Rust Belt Trump States Appear to be Spurning Republicans

While much of the media - and, I will concede this blog - has been focused on the circus surrounding Brett Kavanaugh's unfortunate nomination tot he U.S. Supreme Court and Republicans' intent to push him through no matter what, there is positive news.  A piece I saw today showed a poll revealing that the generic candidate enjoyed a 12 point lead over the generic Republican candidate.  Secondly as the Virginian Pilot reports via a re-post of a Bloomberg story, things are NOT looking good for Republicans in the Rust Bet states that disastrously handed the White House to Der  Trumpenführer,  Cook's Political Report described the GOP situation as follows:

The Republican challenge of holding onto their tenuous House majority seems unrelenting; something could happen to alter the apparent trajectory of this election, but right now it seems headed for Democratic gains of between 20 and 40 seats, most likely more than the 23 necessary to tip control.

Similarly, on the state level, the losses could be quite high. Keep in mind that three-quarters of the nation’s governorships and four-fifths of the state legislative seats are up in this midterm-election cycle. As Democrats learned in 2010 and 2011, having catastrophic losses in the last midterm before redistricting ends up being the defeat that keeps on defeating for the rest of a decade. We could see GOP net losses of at least five and as many as 10 governorships and between 400 and 550 state legislative seats, perhaps with control of 10 or 11 legislative chambers flipping from red to blue.

Of course, making sure these predictions come to pass means that Democrats and independents sickened by the Trump/Pence/GOP agenda must get out and actually vote on November 6, 2018.  This is especially true for Blacks, Hispanics and younger voters.  But back to the Pilot/Bloomberg piece: 

The Rust Belt states that provided an election night shocker two years ago — delivering the presidency to Donald Trump — could hand Democrats crucial wins in the midterm elections.

Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, which Trump won in 2016 by a total of less than 80,000 votes to put him over the top in the Electoral College count, are looking less like Trump country this year, as Republicans trail Democratic opponents.

The shift illustrates the year’s challenging political landscape for Republicans. Even with a booming economy and record stock market — typically benchmarks of presidential success — the party’s chances of keeping control of the U.S. House have dropped in recent weeks. Trump’s vulnerabilities even threaten the party’s prospects of holding the U.S. Senate, long considered thought safe from Democratic takeover this year.

The situation confronting Republicans is typified in Wisconsin, where Trump beat Democrat Hillary Clinton by 22,748 votes, or 0.8 percentage points.

While times are generally good in the Badger State — the unemployment rate in July was 2.9 percent, down from 3.5 percent in the month Trump took office, and below the national average — Republican candidates are struggling.

Gov. Scott Walker, once a rising Republican Party star, is fighting for his political life, according to a Marquette University Law School Poll released on Sept. 18. The survey showed Democrat Tony Evers with the support of 49 percent of likely voters, compared with 44 percent for Walker.

Also in Wisconsin, Sen. Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat pummeled by millions of dollars in negative advertising from conservative groups, led her Republican challenger, state Sen. Leah Vukmir, 53 percent to 42 percent.

Trump’s job approval has fallen to 42 percent in the state, down from 45 percent in Marquette’s August poll. Among independent voters, a pivotal group, 41 percent approve of his performance.

Many voters in Wisconsin, which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says is among the states most vulnerable to a prolonged trade war, are also skeptical of Trump’s tariffs on China and other nations. More than half — 58 percent — think free trade agreements have generally been a good thing for the U.S. economy, while 25 percent think they have been bad for the economy.

Trump’s approval ratings in the other states in the region are equally low, according to polling in August by Morning Consult. He was at 42 percent in Michigan, 45 percent in Pennsylvania, 44 percent in Iowa and 40 percent in Minnesota.

While not included in the Marquette poll, Republicans are nervous about the congressional race in southeastern Wisconsin to replace retiring House Speaker Paul Ryan, even though it’s rated as “lean Republican” by Cook. The Congressional Leadership Fund, the top super political action committee backing Republican efforts to hold the House, said this week that it’s reserving $1.5 million in advertising for the district. In 2016, Ryan swept the district by almost 35 points.

Prospects for Republicans in the other Trump-won states in the Rust Belt aren’t looking much better.

In Michigan and Pennsylvania, Democratic incumbent Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Robert Casey have double-digit polling leads against their Republican challengers and also held massive cash-on-hand advantages in the most recent campaign finance reports.

In the fight for the House, Pennsylvania looks like one of the better pickup opportunities for Democrats. The state has two ingredients that could benefit the party in this year’s closest House races: suburban swing districts and an abundance of female candidates in a year when women are showing unprecedented levels of political engagement.

The contests for governor in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota are also rated as either “lean Democrat” or “likely Democrat.” Walker’s race in Wisconsin and another in Iowa that features a Republican incumbent — albeit the state’s former lieutenant governor, who rose to the post when long-serving Gov. Terry Branstad became U.S. ambassador to China — are rated as tossups.

John Brabender, a Republican strategist who served as a senior adviser to former Pennsylvania senator and 2016 presidential candidate Rick Santorum, said people shouldn’t be surprised that Republican candidates in Rust Belt states are struggling.

Trump only very narrowly won there and those states have been heavily Democratic in recent history. Plus, Brabender said, Trump was competing against a deeply unpopular candidate in Clinton.

“Unfortunately for Republicans this year, she’s not on the ballot,” he said. “Being pro-Trump may not equate to being pro-Republican.”

It remains critical to get every possible Democrat voter registered and to the polls on election day.  I don't want the Republicans to lose - I want them to lose by landslides that will send terror through whatever Republicans remain in office, including those in the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates.  They need to understand that 2019 could see them sent into retirement if they continue their racist, voter disenfranchising and homophobic ways. 

Walker Quits 2016 Presidential Race

Candidly, at times it is hard for me to decide which of the Republican Presidential nominee candidates is the most despicable.  There are so many contenders, almost all of whom spew coded messages of racism, anti-Hispanic bigotry, homophobia and a contempt for women, not to mention an agenda that makes war on the poor and less fortunate.  But certainly, Scott Walker has been among those at the top of my list.  In his war against unions in Wisconsin he has shown himself to be against average Americans and their families, and his ridiculous anti-Muslim and anti-climate change harangues have shown that he's either an idiot or a knowing liar.  Thus, I was most delighted to hear that Walker has suspended his presidential campaign.  Indeed, the most decent thing I have heard him say were the words of his brief statement announcing the suspension of his campaign.  Here are highlights on this welcome development from the New York Times:

Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, whose early glow as a Republican presidential contender was snuffed out with the rise of anti-establishment rivals, announced on Monday that he was quitting the race and urged some of his 15 rivals to do the same so the party could unite against the leading candidate, Donald J. Trump. 

Mr. Walker’s pointed rebuke of Mr. Trump gave powerful voice to the private fears of many Republicans that the party risked alienating wide swaths of the American electorate – Hispanics, women, immigrants, veterans, and most recently Muslims – if Mr. Trump continued vilifying or mocking those groups as part of his overtures to angry and disaffected voters.

Still, Mr. Walker’s exit was not selfless: He was running low on campaign cash, sliding sharply in opinion polls, losing potential donors to rivals and unnerving supporters with a steady stream of gaffes, like saying he would consider building a barrier wall along the Canadian border.

Appearing ashen and drained at a brief news conference late Monday in Madison, Mr. Walker said the Republican presidential field was too focused on “how bad things are” rather than on “how we can make them better for everyone.” Without naming Mr. Trump, Mr. Walker issued a plea to fellow candidates to coalesce around a different Republican who could offer a more “optimistic” vision and guide the party to a victory next year that, he admitted with sadness in his voice, he could not achieve himself.

Mr. Walker’s departure is likely to have little impact given the sprawling field. He was competing most aggressively in Iowa, which he deemed a must-win state, but he had fallen from first to 10th place in a recent poll there. He also drew support from less than one-half of 1 percent of Republican primary voters in a recent CNN national poll.

If the demise of Mr. Walker’s campaign underscores anything, it is the increasingly intense pressure that candidates are under to raise enormous sums of money not only for their political operations but also for their “super PACs.”

The need to raise money has had the effect of turning the traditional state-by-state nomination fights into national contests, in which candidates need to prove themselves to donors across the country – rather than merely win over voters in the handful of states that hold the earliest caucuses and primaries. Mr. Walker increasingly tailored his message for Iowans, taking some sharply conservative stands on issues like immigration and same-sex marriage that could pose problems with moderates.

 My analysis is simple: good riddance! 

Scott Walker Stumbles with Anti-Union Agenda

With his campaign in crash and burn mode, in obvious desperation, Scott Walker has stated that he wants to take his anti-union campaign nationwide.  In one report, Walker said he wanted to end all federal employee unions.  This message is supposed to electrify working class voters who ironically have seen their wages stagnate for 40 years largely because of the decline in labor unions.  Walker's message may play well with plutocrats, but average Americans need to run screaming from Walker.  I make no secret of the fact that I find Walker to be a thoroughly despicable individual.  Let's hope that this is the beginning of the end of Walker's presidential campaign.  Here are highlights from Politico:

Scott Walker is doubling down on his anti-union message. But GOP voters don't seem to be listening.  Walker traveled to union-friendly Las Vegas Monday to inveigh against "big-government union bosses."

He pledged elimination of the National Labor Relations Board. He promised a national “right to work” law freeing workers from mandatory payments to unions that bargain collectively on their behalf. And he said he’d block President Barack Obama’s proposal to expand overtime eligibility to 5 million new workers.

For Walker it may be a last stand as his support tumbles from double digits as recently as July to a dismal 2 percent, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released Monday. 

Walker’s presidential campaign is premised in a large part on the idea that GOP primary voters will flock to a candidate willing to confront and diminish the power of organized labor. Walker aides say his anti-union platform is designed to portray the Wisconsin governor as a politician who can easily translate his statewide successes to the federal government. 

But one of 2016’s biggest surprises is that the anti-union message isn’t selling, either for Walker or for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, another GOP candidate who’s built much of his campaign around his willingness to face down union bosses. Unions don't seem to loom especially large as a problem to rank-and-file Republican voters.

Also working against Walker and Christie is the Donald Trump factor. The billionaire mogul has excited a wave of populist-minded, lower-income voters who, when it comes to unions, are hardly conservatives at all. Trump himself is mildly pro-union, an occupational necessity for any real estate magnate operating in the Northeast. "Unions still have a place in American society," Trump wrote in 2000.

Harold Schaitberger, the president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said, “Mr. Trump, who I don’t believe has very much in common with our goals and our agenda, even he calls out recently the gross CEO pay and the disparity between the CEO class, if you will, and the workers that actually help make their companies successfully." Roughly half of Schaitberger's rank and file is Republican.

Perhaps some of the moronic racists and anti-immigrant bigots are finally figuring out the reality that the GOP's anti-union agenda only aids huge corporations and the wealthy and only serves to speed the movement of the nation to a new Gilded Age where the 1% have all the wealth and the rest of us scramble for the crumbs they drop.

GOP Is Using Black Lives Matter to Scare Whites Into Voting for Them

Sadly, among the base of today's Republican Party, black lives do not matter.  For that matter, neither do LGBT lives or the lives of those who are non-white and/or non-right wing Christian.  Yet, in typical form, the GOP presidential candidates are trying to whip up fear about crime and drive white voters - who they desperately need in higher and higher percentages - to vote Republican.  In many cities, police forces are out of control in terms of the unnecessary level of violence they use.  And sadly, blacks are often the targets of this excessive force.  By whipping up fear over crime, the GOP seeks to change the topic and push votes its way.  It's obscene, but then again, so is today's GOP.  Here are highlights from a piece in Slate:

Almost everyone has something to demagogue in the 2016 Republican primary. For Donald Trump, it’s Latino immigration, and Mexican migrants in particular. For Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, it’s the nuclear deal with Iran; for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, it’s the Kim Davis affair in Kentucky, where a county official was jailed for refusing to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples; and for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, it’s crime.

That may seem like a strange choice, given broad trends. National rates of violent crime are down to their lowest levels in a generation, with steep drops in gun homicide among all groups. And while violence is still a problem for isolated, low-income black Americans, the overall portrait is good: Twenty years after the crime waves of the 1990s, American cities and metropolitan areas are as safe as they’ve ever been.

Long-term trends can obscure short-term variations, however, and there’s contested evidence that we’re in the middle of a violent crime spike, sparked by a so-called Ferguson effect where less aggressive policing—fueled by “Black Lives Matter” protests—encourages criminals.
[H]umans are built to see patterns in unrelated events, and the crime increase—plus a rash of high-profile shootings aimed at police officers—has brought new partisan attacks on Black Lives Matter, even while 2015 stands as an unusually safe year for police officers, so far. “In the last six years under President Obama, we’ve seen a rise in anti-police rhetoric,” wrote Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in an op-ed last week, citing “demonstrations and chants where people describe police as ‘pigs’ and call for them to be ‘fried like bacon.’ ” Walker was referring to a small group of protesters in Minnesota who by all accounts are unrepresentative of the larger movement.

A struggling Christie—who, along with Huckabee and Cruz, lags far behind in the polls—has picked up on this, and run with it. On Tuesday, during an interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, the New Jersey governor slammed Democrats on crime. “It’s the liberal policies in this city that have led to the lawlessness that’s been encouraged by the president of the United States,” he said. “And I’m telling you, people in this country are getting more and more fed up.”

With crime and killings in the news, Democrats may be vulnerable to claims of indifference or even encouragement, given their support for Blacks Live Matter. Indeed, this violence threatens the whole project for criminal justice reform.

By blaming Obama and Black Lives Matter for an increase in crime or new attacks on police officers, they’re working to conjure the fear and uncertainty of the ’80s and ’90s—when violent crime was at an all-time high—and capitalize on them. And it’s worth noting the extent to which these appeals come at the same time that Republicans need to increase their share of the white vote to win a national majority. It’s no accident, . . . 

The Pushback Against Unfair Labor Practices

As noted in a post yesterday, the wages of most Americans have stagnated over the last 40 years and most of the profits of soaring worker productivity has gone to business owners and large corporations.  The power of labor unions which helped build America's middle class has been crippled and far too many employees find themselves with no real bargaining power.  Adding to the employment racket is the practice of making employees "salaried workers" and then demanding hours of work that effective drive down the real hourly wages paid to the ridiculous with no chance for overtime pay.  Jeb Bush thinks American need to work longer hours and the GOP wants to destroy unions to further erode workers' power.  As a column in the Washington Post notes, some efforts are being made to even the playing field.  Here are highlights:

On this Labor Day, American workers may be beginning to reclaim what by right should be theirs. To be sure, the economic statistics continue to appall: In the second quarter of this year, for instance, labor costs rose at their lowest rate since the early ’80s — a measly 0.2 percent, despite steady economic growth and falling unemployment. That’s what happens when the income gains from work accrue almost entirely to owners, stock players and top executives.

But the pushback against the imbalances of power and income between workers (who have little) and employers (who have lots), which has been spurred by fast-food workers’ “Fight for 15,” is showing some distinctly positive results. Ordinances to raise the local minimum wage, for instance, which first popped up in liberal strongholds such as San Francisco and Seattle, have in the past few weeks been enacted in St. Louis; Kansas City, Mo.; and Birmingham, Ala. A proposed ballot measure to raise the minimum wage to $15 by 2021 in California — home to one of every eight U.S. workers — commanded 68 percent support in a Field Poll survey last week.

Unions are polling better, too: In a mid-August Gallup Poll, they had a 58 percent approval rating, including 66 percent among adults under 35. That’s radically at odds, of course, with the percentage of private-sector workers who actually belong to unions, which is just 6.6 percent. The chasm between the number who approve and the number who belong stems from decades of union smashing by employers

Last week, the President Obama-appointed majority on the National Labor Relations Board ruled that a local union representing staffing agency employees at Browning Ferris, a California waste-management company, could bargain with Browning Ferris itself: The parent company, the board members said, was really a joint employer. The new joint-employer standard will help fast-food workers seeking to unionize chains such as McDonald’s, but it likely will spur even more immediate unionization efforts in such permatemp-reliant workplaces as warehouses, hotels and factories.

No effort to reduce our towering levels of inequality can succeed unless workers can amass more power. On this Labor Day, they appear to be finding ways to do just that. 

A Debate that Pandered to the Lunatic Base

The husband and I watched the so-called "big boy debate" - no, I'm not talking about Chris Chrstie's waist size - on Fox News last night.  It was a painful experience in some ways and there were moments when I wanted to throw something at the television and scream.  Probably the main winners were the Fox News moderators who did a far better job needling the collection of blowhards and liars on the stage who time and time again gave answers that made it clear that they are only too willing to prostitute themselves to the ugliest elements of the GOP base.  Perhaps the most sickening moments for me were near the end when the  political whores candidates spoke about religion.   I truly wanted to vomit and by their craven statements about a fairy tale religion proved that none of them were fit to be the president of a modern day super power.  One would have thought that they were competing for the position of pastor at a far right Southern Baptist parish.  A column in the New York Times looks at the debate and the only stellar performance: the moderators.  Here are highlights:

The first question to Chris Christie was about the nine credit downgrades that New Jersey had suffered since he became its governor.

Ben Carson was reminded of his domestic-policy blunders, of his foreign-policy blunders, of a whole raft of loopy statements that raise serious questions about how well he understands the country and globe. Could he reassure voters?

And Donald Trump had to listen obediently, even meekly, as Megyn Kelly—the one woman on Fox News’s panel of three debate moderators—recited a squirm-inducing litany of his misogynistic remarks through time.

This wasn’t a debate, at least not like most of those I’ve seen.  This was an inquisition.

 

On Thursday night in Cleveland, the Fox News moderators did what only Fox News moderators could have done, because the representatives of any other network would have been accused of pro-Democratic partisanship.

They took each of the 10 Republicans onstage to task. They held each of them to account. They made each address the most prominent blemishes on his record, the most profound apprehensions that voters feel about him, the greatest vulnerability that he has.

It compels me to write a cluster of words I never imagined writing: hooray for Fox News.

Fox accomplished something important. It prevented the Republican contenders from relying on sound bites and hewing to scripts that say less about their talents and more about the labors of their well-paid handlers.

And the questions that the moderators asked weren’t just discomfiting, humiliating ones. They were the right ones, starting with a brilliant opener: Was there any candidate who was unwilling to pledge support to the eventual Republican nominee and swear off a third-party run?

Trump alone wouldn’t make those promises, even though the moderator who asked that question, Bret Baier, pointed out that such a third-party run would likely hand the presidency to the Democratic nominee.

And thus, in the first minute of the debate, Trump was undressed and unmasked, and he stood there as the unprincipled, naked egomaniac that he is. He never quite recovered. His admission of political infidelity was the prism through which all of his subsequent bluster had to be viewed.

All in all, the large number of candidates made it difficult for anyone to stand out much, so it’s impossible to come up with any sweeping, definitive list of winners and losers.

I do think that Trump lost: He said nothing, not one syllable, that infused his candidacy with any of the gravitas that it sorely needs, and there was something pouty and petulant about his whole performance. Some of his rivals managed, even under the Fox fire, to look grateful to be there and to enjoy themselves, at least a bit. Marco Rubio did.

I also think that Ted Cruz lost, inasmuch as I forgot he was there for most of the debate. I also lost track of Carson, up until a surprisingly charming closing statement, and of Mike Huckabee, until his hilarious conflation of Trump and Clinton at the very end.

Jeb Bush avoided any gaffes and discovered a bit of the spark that he often lacks. John Kasich charted a humane midcourse for Republicans trying to reconcile personal misgivings over same-sex marriage with how the Supreme Court has ruled. Will it do him any favors with Republican primary voters? Maybe not. But he sounded like a leader, and he sounded like a decent man.

Trump was also pressed to defend his many corporate bankruptcies. Bush was pressed to explain his inability months ago to say whether, knowing all that we know now, he would have invaded Iraq. Cruz was pressed about his famously obnoxious demeanor on Capitol Hill.

Scott Walker was pressed on job creation in Wisconsin, which isn’t all that he claims it to be.

“Given your record in Wisconsin, why should voters believe you?” said Chris Wallace, the third Fox moderator.  We shouldn’t.

The thought of any of these men other than perhaps Kasich in the White House is down right frightening. 

Donald Trump Rightly Attacks Scott Walker

I view Donald Trump as a bombastic egomaniac.  But I do applaud his latest barrage of attacks aimed at Scott Walker, a truly dangerous and evil man in my view.   Specifically, Trump focused on the damage Walker has done in Wisconsin and the failed policies that Walker would seek to take nationwide as the GOP works to create a new Gilded Age.  The irony is, of course, that billionaire Trump is the one shining the spotlights.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at Trumps latest attack mode display.  Here are excerpts:

On Saturday Trump went for the hat trick, gleefully insulting Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker because one of Walker’s fundraisers called the billionaire real estate mogul ‘DumbDumb.’

“Finally, I can attack!” Trump said at a packed rally at Oskaloosa High School. “Wisconsin’s doing terribly. It’s in turmoil. The roads are a disaster because they don’t have any money to rebuild them. They’re borrowing money like crazy. They projected a $1 billion surplus, and it turns out to be a deficit of $2.2 billion. The schools are a disaster. The hospitals and education was a disaster. And he was totally in favor of Common Core!”

The mention of the state-driven education standards — from which Walker, like many Republican governors, has walked away — incited a prolonged boo. That was not enough for Trump, who told a story about Walker giving him a “beautiful plaque” out of gratitude for campaign donations and wondered if “Wisconsin paid for it.”

Republicans’ hopes of banishing Trump from their presidential primary may have wilted in the heat of the Iowa summer. On his first visit to the caucus state since the McCain insult, Trump drew a crowd of 1,300 in a city of 11,463. He cleaned up his remarks about veterans, from the stage and in the crowd. He talked with characteristic gusto about “killing in the polls and” securing a spot in the party’s first sanctioned debate, scheduled for Aug. 6.

Trump did all of this at a four-hour spectacle — the Make America Great Again Rally and Family Picnic — that felt like a New York cinematographer’s idea of an “Iowa event.” A campaign bus stood unused until Trump posed in front of his, giving a double thumbs-up before hopping into an SUV.

[C]onservative Iowans fell into two camps. One group adored Trump’s brio, but wished he hadn’t gotten personal with McCain (R-Ariz.). The larger camp egged Trump on for again refusing to play nice. . . . Republican voters, who had dutifully turned out for “anti-establishment” candidates and been disappointed, insisted that Trump was just the man to blow up the system.

He also won cheers for telling how he denied credentials to the Des Moines Register, Iowa’s largest newspaper, after its editorial board called on him to quit the race. In a back-and-forth with reporters, with the Register’s team kept outside his event, Trump proved that he was comfortable being playful with the facts.  “I didn’t ban them,” he insisted. “They just couldn’t get credentials.”

The Trump circus continues and, hopefully, it will spotlight all of the GOP's failed policies and positions. 

Scott Walker: War With Iran On Day One

The GOP clown car of presidential candidates is full of idiots, but some are more dangerous than others.  Case in point?  Scott Walker who seemingly cannot discern the difference between waging war on public sector labor unions and going to war against a relatively educated nation of over 80 million people.  How else to explain Walker's boast that he'd wage war against Iran on the first day of his presidency if he's elected.   It's all part and parcel with Walker's not ready for prime time stature and cretinous mindset.  Yes, such idiocy plays well with the GOP base comprised of Christofascists who love slaughtering Muslims (including women and children) and those clinging to the myth of American exceptionalism, but for rational, logical, thinking individuals, Walker's bluster ought to be frightening and immediately disqualify him from the presidency.  Here are highlights from a piece in Huffington Post:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said over the weekend that the next president of the United States needed to be prepared to take aggressive military action on their very first day in office, including against Iran.

The presidential contender, who had promised to "terminate" the nuclear agreement with Iran upon his inauguration, made the remark while speaking with reporters at the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, on Saturday. Walker was asked about a criticism from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R), who asserted during a town hall last week that unwinding the agreement on day one was an unrealistic promise.

Asked about Bush's remarks on Saturday, Walker argued -- without mentioning Iran directly -- that a president ought to be ready to take action from the moment they step foot into the Oval Office.

"He may have his opinion. I believe that a president shouldn't wait to act until they put a cabinet together or an extended period of time, I believe they should be prepared to act on the very first day they take office," he said. "It's very possible, God forbid that this would happen, but very possible, that the next president could be called to take aggressive actions, including military actions, on their very first day in office."

After Walker aides accused Bush of softening on his opposition to the agreement, the former Florida governor issued a statement to The Weekly Standard assuring that he “would begin immediately to responsibly get us out of this deal.”

The dispute between the two early GOP frontrunners comes just weeks before the first debate, hosted by Fox News in August. It also follows Walker's efforts to bone up on foreign policy, positioning himself as one of the most hawkish candidates in the 2016 Republican presidential field. Addressing conservatives at the Family Leadership Summit on Saturday, Walker said the U.S. needed "a foreign policy that puts steel in the face of our enemies," and one that unapologetically asserted power across the globe.

Note that the forum where Walker spoke was the Iowa Family Leadership Summit which was sponsored by a who's who of hate groups and extreme right Christofascist organizations. These people literally love the idea of killing Muslims no matter the financial or human life cost involved for America. 

Scott Walker Rushes to "Clarify" of His Anti-Gay Boy Scout Remarks

Faced with a swift and hard hitting backlash against his statement that the soon defunct Boy Scouts of America policy that barred gay scoutmasters "protected children" - which implied that gays were pedophiles and child molesters - Scott Walker's minions have rushed to do damage control and "clarify" what Walker really meant.  Walker and his handlers obviously think most of us are complete morons because for anyone who saw the video of Walker or read the text of his remarks, it was crystal clear what he meant, and it wasn't what Walker's spin masters are claiming.  Most folks are buying Walker's bull shit excuse/clarification and, if we are lucky, it is only one of many gaffes that Walker will make that show him to be an utter douche bag.  Bottom line, Walker is so full of shit that it's a wonder he hasn't exploded.  Here are highlights from Think Progress on Walker's damage control effort:

The Wisconsin governor declared his entrance into the 2016 race with a promise to be a bold conservative who wins on principle, but on only his third day out he’s already waffling on his commitment to targeting the LGBTQ community for discrimination.

On Tuesday, [Walker] came out in opposition to the Boy Scouts of America’s unanimous decision to overturn its ban on gay troop leaders only one day after announcing his candidacy. One day later, the Republican Wisconsin Governor attempted to walk that position back.

On Wednesday, after widespread media coverage noted Walker’s suggestion that gay adults are child predators, Walker rushed to mitigate the damage, claiming he never meant that the ban protected boy scouts from gay leaders but actually protected the children from the debate Americans who want to discriminate against the LGBTQ community force upon the nation.

[D]uring a press conference in South Carolina today, the New York Times reports that Walker himself attempted to clarify his remarks, saying the ban protected children “from being involved in the very thing you’re talking about right now, the political and media discussion about it, instead of just focusing on what Scouts is about, which is about camping and citizenship and things of that nature.”

When Walker was specifically asked about his comment supporting the ban, explicitly calling out his claim that “it protected children” on Tuesday, Walker doubled down, citing the fact that his mother was a den mother and calling the ban “perfectly fine”

Scott Walker: Blind Ambition and Little Intellect

All of the occupants of the GOP presidential candidate clown car are, in my view, dangerous to America and average Americans.  The question is, which one poses the gravest danger combined with a possible chance of winning the nomination.  Some of the conservative chattering class like Scott Walker, a man who holds workers in open contempt and has disdain for the minimum wage - any minimum wage - and wants to spread the economic desolation he has brought to many Wisconsin families nationwide.  The many is a study of cold ambition, little or no intellect, and a willingness to resort to demagoguery.   On important issues, he has no solutions or alternate proposals, including the new agreement with Iran which he wants cancelled.  In Walker's ignorance embracing world, war with Iran seemingly is his only acceptable option even though Iraq and Afghanistan are cake walks compared to what Iran would offer in a full fledged war (Iran's far more educated population is 78,192,200 versus Iraq's 36,004,552 - Afghanistan's is 31,822,848 - or more than twice that of countries the USA has been unable to subdue).  Facts, of course, do not matter to Walker and the GOP base.  A column in the New York Times looks at Walker and his frightening aspects.  Here are highlights:

[W]hat I see in him is the kind of soullessness too common in American politicians and the kind of careerism that makes American politics such a dreary spectacle.

I see an ambition even more pronounced than any ideology. I see an interest in personal advancement that eclipses any investment in personal growth.

These are hardly unusual traits in our halls of government. But they’re distilled in Walker, the governor of Wisconsin.

 
He’s styling himself as a political outsider, but that’s a fluke of geography, not professional history. While it’s true that he hasn’t worked in Washington, he’s a political lifer, with a résumé and worldview that are almost nothing but politics.

He has drawn barbs for the fact that he left Marquette before graduating and was many credits shy of a degree. But I know plenty of people whose intellectual agility and erudition aren’t rooted in the classroom, and his lack of a diploma isn’t what’s troubling.

The priorities that conspired in it are. He was apparently consumed during his sophomore year by a (failed) bid for student body president. According to a story by David Fahrenthold in The Washington Post, he was disengaged from, and cavalier about, the acquisition of knowledge.
When allies and opponents talk about his strengths, they seem to focus not on his passion for governing but on his cunning at getting elected. “He’s a sneaky-smart campaigner, they say, a polished and levelheaded tactician, a master at reading crowds,” . . .  “He learned the value of ignoring uncomfortable questions, rather than answering them.”

He tailors his persona to the race at hand. To win his second term as governor of Wisconsin and thus be able to crow, as he’s doing now, about the triumph of a conservative politician “in a blue state,” he played down his opposition to abortion, signaled resignation to same-sex marriage and explicitly supported a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

But with his current focus on the Iowa caucuses, he no longer supports a path to citizenship, flaunts his anti-abortion credentials and has called for a constitutional amendment permitting states to outlaw same-sex marriage.
His advisers, meanwhile, trumpet his authenticity. Authenticity? That’s in tragically short supply in the presidential race, a quality that candidates assert less through coherent records, steadfast positions or self-effacing commitments than through what they wear (look, Ma, no jacket or necktie!)  . . .

“I love America,” Walker said in Monday’s big speech. That was his opening line and an echo of what so many contenders say.

I trust that they all do love this country. But from the way they pander, shift shapes and scheme, I wonder if they love themselves just a little more.

Scott Walker: Boy Scout Ban on Gays ‘Protected Children’

As NPR and other news outlets are reporting, the executive committee of the Boy Scouts of America has unanimously adopted a resolution that would allow gay adults to serve as Scout leaders, ending a longstanding ban on gay scout leaders in the organization.  A ban that was based on religious inspired bigotry and the lies disseminated by the "godly folk."  The Boy Scout's National Executive Board will meet July 27 to ratify the resolution.  While many view the move as yet another step towards expanded equality and a rejection of religion as a justification fort evil, the Christofascists are acting as if someone did a bowel movement in their Cheerios.  Joining this latter group is GOP presidential candidate Scott Walker who says that the ban "protected children" - a repeat of the Christofascist lie that gays are all would be child molesters and sexual predators.   The Daily Beast looks at Walker's foul anti-gay statements.  Here are excerpts:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has spoken out against the Boy Scouts’ recent decision to lift its ban on gay troop leaders. In an interview with IJReview, Walker cited his support for the “previous membership policy because it protected children and advanced Scout values.”

In response to the vote, Walker told IJReview:

“I was an Eagle Scout, my kids have been involved, Tonette (Walker) was a den mother.

“I have had a lifelong commitment to the Scouts and support the previous membership policy because it protected children and advanced Scout values.”

Scott Walker is a despicable asshole.  Even worse than his anti-gay views are his desire to spread the economic poison he has sown in Wisconsin nationwide.   If there is a scandal to be found in Walker's background, I wish it would explode to the surface now.
 

Scott Walker Annouces Candidacy with Appeals to Greed, Racism, Homophobia and Xenophobia

Driving home tonight I listened to portions of Scott Walker's candidacy announcement speech on Satellite radio and when not yelling at the the radio, I found myself wanting to vomit.  Particularly over the mindless cheering of an audience - which was, thankfully small - who seemed to embody the ignorance and bigotry that are now synonymous with being a Republican.  Walker's speech was big on the GOP's reverse Robin Hood agenda, embroiling U.S. ground troops in wars across the globe, slashing taxes for the wealthy who he code named "job creators," slashing the social safety net, and throwing American families to the whims of employers and health care insurance companies for health care coverage.  As a piece in Policususa.com noted,  you could almost see the Koch Brothers' lips moving as Walker spoke.  Here are some article highlights:

Scott Walker announced his campaign for president by repeating almost word for word the top priorities of the Koch brothers.

Scott Walker immediately listed why he thinks he should be president. He discussed his efforts to suppress the vote (voter ID laws), more guns (Castle doctrine), less medical care for women (defunding Planned Parenthood), and lower wages (union busting). Walker gave the usual empty Republican gibberish about giving power back to states. 

Gov. Walker’s whole speech was based on selling himself as someone who can win in blue states because he has managed to survive in Wisconsin. Walker announced his plan to gut federal funding for education, Medicaid and job retraining by disguising this as sending money back to the states. What Walker was referring to was block grants that would lead to fewer people getting services. 

Walker attacked poor people and talked about the “dignity of work.” Walker disguised it as helping people move from government dependence to independence. He touted his drug testing of welfare recipients. He claimed that he was making it easy to get a job, but what he has actually done in Wisconsin is throw hundreds of thousands of people off of healthcare while harming senior citizens by cutting Wisconsin’s SeniorCare program.

Scott Walker promised to take away 18 million Americans access to healthcare by repealing Obamacare. Just like every other Republican candidate, Walker called for the repeal of regulations, which he called “the Obama regulations.”

Gov. Walker’s speech was a direct point by point delivery of the Koch agenda. Walker said that job creators need a tax cut so that they can be more competitive in the world and create more jobs.

Scott Walker claimed to be a new leader, but his plan for the future is straight out of centuries past.

Walker promised to fight and win for Americans, but by Americans he clearly meant the wealthy billionaires.

The name Scott Walker will be on the ballot, but it is the Koch brothers agenda that he is running on.

Should Walker win the presidency, in short order we will find ourselves living in a reprise of the 1890's Gilded Age with all of its worse attributes.  And with all his talk of families with a "mother and father." LGBT Americans with half a mind should understand that we are on the hit list right behind unions and minorities.  When Walker is compare to Trump, at least trump is honest about his greed and his bigotry.

What I find so ironic - or should I say hypocritical - about the GOP candidates id that they all claim to revere "Christian values," what they are in fact peddling is the antithesis of the true Gospel message.  It is all about hate, division, lots of greed, and and utter disdain for the welfare of one's neighbors and fellow man.  Needless to say, the "godly folk" - for whom I have nothing but contempt - will eat it up. 

Scott Walker’s Revolt Back Home

Sam Brownback isn't the only Republican governor wreaking havoc on his state while pushing the Tea Party/Christofascist Kool-Aid.   Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal both have presidential aspirations and are focusing what plays well to the most lunatic elements of the GOP base in swing states while things crumble and crash in their home states.  Jindal and the GOP controlled Louisiana legislature have utterly ravaged Louisiana.  Back in Wisconsin, Scott Walker's vaunted policies are wearing thin and he faces a revolt.   A piece in Politico looks at the growing revolt Walker faces at home even as he tries to sell the same poison nationwide.  Here are highlights:

As Walker prepares for a presidential run, he is increasingly speaking to national audience rather than a Wisconsin one. Instead of crisscrossing Wisconsin to get his budget passed, Walker’s calendar is filling up with trips to swing states, like his visit last weekend to Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst’s “Roast and Ride,” a motorcycle-themed political fundraiser.

Walker’s small government rhetoric is getting a warm reception in Iowa, where he leads the presidential field by more then seven points.

In Wisconsin, however, GOP state lawmakers aren’t nearly as enthusiastic about an agenda some see as geared more toward what plays well at those out-of-state stops than what’s best for the people back home. While Walker chatted up Iowans from the seat of his Harley-Davidson this weekend, his fellow Republicans in the state Legislature continued to rework Walker’s budget, having already reversed politically unpopular cuts to education, among other things.

It was just the Friday before last that the Legislature’s budget committee eased Walker’s cuts to the University of Wisconsin System after previously stopping his $127 million hit to public schools. Right about the time the Joint Finance Committee wrapped up its final vote on that piece of the budget late that evening, Walker was 1,000 miles away in New Hampshire addressing the Belknap County GOP Sunset Dinner Cruise.

 "The university doesn't deserve this cut. This is just reality," GOP state Sen. Luther Olsen said ahead of the vote. "To tell people that they're not working hard enough and they should teach more is probably just ridiculous," he said, responding to the claim by Walker and others that the university could absorb the cut through things like requiring professors to teach one extra class a semester.

It’s a scene that’s played out more than once this spring as lawmakers wrangle with Walker’s budget and other issues. His frequent out-of-state trips have given Democrats plenty of fodder to declare Walker an absentee governor placing his expected presidential run above the needs of Wisconsinites.

[I]t is somewhat odd to see a likely presidential candidate who has pinned much of his candidacy on the fights he’s won back home suffering loss after loss on his latest set of budget priorities—especially at the hands of his own party. Some GOP lawmakers privately see a governor who’s rarely on the bully pulpit to provide leadership on things like passing right-to-work, the effort by some Republicans to repeal the prevailing wage and securing the long-term future of the state’s transportation fund.

Some also complain bitterly—though almost never in public—that Walker’s budget was drafted with his presidential aspirations in mind, not what’s good for the state long term.  "We may have a crap budget, but we're going to make it better," freshman GOP state Rep. Rob Brooks said in an unusually blunt moment while on the Assembly floor.

Democrats have chalked up some of the GOP tensions to Walker’s frequent absences. A check of Walker’s March calendar, the last one his office has released to reporters, shows there were 19 days that month in which he didn’t list a single in-state event.

Scott Walker Backs Federal Amendmentto Ban Same-Sex Marriage

The self-prostitution of the occupants of the GOP clown car of would be presidential nominees is accelerating and now Scott Walker has pulled out all the stops to catch up with anti-gay extremist Ted Cruz and stated that he backs an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban same sex marriage should the U.S. Supreme Court strike down all state marriage bans.  Never mind that such an amendment has no likely chance of clearing Congress much less garnering approval of  three quarters of the states.   It's all about exciting the Christofascists and hopefully getting their primary votes.  A nasty, tawdry whore has more integrity than Walker.  CBS News looks at Walker's batshitery and self-prostitution.  Here are excepts:

Potential Republican presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says that he would support a constitutional amendment allowing states to enact same-sex marriage bans.

"I personally believe that marriage is between one man and one woman," Walker said Sunday on ABC News, answering a question about an upcoming Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage. "If the court decides that, the only next approach is for those who are supporters of marriage being defined as between one man and one woman is ultimately to consider pursuing a constitutional amendment."

Walker had supported a 2006 Wisconsin's constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, but a federal judge declared the law unconstitutional in 2014. 

When asked a question about his opinion on recent headlines over Caitlyn Jenner's public transformation, Walker chose to limit his comments on the "personal decision." 

"I think it's a personal decision," the Wisconsin governor said. "And to me, I don't know that there's anything more to comment on. It's a personal decision."

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the first to declare his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination, has also proposed a similar constitutional amendment to protect states' abilities to ban same-sex marriage. "T  he people should decide the issue of marriage, not the courts," Cruz said in a statement.

The Supreme Court is expected to hand down a decision on same-sex marriage by the end of this month.

Hillary Slams Republicans on Voter Disenfranchisement

Here in Virginia like many states where the GOP largely controls the state legislature, the principal why in which the Virginia GOP has faced demographic change and a movement from rural to urban voters has been to seek to disenfranchise as many likely Democrat voters as possible rather face the reality that fewer and fewer voters want what the GOP is peddling.  The excuse, of course for ID requirements and other measures to disenfranchise voters is the canard of "voter fraud" even though there is no evidence whatsoever to back up GOP claims that it is a serious problem.  Easier I guess to hide behind the smoke screen of fighting voter fraud that admit that the GOP is increasing one large KKK gathering.  On her campaign swing through Texas, Hillary Clinton made a point of calling out the GOP and four would be GOP presidential nominees on their anti-democratic policies and, if truth be told, racism.  Here are highlights from Politico:

HOUSTON, TX — For the first time since hitting the campaign trail two months ago, Hillary Clinton took on her Republican rivals by name, calling out four presidential contenders as she spoke authoritatively about restoring voting rights and asked rhetorically, “What part of Democracy are they afraid of?”

Dressed in a red jacket on her first swing through the red state of Texas, Clinton called for a universal system that automatically registers voters when they turn 18, which would replace the current opt-in system.

The former secretary of state also called for a new national standard of at least 20 days of early in-person voting in every state, a move she argued would reduce long lines at the polls and expand participation.

“What is happening is a sweeping effort to disempower and disenfranchise people of color, poor people and young people from one end of our country to another,” Clinton said in a fiery 30-minute speech at Texas Southern University, a historically black college.

But it was the portion of her speech where she uncharacteristically went on a personal attack against former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie that was the apex of her speech. About two-thirds of the way into her remarks, she blasted the group for “fear-mongering” on a “phantom epidemic of election fraud.”

“Former Governor Rick Perry signed a law that a federal court said was actually written with the purpose of discriminating against minority voters,” she said. “He applauded when the Voting Rights Act was gutted.” She slammed Texas for having laws where student IDs are not accepted as valid identification at the polls but a concealed weapons permit is.

“In Wisconsin, Scott Walker cut back early voting and signed legislation that would make it harder for college students to vote,” she said, and called out Christie for vetoing legislation to extend early voting.

“In Florida, when Jeb Bush was governor, state authorities conducted a deeply flawed purge of voters before the 2000 presidential election,” she said. “Today Republicans are systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.”

Clinton said the fight to protect voting rights was “for the student who has to wait hours for his or her right to vote, for the grandmother who’s turned away from the polls because her driver’s license expired, for the father whose done his time and paid his debt to society but still hasn’t gotten his rights back.”

Democrats, and particularly minority groups, are energized and angered by what they see as blatant Republican attempts to disenfranchise them. Obama has claimed that the very right to vote is threatened. Democrats have hit the issue hard, not only on the merits but also because it galvanizes the party’s base and helps raise money.

On the GOP side, leaders argue restrictive voting laws they support are necessary to maintain ballot box integrity. But many of those laws disproportionately impact minority communities.

Outside groups supporting Clinton see the overall contrast with the Republican party as a strong play for the former secretary of state.

“Nearly the entire Republican Party has worked to restrict voting, from Republicans like Scott Walker and Marco Rubio who supported limiting opportunities for early and weekend voting, to Rick Perry who signed legislation that disenfranchised up to 600,000.

Kudos to Hillary for calling these assholes out.