Teflon Don?

The prospect of impeachment is a serious matter for any American President. In 1974, Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached, but acquitted by the Senate. Now, Donald Trump faces the prospect of impeachment for alleged abuse of power in his dealings with Ukraine.

In the spirit of this irreverent tweet from Ryan Fournier, founder of the Students for Trump group, I would also like to blame Trump for giving the Soviet Union the atomic bomb, killing Teamster boss Jimmy Hoffa, and giving the United States the NTSC television standard instead of PAL.

Fournier alludes to alleged improper conduct from Hillary Clinton in running the Clinton Foundation, in which funds raised for disaster relief for Haiti were improperly handled, Russia bribing the Clinton Foundation to obtain a favourable uranium deal, and in her capacity as Secretary of State during Barack Obama's first term as President. The email and Benghazi controversies dogged her during her unsuccessful 2016 Presidential election campaign.

It remains to be seen if Trump is guilty of abuse of power, or if Hillary Clinton actually did all of the things that Fournier accuses her of. 

Onwards and upwards

This is the homepage for Onward Together, a progressive political group founded by Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean, who unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic nomination for President in 2004. Onward Together is a grassroots organisation, formed to promote progressive politics, and oppose the Trump Administration. 

When I saw the coloured arrows on the bottom of the screen, the first thing that came to mind was the broad arrows on the uniforms worn by British convicts in the nineteenth century in Australian penal colonies. Just saying. 

That didn't take long

When Bill Clinton was a Presidential candidate in 1992, he had to deal with allegations of serial marital infidelity. When the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke in 1998, it was no surprise that given his past, Clinton would eventually be involved in a Presidential sex scandal. This led to his impeachment, and contributed to the unsuccessful presidential campaigns of both Al Gore and Hillary Clinton.  

Donald Trump is yet to take office, but already questions are being raised about potential conflicts of interest, with his business interests interfering with his duties as President. The constitution prevents a President from using the office for personal benefit. It is highly likely that Trump will eventually be tarnished by a conflict of interest scandal. The question is if this will be serious enough to lead to his impeachment.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-constitution-liberals-231783

http://time.com/4578431/donald-trump-conflicts-of-interest-list/

Presumptuous

Donald Trump will be the next President of the United States. I thought he was unelectable. I was wrong. Newsweek magazine was sure that Hillary Clinton would easily win the election, and in anticipation, jumped the gun by printing this special commemorative edition. 

It reminded me of the famous picture of former President Harry Truman, holding up a newspaper with a front page story announcing his defeat, when he defied expectations to defeat his Republican opponent Thomas Dewey in the 1948 presidential election.

The United States is in for an interesting 4 years. I'm shocked at the election result. I didn't see it coming. Watching analysis on television news channels, I saw that some commentators are speculating that Trump won't seek a second term, and that the progressive agenda of the Obama administration, centred on identity politics, will be overturned. I don't see how. There's no turning back the clock.

I actually feel sorry for Hillary Clinton. She must be devastated that she will never achieve her ambition of becoming President. As for Donald Trump, during the campaign the media class asserted that he did not have the character or temperament to be President. They might yet be proven right.

Bewilderment

This is the first time I've posted anything about Wikileaks. Why is Hillary Clinton still a viable candidate for the office of President of the United States? A cursory reading of this list of leaked Clinton emails, supplied by Wikileaks isn't very flattering to either her or her associates, to say the least.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/nick-cater/us-election-clinton-campaign-has-been-rocked-to-the-foundations/news-story/da2083829faae49de7888de468774243

http://themillenniumreport.com/2016/10/the-top-100-most-damaging-wikileaks/

You know my name

According to statistics compiled by the United States Social Security Administration, and recently highlighted in an episode of ABC TV's Planet America, the name baby name Hillary has dropped dramatically in popularity in the years since Hillary Clinton became first lady of the United States in 1993. Fast forward 23 years, and she is the first female candidate nominated by a mainstream party for the office of President of the United States. If she wins the election in November, then expect this trend to continue for at least the next four to eight years.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/planet-america/

Psephology for fun and profit

A prominent Australian newspaper columnist thinks it's newsworthy to report that an opinion poll gives presumptive Republican presidential nominee a 46 per cent favourability rating, compared to his likely opponent, Hillary Clinton, who has a 44 per cent rating.

Historically speaking, polls at this point in the electoral cycle are not a reliable indicator of general election results. Back in February and March 1980, Ronald Reagan trailed President Jimmy Carter by 15 points in opinion polls. Reagan won the presidential election in a 44 state landslide. In May 1988, Democrat Michael Dukakis was 10 points ahead of George Bush in opinion polls. Bush went on to convincingly win that year's election. More recently, in October 2012, Mitt Romney was 7 points ahead of Barack Obama in opinion polls, but still lost convincingly to Obama in the general election.

I'd be very surprised if Trump wins the election, but I'm happy to be proven wrong, either now or on election day. All Hillary Clinton has to do to win is to get all of Barack Obama's voters to vote for her, and she's a shoo-in.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/begrudging-wapo-poll-trump-46-clinton-44/article/2591982

Life imitates art

The other day I watched the HD version of Independence Day (1996), Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich's star-studded alien invasion of Earth popcorn movie extravaganza.

As I think about next year's American presidential election and the current field of candidates, I think about Bill Pullman's character in that movie, the fictional President Thomas J. Whitmore. Insofar as he is young and idealistic, Whitmore was described as being by reviewers at the time as being "Clintonian." Plainly speaking, he was partially based on then President Bill Clinton, who was running for re-election at the time.

Bill Clinton's enemies unfairly smeared him as a Vietnam War draft dodger, but allegations of his philandering turned out to be true. By contrast, Whitmore is a retired Air Force pilot who served in the 1991 Gulf War, a faithful husband, and a loving father. He proves his worth by rising to the challenge of defeating a global threat.

It's almost a pity that a man of Whitmore's calibre is not a candidate. Just over a year from election day, there is no candidate in the current field who has captured the imagination of the American public. Hillary Clinton will probably be the Democrat nominee, but the Republican field is too crowded. It's anyone's guess who the eventual nominee turns out to be. I just wish the oxygen thieves would drop out and improve the chances of those who actually have a chance of winning, and are actually capable of doing the job.

Joey come lately?

United States Vice President Joe Biden may or may not be about to declare that he is running for the Presidency next year. If he does, it will add an interesting dynamic to the race. The Democratic field will have more than one viable candidate in it. Hillary Clinton will have some serious competition.

Telling porkies?

The news media has unanimously declared Hillary Clinton to be the winner of Tuesday night's CNN Democratic presidential candidate debate held in Las Vegas, Nevada.

If Ben Shapiro is to be believed, she has been somewhat elastic with the truth about her record as First Lady, Senator for New York, and Secretary of State. I'm all for calling her to account, but I'd like to see the other Democrat candidates subjected to similar scrutiny on Breitbart. 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/14/liar-liar-pantsuit-fire-27-hillary-fibs-obfuscations-lies/

Information is power

As well as being community hubs, and helping people to develop research and critical thinking skills, libraries can also be used to dig up dirt on your political enemies.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/24/how-the-gop-is-digging-up-dirt-on-hillary.html

Arduous

Senator Marco Rubio 

As I write this, the United States is gearing up for the 2016 Presidential elections. On the Republican side, Senators Ted Cruz (Texas), Rand Paul (Kentucky), and Marco Rubio (Florida) have formally announced their candidacies. Others, such as former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker may also enter the race.

As things stand today, Hillary Clinton has a very good, but not inevitable chance of securing the Democratic nomination for President. She will be a very formidable candidate. Other potential candidates, such as Governors Lincoln Chafee (Rhode Island) and Martin O'Malley (Maryland), and former Virginia Senator Jim Webb don't yet have her national profile, which is surely a disadvantage.

Looking how the 2012 election turned out for the Republicans, too many candidates ran. Newt Gingrich refused to withdraw from the race even though it was clear he could not win enough delegates for the nominating convention. He selfishly put his personal ambitions ahead of the interests of the party. This disunity meant that there was no clear frontrunner until late in the primary season. The Republicans could well make the same mistake again. They would do much better to choose a candidate with wide appeal.

Should Hillary be the Democratic candidate. maybe the Republican candidate can choose a woman as his running mate. That would be a real game changer. Only this time, make sure she is more eloquent and has a better grasp of foreign affairs than John McCain's running mate, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

The first lady's man strikes again

Bill Clinton

There's no doubt that sex sells in marketing. Former US President Bill Clinton, whose private life has always been somewhat colourful, with more twists and turns than the roads through the Scottish highlands, is believed to have a secret mistress. That's one of the allegations in Ronald Kessler's forthcoming book, The First Family Detail: Secret Service Agents Reveal the Hidden Live of Presidents. 

Before a new biography or autobiography is published, its marketers often release salacious tidbits to the media to create pre-release buzz around it. Clearly that's what is happening here, and the public is probably thinking, "So, Bill's up to his old tricks, is he?"

The reader of this blog will never see it turned into a trashy supermarket tabloid or gossip column. I abhor gossip and rumours. The only reason I'm writing about it is because I wonder what impact this story will have on Hillary Clinton's ambitions to make a second run for the Presidency in 2016. Could an allegation like this stall her campaign at the traffic lights? Should she be a candidate, once again she'll have to deal with rumours and innuendo about her marriage, much like her husband did during his 1992 candidacy and entire tenure of office as President.

Bill Clinton's infidelities and his character issues were arguably one of the reasons why Vice President Al Gore lost the 2000 election to George W. Bush. Perhaps he's now dashed his wife's Presidential ambitions as well. 

On bended knee

Last week The Australian reprinted an article from Gerard Baker of The Times which was in my view a very incisive analysis of the current American Presidential election campaign. As Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fight it out to secure the Democratic nomination, a cult of personality seems to have developed around Obama, where the mostly favourable news media coverage he has received has become almost idolatrous, with him becoming a pseudo-Messianic figure. If this article is to be believed, this is not a new phenonemon, stretching back to the days of Robert Kennedy and Jimmy Carter, and in more recent years, to Bill Clinton. Had Kennedy not been assassinated in June 1968, he may well have become President, and probably would have served two terms. For their part, Presidents Carter (1977-1981) and Clinton (1993-2001) turned out to be flawed and human after all, which would have come as a disappointment to those journalists who canonised them at the time.

Despite our mistrust of authority figures and the tall poppy sydrome, we in Australia have often fallen into the same trap. Despite leading one of the most bold and progressive, but also inept governments in Australian history, former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam (1971-1975) remains a hero to many from the non-conservative side of politics, as is Bob Hawke (1983-1991). As a Christian, I need to heed Scriptural counsel about respecting our political leaders and praying for them, but not to the extent of hero worshipping them, which would be sinful. In the end, we voters need to be objective and informed about politics and politicians. We need to see through the lofty rhetoric of election campaigns and not allow ourselves to be carried away by the grand promises we often hear at these times.