If there is anybody in the Trump Administration, past or present, who disappoints me above everybody else it would be Energy Secretary Rick Perry. Even more so than former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley.
Perry's comment that Trump was "sent by God" to be President is neither shocking nor surprising. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders have made similar comments. But it is utterly dismaying given Perry's warnings about Trump during his all too brief presidential bid in 2015.
The former Texas Governor is perhaps best remembered for calling Trump "a cancer on conservatism" which he added "must be clearly diagnosed, excised and discarded.” Conservatives have not only been unwilling to make a diagnosis, but have let the cancer spread.
But Perry also described Trump as "a false prophet" and lambasted him when he declared he could not recall an occasion when he sought forgiveness from God. Perry said, “A man too arrogant, too self-absorbed, to seek God’s forgiveness is precisely the type of leader John Adams prayed would never occupy the White House.” Well, John Adams worst nightmare has been realized. Trump hasn't sought forgiveness from God or anyone else and no one within his inner circle would dare tell him such a thing least of all Rick Perry who received his 30 pieces of silver long, long ago.
That Perry also said that Barack Obama was ordained by God to be President doesn't mitigate his hypocrisy in the least. This is a man who after all referred to Obama as President Zero during his first White House bid in 2011. While Perry might have had legitimate policy differences with Obama he certainly never characterized him as man sent by God when he held the highest office in the land. The generosity Perry has for Obama now didn't exist when he wanted his job.
Of course, it could be the case that Perry will say anything depending on what his needs are at the moment. He isn't the first politician to do such a thing and he is far from the last. If that is the case then it only reinforces the well worn skepticism the public has of elected officials. Still, to go from describing someone as "a false prophet" to a man "sent by God to do great things" is a stretch beyond all elasticity.
Most disturbing of all is that the Rick Perry of 2015 was absolutely right about Donald Trump. The fact that Perry and so many other Republicans could be so easily purchased demonstrates not only a lack of principles and values but a complete and utter lack of faith.
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
White Sox Cut Yolmer Sanchez From Team Despite Winning a Gold Glove
Major League Baseball has 750 roster spots. Let's just say the supply of players exceeds the demand despite the fluidity in team rosters with injuries and players not living up to expectations. Roster spots are tenuous. Unless you are in Mike Trout, Bryce Harper, Gerrit Cole, Stephen Strasburg or Anthony Rendon territory, it can be hard for a big league baseball player to know where he stands from one day to the next.
Consider the case of Yolmer Sanchez. He's been a part of the Chicago White Sox organization since 2009 when he signed as an international free agent at the age of 16. The Venezuelan born Sanchez made his big league debut in 2014 and has been an everyday player since the 2016 season. He led the AL in triples in 2018 with 10. In 2019, Sanchez earned a Gold Glove for his defensive work at second base.
You would think that winning a Gold Glove would be sufficient to keep your roster spot. But as Johnny Carson would tell Ed McMahon, "You would be wrong bourbon breath." The White Sox have put Sanchez on waivers effectively cutting him from the team. Although Sanchez would lead the AL in defensive runs saved among second basemen, he also had the lowest slugging percentage in MLB (.321).
Sanchez is eligible for arbitration and the Chisox would have had to pay him at least $6.2 million in 2020 (he earned $4,625,000 in 2019). So the White Sox determined Sanchez's lack of offensive production negated his defensive contributions to speak nothing of his positive presence in the Chisox clubhouse. Sanchez can also play shortstop, third base and the outfield. But I guess the White Sox don't think a utility player is worth $6 million a year.
In an era dominated by the home run, one wonders if today's White Sox would have kicked Hall of Fame second baseman Nellie Fox to the curb. I'm not saying that Sanchez is in Fox's class. Fox hit over .300 six times and led the AL in hits four times in his 19-year big league career. But Fox never hit more than 6 home runs a season. I suspect if Sanchez had hit 30 home runs and had half the defensive efficiency he would still be on the Chisox roster.
I can only hope that one of the 29 other teams can see Sanchez's value be it as an everyday Gold Glove caliber player or as a utility man. Given that there are free agents who will be signed for well in excess of $200 million, $6 million seems a small price to pay for someone who can catch the ball and keep the other team from scoring. Whoever does sign Yolmer Sanchez will see dividends which might have gone the way of the White Sox in 2020.
Consider the case of Yolmer Sanchez. He's been a part of the Chicago White Sox organization since 2009 when he signed as an international free agent at the age of 16. The Venezuelan born Sanchez made his big league debut in 2014 and has been an everyday player since the 2016 season. He led the AL in triples in 2018 with 10. In 2019, Sanchez earned a Gold Glove for his defensive work at second base.
You would think that winning a Gold Glove would be sufficient to keep your roster spot. But as Johnny Carson would tell Ed McMahon, "You would be wrong bourbon breath." The White Sox have put Sanchez on waivers effectively cutting him from the team. Although Sanchez would lead the AL in defensive runs saved among second basemen, he also had the lowest slugging percentage in MLB (.321).
Sanchez is eligible for arbitration and the Chisox would have had to pay him at least $6.2 million in 2020 (he earned $4,625,000 in 2019). So the White Sox determined Sanchez's lack of offensive production negated his defensive contributions to speak nothing of his positive presence in the Chisox clubhouse. Sanchez can also play shortstop, third base and the outfield. But I guess the White Sox don't think a utility player is worth $6 million a year.
In an era dominated by the home run, one wonders if today's White Sox would have kicked Hall of Fame second baseman Nellie Fox to the curb. I'm not saying that Sanchez is in Fox's class. Fox hit over .300 six times and led the AL in hits four times in his 19-year big league career. But Fox never hit more than 6 home runs a season. I suspect if Sanchez had hit 30 home runs and had half the defensive efficiency he would still be on the Chisox roster.
I can only hope that one of the 29 other teams can see Sanchez's value be it as an everyday Gold Glove caliber player or as a utility man. Given that there are free agents who will be signed for well in excess of $200 million, $6 million seems a small price to pay for someone who can catch the ball and keep the other team from scoring. Whoever does sign Yolmer Sanchez will see dividends which might have gone the way of the White Sox in 2020.
Monday, November 25, 2019
Free Agent Catchers Grandal & d'Arnaud Find New Teams in Chicago & Atlanta
Two of the most significant signings so far in the MLB off-season have both been catchers.
Yasmani Grandal, who spent 2019 with the Milwaukee Brewers after four seasons with the Los Angeles Dodgers, signed a four year, $73 million contract with the Chicago White Sox on November 21st. Then yesterday Travis d'Arnaud, who was cast aside by the New York Mets and the Los Angeles Dodgers after a single game found his footing with the Tampa Bay Rays, signed a two year deal with the Atlanta Braves worth $16 million.
Both Grandal, who turned 31 earlier this month, and d'Arnaud, 30, came off the best seasons of their careers. Grandal earned his second NL All-Star Team selection hit a career high 28 HR and drove in a career high 77 runs in a career high 153 games. Grandal declined his mutual option with the Brewers and opted to test the free agent market. The White Sox liked Grandal's post-season experience as he has played in five straight post-seasons. If the Chisox are to make a move in the AL Central then they will need a veteran catcher like Grandal to guide their young pitching staff.
Meanwhile, d'Arnaud slammed 16 HR with 67 RBI in only 92 games with the Rays. His highlight of the season was a 3 HR game, the third of which was walk off shot off New York Yankees closer Aroldis Chapman to start the second half of the season. The Braves sought d'Arnaud to replace Brian McCann who retired after the Braves were eliminated in the NLDS by the St. Louis Cardinals.
I suspect d'Arnaud signed with the Braves to get a measure of revenge against the Mets. Although not originally a Met, d'Arnaud had been a member of the Mets since coming to the organization along with Noah Syndergaard in the deal which sent 2012 NL Cy Young winner R.A. Dickey to the Toronto Blue Jays. After finishing seventh in NL Rookie of the Year balloting in 2014, d'Arnaud struggled to stay healthy missing significant portions of the 2015, 2016 and nearly all of the 2018 season due to Tommy John surgery. His return to the NL East will give d'Arnaud ample opportunity to take out his motivation out on the Mets. This is, of course, provided that d'Arnaud can stay healthy. I suspect this is the reason why d'Arnaud's is more than four times smaller than that of Grandal.
Still, I suspect that both Grandal and d'Arnaud will make significant contributions to their new teams in 2020.
Yasmani Grandal, who spent 2019 with the Milwaukee Brewers after four seasons with the Los Angeles Dodgers, signed a four year, $73 million contract with the Chicago White Sox on November 21st. Then yesterday Travis d'Arnaud, who was cast aside by the New York Mets and the Los Angeles Dodgers after a single game found his footing with the Tampa Bay Rays, signed a two year deal with the Atlanta Braves worth $16 million.
Both Grandal, who turned 31 earlier this month, and d'Arnaud, 30, came off the best seasons of their careers. Grandal earned his second NL All-Star Team selection hit a career high 28 HR and drove in a career high 77 runs in a career high 153 games. Grandal declined his mutual option with the Brewers and opted to test the free agent market. The White Sox liked Grandal's post-season experience as he has played in five straight post-seasons. If the Chisox are to make a move in the AL Central then they will need a veteran catcher like Grandal to guide their young pitching staff.
Meanwhile, d'Arnaud slammed 16 HR with 67 RBI in only 92 games with the Rays. His highlight of the season was a 3 HR game, the third of which was walk off shot off New York Yankees closer Aroldis Chapman to start the second half of the season. The Braves sought d'Arnaud to replace Brian McCann who retired after the Braves were eliminated in the NLDS by the St. Louis Cardinals.
I suspect d'Arnaud signed with the Braves to get a measure of revenge against the Mets. Although not originally a Met, d'Arnaud had been a member of the Mets since coming to the organization along with Noah Syndergaard in the deal which sent 2012 NL Cy Young winner R.A. Dickey to the Toronto Blue Jays. After finishing seventh in NL Rookie of the Year balloting in 2014, d'Arnaud struggled to stay healthy missing significant portions of the 2015, 2016 and nearly all of the 2018 season due to Tommy John surgery. His return to the NL East will give d'Arnaud ample opportunity to take out his motivation out on the Mets. This is, of course, provided that d'Arnaud can stay healthy. I suspect this is the reason why d'Arnaud's is more than four times smaller than that of Grandal.
Still, I suspect that both Grandal and d'Arnaud will make significant contributions to their new teams in 2020.
Sunday, November 24, 2019
Winnipeg Blue Bombers Win 1st Grey Cup Since 1990
The Winnipeg Blue Bombers have defeated the Hamilton Tiger Cats 33-12 to win their first Grey Cup since 1990 in front of a capacity crowd in Calgary. Until tonight, the Blue Bombers had the longest Grey Cup drought.
Their triumph was very much Made in Winnipeg. Running Back Andrew Harris, a native Winnipeger, scored two touchdowns rushing for 131 yards. This earned Harris both Most Outstanding Player and Most Outstanding Canadian honors, the first time a single player has earned both accolades in the Grey Cup which has now been played 107 times.
With the Blue Bombers' now in the winners' circle, the Ticats have now inherited the league's longest Grey Cup drought having not won since 1999. Wide Receiver Brandon Banks, widely expected to win the CFL's Most Outstanding Player, left the game in the 3rd quarter with a leg injury.
Overall, it is the Blue Bombers' 11th Grey Cup title.
Their triumph was very much Made in Winnipeg. Running Back Andrew Harris, a native Winnipeger, scored two touchdowns rushing for 131 yards. This earned Harris both Most Outstanding Player and Most Outstanding Canadian honors, the first time a single player has earned both accolades in the Grey Cup which has now been played 107 times.
With the Blue Bombers' now in the winners' circle, the Ticats have now inherited the league's longest Grey Cup drought having not won since 1999. Wide Receiver Brandon Banks, widely expected to win the CFL's Most Outstanding Player, left the game in the 3rd quarter with a leg injury.
Overall, it is the Blue Bombers' 11th Grey Cup title.
Friday, November 22, 2019
Are Impeachment Hearings Actually Helping Trump?
Are the impeachment hearings actually helping President Trump?
A couple of new polls seem to suggest this is the case. Two polls (one from Emerson and another from Morning Consult-Politico) indicate a double digit drop in support for impeachment among independents since the hearings went public. Over this same period, Trump's numbers have gone up modestly among independents.
Mind you these polls were taken before Ambassador Gordon Sondland's testimony on Wednesday in which he stated there were was a "quid pro quo" and that President Trump, Vice-President Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former Energy Secretary Rick Perry were involved in a scheme to withhold military aid to Ukraine unless they announced investigations into the Bidens and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. With this in mind, it will be interesting to see if these numbers flip back yet again.
But if the number don't flip then it will mean the impeachment hearings will have backfired on Democrats. It will also mean that the country is in a whole lot of trouble. Because what we will have is a lawless President and a public that does not care or is at the very least prepared to look the other way. It could be the case that the public has been desensitized to corruption. It could also be the case that the public doesn't like Trump's conduct but don't believe Democrats are any better in their behavior.
For now the jury is still out on the impeachment hearings. If there is a silver lining is that if independent voters can change their minds once then they can change them again.
A couple of new polls seem to suggest this is the case. Two polls (one from Emerson and another from Morning Consult-Politico) indicate a double digit drop in support for impeachment among independents since the hearings went public. Over this same period, Trump's numbers have gone up modestly among independents.
Mind you these polls were taken before Ambassador Gordon Sondland's testimony on Wednesday in which he stated there were was a "quid pro quo" and that President Trump, Vice-President Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former Energy Secretary Rick Perry were involved in a scheme to withhold military aid to Ukraine unless they announced investigations into the Bidens and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. With this in mind, it will be interesting to see if these numbers flip back yet again.
But if the number don't flip then it will mean the impeachment hearings will have backfired on Democrats. It will also mean that the country is in a whole lot of trouble. Because what we will have is a lawless President and a public that does not care or is at the very least prepared to look the other way. It could be the case that the public has been desensitized to corruption. It could also be the case that the public doesn't like Trump's conduct but don't believe Democrats are any better in their behavior.
For now the jury is still out on the impeachment hearings. If there is a silver lining is that if independent voters can change their minds once then they can change them again.
Thursday, November 21, 2019
Democratic Debate Anti-Climatic After Sondland's Impeachment Testimony
Last night, I went to the Black Sheep on Third Avenue near East 38th Street to watch the Democratic Debate which took place in Atlanta and aired on MSNBC. The event was sponsored by the New York City Political Forum.
Upon my arrival, House impeachment proceedings were still going on with the testimony of Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russian, Ukrainian, and Eurasian Affairs and United States Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs David Hale. Cooper revealed that Ukrainian officials were aware there was a problem with U.S. military assistance the day of President Trump's call to Ukrainian President Voldymor Zelensky. Her testimony followed that U.S. Ambassador to the UN Gordon Sondland who confirmed there was "quid pro quo". Zelensky's meeting with President Trump and ongoing military assistance was conditional upon Zelensky announcing an investigation into the Bidens as well as alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. Sondland implicated President Trump, Vice-President Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. With Sondland's testimony, Republicans lost their key talking point that all the previous testimony by William Taylor, George Kent and Alexander Vindman was second hand and hearsay.
Given the explosive nature of these revelations, the Democratic Debate seemed anti-climatic and it showed in MSNBC anchor Brian Williams' presentation. Unfortunately, much of the debate lived up to their low expectations.
Oh, there were moments here and there as when Cory Booker suggested Joe Biden was high on marijuana when he said he opposed its legalization, when Amy Klobuchar said she raised $17,000 in campaign donations from her ex-boyfriends or when Andrew Yang declared he was not insane. But for the most part, the 10 Democratic candidates had little to say and did not inspire confidence that they could defeat Trump in a year's time even if he were to be impeached by the House of Representatives.
Perhaps the only exception to this would be Pete Buttigieg. Klobuchar and Tulsi Gabbard tried to knock Buttigieg off his game by challenging his lack of experience and foreign policy credentials and Buttigieg handled them with ease. When Kamala Harris was given an opportunity to go after Buttigieg she demurred. Harris was more interested in settling scores with Gabbard who knocked Harris off her pedestal in the July debate and has been unable to climb back. Biden was fine when he kept his answers short, but bizarrely went after Tom Steyer over his commitment to climate change. Rachel Maddow and company lobbed softball questions at both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and will likely remain where they have been. Booker had a nice closing statement during which he invoked Congressman John Lewis who was sitting in the audience, but he also had to beg to be included in next month's debate. As of this writing only six candidates have qualified (Buttigieg, Biden, Bernie, Warren, Klobuchar and Harris) to say nothing of former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
As for the crowd at the Black Sheep, it was quite hostile to Biden as was the case when I attended the September debate on the Lower East Side. While Warren did not get the raucous reception she got back in September, she was warmly received as were Bernie and Yang. The NYC Political Forum is ostensibly a non-partisan organization, I get the sense its orientation is fairly left-wing. However, this was a slightly older crowd and a little more low key than when surrounded by SJW NYU students. Perhaps I will attend future debate watch parties or other events.
The question remains if future debates will continue to be overshadowed by impeachment proceedings. The next debate is also scheduled to take place six days before Christmas. Given that the Iowa Caucus takes place in February it would have been more sensible to have this debate in January. But politics and sensibility seldom align. In which case next month's debate will very likely be as anti-climatic as the one which occurred less than 24 hours ago.
Upon my arrival, House impeachment proceedings were still going on with the testimony of Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russian, Ukrainian, and Eurasian Affairs and United States Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs David Hale. Cooper revealed that Ukrainian officials were aware there was a problem with U.S. military assistance the day of President Trump's call to Ukrainian President Voldymor Zelensky. Her testimony followed that U.S. Ambassador to the UN Gordon Sondland who confirmed there was "quid pro quo". Zelensky's meeting with President Trump and ongoing military assistance was conditional upon Zelensky announcing an investigation into the Bidens as well as alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. Sondland implicated President Trump, Vice-President Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. With Sondland's testimony, Republicans lost their key talking point that all the previous testimony by William Taylor, George Kent and Alexander Vindman was second hand and hearsay.
Given the explosive nature of these revelations, the Democratic Debate seemed anti-climatic and it showed in MSNBC anchor Brian Williams' presentation. Unfortunately, much of the debate lived up to their low expectations.
Oh, there were moments here and there as when Cory Booker suggested Joe Biden was high on marijuana when he said he opposed its legalization, when Amy Klobuchar said she raised $17,000 in campaign donations from her ex-boyfriends or when Andrew Yang declared he was not insane. But for the most part, the 10 Democratic candidates had little to say and did not inspire confidence that they could defeat Trump in a year's time even if he were to be impeached by the House of Representatives.
Perhaps the only exception to this would be Pete Buttigieg. Klobuchar and Tulsi Gabbard tried to knock Buttigieg off his game by challenging his lack of experience and foreign policy credentials and Buttigieg handled them with ease. When Kamala Harris was given an opportunity to go after Buttigieg she demurred. Harris was more interested in settling scores with Gabbard who knocked Harris off her pedestal in the July debate and has been unable to climb back. Biden was fine when he kept his answers short, but bizarrely went after Tom Steyer over his commitment to climate change. Rachel Maddow and company lobbed softball questions at both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and will likely remain where they have been. Booker had a nice closing statement during which he invoked Congressman John Lewis who was sitting in the audience, but he also had to beg to be included in next month's debate. As of this writing only six candidates have qualified (Buttigieg, Biden, Bernie, Warren, Klobuchar and Harris) to say nothing of former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
As for the crowd at the Black Sheep, it was quite hostile to Biden as was the case when I attended the September debate on the Lower East Side. While Warren did not get the raucous reception she got back in September, she was warmly received as were Bernie and Yang. The NYC Political Forum is ostensibly a non-partisan organization, I get the sense its orientation is fairly left-wing. However, this was a slightly older crowd and a little more low key than when surrounded by SJW NYU students. Perhaps I will attend future debate watch parties or other events.
The question remains if future debates will continue to be overshadowed by impeachment proceedings. The next debate is also scheduled to take place six days before Christmas. Given that the Iowa Caucus takes place in February it would have been more sensible to have this debate in January. But politics and sensibility seldom align. In which case next month's debate will very likely be as anti-climatic as the one which occurred less than 24 hours ago.
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Obama is Right To Say Democrats Are Going Too Far Left; He's Also The Wrong Messenger
Late last week, during an appearance at Democracy Alliance, former President Obama told a group of Democratic Party donors the dangers of veering too far to the left:
The average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it. And I think it’s important for us not to lose sight of that. There are a lot of persuadable voters and there are a lot of Democrats out there who just want to see things make sense. They just don’t want to see crazy stuff. They want to see things a little more fair, they want to see things a little more just. And how we approach that I think will be important.
You know what. I agree with him. Medicare For All, The Green New Deal and reparations will keep voters with the devil they know in Donald Trump. Democrats should focus on being a viable alternative to Trump rather than changing the world and reinventing the wheel.
The problem is Obama is the last person who should be telling this to Democrats. After all, this was the President who fundamentally overhauled the American health care system and much chaos and craziness ensued.
As much as anything else, if Medicare For All were to be passed it would effectively supplant Obamacare and with it his domestic policy legacy for whatever that was worth. In this respect, Obama's remarks are self-serving.
Needless to say, Democratic presidential hopefuls like Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker have dismissed Obama's intervention. It is a shame. Because the advice is good. It's just that person imparting the advice is in no position to impart it.
The average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it. And I think it’s important for us not to lose sight of that. There are a lot of persuadable voters and there are a lot of Democrats out there who just want to see things make sense. They just don’t want to see crazy stuff. They want to see things a little more fair, they want to see things a little more just. And how we approach that I think will be important.
You know what. I agree with him. Medicare For All, The Green New Deal and reparations will keep voters with the devil they know in Donald Trump. Democrats should focus on being a viable alternative to Trump rather than changing the world and reinventing the wheel.
The problem is Obama is the last person who should be telling this to Democrats. After all, this was the President who fundamentally overhauled the American health care system and much chaos and craziness ensued.
As much as anything else, if Medicare For All were to be passed it would effectively supplant Obamacare and with it his domestic policy legacy for whatever that was worth. In this respect, Obama's remarks are self-serving.
Needless to say, Democratic presidential hopefuls like Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker have dismissed Obama's intervention. It is a shame. Because the advice is good. It's just that person imparting the advice is in no position to impart it.
Friday, November 15, 2019
Pirates Hire Cherington as GM; Will John Farrell Board Buc's Ship?
Upon learning the Pittsburgh Pirates had hired Ben Cherington to be the team's new GM, I immediately pondered if he would hire John Farrell to be the team's new skipper.
After all, it was Cherington who hired Farrell to manage the Boston Red Sox in 2013. All Farrell did was guide the team to a World Series title. Two last place finishes followed and Cherington would resign after the Red Sox brought in Dave Dombrowski to oversee the club. Farrell remained the Red Sox manager as they rebounded to back to back AL East titles in 2016 and 2017 before Dombrowski dismissed Farrell in favor of Alex Cora. Like Farrell, Cora got a World Series ring in his inaugural season at Fenway before coming back down to earth in 2019. The Red Sox decline cost Dombrowski his job. What comes around goes around.
In the meantime, Cherington joined the Toronto Blue Jays' front office late in 2016 and has been biding his time before another GM job came along. Cherington's first task in Pittsburgh will be to name a new manager and Farrell has made no secret his desire to return to the dugout. Now an opportunity has presented itself for a reunion.
After all, it was Cherington who hired Farrell to manage the Boston Red Sox in 2013. All Farrell did was guide the team to a World Series title. Two last place finishes followed and Cherington would resign after the Red Sox brought in Dave Dombrowski to oversee the club. Farrell remained the Red Sox manager as they rebounded to back to back AL East titles in 2016 and 2017 before Dombrowski dismissed Farrell in favor of Alex Cora. Like Farrell, Cora got a World Series ring in his inaugural season at Fenway before coming back down to earth in 2019. The Red Sox decline cost Dombrowski his job. What comes around goes around.
In the meantime, Cherington joined the Toronto Blue Jays' front office late in 2016 and has been biding his time before another GM job came along. Cherington's first task in Pittsburgh will be to name a new manager and Farrell has made no secret his desire to return to the dugout. Now an opportunity has presented itself for a reunion.
Thursday, November 14, 2019
Trout Wins 3rd AL MVP; Bellinger Earns 1st NL MVP
Yesterday, the AL & NL Cy Young Awards were bestowed on pitchers over the age of 30. Today, the AL & NL MVP Awards were claimed by two players under the age of 30.
Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels earned his 3rd AL MVP besting Houston Astros third baseman Alex Bregman. Trout, 28, previously won this honor in 2014 and 2016. Despite missing 34 games due to a foot injury that would eventually require season ending surgery, Trout led the AL in OBP (.438), SLG (.645), OPS (1.083) and OPS+ (185) and also hit a career high 45 home runs.
Just up I-5 North, we find our NL MVP. Los Angeles Dodgers right fielder Cody Bellinger earned the honor for the first time. Bellinger, 24, hit .305 with 47 HR and 115 RBI. He also earned a Gold Glove for his defensive play. The second generation player beat out last year's NL MVP Christian Yelich for the trophy. There are a lot of people who think Bellinger will win multiple MVPs just like Trout.
Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels earned his 3rd AL MVP besting Houston Astros third baseman Alex Bregman. Trout, 28, previously won this honor in 2014 and 2016. Despite missing 34 games due to a foot injury that would eventually require season ending surgery, Trout led the AL in OBP (.438), SLG (.645), OPS (1.083) and OPS+ (185) and also hit a career high 45 home runs.
Just up I-5 North, we find our NL MVP. Los Angeles Dodgers right fielder Cody Bellinger earned the honor for the first time. Bellinger, 24, hit .305 with 47 HR and 115 RBI. He also earned a Gold Glove for his defensive play. The second generation player beat out last year's NL MVP Christian Yelich for the trophy. There are a lot of people who think Bellinger will win multiple MVPs just like Trout.
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
Verlander & deGrom Each Win Their 2nd Cy Young
Both Justin Verlander and Jacob deGrom have got Cy Young second helpings. While Verlander earned his first AL Cy Young since 2011 (the longest duration between Cy Youngs), deGrom has won back to back NL Cy Young Awards.
Verlander led the AL in wins (21), starts (34) and innings pitched (223). Throw in 300 strikeouts, his 3,000th career strikeout and his third career no-hitter en route to an AL pennant for the Houston Astros. The 36-year old Verlander beat out teammate Gerrit Cole for the honor. In between his two Cy Youngs, Verlander finished runner up in AL Cy Young balloting thrice (2012, 2016 & 2018). As good as Cole was this year, Verlander was just too good to finish second.
Although deGrom, 31, didn't post a sub-2.00 ERA in 2019, his ERA of 2.43 was plenty good as the New York Mets ace struck out a NL leading 255 batters in only 204 innings pitched. The back to back Cy Youngs for deGrom are the first since Tim Lincecum won back to back Cy Youngs for the San Francisco Giants in 2008 and 2009.
Tomorrow we learn the winners of the AL and NL MVP Awards.
Verlander led the AL in wins (21), starts (34) and innings pitched (223). Throw in 300 strikeouts, his 3,000th career strikeout and his third career no-hitter en route to an AL pennant for the Houston Astros. The 36-year old Verlander beat out teammate Gerrit Cole for the honor. In between his two Cy Youngs, Verlander finished runner up in AL Cy Young balloting thrice (2012, 2016 & 2018). As good as Cole was this year, Verlander was just too good to finish second.
Although deGrom, 31, didn't post a sub-2.00 ERA in 2019, his ERA of 2.43 was plenty good as the New York Mets ace struck out a NL leading 255 batters in only 204 innings pitched. The back to back Cy Youngs for deGrom are the first since Tim Lincecum won back to back Cy Youngs for the San Francisco Giants in 2008 and 2009.
Tomorrow we learn the winners of the AL and NL MVP Awards.
Sanford's Dismal WH Bid Proves GOP Don't Give a Damn About The Debt
Yesterday, former Congressman and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford ended his bid to challenge President Trump for the GOP nomination after only 65 days on the campaign trail.
Sanford cited impeachment as his reason for dropping out. But his bid was doomed to the failure when South Carolina Republicans wouldn't even hold a primary.
Nor did Republicans respond to Sanford's talk about the national debt and government spending. Once again this proves the GOP doesn't give a damn about the debt. So long as President Trump doesn't care about it. Of course, if a Democrat should win the White House in 2020 then they will start to care about the debt and government spending again. Former Illinois Congressman Joe Walsh has also been outspoken about the debt and government spending and is getting much the same response. But at least Walsh is fighting. Unlike Sanford, Walsh supports impeaching Trump.
For the moment, Walsh is still challenging Trump as is former Massachusetts Governor William Weld. Neither campaign has resonated either to Trump's left or to Trump's right because Trump is the beginning and the end of the Republican Party among GOP voters who have no center.
Sanford cited impeachment as his reason for dropping out. But his bid was doomed to the failure when South Carolina Republicans wouldn't even hold a primary.
Nor did Republicans respond to Sanford's talk about the national debt and government spending. Once again this proves the GOP doesn't give a damn about the debt. So long as President Trump doesn't care about it. Of course, if a Democrat should win the White House in 2020 then they will start to care about the debt and government spending again. Former Illinois Congressman Joe Walsh has also been outspoken about the debt and government spending and is getting much the same response. But at least Walsh is fighting. Unlike Sanford, Walsh supports impeaching Trump.
For the moment, Walsh is still challenging Trump as is former Massachusetts Governor William Weld. Neither campaign has resonated either to Trump's left or to Trump's right because Trump is the beginning and the end of the Republican Party among GOP voters who have no center.
Deval Patrick Would Be a Credible Presidential Candidate
In recent days former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has been musing about entering the 2020 presidential race.
Like former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Patrick had previously announced he was not running. In December 2018, Patrick issued a statement on Facebook that he would not run because of the "cruelty" of the process. If things were cruel at the end of 2018 they are a thousand-fold as we approach the end of 2019.
With that said if Patrick were to enter the race I would be favorable towards supporting him. Although I did not vote for him in either his successful 2006 and 2010 gubernatorial races, I would have voted for him had he sought a third term in 2014. I was impressed with Patrick's leadership following the Boston Marathon bombing. With then Boston Mayor Tom Menino having health issues that would claim his life in 2014, Patrick picked up the ball and ran with it. Given these circumstances, I hold Patrick in far higher esteem than most Democrats especially Elizabeth Warren. I remember when Warren needed Patrick's guidance in her first press conference after she was elected to the Senate in 2012.
Unfortunately for the former governor, I don't see Massachusetts voters abandoning the progressive Warren for the relatively moderate Patrick never mind the state's Democratic delegation. This is a shame because I think Patrick would be a credible presidential candidate and would fare better against Trump than Warren. Trump can't call Patrick "Pocahantas".
Perhaps Trump would call Patrick "mini-Obama". As with Cory Booker, I'm sure Patrick would be measured against Obama. But I would make the case that Patrick came to office with a far better resume than Obama (a partnership in a Boston law firm before he was 35, his work in the Civil Rights Division of DOJ plus his tenure as the general counsel with both Texaco and Coca-Cola).
Of course, his association with Texaco, Coca-Cola and now Bain Capital isn't likely to earn him fans among the Sandernistas.
Given current political conditions and the lateness of the hour, the odds of Deval Patrick winning the Democratic nomination are slim at best. But from where I sit, outside of Pete Buttigieg and Bloomberg, Patrick would be among the only Democrats for whom I would consider casting a ballot. If Democrats want to win in a year's time they will need a candidate who is going to capture independent minded voters. If Democrats want to win in a year's time then they need to give Deval Patrick a serious look.
Like former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Patrick had previously announced he was not running. In December 2018, Patrick issued a statement on Facebook that he would not run because of the "cruelty" of the process. If things were cruel at the end of 2018 they are a thousand-fold as we approach the end of 2019.
With that said if Patrick were to enter the race I would be favorable towards supporting him. Although I did not vote for him in either his successful 2006 and 2010 gubernatorial races, I would have voted for him had he sought a third term in 2014. I was impressed with Patrick's leadership following the Boston Marathon bombing. With then Boston Mayor Tom Menino having health issues that would claim his life in 2014, Patrick picked up the ball and ran with it. Given these circumstances, I hold Patrick in far higher esteem than most Democrats especially Elizabeth Warren. I remember when Warren needed Patrick's guidance in her first press conference after she was elected to the Senate in 2012.
Unfortunately for the former governor, I don't see Massachusetts voters abandoning the progressive Warren for the relatively moderate Patrick never mind the state's Democratic delegation. This is a shame because I think Patrick would be a credible presidential candidate and would fare better against Trump than Warren. Trump can't call Patrick "Pocahantas".
Perhaps Trump would call Patrick "mini-Obama". As with Cory Booker, I'm sure Patrick would be measured against Obama. But I would make the case that Patrick came to office with a far better resume than Obama (a partnership in a Boston law firm before he was 35, his work in the Civil Rights Division of DOJ plus his tenure as the general counsel with both Texaco and Coca-Cola).
Of course, his association with Texaco, Coca-Cola and now Bain Capital isn't likely to earn him fans among the Sandernistas.
Given current political conditions and the lateness of the hour, the odds of Deval Patrick winning the Democratic nomination are slim at best. But from where I sit, outside of Pete Buttigieg and Bloomberg, Patrick would be among the only Democrats for whom I would consider casting a ballot. If Democrats want to win in a year's time they will need a candidate who is going to capture independent minded voters. If Democrats want to win in a year's time then they need to give Deval Patrick a serious look.
If Kapler Couldn't Manage The Phillies Then How Can He Manage The Giants?
Gabe Kapler is back on his feet again. Just over a month after being given his walking papers by the Philadelphia Phillies with a year remaining on his contract, Kapler is heading west to manage the San Francisco Giants.
Kapler edged Houston Astros bench coach Joe Espada and Tampa Bay Rays bench coach Matt Quatraro for the position. His edge was his previous working relationship with Farhan Zaidi during their respective tenures with the Los Angeles Dodgers where Kapler was director of player development and Zaidi was the GM.
Whoever ended up being chosen was going to have big steps to fill with Bruce Bochy's three World Series titles notwithstanding the fact the Giants have only made the post-season once since 2014. But if Kapler couldn't do anything with a Phillies team stacked with veterans I can't see him doing any better by the Bay. I suspect the Giants would be better off with either Espada or Quatraro at the helm.
I don't know what the terms of Kapler's contract with the Giants are, but it would not come as a shock if he does not last its duration.
Kapler edged Houston Astros bench coach Joe Espada and Tampa Bay Rays bench coach Matt Quatraro for the position. His edge was his previous working relationship with Farhan Zaidi during their respective tenures with the Los Angeles Dodgers where Kapler was director of player development and Zaidi was the GM.
Whoever ended up being chosen was going to have big steps to fill with Bruce Bochy's three World Series titles notwithstanding the fact the Giants have only made the post-season once since 2014. But if Kapler couldn't do anything with a Phillies team stacked with veterans I can't see him doing any better by the Bay. I suspect the Giants would be better off with either Espada or Quatraro at the helm.
I don't know what the terms of Kapler's contract with the Giants are, but it would not come as a shock if he does not last its duration.
Tuesday, November 12, 2019
Baldelli & Shildt Narrowly Win AL & NL Manager of the Year
Prior to the 2019 MLB season, I picked the Minnesota Twins and the St. Louis Cardinals to face off in the World Series. While this did not come to pass both teams won their respective divisions. For this Rocco Baldelli and Mike Shildt were named AL and NL Manager of the Year, respectively.
Baldelli, 38, is the youngest manager to be bestowed with the honor. The former Tampa Bay Ray was named the Twins manager after the team fired Paul Molitor following the 2018 season. Under Baldelli's stewardship the Twins slugged a MLB record 307 HRs en route to 101 wins and the team's first AL Central title since 2010. While the Twins were swept by the New York Yankees, Baldelli narrowly edged Yankees skipper Aaron Boone for the honor.
For his part, Shildt guided St. Louis to its first post-season appearance since 2015. Shildt took over the Cardinals in the middle of the 2018 season after the dismissal of Mike Matheny (who has since been named manager of the Kansas City Royals). Shildt had fewer first place votes than Milwaukee Brewers manager Craig Counsell, but had more second place votes. The 51-year old skipper is the first Manager of the Year winner to have never played professional baseball. There have only been a few big league managers without professional experience as a player. Most of the time this doesn't go over well, but Shildt has had 15 years worth of experience in the Cardinals organization and has found a way to bridge that gap. This is a remarkable achievement.
Tomorrow evening will be set aside to honor pitchers as we learn the AL and NL Cy Young Award winners.
Baldelli, 38, is the youngest manager to be bestowed with the honor. The former Tampa Bay Ray was named the Twins manager after the team fired Paul Molitor following the 2018 season. Under Baldelli's stewardship the Twins slugged a MLB record 307 HRs en route to 101 wins and the team's first AL Central title since 2010. While the Twins were swept by the New York Yankees, Baldelli narrowly edged Yankees skipper Aaron Boone for the honor.
For his part, Shildt guided St. Louis to its first post-season appearance since 2015. Shildt took over the Cardinals in the middle of the 2018 season after the dismissal of Mike Matheny (who has since been named manager of the Kansas City Royals). Shildt had fewer first place votes than Milwaukee Brewers manager Craig Counsell, but had more second place votes. The 51-year old skipper is the first Manager of the Year winner to have never played professional baseball. There have only been a few big league managers without professional experience as a player. Most of the time this doesn't go over well, but Shildt has had 15 years worth of experience in the Cardinals organization and has found a way to bridge that gap. This is a remarkable achievement.
Tomorrow evening will be set aside to honor pitchers as we learn the AL and NL Cy Young Award winners.
Monday, November 11, 2019
Alvarez & Alonso Decisively Win AL & NL Rookie of the Year Honors
To the surprise of no one Yordan Alvarez of the Houston Astros and Pete Alonso of the New York Mets have earned AL and NL Rookie of the Year honors.
Despite not making his MLB debut until June 9th, Alvarez earned all 30 first place votes. In only 87 games, Alvarez hit .313 with 27 HR and 78 RBI for the AL champions. One can only begin to imagine what the 22-year old Cuban born slugger has in store over a full season in 2020.
Alonso made the Mets out of spring training and started hitting home runs immediately. He hit a MLB record 53 HRs for a rookie which also led all of MLB. Throw in 120 RBIs as well as the HR Derby at the All-Star Game and the 24-year old first baseman has become the face of the Mets franchise. Surprisingly, Alonso did not win the award unanimously. Atlanta Braves rookie pitcher Mike Sirotka earned a single first place vote. Yet this is but a footnote. It doesn't change the fact Alonso is ROY.
Tomorrow, the AL and NL Managers of the Year are announced.
Despite not making his MLB debut until June 9th, Alvarez earned all 30 first place votes. In only 87 games, Alvarez hit .313 with 27 HR and 78 RBI for the AL champions. One can only begin to imagine what the 22-year old Cuban born slugger has in store over a full season in 2020.
Alonso made the Mets out of spring training and started hitting home runs immediately. He hit a MLB record 53 HRs for a rookie which also led all of MLB. Throw in 120 RBIs as well as the HR Derby at the All-Star Game and the 24-year old first baseman has become the face of the Mets franchise. Surprisingly, Alonso did not win the award unanimously. Atlanta Braves rookie pitcher Mike Sirotka earned a single first place vote. Yet this is but a footnote. It doesn't change the fact Alonso is ROY.
Tomorrow, the AL and NL Managers of the Year are announced.
Ilhan Omar Dislikes Jews, Not Billionaires
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is engaging in her favorite pastime - defaming Jews. Over the weekend, she went on Twitter to make known her views about former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's possible presidential candidacy and philanthropist Leon Cooperman's support for Bloomberg. Omar tweeted, "I wonder why" accompanied by a "hmmmmn" emoji.
Supporters of Omar claim that she was calling out Bloomberg and Cooperman for being billionaires.
But Bloomberg and Cooperman are also both Jewish.
If Omar wanted to take a shot at billionaires then why didn't she criticize Jeff Bezos for urging Bloomberg to run?
Because Bezos isn't Jewish.
Did Omar send out a tweet when billionaire Tom Steyer entered the Democratic presidential race? Nope.
Omar doesn't dislike billionaires. She dislikes Jews whatever their socioeconomic status.
Mind you, Omar sent out the tweet shortly speaking to CAIR, a notoriously anti-Semitic organization.
No doubt Omar supporters will point out her endorsement of Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish. As I argued last month, Omar (along with Rashida Tlaib and AOC) endorsed Bernie to neutralize charges of anti-Semitism. The fact remains that Omar supports BDS whose aim and objective is the end of Israel while opposing sanctions against Turkey calling them part of the "same failed playbook." It is clear Omar does not mind the use of this playbook if it is deployed against Jews. This is how anti-Semites operate.
Supporters of Omar claim that she was calling out Bloomberg and Cooperman for being billionaires.
But Bloomberg and Cooperman are also both Jewish.
If Omar wanted to take a shot at billionaires then why didn't she criticize Jeff Bezos for urging Bloomberg to run?
Because Bezos isn't Jewish.
Did Omar send out a tweet when billionaire Tom Steyer entered the Democratic presidential race? Nope.
Omar doesn't dislike billionaires. She dislikes Jews whatever their socioeconomic status.
Mind you, Omar sent out the tweet shortly speaking to CAIR, a notoriously anti-Semitic organization.
No doubt Omar supporters will point out her endorsement of Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish. As I argued last month, Omar (along with Rashida Tlaib and AOC) endorsed Bernie to neutralize charges of anti-Semitism. The fact remains that Omar supports BDS whose aim and objective is the end of Israel while opposing sanctions against Turkey calling them part of the "same failed playbook." It is clear Omar does not mind the use of this playbook if it is deployed against Jews. This is how anti-Semites operate.
Thoughts on Veterans Day & Remembrance Day
Today marks Veterans Day in the United States. In Canada, the country of my birth, it is Remembrance Day as it is in all Commonwealth countries.
Both Veterans Day and Remembrance Day began as Armistice Day signifying the end of WWI, the war to end all wars, at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. But how November 11th is observed has changed over time.
In the United States, Veterans Day honors all living veterans whereas Memorial Day honors veterans who lost their lives in the line of duty. In Canada, Remembrance Day honors veterans both living and dead although the emphasis is on those soldiers who fell as signified by the wearing of the poppy. The poppy is in reference to the opening line of the poem "In Flanders Field" written by Dr. John McRae in honor of a friend who died at the Second Battle of Ypres in Belgium (In Flanders fields the poppies blow/Between the crosses, row on row) symbolizing the fragility of life.
As such Remembrance Day is a more somber occasion than Veterans Day and dare I say Memorial Day. In this country, Memorial Day marks the beginning of summer and despite our best efforts has become a day of reverie synonymous with barbecues.
But whatever the differences between Veterans Day and Remembrance Day, American and Canadian soldiers have fought on the same soil for the same cause on the beaches of Normandy, in Korea and in Afghanistan. Those who came home deserve our gratitude whether they live in Vancouver, British Columbia or Vancouver, Washington. If you see a veteran be sure to give your thanks. For Those who didn't come home they deserve our grieving whether their coffins and graves are covered with the star and stripes or the maple leaf.
Both Veterans Day and Remembrance Day began as Armistice Day signifying the end of WWI, the war to end all wars, at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. But how November 11th is observed has changed over time.
In the United States, Veterans Day honors all living veterans whereas Memorial Day honors veterans who lost their lives in the line of duty. In Canada, Remembrance Day honors veterans both living and dead although the emphasis is on those soldiers who fell as signified by the wearing of the poppy. The poppy is in reference to the opening line of the poem "In Flanders Field" written by Dr. John McRae in honor of a friend who died at the Second Battle of Ypres in Belgium (In Flanders fields the poppies blow/Between the crosses, row on row) symbolizing the fragility of life.
As such Remembrance Day is a more somber occasion than Veterans Day and dare I say Memorial Day. In this country, Memorial Day marks the beginning of summer and despite our best efforts has become a day of reverie synonymous with barbecues.
But whatever the differences between Veterans Day and Remembrance Day, American and Canadian soldiers have fought on the same soil for the same cause on the beaches of Normandy, in Korea and in Afghanistan. Those who came home deserve our gratitude whether they live in Vancouver, British Columbia or Vancouver, Washington. If you see a veteran be sure to give your thanks. For Those who didn't come home they deserve our grieving whether their coffins and graves are covered with the star and stripes or the maple leaf.
Friday, November 8, 2019
3 Reasons Democrats Won't Nominate Bloomberg
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is giving really serious thought to entering the 2020 Democratic presidential race.
It was about this time a year ago that Bloomberg pondered getting into the race only to decide against it this past March. At the time, Bloomberg stated:
As I've thought about a possible presidential campaign, the choice before me has become clear. Should I devote the next two years to talking about my ideas and record, knowing that I might never win the Democratic nomination? Or should I spend the next two years doubling down on the work that I am already leading and funding, and that I know can produce real and beneficial results for the country, right now? I've come to realize that I'm less interested in talking than doing.
It would appear Bloomberg is now more interested in talking.
Despite his progressive credentials on issues like climate change and gun control, there are three reasons I can think why Democrats would never nominate him as their presidential standard bearer.
First, much like Donald Trump, Bloomberg was originally a Democrat. But when he sought the mayoralty of New York City in 2001 he switched his political registration to Republican for the simple reason that he could never win the Democratic Party's nomination. If Bloomberg couldn't win the supports of Democrats in New York City then how can he expect to earn the support of Democrats across the country?
Second, Bloomberg is a billionaire. In a party that features Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, nominating Bloomberg is simply inconceivable. AOC believes billionaires should cease to exist. If a critical mass of Democrats believe there shouldn't be billionaires then what makes anyone think they would vote for one?
Third, Bloomberg is Jew who steadfastly supports Israel. The Democratic base will tolerate Bernie Sanders because he denounces Israel every chance he gets and supporting him insulates them from charges of anti-Semitism. Bloomberg, on the other hand, has stood up for Israel as he did when he protested the Obama Administration's temporary ban of domestic flights into Israel during the 2014 Gaza War by flying on his private jet to Tel Aviv and wrote an op-ed to defend his actions. I also remember when he went to Jerusalem in August 2003 to ride a bus route that had been target in a suicide bombing which claimed the life of a New York area Orthodox Jewish woman and her infant son. In a party where AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib and their anti-Semitic remarks and actions are tolerated, it would be simply inconceivable to see the nomination of a staunchly pro-Israel candidate much less one who is Jewish.
Although I have my disagreements with Michael Bloomberg, I would consider cast a ballot for him as our next President. But chances are that ballot would be a write-in. Bloomberg winning the Democratic nomination would surely be a write-off.
It was about this time a year ago that Bloomberg pondered getting into the race only to decide against it this past March. At the time, Bloomberg stated:
As I've thought about a possible presidential campaign, the choice before me has become clear. Should I devote the next two years to talking about my ideas and record, knowing that I might never win the Democratic nomination? Or should I spend the next two years doubling down on the work that I am already leading and funding, and that I know can produce real and beneficial results for the country, right now? I've come to realize that I'm less interested in talking than doing.
It would appear Bloomberg is now more interested in talking.
Despite his progressive credentials on issues like climate change and gun control, there are three reasons I can think why Democrats would never nominate him as their presidential standard bearer.
First, much like Donald Trump, Bloomberg was originally a Democrat. But when he sought the mayoralty of New York City in 2001 he switched his political registration to Republican for the simple reason that he could never win the Democratic Party's nomination. If Bloomberg couldn't win the supports of Democrats in New York City then how can he expect to earn the support of Democrats across the country?
Second, Bloomberg is a billionaire. In a party that features Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, nominating Bloomberg is simply inconceivable. AOC believes billionaires should cease to exist. If a critical mass of Democrats believe there shouldn't be billionaires then what makes anyone think they would vote for one?
Third, Bloomberg is Jew who steadfastly supports Israel. The Democratic base will tolerate Bernie Sanders because he denounces Israel every chance he gets and supporting him insulates them from charges of anti-Semitism. Bloomberg, on the other hand, has stood up for Israel as he did when he protested the Obama Administration's temporary ban of domestic flights into Israel during the 2014 Gaza War by flying on his private jet to Tel Aviv and wrote an op-ed to defend his actions. I also remember when he went to Jerusalem in August 2003 to ride a bus route that had been target in a suicide bombing which claimed the life of a New York area Orthodox Jewish woman and her infant son. In a party where AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib and their anti-Semitic remarks and actions are tolerated, it would be simply inconceivable to see the nomination of a staunchly pro-Israel candidate much less one who is Jewish.
Although I have my disagreements with Michael Bloomberg, I would consider cast a ballot for him as our next President. But chances are that ballot would be a write-in. Bloomberg winning the Democratic nomination would surely be a write-off.
Monday, November 4, 2019
My Verdict on Jury Duty in NYC
Last month, I had the displeasure of being summoned to the Manhattan Civil Courthouse for jury duty.
My Dad as well as my colleagues were astonished that my presence would be required after scarcely year in the city. What had I done to warrant such ignominious treatment?
Jury summons are not unfamiliar to me. Indeed, during my 18½ years in Boston I was thrice summoned for jury duty. Twice I underwent voir dire but was not selected for jury duty. In the latter case, I asked to be excused because I was scheduled to undergo an endoscopy early the following week which would have likely conflicted with the trial. Fortunately, I was excused. The final time I was summoned, my appearance was cancelled as no cases were scheduled for the day in question. All in all, other than having to be in court by 8 a.m., these experiences were relatively painless. The same cannot be said for New York City.
When it comes to jury duty, there are significant differences between Massachusetts and New York. In the Bay State, when summoned, one can delay one's service up to one year. In the Empire State, one can only delay one's service from 2 to 6 months. If I chose this route then chances are I would have been summoned again in the dead of winter. So I decided the bite the bullet and get it out of the way.
I made a point of taking the subway down to Lower Manhattan a few days before my appearance. Unlike Midtown or the Upper West Side, Lower Manhattan is not on a grid. Indeed, it reminds me of downtown Boston only on a far larger scale. I'm glad I did this because if I hadn't I surely would have ended up at 1 World Trade Center instead of 111 Centre Street.
In Boston, when jurors were gathered into a room we were addressed in person by judge. In NYC, when jurors are gathered in a room we must watch a UHF quality TV featuring a short film on the importance of jury duty narrated by Nightline co-anchor Byron Pitts. The grainy quality of the film made it look like a hostage video and I think Pitts wanted to be there about as much as we did.
In Boston, we had frequent breaks between the long silences. In NYC, one must be ready to be summoned at any moment. You can go to the bathroom and sign out, but if your name is called and you miss it then you do so at your own risk. In Boston, there were cafeterias where one could buy tasty food at a reasonable price. In NYC, there are no cafeterias and you're stuck with a vending machine dispensing junk food. Fortunately, given my idiosyncratic diet, I brought my own stock of non-dairy protein bars and mushroom based jerky. They served me well. While my appetite was satiated, my ears were subject to unpleasant noises. As I mentioned, in Boston, there was silence. In NYC, the female Indian court clerk felt the need to talk constantly. She sounded like an aspiring DJ who had failed to find a job in radio on account of an annoying voice.
After nearly two hours of disorientation, I was among a group of prospective jurors summoned to a panel across the road at the New York County Criminal Court on 100 Centre Street. The court officers gave us yellow cards so we could bypass security. We proceeded to the 13th floor and escorted into a courtroom. The case in question was one where the defendant was accused of child sexual assault. Obviously a disturbing accusation, but as the judge presiding over the case stated it is only an accusation. Nevertheless this proved a difficult situation for a lot of prospective jurors who disclosed they or members of their family had been sexually assaulted with some breaking down in tears. Needless to say these prospective jurors were excused from the case as was the one prospective female juror who stated those accused of sexual assault weren't entitled to the presumption of innocence.
I was summoned the jury box and questioned at length by the judge as to, among other things, where I was from, where I went to school, with whom did I live and where did I get my news. The last question was particularly interesting because a lot of people said The New York Times and NPR. I wonder if the judge would have dismissed a juror if he or she had said Fox News or Breitbart. But no one made such a disclosure.
The judge gave two minutes apiece to the ADA and defense attorneys to pose their questions. While the ADA was conducting voir dire I had placed my hand under my chin as is my want and she immediately questioned this behavior. I assured her that it was merely a personal habit rather than a reflection of my ability to determine the facts of the case fairly. For his part, the defense attorney asked me to clarify my work with children. I had disclosed that I worked for Massachusetts child abuse hotline run by what was then known as DSS in 2000 and 2001. At the conclusion of voir dire, we were all asked to leave the room to, as the judge put it, "talk about you behind your backs." I'm sure there was plenty of talk about me as I was not among the jurors selected.
There was good news and bad news. The good news is that I had 90 minutes for lunch and I had a nice walk around Chinatown. The bad news was that I had to return to the jury room at 111 Centre Street. In Massachusetts, once you are excused from a jury panel then you are done with your jury service. Not so in NYC. Indeed, one can be kept up to three days before being excused assuming you haven't been selected.
Upon my return, I saw that my phone & iPad were running low on battery life. Fortunately, there was a side room for that convenience. At 3 p.m., another jury panel was convened but my name was not called. Ditto for an hour later. The clerk then said anyone who hadn't been called for the 4 p.m. panel to report to her. Two of us approached. It turns out the court officers had lost our jury ballots. So we had to give her our jury IDs and join the 4 p.m. panel.
Unlike the 11 a.m. panel, the court officers did not give us yellow cards. Security at 100 Centre Street was furious with the court officers and a shouting match ensued. After words were exchanged, security let us in but severely admonished the court officers.
Once again we proceeded to the 13th floor to another courtroom. Another criminal case. Thankfully not another child sexual assault, but rather theft and possession of stolen goods. No sooner than we took our seats, the judge dismissed us for the day and told us to report to the courtroom at 9:45 a.m. the following day.
At the appointed time the 13th floor was jammed full of people from both the 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. panel from the previous day. One of the court officers (an older gentleman who was overseeing the 3 p.m. panel) castigated jurors for not listening to the judge and told them to stop asking him questions to which they already knew the answer. There was a younger, taller court officer who repeatedly demanded people make way for him as he proceeded up and down the hall. "You have to make way for me!!! You have to make way for me!!! There are plenty of seats!!!" There weren't any. These court officers clearly enjoy what little authority they have and the exercise thereof.
Court did not convene until 10:15 a.m. Once again, I was selected to go into the jury box. Unlike the older white female judge who questioned each juror individually, this white middle aged judge had us answer his questions from a laminated handout. This judge also gave the ADA and defense attorneys 15 minutes apiece to conduct their respective voir dire. The young Asian ADA asked me a question but the older German accented defense attorney thankfully did not. The defense attorney made a point of saying, "I don't need to put on a case. I can sit on my ass if I want, but I won't." A bit much arrogance for my liking. However, the judge was annoyed with the ADA who not only went over his allotted time but twice asked to extend his time.
As with the previous days, the courtroom was cleared so the judge and attorneys could talk behind our backs. Yet another half hour passed. Shortly after re-entering the courtroom, I exited after being excluded from my second jury panel in less than 24 hours. Those of us not selected were told to go up two floors to another jury room. Upon entry there was no one there. So we just sat and waited.
After an hour, a female African American clerk entered the room apparently having returned from lunch and was shocked to see us there. We explained that we had been excused from a jury panel an hour earlier. Fortunately, she had the most sense if anyone I had encountered in a day and a half there because she excused us from our obligations, printed us our proof of service and sent us on our way. She said, "We'll see you in four years, but I won't because I'll be retired by then." It was 1:30 p.m. on a Friday and I had the rest of the day to myself.
It was said over and again that trial by jury is the cornerstone of our democracy. But if I were ever appeared in court as a defendant I think I'd prefer a bench trial. I didn't have much interaction with the other prospective jurors. I don't like to bother people and invade their space. In any case, I got the very strong sense they didn't want to be there anymore than anyone else and had other things to do. As such, do I really want to put my fate into the hands of someone who is in a hurry to get to a Yankees game?
What soured me the most was the lack of professionalism among the court officers. They treated us as criminals, not as law abiding citizens. Needless to say, I am not looking forward to having to go back in four years time. This is, of course, assuming that I am still living in New York City by then.
My Dad as well as my colleagues were astonished that my presence would be required after scarcely year in the city. What had I done to warrant such ignominious treatment?
Jury summons are not unfamiliar to me. Indeed, during my 18½ years in Boston I was thrice summoned for jury duty. Twice I underwent voir dire but was not selected for jury duty. In the latter case, I asked to be excused because I was scheduled to undergo an endoscopy early the following week which would have likely conflicted with the trial. Fortunately, I was excused. The final time I was summoned, my appearance was cancelled as no cases were scheduled for the day in question. All in all, other than having to be in court by 8 a.m., these experiences were relatively painless. The same cannot be said for New York City.
When it comes to jury duty, there are significant differences between Massachusetts and New York. In the Bay State, when summoned, one can delay one's service up to one year. In the Empire State, one can only delay one's service from 2 to 6 months. If I chose this route then chances are I would have been summoned again in the dead of winter. So I decided the bite the bullet and get it out of the way.
I made a point of taking the subway down to Lower Manhattan a few days before my appearance. Unlike Midtown or the Upper West Side, Lower Manhattan is not on a grid. Indeed, it reminds me of downtown Boston only on a far larger scale. I'm glad I did this because if I hadn't I surely would have ended up at 1 World Trade Center instead of 111 Centre Street.
In Boston, when jurors were gathered into a room we were addressed in person by judge. In NYC, when jurors are gathered in a room we must watch a UHF quality TV featuring a short film on the importance of jury duty narrated by Nightline co-anchor Byron Pitts. The grainy quality of the film made it look like a hostage video and I think Pitts wanted to be there about as much as we did.
In Boston, we had frequent breaks between the long silences. In NYC, one must be ready to be summoned at any moment. You can go to the bathroom and sign out, but if your name is called and you miss it then you do so at your own risk. In Boston, there were cafeterias where one could buy tasty food at a reasonable price. In NYC, there are no cafeterias and you're stuck with a vending machine dispensing junk food. Fortunately, given my idiosyncratic diet, I brought my own stock of non-dairy protein bars and mushroom based jerky. They served me well. While my appetite was satiated, my ears were subject to unpleasant noises. As I mentioned, in Boston, there was silence. In NYC, the female Indian court clerk felt the need to talk constantly. She sounded like an aspiring DJ who had failed to find a job in radio on account of an annoying voice.
After nearly two hours of disorientation, I was among a group of prospective jurors summoned to a panel across the road at the New York County Criminal Court on 100 Centre Street. The court officers gave us yellow cards so we could bypass security. We proceeded to the 13th floor and escorted into a courtroom. The case in question was one where the defendant was accused of child sexual assault. Obviously a disturbing accusation, but as the judge presiding over the case stated it is only an accusation. Nevertheless this proved a difficult situation for a lot of prospective jurors who disclosed they or members of their family had been sexually assaulted with some breaking down in tears. Needless to say these prospective jurors were excused from the case as was the one prospective female juror who stated those accused of sexual assault weren't entitled to the presumption of innocence.
I was summoned the jury box and questioned at length by the judge as to, among other things, where I was from, where I went to school, with whom did I live and where did I get my news. The last question was particularly interesting because a lot of people said The New York Times and NPR. I wonder if the judge would have dismissed a juror if he or she had said Fox News or Breitbart. But no one made such a disclosure.
The judge gave two minutes apiece to the ADA and defense attorneys to pose their questions. While the ADA was conducting voir dire I had placed my hand under my chin as is my want and she immediately questioned this behavior. I assured her that it was merely a personal habit rather than a reflection of my ability to determine the facts of the case fairly. For his part, the defense attorney asked me to clarify my work with children. I had disclosed that I worked for Massachusetts child abuse hotline run by what was then known as DSS in 2000 and 2001. At the conclusion of voir dire, we were all asked to leave the room to, as the judge put it, "talk about you behind your backs." I'm sure there was plenty of talk about me as I was not among the jurors selected.
There was good news and bad news. The good news is that I had 90 minutes for lunch and I had a nice walk around Chinatown. The bad news was that I had to return to the jury room at 111 Centre Street. In Massachusetts, once you are excused from a jury panel then you are done with your jury service. Not so in NYC. Indeed, one can be kept up to three days before being excused assuming you haven't been selected.
Upon my return, I saw that my phone & iPad were running low on battery life. Fortunately, there was a side room for that convenience. At 3 p.m., another jury panel was convened but my name was not called. Ditto for an hour later. The clerk then said anyone who hadn't been called for the 4 p.m. panel to report to her. Two of us approached. It turns out the court officers had lost our jury ballots. So we had to give her our jury IDs and join the 4 p.m. panel.
Unlike the 11 a.m. panel, the court officers did not give us yellow cards. Security at 100 Centre Street was furious with the court officers and a shouting match ensued. After words were exchanged, security let us in but severely admonished the court officers.
Once again we proceeded to the 13th floor to another courtroom. Another criminal case. Thankfully not another child sexual assault, but rather theft and possession of stolen goods. No sooner than we took our seats, the judge dismissed us for the day and told us to report to the courtroom at 9:45 a.m. the following day.
At the appointed time the 13th floor was jammed full of people from both the 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. panel from the previous day. One of the court officers (an older gentleman who was overseeing the 3 p.m. panel) castigated jurors for not listening to the judge and told them to stop asking him questions to which they already knew the answer. There was a younger, taller court officer who repeatedly demanded people make way for him as he proceeded up and down the hall. "You have to make way for me!!! You have to make way for me!!! There are plenty of seats!!!" There weren't any. These court officers clearly enjoy what little authority they have and the exercise thereof.
Court did not convene until 10:15 a.m. Once again, I was selected to go into the jury box. Unlike the older white female judge who questioned each juror individually, this white middle aged judge had us answer his questions from a laminated handout. This judge also gave the ADA and defense attorneys 15 minutes apiece to conduct their respective voir dire. The young Asian ADA asked me a question but the older German accented defense attorney thankfully did not. The defense attorney made a point of saying, "I don't need to put on a case. I can sit on my ass if I want, but I won't." A bit much arrogance for my liking. However, the judge was annoyed with the ADA who not only went over his allotted time but twice asked to extend his time.
As with the previous days, the courtroom was cleared so the judge and attorneys could talk behind our backs. Yet another half hour passed. Shortly after re-entering the courtroom, I exited after being excluded from my second jury panel in less than 24 hours. Those of us not selected were told to go up two floors to another jury room. Upon entry there was no one there. So we just sat and waited.
After an hour, a female African American clerk entered the room apparently having returned from lunch and was shocked to see us there. We explained that we had been excused from a jury panel an hour earlier. Fortunately, she had the most sense if anyone I had encountered in a day and a half there because she excused us from our obligations, printed us our proof of service and sent us on our way. She said, "We'll see you in four years, but I won't because I'll be retired by then." It was 1:30 p.m. on a Friday and I had the rest of the day to myself.
It was said over and again that trial by jury is the cornerstone of our democracy. But if I were ever appeared in court as a defendant I think I'd prefer a bench trial. I didn't have much interaction with the other prospective jurors. I don't like to bother people and invade their space. In any case, I got the very strong sense they didn't want to be there anymore than anyone else and had other things to do. As such, do I really want to put my fate into the hands of someone who is in a hurry to get to a Yankees game?
What soured me the most was the lack of professionalism among the court officers. They treated us as criminals, not as law abiding citizens. Needless to say, I am not looking forward to having to go back in four years time. This is, of course, assuming that I am still living in New York City by then.
Friday, November 1, 2019
Beto Bows Out
A year ago Beto O'Rourke came within an eyelash of unseating Ted Cruz from the Senate.
Even though he fell short, O'Rourke's political stock was rising.
One year later, O'Rourke would be lucky to sell enough penny stocks to buy a one way ticket to Palookaville.
Today, O'Rourke dropped out of the 2020 Democratic race.
You know your presidential race is going badly when fellow Democrats called upon him to run for the Senate a la John Hickenlooper.
Any chance O'Rourke had of unseating John Cornyn ended the moment he called for a mandatory gun buyback program following the El Paso massacre.
O'Rourke lost me when he bashed Benjamin Netanyahu on the campaign trail and likened climate change activists to American soldiers who stormed Normandy Beach on D-Day.
Where O'Rourke goes from here is anybody's guess. I can't see him running for office anytime soon. Perhaps he'll get a gig at the Kennedy School of Government and then get a reality show on MSNBC where he visits dental offices around the country. He might not become President much less a Senator, but I'm sure he'll never have to worry about his finances. Let's just say his fate is the least of my worries.
Even though he fell short, O'Rourke's political stock was rising.
One year later, O'Rourke would be lucky to sell enough penny stocks to buy a one way ticket to Palookaville.
Today, O'Rourke dropped out of the 2020 Democratic race.
You know your presidential race is going badly when fellow Democrats called upon him to run for the Senate a la John Hickenlooper.
Any chance O'Rourke had of unseating John Cornyn ended the moment he called for a mandatory gun buyback program following the El Paso massacre.
O'Rourke lost me when he bashed Benjamin Netanyahu on the campaign trail and likened climate change activists to American soldiers who stormed Normandy Beach on D-Day.
Where O'Rourke goes from here is anybody's guess. I can't see him running for office anytime soon. Perhaps he'll get a gig at the Kennedy School of Government and then get a reality show on MSNBC where he visits dental offices around the country. He might not become President much less a Senator, but I'm sure he'll never have to worry about his finances. Let's just say his fate is the least of my worries.
Longtime Met Beltran To Be Named New Manager
Former New York Mets outfielder Carlos Beltran has reportedly been named the team's new manager succeeding Mickey Callaway who was dismissed with one year remaining on his contract. Beltran spent nearly a third of his 20-year big league career with the Mets playing with them from 2005 through the middle of the 2011 season when he was traded to the San Francisco Giants. His playing career ended in 2017 when he earned his lone World Series ring with the Houston Astros.
Following his retirement, Beltran was interviewed for the managerial post with the crosstown New York Yankees after Joe Giradi was sacked. The position, of course, went to Aaron Boone. The Yankees subsequently hired Beltran to be a special adviser to GM Brian Cashman. Ironically, Beltran beat out Girardi who was interviewed twice for the vacancy before ultimately being offered the job in Philadelphia. I think Mets GM Brodie Van Wagenen wanted a manager less likely to have his own ideas or at least wedded to them.
This isn't a knock on Beltran. In fact, I think he is the best possible choice. He has credibility with the players and has a very keen sense of observation as he was the one who pointed out that Yankees starter James Paxton was tipping his pitches early this season.
Of course, Beltran is in a tough division with the World Series champion Nationals, back to back NL East champion Braves and a Phillies team with Girardi at the helm. But I think it would be a mistake to sell Beltran short. If anyone can handle the scrutiny that is involved with being the manager of the New York Mets, it would be Beltran.
Following his retirement, Beltran was interviewed for the managerial post with the crosstown New York Yankees after Joe Giradi was sacked. The position, of course, went to Aaron Boone. The Yankees subsequently hired Beltran to be a special adviser to GM Brian Cashman. Ironically, Beltran beat out Girardi who was interviewed twice for the vacancy before ultimately being offered the job in Philadelphia. I think Mets GM Brodie Van Wagenen wanted a manager less likely to have his own ideas or at least wedded to them.
This isn't a knock on Beltran. In fact, I think he is the best possible choice. He has credibility with the players and has a very keen sense of observation as he was the one who pointed out that Yankees starter James Paxton was tipping his pitches early this season.
Of course, Beltran is in a tough division with the World Series champion Nationals, back to back NL East champion Braves and a Phillies team with Girardi at the helm. But I think it would be a mistake to sell Beltran short. If anyone can handle the scrutiny that is involved with being the manager of the New York Mets, it would be Beltran.
10 Depressing Reasons Why Trump Will Be Re-Elected
In
one November from now, Americans will go to the polls to determine Donald
Trump’s fate as well as our own. Despite everything Trump has said and done since
his election nearly three years ago, I believe there are a sufficient number of
voters who will see fit to re-elect him in a year from now. This is a
depressing thought. But no matter how depressing the prospect of a second Trump
term, we cannot and must not discount the possibility. With this in mind, here
are 10 depressing reasons why I have concluded that voters will stick with
Trump on November 3, 2020.
1.
People Are Better Off Now Than They Were Four Years Ago
As
of September 2019, the national unemployment rate is 3.5%. As the Trump White
House boasts, it is the 19th consecutive month the unemployment rate has been at 4% or lower and represents the lowest monthly unemployment rate since May 1969. But unemployment has been trending downward for nearly the
entire 2010s. After reaching 10% in October 2009, during President Obama’s
first year in office, the unemployment rate had been cut in half by September
2015. When Trump entered office, the unemployment rate was 4.7%.
So
Trump inherited a good economic situation from Obama. Mind you, Obama is no
more responsible for the decline in unemployment which took place while he was
in office than Trump is. Chances are if voters had elected John McCain, Mitt
Romney and Hillary Clinton in successive presidential elections we would very
likely have the same level of low unemployment. But politicians being
politicians, they like taking credit for things with which they have little or
nothing to do. In Trump’s case, he takes bragging to a whole new level
characterizing the economy under his watch as “the greatest in the history of
the country” despite all evidence to the contrary.
In
Trump’s case, an argument can be made that his tariff policies on allies and
adversaries alike could put the U.S. economy into recession. It is estimated that Trump’s tariffs increase average costs per household between $500 to $1700 and lower annual G.D.P.in 2020 an estimated 0.3% to 1%. It might not seem
like a lot. But even with unemployment at 3.5%, the manufacturing index of 47.8 in September 2019 was at its lowest level since June 2009 when the country was
still in the midst of the Great Recession. The writing is on the wall. Just
not on the one Trump says he wants to build.
Notwithstanding
these warning signs, by the time the full impact of Trump’s tariffs are
realized it will be well after the election and Trump will be safe from the
voters. As long as a critical mass of voters are content with their lot in life
then they will see no reason to rock the boat even if it is beginning to take
on water.
2.
Trump’s Tweets Work
For
all of their vulgarity and balderdash, President Trump’s tweets work. They work because Trump tweets prolifically and repeats the same messages over and over again. Think “hoax”, “witch hunt”, “fake news” and targets like Hillary
Clinton, James Comey and Robert Mueller not to mention the present Democratic
field while praising his own efforts to no end. Tweet and retweet the same
message, no matter how false, and you can fool enough of the people to believe
it as the gospel truth.
Kamala
Harris only makes matters worse by demanding Twitter suspend Trump’s account. While Harris is correct to say that Trump’s words are irresponsible,
suspending his account would be equally irresponsible. Such a measure would
turn Trump into a martyr and have the effecting of mobilizing conservatives –
even those not inclined to support him. Then there are practical
considerations. Banning Trump from Twitter would not prevent him from
communicating by other means. When it comes to Trump’s tweets the answer isn’t
banning speech but better speech. Unfortunately, Democrats don’t seem to be
willing to offer anything better thus giving voters little reason to change
their minds.
3.
His Supporters Aren’t Abandoning Him
Trump’s
tweets are the foundation of his presidency. It’s like attending a Trump rally
without ever having to leave the comfort of your home. Not a single inch of
that “big, beautiful wall” along the southern border has been built and, if it
ever gets under way, Mexico won’t be paying for it.
You
would think Trump’s supporters would feel betrayed by the President. But
thought doesn’t enter into the equation. Accomplishments don’t matter. Wall or
no wall, Trump’s supporters aren’t abandoning him. They would run through a
wall for them and then rebuild it only to run through it again.
After
Trump received strong criticism for putting anti-racists and white supremacists
on the same moral plane after Charlottesville in August 2017, BBC journalist Katty Kay made the case why Trump supporters will never abandon him:
He
defies the normal metrics for success because his voters don't so much support
him for what he does as they adore him for what he's against.
Mr.
Trump is against the political establishment (the media, the Republican Party,
political grandees like the Bushes and the Clintons) and change (which
encompasses everything you had but fear you are losing) and he's against the world
(which has taken jobs and sent immigrants to take over America).
Peter
Wehner, a so-called “establishment Republican” who worked for President Reagan
and both Bushes, takes a slightly different view. Wehner believes there are
Trump supporters who realize how dangerous he is, but cannot bring themselves
to admit they are wrong. “To indict him is to indict themselves, and to indict
their own judgment, and that’s hard for any human being," Wehner wrote, "They will defend him
regardless of what happens, come hell or high water.”
Whether
Trump supporters are true believers or just unwilling to admit they were wrong,
they are standing by him. Eric Ostermeier, a University of Minnesota political
science professor and founder of the blog Smart Politics notes, “Given
everything that has happened to his administration, what I think is very
telling, is [his base of support] has not moved more than a few inches. Here in
Minnesota it has also been pretty consistent; it was 46 when he was
inaugurated, and its 43 now. Some of his negatives have risen, but those who
support him have remained relatively stable.”
And
with stability comes re-election.
4.
People Have Short Memories
Despite
the stability in his support, President Trump has behaved in a manner which
suggests otherwise. He has said and done many things inconceivable for the
President of the United States much less a normal human being.
There
is Trump’s constant refrain that the media as “an enemy of the people”,
referring to black majority nations as “shithole countries”, his barbs at
Senator John McCain months after his death while casually accusing Mueller’s
investigators, FBI officials and various members of treason, a crime punishable
by imprisonment or death. But for many this is all water under the bridge.
How
many of you have already forgotten the video depicting Trump graphically executing his critics in the Democratic Party and the media? This wasn’t
Trump’s doing in particular, but it was shown in a room of his most fervent
supporters at his Doral resort in Miami. This would be the same Doral which
would have hosted next year’s G-7 Summit if not for overwhelming negative
public opinion.
Then
there are the lies. More than 12,000 from which to choose. Most of these
are the same lies – the wall is being built, the economy is the greatest
ever, he passed the largest tax cut ever, Russia didn’t interfere in the 2016
election, etc. Then there was the time he deployed a sharpie to claim that
Alabama was in the path of Hurricane Dorian and insisted that his lie was true.
This might be funny if it wasn't for Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross threatening the jobs of NOAA officials who contradicted Trump - by stating the facts. It's bad enough that Trump lies, but his Cabinet is demanding that civil servants aid and abet those lies or lose their livelihood. Who would want to live in that kind of America?
But
the barrage of balderdash and onslaught of insults is so voluminous it is hard
to keep up. One outrage can easily make one forget the hundred which came
before it. How many of you remember the beginning of 2019 when there was a partial shutdown of the federal
government for five weeks? This might as well have been five years ago.
If
not for the recent passing of Elijah Cummings, it would have been easy to
forget that the former Baltimore area Congressman was a target of racially charged tweets by Trump only three months ago. Tweets which characterized
Cummings’ district as "a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess"
and that "no human being would want to live there.” Of course, many human
beings live in Maryland’s 7th District and most of them are
African-American. This is the sort of thing we ought to remember this when
entering the voting booth. But by the time November 2020 comes around, for most
people, Elijah Cummings will scarcely be a footnote in the news cycle.
Those
who support Trump will either dismiss his insults and lies as fake news or wear
it as a badge of honor. Voters who have fewer illusions about Trump, but
distrust politicians in general may be inclined to conclude that Trump is no
worse than anyone else. But as former world chess champion and Russian exile Gary Kasparov put it, “The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform
or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate
truth.” If re-electing Trump doesn’t annihilate the truth, it will
collapse its foundation and thereby take decades to rebuild.
5.
Impeachment is Dead on Arrival
President
Trump brazenly called upon recently elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr
Zelensky to do him a favor and investigate Joe Biden. If he didn’t it would be
a shame if anything happened to their military aid. After initial denials, this
account of events was confirmed by White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney
(before he denied ever saying any such thing hours later) and by acting
Ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor, Jr. (who did not recant his account).
Trump has also called upon China to investigate Biden in exchange for the
easing of tariffs. Both of these are impeachable offenses.
While
public support for impeachment has increased, so long as the Senate is
controlled by Mitch McConnell impeachment is dead on arrival. The Republican
Senators who don’t worship at Trump’s altar are scared to death that he will
mock them on Twitter. And if they aren’t scared of Trump then they are scared of his supporters who claim impeachment is a coup. That it is a legitimate
constitutional process means absolutely nothing to them. It certainly means
nothing to the 30 Republican Congressmen who recently stormed a secure area of Congress to prevent a closed door impeachment hearing from proceeding. Trump
supporters claim the impeachment process will be undoing a legitimate election.
Even if one agrees Trump was legitimately elected in 2016 that doesn’t entitle
him to engage in impeachable behavior in 2019. But let us remember Trump
believes that being President entitles him to do “whatever the hell I want.”
6.
“Investigating The Investigators” is Only Get Started
And
what Trump wants to do is to turn the heat on the people who have investigated
him during the Mueller Report which he has long characterized as a hoax and a
witch hunt. What began as an administrative review of the origins of the
Mueller Report by Attorney General William Barr in May has now turned into a criminal investigation led by U.S. attorney John Durham. This far more
closely resembles a hoax and a witch hunt than the Mueller Report which
actually resulted in a jail sentence for former Trump campaign manager Paul
Manafort and a pending trial for longtime Trump advisor Roger Stone.
Notwithstanding
Durham’s stellar reputation as a prosecutor, pressure might be brought to bear
from the White House against Durham to lay charges given how Trump expects “bad things” to come of the inquiry. Considering how Trump has railed against the FBI by accusing it of treason, it would not shock me to see indictments
against the likes of longtime Trump bogeymen Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew
McCabe and perhaps even against former FBI Director James Comey and Mueller
himself.
Of
course, any indictments which might be brought will have no legal merit
whatsoever. There is only treason against the United States, not the President
of the United States never mind a presidential candidate. But such indictments
would have the effect of intimidating those who dare hold Trump to scrutiny,
prevent further inquiry and accelerate this country’s descent into
authoritarianism.
Even
if no indictments are ever brought so long as the DOJ investigation against the
Mueller Report is open, it will be grist for Trump’s mill during the election
campaign and his supporters won’t be able to get enough. While most voters will
see through it, there will be enough voters for whom this will effectively
cancel out the impact of any impeachment proceedings against Trump - especially if Trump is in a pardoning mood.
7.
Democrats Won’t Turn Out for Joe Biden Just as They Didn’t For Hillary
Clinton
President Trump has asked not one, but two foreign governments to
investigate an American citizen and all because he dares to challenge Trump for the office he holds. Yet for all of Trump’s illegality and impropriety,
Joe Biden isn’t exactly getting much in the way of sympathy. After all, there
more than dozen other Democrats who want to be the one who faces Trump next
year. Meanwhile, Democratic Party activists have been lukewarm at best to Biden
while displaying outright hostility at worst. Unlike President Obama, Biden garners very little enthusiasm among younger voters. During the Democratic
debate in September, I witnessed a room full of NYU students openly boo the former VP.
Biden
could still win the nomination, but a critical mass of Democrats have no
enthusiasm for him and will sit on their hands as they did for Hillary Clinton
in 2016. At this point, Elizabeth Warren has captured the hearts of most
progressives and is now viewed as the frontrunner.
8.
Donald Trump is a Liar, But Elizabeth Warren is a Phony
Whatever
affection the Democratic base has for Warren, she has plenty of problems of her
own. Her false claims of Native American identity continue to be her kryptonite. While none of her Democratic rivals have seen fit to challenge
her claims, Trump will not be so hesitant. After all, it was Trump who goaded
Warren to ill-advisedly take a DNA test to prove her Native American ancestry
much to the anger and dismay of the Cherokee Nation.
Now
comes her dubious claim that she was fired from a teaching job in New Jersey in the 1970’s due to her pregnancy when in fact she was encouraged to go to law
school. It also doesn’t help that Warren can’t bring herself to admit that
her Medicare for All proposal will result in tax increases on the middle class.
All of which makes you wonder why Democrats keep nominating smug elitists who
reside in Massachusetts.
President
Trump might be a pathological liar, but Elizabeth Warren only need tell a lie
or two to undo her credibility. But for all his fallacious behavior, Trump
somehow comes off as genuine while Warren comes off as a phony. If Democrats
nominate Warren then you can be sure Trump will call Warren “Pocahantas” and "Fauxcahontas" every
chance he gets. Warren might have a plan for everything, but I don't think she has a plan for defeating Donald Trump.
9.
Bernie Sanders’ Heart
Whatever
one thinks of Bernie Sanders, there is nothing phony about him. He wears his
heart on his sleeve. And his return to the campaign trail scarcely two weeks
removed from a heart attack has made his campaign something of a feel good
story. Endorsements from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib
demonstrate that he still has a shot at the nomination.
Bernie’s
heart might be in it, but there will remain the question if it could give out.
President Trump is the epitome of the obesity epidemic in America despite at least one of his supporters insisting that he looks younger in office.
With all that being said, Trump hasn’t suffered a heart attack and he
would raise Bernie’s ticker in a heartbeat. And when Trump doesn’t tweet
about Bernie’s heart, he’ll tweet about AOC, Omar and Tlaib at every
opportunity and not without justification. While it was wrong to for Trump to
encourage his supporters to “send them back”, he will strike a resonant chord
when he raises the legitimate question of their anti-Semitic statements and
support of BDS. It will certainly make the case that their endorsement of a
Jewish candidate for the White House is little more than a smokescreen.
10.
People Trust The Government and The Media Less Than They Trust Trump
As
of this writing, President Trump has an overall disapproval rating of 54.4%. You would think this screams, “One Term President!!!” The problem is that Americans have less trust our institutions less than they trust President Trump including the media. At least a third of Americans agree with Trump’s oft-repeated view that the media is an enemy of the American people. Only 17% of Americans trust the government.
While
there is such a thing as a healthy skepticism of authority, this level of
distrust in the government is the sort of thing which helped allowed Trump get
to the White House and probably remain there even though he is now very much
part of the government. If we had more trust in government, in our media and
other public institutions, Trump’s candidacy would never have gotten off the
ground floor at Trump Tower. And yet here we are nearly three years removed
from Trump being elected our 45th President and a year away from
signing up for four more years of tantrums, tweets and totalitarian praise.
Conclusion
For
all of Trump’s foolishness, impulsiveness, meanness, prejudice and utter
disregard for the law by using the White House for personal gain, most of us
are doing well enough that we don’t care, don’t want to overturn the apple
cart, don’t remember what they had for breakfast yesterday much less what Trump
tweeted three months ago or are content to look the other way. Of course, this
might result in a lot of sore necks and visits to the chiropractor because
there is no reason to believe Trump’s foolishness, impulsiveness, meanness,
prejudice and utter disregard for the law will cease.
For
all his character deficiencies, Trump stays on message to hold his base. While
many who voted for Trump might not worship him much less think of attending one
of his rallies. They might even find what he says and tweets to be offensive.
But people learn to tune out what he says as the alternatives aren’t viewed in
any higher esteem. There are also low opinions of the institutions inside and
outside of government charged with holding him to account. In which case, there
could be as many voters inclined to believe the origins of the Mueller Report
are corrupt than anything Trump has done where it concerns asking the Ukrainian
President. It is a sad, depressing state of affairs. But so long as this
depressing state of affairs persists then none of us should be surprised if a
plurality of American voters gives Trump another mandate in a year from now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)