Tag Archive: Jimmy Carter


“No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy.” – Henry Kissinger

To Almost DailyBrett, it seems that “too much fraternizing” has resulted in way-too-much trouble for way-too-many men and has spawned (no pun intended) a global movement: #MeToo.

Should your author apologize when he dares to admit that he is indeed stricken with the Y-Chromosome?

More to the point: Are men born guilty?

Do the adjectives “creepy” and “pervy” always modify the nouns, “man,” “men” and “male(s)”?

The Genesis for this blog goes far beyond the litany of once successful men, who are now-and-forever relegated to the sidelines of life. Did their actual/alleged “fraternizing” maybe or actually go too far to be dubbed sexual assault/harassment?

Reportedly, the foibles of men originate from the Garden of Eden to 20th Century high school/college activities right up to the present day.

John Wayne’s “A man is going to do what a man is going to do” or “Boys will be boys” has been ushered into oblivion. Responsibility and accountability should reign for everyone.

Far too many women have experienced/suffered boorish (and at times criminal) behavior by way too many men. The #MeToo movement is predicated on a basis of hurt and pain for literally millions of women.

Even though Almost DailyBrett can state with impunity the vast majority of men are not saintly and pure – even Jimmy Carter “lusted in his heart” on the hallowed pages of Playboy – they are not automatically guilty because they came into the world as baby boys.

Not every male is the “Midnight Rambler.” It just may seem that way listening to the 24-7-365 talking heads on the partisan networks.

And yet if it always seems to come down to “he said/she said.” Your author will always take the “over” for the female of the species. Men can have their careers ruined based upon a charge whether the allegations are true or not.

Remember Rolling Stone Magazine’s December 2014 report on the rape culture, targeting University of Virginia’s Phil Kappa Psi fraternity. The only problem with the story, it was determined to be 100 percent untrue. “A Rape On Campus” was fake news before “Fake News” became in vogue.

For the university and the fraternity, the damage has been done. Forget about due process.

Does it suck to be a male?

“I Don’t Hate White Men … “

“I don’t hate white men. Actually, I’m so personally and emotionally invested in changing the culture of toxic masculinity that we made a little white man of our own.” – Former Grad School Classmate

Almost DailyBrett’s graduate school classmate actually does not hate white men … Ahhh, that’s refreshing.

Congrats on attempting to raise a “little white man of your own.” Hopefully, you can relate to scores of other mothers, who tried to tame these testosterone infested/infected creatures.

Maybe, you will understand the agrarian-turned-industrial-turned-service economy is working against men. Can you assist in educating these tadpoles to be successful gentlemen of the 21st Century?

Even though men have a plethora of issues, contributing to a culture of toxic masculinity, one must admit that men play an un poquito role in promulgating the human race through the provision of essential nutrients.

Pointing to the obvious: Many men are faithful, bring home the bacon, help raise children and assist in building our society. Yes, these hombres do indeed exist.

And yet, if they are charged … If an accusation is leveled … If they become collateral damage in a political fight, their worlds will change for the worse in mere digital nanoseconds.

When popular media discuss a “gender gap,” the term is automatically assessed as to only include the gulf between women and men. What about the other way around? Irrelevant?

Not so fast. According to national 2016 general election exit surveys, Hillary Clinton won the women’s vote, 54-41 percent, a 13 percent margin. Game, set match?

Oops, men favored Donald Trump over Hillary, 52-41 percent, an 11 percent margin. Misogyny?

Wait: White women voted for Trump over Hillary, 52-41 percent.

Maybe, the issue as noted by University of Virginia Political Science Professor Larry Sabato was the presence on the ballot of a “particular woman” with a ton of baggage.

The 2016 result does not preclude a women someday serving as America’s chief of state (see Teresa May in Britain and Angela Merkel im Deutschland).

Almost DailyBrett must reinforce here and now that an undefined number of bad Herren have inflicted pain and suffering on more women than those who actually courageously reported these transgressions.

Each and every case is inexcusable.

And yet to mothers raising male babies, toddlers, kids, teenagers, young men, these males are not guilty by birth. Agree?

The automatic presumption of guilt is never fair. America is governed by the Rule of Law. That basic precept applies to everyone, including those with testosterone coarsening through their bodies.

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/henry_kissinger_105144

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culture-mind-and-brain/201802/the-real-problem-toxic-masculinity

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/12/19/not-all-men-are-creeps/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2016/11/07/millions-of-active-women-supporting-millions-of-idle-men/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/deadbeat-boyfriends/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/impact-journalism/

With all due respect to the memory of LBJ and his colorful comment about FBI boss J. Edgar Hoover, American politics has been turned on its head.

Way back in the 20th Century, the conventional wisdom was to take the time to provide quality TLC to your electoral base, reach out to independents, and be extremely anal about your political enemies.

The rationale: Your friends can change, but your enemies will always be there for you.

Some contend the ageless adage: “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer” … is attributable to Chinese militarist Sun Tzu or maybe Italian philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli or even Al Pacino in Godfather II.

We may never know for sure.

The Economist’s Lexington this week examined the prospects of the “Never Trump” movement within the Republican Party to possibly mount a primary challenge against Donald Trump when the 2020 presidential cycle immediately commences after the November midterms.

Considering that Trump’s approval rating is 90 percent among Republicans (i.e., two Supreme Court picks, tax reform, regulatory relief, strong economy, no wars), the chances of beating him right now in the GOP primary appear to be slim and none with Slim being out-of-town.

Ready for more GOP primary punishment, Ohio Governor John Kasich? Been there, done that?

Almost DailyBrett also is mindful of the time period between now and 2020 is a political lifetime.

What Do Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama All Have in Common?

Even though the philosophical gap among these former presidents is wide, they all enjoyed not having primary opposition when they successfully ran for their respective second terms in 1996, 2004 and 2012 respectively. They also focused their GOTV (Get Out The Vote) efforts on enticing millions of their close friends to vote on election day.

The aforementioned Lyndon Johnson (1968, Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy) along with Jimmy Carter (1980, Ted Kennedy) and George H.W. Bush (Pat Buchanan) all faced credible primary opponents. They all failed re-election, big time.

Trump’s enemies are not going anywhere. They will intensify their rhetoric, ferocity and protests (if that is even possible) between now and November 2020.

The question remains: What will Trump’s friends do in two-years-time?

Donald Trump – whether you adore him or detest him (there is literally no middle ground) – he knows how to play the “us” vs. “them” game better than ever before.

The editorials and op-eds in the New York Times and the Washington Post and the commentary from the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC are consumed by people who didn’t vote for Trump before, and will never vote for him in two years or ever.

As former coach Dennis Green once said: “They are who we thought they were.”

Barring the political fantasy of the 12th Amendment (e.g. Electoral College) being overturned, Trump needs to focus on keeping the red states, red or … keeping his friends, his friends.

One of the ways, he is doing exactly that is by fulfilling promises (e.g., steel and aluminum tariffs for Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania).

Another is the almost by the minute denigration emanating from the political class, questioning the cerebral capabilities of those in the fly-over states that provided Trump with his Electoral College majority.

When all is said (there will be a ton of pontificating and bloviating between now and the next 27 months), the number that still matters is 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.

Trump delivered a relatively comfortable 2016 winning margin of 36 electoral votes above the 270 threshold. And if he holds his 30 states. Game, set and match.

The eventual Democratic nominee must peel away at least two red states. A good place to start would be Florida and its 29 electoral votes.

For Trump, it’s in his best political interest to keep close his friends in Florida.

Maybe even invite them over for some fun in the sun at Mar-a-Lago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfHJDLoGInM

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/389068855293185830/?lp=true

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/08/11/never-trump-republicans-could-have-their-revenge

http://www.startribune.com/he-was-who-we-thought-he-was-the-best-dennis-green-quotes/387948942/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2018/07/19/electoral-college-blues/

 

 

 

“ … The past two years have radicalized me. I am increasingly troubled by how many of my colleagues have decided to abandon any semblance of fairness out of a conviction that they must save the country from Trump.” – Fox, Daily Beast, CNN, Washington Post media commentator/columnist/author Howard Kurtz, “Media Madness”

“The media have been harder on Trump than any other president” and they “feel free to claim that Trump is mentally deranged.” – Former President Jimmy Carter

Almost DailyBrett doesn’t remember being trained to be an amateur psychologist during his years in Journalism school at the University of Southern California.

Back in the Brady Bunch years, your author was pursuing a bachelor’s degree in broadcasting journalism — not psychology — hoping to follow in the hallowed footsteps of Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.

Remember being taught “Reporting Public Affairs” by Joel Kotkin of the Washington Post. My assignment: Cover the 1977 Los Angeles Mayoral race campaign of California State Senator Alan Robbins, maintain a healthy dose of skepticism, and deliver a balanced, accurate report under deadline pressure.

Were those were the good days of American Journalism?

The media held Richard Nixon accountable for Watergate, obstruction of justice and his paranoia (did not attempt to diagnose his condition).

The rubbing elbows days with the Kennedys as played by Tom Hanks (e.g., Ben Bradlee) and Meryl Streep (Katharine Graham) in The Post were gone with the end of Camelot, and the “New Nixon.” The clubhouse door was closed.

The media was now separate and distinct from those they covered, even though both maintained a symbiotic adversarial relationship. One needed the other for reader/viewer access, and the other thrived on a steady stream of news and information.

Certainly, the media has always tilted to the left as any Republican press secretary will tell you. And that conclusion makes sense to this day. For the most part, reporters take a vow of poverty in the form of lower pay scales and less job security than their cousins in the largely well-paid public relations industry (e.g., “The Dark Side”).

These partisan journalists (oxymoron yes, but true nonetheless) have a natural affinity to the institutions of government. Any thrusts that bring into question the value and purpose of always expanding government (e.g., Reagan, “Government is the problem”) and Trump (e.g., Firing FBI chief James Comey) will trigger a vitriolic reaction from the Fourth Estate.

What is different now is that any and all vestiges of ostensible objectivity by the media to both sides of the great American political divide is gone, long gone. Reporters, editors and correspondents don’t even pretend to be fair anymore.

The media war – yes war — against Trump as a person and his ideas, policies, programs is exposed for what it is and what it has become.

The media is practicing unvarnished and unmitigated oppositional journalism.

America Has Only A Two-Party System

“Trump is right. It is the opposition party. Indeed, furiously so, often indulging in appalling overkill. It’s sometimes embarrassing to read the front pages of major newspapers, festooned as they are with anti-Trump editorializing masquerading of news.” — Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer

“A common refrain among Trump antagonists in the press is that they must resist normalizing his presidency. But in the process, they have abnormalized journalism.” – Howard Kurtz

The media is not one of America’s two political parties.

During the course of the life of your Almost DailyBrett author, the Republicans have controlled the White House for 35 years and the Democrats for 28 years. Political tides have roared back and forth (i.e., Goldwater debacle, Vietnam, Watergate, Iran Hostage Crisis, Fall of Communism, Monica, September 11, Big Short, Trump Upset …).

Carter Press Secretary Jody Powell complained in his book “The Other Side Of The Story” about how reporters prided themselves in being “fair to Reagan.”

Oh … for the good ole days.

The real question: Is Oppositional Journalism, actually Journalism?

If stories that favor Trump are irrelevant and tales that discredit Trump are championed, then what’s the point of the former when the media closes its collective ears and eyes?

In some respects — not all — the elite media types have threatened to give arrogance a bad name. And just as many are celebrating the journalism as depicted by Hanks and Streep, keep in mind those were the days of somewhat objective journalism.

Is there a chance that some in the Journalism community will take a moment and reflect about how oppositional journalism emerged from the primordial ooze, grew and mutated?

Is there a chance to turn back the clock in a good way? Let’s hope so.

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/07/27/sympathy-for-sarah-huckabee-sanders/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/07/22/from-affirming-back-to-informing/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/05/21/has-the-media-reached-the-point-that-it-can-never-cover-trump-fairly/

 

“We lost because of Clinton Inc. The reality is Clinton Inc. was great for her (Hillary) for years she had all the institutional benefits. But it was an albatross around the campaign.” – Clinton advisor/friend to the authors of “Shattered.”

“I love Hillary. I think she has a right to analyze what happened. But we do have to move on.” – Senator Al Franken (D-Minnesota)

Is it smart personal public relations for Hillary Clinton to write “What Happened,” an angry tome about her unfortunate 2016 campaign?

Think of it this way: Is there a PR and marketing counselor on this planet, who would have the gravitas to talk her out of writing a book, way too many will regard as “boo-hoo-hoo”?

More to the point: Would the Clintons actually listen?

Your author can’t remember a general election loser of a modern era presidential campaign writing a here’s-what-went-wrong book so soon after a bitter defeat.

Jimmy Carter wrote “Keeping Faith” in 1982 and Barry Goldwater penned “With No Apologies” in 1979. Both were memoirs.

Undoubtedly “What Happened” debuting today will become an instant New York Times best seller, directly benefitting the Clinton family fortunes … but there lies a key problem.

 

Almost DailyBrett believes Hillary could provide mentorship to candidates who follow, if she would publicly acknowledge her own critical mistakes: setting up her own personal server, putting her name on the masthead of the Clinton Foundation, giving three speeches at $225,000 each to Goldman Sachs, not addressing the woes of millions in the fly-over states, and essentially having no overriding message to justify her candidacy.

Behaving as if the presidency is simply my turn underestimates the collective intelligence of the electorate, especially tens of thousands who feel left behind, disdained and betrayed.

Let’s face it, Hillary’s “Stronger Together” campaign motto will not make historians forget Kennedy’s “New Frontiers,” Reagan’s “Morning in America” or more to the point, Trump’s “Make America Great Again.”

She spent way too much time in safe coastal enclaves with Katy Perry and Bruce Springsteen, and cancelled her only general election campaign stop to Wisconsin. Instead of tailoring her message to address the growing electoral populism, she repeatedly railed against the character deficiencies of Donald Trump.

The only problem with that approach is you can’t beat someone with no-one. Where was the alternative?

Pointing Fingers

“We owe him (Trump) an open mind and the chance to lead.” – Hillary Clinton, November 9, 2016

Political journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes were given access to the Clinton campaign operations with the anticipation of a book, intended to provide chapter and verse about Hillary Clinton’s historic breaking of the greatest remaining glass ceiling of them all.

Instead,“Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign” provided a  radically different story, the biggest political upset in American history.

Hillary said all the right things in speaking to her millions of supporters the morning after, but reportedly was angry in her follow-up conversations with friends and compatriots.

Almost DailyBrett thrives on political campaign books, and will read this one as well. One would hope there would be more self-reflection, acknowledgement and taking personal responsibility by Hillary for what went wrong.

One anticipates the book will bore into the FBI (Comey), KGB (Putin), KKK (Trump). We already know from early reports about the book that Hillary takes particular aim at Bernie Sanders, who she does regard as a Democrat. Looking back to last year, Sanders tapped the mood of the electorate when he said the system was “corrupt.” Trump talked about a “rigged” America to the detriment of the lunch-pail crowd with high-school diplomas.

They vote too.

Hillary offered the status quo, the third-term of Barack Obama.

Personal public relations are the most important of all when it comes to individual branding and reputation. An angry book from an incensed candidate less than one year after a devastating defeat is most likely going to come across as sour grapes.

It will undoubtedly make the Clintons even richer as well her publisher, Simon & Schuster.

But will we be wealthier in our knowledge about what really went wrong with Hillary’s campaign, and why the fireworks were cancelled and the glass ceilings at the Javits Center and most of all, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, are still standing?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/hillary-clintons-what-happened-a-national-monument-to-getting-it-wrong

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcmanus-clinton-book-20170910-story.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/07/books/keeping-the-faith.html?pagewanted=all&mcubz=1

http://www.nytimes.com/1979/11/04/archives/favorite-conservative-goldwater.html?mcubz=1

 

“ … Hillary believes that it’s vital to deceive the people by having one public policy and a totally different policy in private. … For example, here she is tonight, in public, pretending not to hate Catholics.” – Donald Trump drawing boos at the Al Smith charity dinner

trumphillarysmith

 

Ronald Reagan turned over in his grave with that nasty remark.

Putting partisan politics to the side (if that’s still possible), The Great Communicator clearly understood and practiced the discipline of knowing, appreciating and respecting your audience.

In many ways the answer is just so simple: The Five W’s and One H of Journalism:

What does the audience expect?

When is the event?

Where is the venue?

Who is attending?

Why is the occasion important?

How will you appreciate and respect your audience?

There was Reagan’s solemn 1984 speech at the cliffs of Normandy on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of D-Day.

There was his 1987 “Mr Gorbachev tear down this wall” address in the shadow of the Brandenburg Gate.

There was “There you go again” quip to Jimmy Carter in the most watched presidential debate (up-to-this-year) in American history in 1980.

And there was his farewell address to the nation as he was departing the White House in 1989.

The Normandy and Farewell speeches were not overtly political. It would have been wrong in both cases to write and deliver a stem-winder in either of these venues. The media and pundit reaction would be justifiably critical, if The Gipper had misused these settings and occasions.

The Berlin Wall speech and the Cleveland debate were both political in nature. They both offered the opportunity to score political points at the expense of the leader of the Soviet Union and the 39th president of the United States.

As Harry Truman once said: “If you need a friend in Washington, D.C., get a dog.”

As Mary Matalin once said: “Politics is a contact sport.”

Cardinal Timothy Dolan Serving As Referee

Al Smith was the first Roman Catholic to earn a presidential nomination, losing to Republican Herbert Hoover in 1928. Since 1945, the New York Archdiocese has sponsored an annual white-tie dinner at the stately Waldorf Astoria in his honor and to benefit Catholic charities.

Even though the two parties’ respective nominees have attended this fundraising dinner since John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960, the audience expects and wants satirical/self-deprecating humor from the candidates. That tradition remained intact until this past Thursday night.

Less than 24 hours after the two combatants refused to shake hands twice at the final Clinton vs. Trump debate, Cardinal Dolan knew that he would have to serve as a buffer sitting in between Hillary and The Donald, who quite obviously loathe each other.

Nonetheless, the expectations for the speeches from the two candidates were still there. The public relations/reputation management task for each nominee and their respective staffers was to prepare and deliver remarks that demonstrate knowledge, appreciation and respect for the audience.trumpsmith

Sadly that discipline was not there, particularly for Donald Trump.

Why did he think even for a nanosecond that stating that Hillary was “so corrupt” before a mixed-audience was going to meet the standards of the evening?

Worse The Donald’s remarks about Hillary pretending to not hate Catholics in a room in which literally dozens had been schooled with the Baltimore Catechism drew the boos and catcalls they deserved.

Among the litany of problems associated with Trump’s campaign, one of the most basic is a total lack of political discipline. He obviously does not listen to his advisors, who know political campaigns and how to set and respond to audience expectations.

Two GOP standard bearers could not be more different: Ronald Reagan was a model of political discipline and simplicity of message. Donald Trump cannot and will not maintain political discipline, and Hillary knows it.

More importantly, the nation knows The Donald does not have the temperament to deliver audience-specific remarks, let alone be trusted with access to our nuclear codes.

The expectations are that Hillary will become the 45th chief executive of the United States and the first president who happens to be a woman, when the polls in California, Oregon and Washington close at 11 pm EST. 8 pm PST on November 8.

Almost DailyBrett will boldly predict: Hillary will be elected one hour earlier when Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona … and maybe even Utah (gasp) are recorded in the blue column … if not sooner. This is a wave election in which Hillary will receive the better part of 400 electoral votes, if not more.

Will The Donald wake up on November 9 and realize that he did not even attempt for a nanosecond during the past 17 months to know, appreciate and respect his audiences?

Forget it. He didn’t listen to any wisdom when it mattered. And he certainly won’t accept any guidance when it doesn’t matter anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/politics/al-smith-dinner-clinton-trump.html?_r=0

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/20/politics/al-smith-catholic-dinner-memorable-lines-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/20/the-very-bad-jokes-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-told-at-the-al-smith-dinner/?wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_E._Smith_Memorial_Foundation_Dinner

 

 

“Good moments can be more important than good arguments.” – Former Presidential Campaign Manager Karl Rove

“Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.” – Former U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen to former Senator Dan Quayle

“There you go again.” – Ronald Reagan to Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter, left, and Republican Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan, shake hands Tuesday night, October 28, 1980, in Cleveland, Ohio, before debating before a nationwide television audience. (AP Photo/stf)

President Jimmy Carter, left, and Republican Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan, shake hands Tuesday night, October 28, 1980, in Cleveland, Ohio … (AP Photo/stf)

It was Reagan who walked over to shake Carter’s hand after their sole debate, not the other way around. Courtesy matters.

What will be THE moment that transforms Monday’s watershed presidential debate — maybe 100 million viewers — between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and business mogul Donald Trump?

What will be the indelible image (i.e., George H.W. Bush looking at his watch; Al Gore moving aggressively toward George W. Bush; aftershave dripping off the face of a haggard Richard Nixon; Mitt Romney’s ‘Big Bird’ remark), which will instantly go viral on literally millions of mobile devices and other second screens?

Remember when mom repeatedly and maddenly told you: “It’s not what you say, but how you say it”?

Temperament and persona matters in a presidential debate, not the ability to recite wonkish policy and stats.

The author of Almost DailyBrett was privileged to attend one debate, the second encounter between then Vice President George W. Bush and former Massachusetts Michael Dukakis. The debate will be forever remembered for Bernard Shaw’s (CNN) opening question to Dukakis and the governor’s response:

Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?”

DUKAKIS: “No, I don’t, Bernard, and I think you know that I’ve opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don’t see any evidence that it’s a deterrent …”dukakisdebate

It was not your command of criminal justice issues, governor … the question pertained to your wife being brutally raped and murdered. Shaw’s question was woefully unfair. Where was your revulsion? Didn’t you have any concern for the horrific image of Kitty being raped and murdered?

Instead, “I don’t see any evidence that it’s a deterrent …” Were you a robot that night, governor? Where was the pathos?

Divorce Court?

The nationwide and swing-state polls are only snapshots in time at this particular moment. They will change after Monday.

Hillary has a lead in the horse race and most importantly in the Electoral College. The race is her’s to lose and she is doing her best to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

When it comes to boring wonkish detail (prose), no one can beat her. Monday’s debate is not a spelling bee. Will Hillary pile on Trump and his “basket of deplorables”? Will she offer more status quo or a vision of the future?

Conversely, which Donald Trump is going to show up? There are three debates, each lasting 90-minutes. Can Trump exhibit presidential discipline for four-and-one-half hours? Almost DailyBrett is taking the ‘under.’

The elite media of course will collectively declare a winner, most likely even as the debate is taking place, forcing one side to face the difficult chore of defending their champion in the post-debate Hofstra University spin room. Will the media winner/loser declaration drive follow-up polling, thus elevating the stature of the elites in communications? Bet on it.

But what if the event is judged as a tie? Doesn’t a tie go to the runner?

The 2016 election is a contest for an open-seat as Barack Obama is completing his second term. Who is the challenger (e.g., “the runner”)? One could argue that Trump holds that role, considering Hillary’s quarter-decade of more in politics (i.e., First Lady, U.S. Senator, Secretary of State).

Is a tie, a tie? No. It would be a win for Trump as the challenger always has the advantage.

Hillary will naturally swing for the fences, trying to expose The Donald’s lack of gravitas and more importantly trying to get under his legendary thin skin. Will The Donald take the bait? Your author is taking the “over.”

So … what are the best strategies for both candidates? Be offensive without being offensive. As Rove has suggested talk to moderator Lester Holt and therefore the nation, and not to be other candidate.

No one wants to watch a rerun of “Divorce Court.” And we don’t wonkish prose. What we need and what makes better theatre and “good moments” is passionate poetry, pointing to a brighter future or that Shining City on the Hill.

Will the debate degenerate into a bitter “he said, she said” series of exchanges? Quite possibly.

The goal is to win, but also to keep faith with mumsy’s “… It’s how you say it.”

PALM BEACH, FL: Newlyweds Donald Trump Sr. and Melania Trump with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Clinton at their reception held at The Mar-a-Lago Club in January 22, 2005 in Palm Beach, Florida. (Photo by Maring Photography/Getty Images/Contour by Getty Images)

PALM BEACH, FL: Newlyweds Donald Trump Sr. and Melania Trump with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Clinton at their reception held at The Mar-a-Lago Club in January 22, 2005 in Palm Beach, Florida. (Photo by Maring Photography/Getty Images/Contour by Getty Images)

Maybe the Donald should remember he invited the Clintons to his third wedding in 2005, and Hillary should reflect she was sitting in the first row. There may be more poetry in being the first to walk over to shake the other candidate’s hand.

Maybe a single act of kindness will be is remembered from Monday’s debate?

Don’t count on it.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/when-presidential-debates-matter-1474498044

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/business/presidential-debate-moderators-lester-holt-chris-wallace.html?_r=0

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/jul/21/carlos-curbelo/clintons-really-did-attend-donald-trumps-2005-wedd/

 

 

 

 

“The constitutional power of a president to pardon is unique and sacred, meant to give the chief executive the ability to correct injustices.” – Hamilton Jordan, chief of staff to former President Jimmy Carter

“I think either the president (Bill Clinton) had an incredible lapse in memory or was brain-dead when he did that one (Marc Rich pardon),” – Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, February 11, 2001

An Outgoing President’s Trifecta?

Close Guantanamo.

Visit Cuba.

Pardon Edward Snowden.snowdenSXSW

If true, all Snowden has to do is keep his comrade warm for 10 or 11 more months in the Rodina (until a few days or even hours before the inauguration of the 45th president) and then return to the U.S. as a free man and a hero in many circles.

How many U.S. universities would welcome Snowden as their commencement speaker in May or June, 2017? Ring those First Amendment bells.

Two of Snowden’s biggest fans are Michael Moore and Oliver Stone. And what do these two gents have in common? They make movies. How about an Academy Award epic about Snowden capped off by footage of a presidential pardon and a grateful nation? Guess what?

A New York Times best seller?

An eight-figure Snowden bank account? All for pilfering and leaking top-secret documents in an age of global Terrorism?

Outrageous? Maybe to the majority of Americans, but do our elites really care about them? Besides how many news cycles will it take for most plain folks to forget about the Snowden pardon?

What are the Kardashians doing today?marcrich

Does anybody remember Marc Rich? The spouse of the man who pardoned Rich is ready to become the first woman president of the United States. Did the presidential pardon of Marc Rich hurt her electoral chances?

For those scoring at home, Rich was one of the world’s wealthiest men. He was wanted for more than 50 counts of wire fraud, racketeering, massive income tax evasion and trading oil with Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran, Khadafy’s Libya, Milosevic’s Yugoslavia, Kim Il Sung’s North Korea and Apartheid South Africa. He even renounced his U.S. citizenship.

Rich’s former wife, Denise, provided $450,000 to the Clinton library, and another $1 million to Democratic campaigns. Rich was pardoned. And with his pardon a legal and political precedent was established.richclintons

Strange Bedfellows?

Even though Snowden is exiled in Russia his influence resonates and an ultimate irony has ensued.

The progressive Feel-the-Bern crowd castigates “corporate” interests (e.g., publicly traded companies). In turn, many conservatives have trouble believing the government does anything right.

Isn’t ironic that many in the anti-Wall Street movement are backing publicly traded Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) and anti-government types are supporting the FBI in the fight over unlocking the cell phone of a deceased terrorist?

Some have suggested a “Snowden Effect” in which his theft of and subsequent disclosure of NSA files made him a “hero” with many in the political class, empowered Apple to not cooperate with the FBI.

Privacy über Safety … at least in Cupertino.

Timing Is Everything

Some will contend that pardoning Snowden is a ship that has already sailed.

The White House last year responded to a petition with more than 167,000 signers asked for the fugitive to be pardoned. The chief executive’s office suggested that Snowden should come back and face a jury of his “peers” about charges of theft of government property, unauthorized communication of national defense information, and willful communication of classified intelligence to an unauthorized person. It all adds up to at least two counts for violation of the Espionage Act of 1917.

The petition’s timing was all wrong. Most of all, it was way too early.inaugurationday

Let’s see, the president’s last day in office will be Friday, January 20, 2017.

Almost DailyBrett instinctively knows the best day of the week for bad news: Friday.

What else will be happening that day? The inauguration of the new president? Why not just slip Edward Snowden’s name into a long-list of folks who are being pardoned?

There will be screams and howls mixed into stories about the oath of office, the inaugural address, the balls and the first 100 days. All of these will be presented on a wintry Friday night or Saturday morning. The outgoing president’s legacy will suffer a temporary blow, but still will be intact. Snowden will be a free hombre.

More importantly, who will own the movie and book rights? And the newly wealthy Snowden? He will Move On with his eight-figure life.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB982638239880514586?mg=id-wsj

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121935&page=1

http://www.economist.com/news/obituary/21580438-marc-rich-king-commodities-died-june-26th-aged-78-marc-rich

http://www.newson6.com/story/7683995/specter-hints-at-clinton-impeachment

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/pr-advice-for-edward-snowden/

http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/after-pardoning-criminal-marc-rich-clintons-made-millions-off-friends/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/pr-advice-for-edward-snowden/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/intellectual-property-matters-really/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden

http://time.com/3974713/white-house-edward-snowden-petition/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowden_(film)

Polls are much better as explainers than as predictors.” – Barry Sussman, Washington Post

We lost California before we won it.

Mervin Field of KCBS and Steven Teichner of KABC, both in Los Angeles, proudly projected at 8:01 pm (PST) on November 2, 1982 that LA Mayor Tom Bradley had just been elected governor based upon their scientific calibration of voters leaving polling places at carefully selected precincts statewide.

For the author of Almost DailyBrett, serving as the press director for the rival gubernatorial campaign of then-Attorney General George Deukmejian, it appeared there was going to be a bitter personal pill to swallow. Unemployment was just over the horizon.deukmejianbradley

As a 27-years-young PR practitioner, instinctively I knew my job was to stay positive in the face of crushing news as I was surrounded by swirling pack of vulture reporters on the floor of the Century Plaza Hotel. Meanwhile, Field was on television declaring Bradley’s historic election as the first black governor of California. There was only one problem for the creator of the California poll, my boss Deukmejian was maintaining a comfortable lead.

Yours truly verbally hung onto this lifeline as the night went on.

At approximately 11 pm (PST), ABC News out of New York proclaimed Deukmejian the winner, contradicting Teichner’s projection three hours earlier. Yours truly asked Chuck Henry of KABC, reporting from the floor of the Century Plaza ballroom, WTF was going on.

He didn’t know.

Two hours later, NBC News from Rockefeller Center projected my boss the victor. CBS News in Manhattan completed the trifecta at 5 am (PDT), ending a really bad night for Mervin Field. A bitter Tom Bradley never conceded. George Deukmejian was elected the 35th governor of California by a margin of 106,000 votes out of 7.8 million cast.

What the late-Mervin Field and Steven Teichner missed was the massive distribution of absentee voter applications to high-propensity voters in Orange County and Long Beach by our campaign. For obvious competitive reasons, we did not telegraph this now-accepted campaign practice. How could Field and Teichner reflect these voters, if they never showed up at polling places?

It’s certainly neither the first time political experts have called an election wrong nor will it be the last time.

Missing a Landslide?

“President Dewey warned me not to get overconfident.” – Ronald Reagan

The experts said it was close, but the voters – stubbornly irreverent as usual – made it a landslide. What happened?” – Robert Kaiser, Washington Posttruman

The photo of a beaming Harry Truman holding aloft an early edition of the Chicago Daily Tribune with the banner headline: “Dewey Defeats Truman” is now an eternal part of electoral lore.

Clearly, the pundits got it wrong in 1948. Thomas Dewey never became president of the United States. Certainly, this is the only time the political class got it wrong?

Certainly not.

The pollsters in their infinite wisdom kept telling the American people the 1980 race between President Jimmy Carter and Governor Ronald Reagan was too close to call. Amazingly, two days before the decisive election the Washington Post and Gallup polls reflected Carter leads of 4 and 3 percent respectively.

reaganpollsThe pundits immediately dismissed the polling conducted by Richard Wirthlin and Robert Teeter, citing their obvious bias because they worked for Reagan. As it turns out they saw the landslide that the media pollsters couldn’t or wouldn’t reveal.

From “too close to call,” the race shifted in epic proportions with Reagan ultimately winning the electoral college, 489-49; the popular vote, 50 percent to 41.0 percent; 43.6 million votes to 35.5 million; 44 states to 6 + DC for Carter.reaganlandslide

So what does this all mean as we head into the caucuses and primaries, starting next week?

It’s Down to Clinton vs. Bush: A Battle of Political Dynasties

Remember being told just that repeatedly by the political class: It will be Hillary vs. Jeb in November, 2016

It was inevitable these two familial standard bearers would clash this fall.

Donald who? Bernie who? Cruz who? Marco who?

Let’s see, we have been told that Hillary’s nomination, if not election, was inevitable.

And then there was a Trump surge. Has Trump peaked?

It’s Trump’s race to lose.

It will be decided between Trump and Ted Cruz (What happened to Bush?)

Sanders will win New Hampshire and lose Iowa.

Wait! Sanders may actually win Iowa or at least place well.

Hillary has a firewall in the South …

All of these pronouncements are based in part on traditional polling, based on the laws of mathematics. Let’s see: randomly sampled and selected, neutral questions, 1,000 nationwide respondents, within an acceptable margin of error of 3-4 percent, 95 percent of the time.

The other part of the equation are reporters tweeting each other, bouncing their “theories” off each other (e.g., The Boys and Girls of the Bus), and then colluding to make pious pronouncements.votersNH

But waiting at the lunch counters, the factory gates, the town halls, the bowling alleys, the bars, the PTA meetings are the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire.

The best and the brightest – The Experts — at their second screens may make the pronouncements, but the fickle voters will make the actual decisions.

And who should we listen to?

Almost DailyBrett Note: Very few things in life have a heightened impact on your author’s blood pressure than references to the so-called “Bradley Effect, ” a hidden anti-black bias by the voters. This sentiment does not take account that Bradley stopped campaigning about 10 days before the election, leaving only one campaign for scribes to cover, our campaign. This ill-fated decision was a critical mistake in a razor-thin election. We also directed absentee votes to our high propensity voters as noted above … and (now California Governor) Jerry Brown lost to Pete Wilson by a half-million votes that very same day. Bradley fared better with the voters than Brown. Simply said, it was not a good night for Democrats.

So much for the Bradley effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mervin_Field

http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-mervin-field-20150608-story.html#page=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_gubernatorial_election,_1982

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Sussman

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/441/prejudice-campaign.html

 

 

 

 

The label “Happy Warrior” is eternally associated with former Democratic Vice President and Minnesota Senator Hubert Horatio Humphrey (HHH), describing his relish for political jousting with a big smile of his face.

HHH

His biographer and personal physician Edgar Berman, M.D. in “Hubert” described Humphrey as a warrior who seemed to get happier even as the odds grew longer with the Vietnam War casting a dark shadow over his 1968 presidential campaign…eventually giving us Nixon and Watergate.

For Republicans, our version of the happy warrior immediately evokes memories of Ronald Reagan, “Morning in America” and references to “That Shining City on the Hill.”

As Nancy Reagan has said repeatedly: “He appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears.”

Portrait

As I look out upon the Doug fir trees that surround my hillside home in Oregon’s Willamette Valley as what stands for the sun in the twilight closes the Memorial Day weekend, I sense that yet another Strategic Inflection Point has descended on me. My goals of a predictable position and that very special woman…I know they are both out there…have eluded me for three years and seven years respectively. I am not growing any younger with each passing day.

I have faced down cancer, saw the same disease take my dear wife of 22 years, and then fought Valley Fever to a draw. I raised my daughter by myself for five years, and then moved my lounge act to Eugene…all in pursuit of an advanced degree and a teaching gig that may or may not help me in the end.

Both conventional and social media tell essentially the same story: A historically stubborn unemployment rate, just a couple of clicks under double digits; nearly 24 million unemployed and underemployed (doesn’t count those who have given up the hunt). There are more than 16 million underwater on their mortgages and 13 million vacant properties. The federal government alone is $16 trillion in debt and ditto to a certain degree for states and municipalities. The bill has come due in the form of too much spending, too much credit card debt and mortgages that cannot and never will be paid.

The party is over.

And yet I realize that in the face of my personal adversity and the monumental challenges facing our society that in many ways, I am one of the lucky ones.

What gives me so much inspiration are those rare people who never seem to have a bad day, no matter what happens to them or others. They may be burning up inside, but you would never know it on the outside.

Who wants to be around a “Gloomy Gus” or a “Negative Nancy?” I will take my cup half full thank you very much.

eeyore

Even though I don’t subscribe to his political leanings, I want to be that Happy Warrior or Hubert Horatio “Horn Blower” as Jimmy Carter once described him. In fact, everyone should be a Happy Warrior. We know that better days are out there. We know that the answer lies with innovation, ingenuity and entrepreneurship. We need to keep fighting, keep believing and keep smiling.

One of the great unattributed factoids that I learned in my Silicon Valley days is that 70 percent of the scientists that ever lived are alive today. One must let that statement sink in. Galileo, Copernicus, Salk, Einstein, Newton, Pasteur et al. have all bit the dust, but they only represented a mere fraction of the intellectual firepower of all the scientists that presently walk the earth. What will be the next killer app? Something tells me it will not be with social media and cell phones (albeit they remain vital), but with energy and health care.

I received some bad news Sunday as it applies to my academic career, which will inevitably prompt another decision, maybe taking my taco stand to another city…or maybe not. I also rekindled the flame with someone special on Saturday that reminds me to always maintain reasonable standards, but to never settle in life. When you are confronted with a negative and greeted by a positive, contemplate the latter with a big broad grin on your face.

Somehow, someway I will reach my goals. I will not do so by just focusing on the problem, but by casting my gaze to the horizon and coming up with the answer. I will use every bit of my modest talent and intellect to face down the newest challenge that comes before me.

Didn’t one president state the “Only thing we have to fear is fear itself?” I sense that Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a confident smile on his face when he said it at his first inaugural in 1933 (even though believe it or not, it was way before my time).

I refuse to ever feel sorry for myself…there is nothing remotely attractive about whining and complaining. Instead, I know instinctively that I have to be that happy warrior no matter what else life throws at me.

Bring it on.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Hubert.html?id=AktIup4i-nwC

http://books.google.com/books?id=63r22RO3Z2kC&q=70+percent+of+the+scientists+that+ever+lived+are+alive+today&dq=70+percent+of+the+scientists+that+ever+lived+are+alive+today&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ckDET_2TE4mjiQKO5dHqBw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAQ

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-usa-economy-idUSTRE7BM0AB20120106

http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/24/real_estate/underwater-mortgages/index.htm

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=49092

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057/

The setting is a Darth Vader-style black bus, capable of waging simultaneous nuclear warfare on two or more fronts, rolling through the farm fields of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. An unlikely visitor has just boarded the bus…

obamabus

Little Ole Me (LOM): “You asked for me, sir?”

POTUS: “You are probably wondering why I summoned a Republican from Eugene, Oregon…even though that sounds like an oxymoron…or maybe just a moro…”

LOM: “With all due respect sir we probably don’t want my neighbors to know my political affiliation. They are already really concerned about neighborhood property values.”

POTUS: “Look I only have limited time. In fact my time is running out, if things don’t change pronto. Comprende senor?

LOM: “Si, el Presidente…I am willing to serve my country. What can I possibly do to help the red, white and blue?

POTUS: “You mean the Tea Party colors? Don’t get me started…Let me get to the point. You write Almost DailyBrett, a strategic communications blog…”

LOM: “You know about Almost DailyBrett? I don’t know if I should be flattered or appalled…”

POTUS: “The question is how can I change my image, my perception and my messaging to turn around my 39 percent polling numbers nationally, and in particular win Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and all the other swing states.”

LOM: “They really like you in San Francisco…

POTUS: “Think again. They don’t like anyone in San Francisco. Have you ever seen a happy social-justice activist?”

LOM: “Can’t say that I have ever seen a ‘happy’ activist in my entire life.”

POTUS: “What I really need to do is embrace Republican principles without setting off a rebellion among my liberal…err…progressive base…”

LOM: “That’s going to be tough sir. You are trying to do the right thing…Sorry sir…You are trying to do the correct thing without pissing off the pissed off. How can you satisfy the insatiable?”

POTUS: “I can’t afford a Ted Kennedy or Pat Buchanan-style primary challenge. I have enough problems with Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann…They are all more telegenic than me.”

LOM: “Especially Michele Bachmann…I get lost in her eyes…”

POTUS: “So do I…Let’s get off this tangent before I get in trouble with my Michelle, my belle. I already have enough comparisons with Jimmy Carter, particularly his incompetence, to have to face a similar primary challenge from the left wing of my party…”

LOM: “Mr. President. Can someone really run to the left of you? Do you really think it is still possible for a credible primary challenge to be mounted at this late date? And do you think the redistributionist social justice crowd is going to sit it out next November, if Mitt Romney or Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann is the GOP standard bearer? I think not.”

POTUS: “Maybe I just blame the Standard & Poor’s downgrade, the massive unemployment and the record $14 trillion deficit on George W. Bush and the Tea Party?…And then I can vilify the Republican nominee. I think I have a winning strategy. You don’t think I should run on my record?”

LOM: “Do the names Harry S. Truman and Ronald Reagan ring a bell?”

POTUS: “Of course, they were well respected throughout all 57 states, Alaska and Hawaii too…”

LOM: “Truman said, ‘The Buck Stops Here.’ You should declare that you are the president. You accept responsibility for the past three years, and you have a plan for the future.”

POTUS: “I do?”

LOM: “And Reagan campaigned for re-election with the mantra, ‘Morning in America.’ It was a message of optimism and hope. Why can’t you go back to offering hope for a better tomorrow? Maybe even a Shining City on the Hill?”

POTUS: “You know, I remember mentioning the notion of hope in 2008.”

LOM: “Do you remember when Bill Clinton fried his fellow Democrats with a massive welfare reform bill, so much that it even upset Hillary?”

POTUS: “You are reminding me about upsetting Hillary?”

LOM: “Sorry sir. I am just suggesting that you should infuriate Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Let them start attacking you. Your polling numbers will skyrocket…even better than taking out Osama bin Laden.”

nancyharry

POTUS: “Do you think I can send in the Navy SEALS to take out Harry and Nancy?”

LOM: “No sir. Something about the messy Separation of Powers gets in the way.”

POTUS: “And then what should I do?”

LOM: “Propose a true compromise. In exchange for closing corporate loopholes, you should offer true entitlement reform for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which represent 60 percent of the budget. Exempt everyone over 50 years of age from these changes, and then apply means testing and raise the age limit to at least 67 for all of those under 50. All additional revenue will be used for deficit reduction. Wall Street will be happy, and maybe Standard & Poor’s will restore the nation’s AAA bond rating.”

POTUS: “You mean be a leader instead of a campaigner. I am really great on the stump…Do you really think I should hack off Harry and Nancy?”

LOM: “Have you ever heard the German word, ‘Schadenfreude?’

POTUS: “Schadenfreude?”

LOM: “When Harry and Nancy are unhappy, I am happy and a whole lot of other people too, especially in the swing states.”

POTUS: “Sounds like a great strategic communications strategy.”

LOM: “Thank you Mr. President. Can I get off the bus now?”

%d bloggers like this: