Along came Jones?

The title is from a classic early rock and roll song by the Coasters.  Jones in this instance being Roy Moore’s Democrat opponent to serve the balance of Jeff Sessions’ term in the U.S Senate from Alabama.

As for Moore, I’ve thought (and written) that the allegations, even if unproven (or unprovable after four decades) create a miasma around the man. He stinks on ice.

That said, if he is elected, I’m reasonably certain he would vote as a conservative and would support pretty much the entire Trump agenda. As soon, of course, as we actually find out what that agenda might be beyond “I’m the Greatest! Me Me Me!”

Seriously, Moore would tend to vote with the Republican caucus, even if many of the holier-than-thou Republicans would rather he stayed at home. This is both a good and necessary thing.

On the other hand, if the Democrat Doug Jones should win, there’s the likelihood he would toe the Schumer-Pelosi party line. Also, he appears to be an abortion zealot, meaning he’d likely go along with killing a live-born, viable infant if that was the mother’s “choice.”  

Somewhat surprisingly despite all the accusations against Moore, recent polling shows that he is rising in the polls, and JMC Analytics reaches these conclusions:

(1) Roy Moore has regained his lead in the polls;

(2) Republicans have similarly regained the lead in the generic ballot test, and

(3) allegations of sexual misconduct against Roy Moore have not materially impacted the race.

My take?  Oftentimes you go to war with the army you have.  In this case, Roy Moore would at least tend to point his weapons away from his Republican comrades.  Tend to,  although it depends on how tied he might be to Steve Bannon, for whom Mitch McConnell somehow epitomizes Satan his very self.

Strange times, these.

Advertisements

Honor thy word: repeal it

There’s a lot of sturm und drang going on as Republicans in Congress fuss and feud about repealing and (possibly) replacing Obamacare. A/K/A the Orwellian-entitled “Affordable Care Act.” No one not on welfare can afford it. The country can’t afford it, but, hey, facts are pesky things, aren’t they?

If Obamacare is repealed and not replaced, the mainstream media and the Democrats will blame Republicans for each and every bad thing suffered by anyone in our country. This will include lurid stories about poor-but-hardworking folks who used to have “free” healthcare.” Not to mention ads featuring a Trump look-alike tossing Granny and small children off a cliff.

If Obamacare is repealed and is replaced, all those bad things will still be the fault of Republicans. Except that now whatever repleaces Obamacare will be labeled “Trumpcare.” And, of course, cue those ads…

Point being: it matters not one whit what happens. Facts will not matter. It will be bad, bad, bad because it’s no longer “Obamacare.” Republicans will be blamed by the Democrats and their enablers in Hollywood and the mainstream media.

What I suggest is: repeal the damned thing. Period. Millions will no longer be on what has turned out to be a bad idea. One that limits choices of doctors. One that drives premiums way up for those that pay them.

Who loses? People who receive health insurance as a form of welfare. Who will now go back to Medicaid (as many now “enrolled” in Obamacare are) if they are poor enough. If they are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid, do what the rest of us must do: find health insurance on the private market that you can afford.

As for The Donald…

Trump is almost a walking definition of what it means to be vulgar. He is a blowhard. He is a bully, juvenile in his attacks. Not just juvenile, but sometimes downright mean-spirited (e.g. mocking a disabled reporter for his disability, not for his opinions).

When his supporters argue, “But what he is saying is true,” does this apply to Trump’s many insults against others? And what is the truth about vague statements that such-and-such is “going to be terrific?” Because he’s going to make “great deals,” I suppose.

Look, Donald Trump is fun to watch (except when he is cringe-worthy). And he is owed a debt for bringing issues to the fore (such as immigration and the brainless Obama plan to bring tens of thousands of un-vetted Syrian refugees into our country).

But as a potential commander-in-chief? As we might say in my native New York, fuhgeddaboudit.

Nothing much has changed

Been away since last September, for a variety of reasons, including surgery.  In the four months, little of substance has changed in the Republican primary.  Then, I wrote:

Two points. First, conservatives and Republicans (I am both) need to ask themselves: are those seeking the Republican nomination likely to be better, or worse presidents, than Hillary (or Joe or, shudder, Bernie)? There is not a single person running on our side who would not make a better president than any of those the Democrats have on offer (whatever happened to Jim Webb?).

Second, hark back to William F. Buckley’s premise: we should nominate the most conservative candidate who can win the general election. Not the perfect candidate. He (or she) does not exist.

Right now, for me at least, that would be Marco Rubio. He is smart, well-versed on the issues of the day, good on his feet, and presents the starkest possible generational contrast with the Old Folks the Dems have to offer.

Marco Rubio is still my first choice.  As for The Donald, he thunders on,  spitting his venom at those who disagree with his greatness.

State of the Republican race

It has been said many times, but bears repeating: there is no perfect candidate. Even if there were, my perfect candidate would likely be different than your perfect candidate.

Two points. First, conservatives and Republicans (I am both) need to ask themselves: are those seeking the Republican nomination likely to be better, or worse presidents, than Hillary (or Joe or, shudder, Bernie)? There is not a single person running on our side who would not make a better president than any of those the Democrats have on offer (whatever happened to Jim Webb?).

Second, hark back to William F. Buckley’s premise: we should nominate the most conservative candidate who can win the general election. Not the perfect candidate. He (or she) does not exist.

Right now, for me at least, that would be Marco Rubio. He is smart, well-versed on the issues of the day, good on his feet, and presents the starkest possible generational contrast with the Old Folks the Dems have to offer.

While The Donald might get the nomination, he is rather disliked by the general electorate. And his explosive response to any slight, perceived or real, would do him in in the general.

What about Bush, Carson, and Fiorina? The name Bush has become anathema, and we are not some third-rate monarchy that passes the throne to the next in line for coronation. Carson? Brilliant surgeon, marvelous person. Not a clue when it comes to what matters in running our military or foreign policy. We’ve already seen what on-the-job training will get you in a president. Fiorina? Failed executive, failed senate candidate. ‘Nuff said.

As for Scott Walker, for whom I had high hopes, he disappointed with his sour grapes exit. But he was right. We need to focus on dumping Trump. No-chance candidates such as Govs. Gilmore, Huckabee, Jindal, and Pataki, and Sens. Graham, Paul, and Santorum should exit gracefully before wasting any more time and money.

Summer of Trump

Ah, Donald Trump. He is now a media frenzy, a human tornado of bloviation, exaggeration, and braggadocio. I very much admire the man’s brass huevos, and love it when he gives off-the-top-of-his-head responses. But wait, as they say on the infomercials, is it possible this jamoke could gain our nomination and actually be elected president? I did not think so, but…

Anecdotal, but perhaps a leading indicator of The Donald’s electability: First, a good friend, a lifelong Democrat and liberal, very much likes Trump and says she will vote for him. First double-take.

Second, my union-forever inlaws have told me they also like Trump, and would vote for him. Second double-take.

In both cases, likely the first Republican (ok, purists – the man on the Republican ticket) they will have ever voted for.

My conclusion, albeit quite tentative, is that Trump, should he gain the Republican nomination, has a very good chance at winning.

The question for actual Republicans, including myself, is this: Is Donald Trump the best we can do? Seems to me he is a Republican of convenience. He is mercurial, and has changed his positions radically within the very recent past.

Perhaps the Summer of Trump will lead to an Autumn Awakening among Republicans, and Trump will take his proper place, trailing genuine and serious conservatives such as Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, and Rick Perry.

Impressive Field

Perhaps the most frustrating thing about watching last night’s two debates was that, without exception, every single person on the stage would make a better president than Hillary Clinton.

And even Hillary would be better than He Whose Name Must Not be Mentioned. Can’t see even the Queen Bee make this kind of vainglorious, narcissist utterance (with a teleprompter, natch):

…this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…

Exceeding Obama or Hillary, however, is a low bar indeed. Among all who took both stages, my assessment is that Carly Fiorina did herself the most good, and, for what it’s worth, “won” the undercard.

Marco Rubio demonstrated that he is ready for prime time battle against the Hillary and the entire crew of flying monkeys in the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, to only slightly modify a whine from Hillary.

Senator Rubio has the great advantage against Hillary of clearly being of a younger generation, with greater energy, and, while Hillary is “likable enough” that is not even close to the apparent reality of a cold, calculating, lying schemer.