is using the FBI investigation of Secretary Clinton to keep her vocal views in check.   If this is correct, she really cannot make any substantial critique of Obama policy while the investigation is pending.   She has commented or responded, clearly limiting her comments about or against the President on all international issues, particularly those of ISIS.  She is very careful.  She will not claim or support the nature of Islamic terrorists, preferring a stance that "We do not war against the Muslims."  This is a stretch in the minds of many Americans.  She will not comment on alliances with the Russians, preferring the softer language of "separate but equal in a common cause."   She will not comment on arming the Kurds or supplying the Jordanians or Syrian moderates, preferring to indicate there is not even an issue of discussion.  The world is now a difficult place for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. I think

Who to support???? We see the Democrats performing a type of surgery upon the actions of the President, carefully distinguishing themselves from current policy only on particular matters.   They seem to live in fear of a insider condemnation.   Or they believe the President is essentially correct but for these particular exceptions. Overall, they are mostly united upon social programs.   Overall, they minimize international events, preferring to emphasize domestic issues, upon which there is merit, owing to a world view that every country is an independent agency.   If you so believe, this is your expression of what needs to be achieved.   If you believe climate change is paramount and more importantly anthropomorphic, these folks are your people.    The Democrats are more-or-less unified in their support for Secretary Clinton.   None of her established blemishes seem to matter.    Bernie is not  viable no matter how many/few like his honest but detached approach.  This is