Local News Since 1890 Now Online!

Posts Tagged ‘hillary clinton’

Dems, get your heads out of your …

In Business, Economy, Education, National News, Opinion, Politics, psychology, Uncategorized on September 27, 2017 at 11:24 am

Deer In Headlines
By Gery L. Deer

Hey, all of you Democrats who are whining and crying about a Trump presidency, listen up (or in this case, keep reading). You’re the reason he’s president, so either get over it or get on the ball, make up your minds. In all my years a writer I have never seen a more bumfuzzled time in American politics. It’s goofy on both sides, but the Democrats really take the prize here.

And, as I have written many times, they handed the White House to Trump on a silver platter, covered in gold and trimmed in platinum. “What? It’s not our fault,” blah, blah, blah. Oh, yes, it is your fault.

The only reason, the only reason, the only reason (yes, that’s meant to be there three times) Trump won the election was because Democrats divided themselves and didn’t get out and vote. Protesting Hillary or Bernie or whoever cost them the election, not some overwhelming love of Trump. Just to beat the dead horse one more time, it happened something like this.

On one side, you had the Bernie Sanders hippies. Yes, I meant to use that word – hippies. The sandal-wearing, left-wingers who hate corporate America, right up until their non-profit needs a check. Moreover, they have absolutely no idea how to pay for any of the grand social overhauls they want to make. Giving everything free to everyone costs somebody money somewhere. Just writing that gives me a headache.

Confused Hillary courtesy of TheGatewayPundit.com

Then you have the Hillary Clinton crowd. For all that the pant-suited, former First Lady commands intelligence, experience, and demeanor, she inspires, well, no one, for any reason. She carries the baggage of a type that’s not easily shed in the social media-driven trenches of popular politics. Instead of falling in behind Hillary after the primaries, white Obama voters went over to Trump – I still don’t get that, but the math doesn’t lie.

Could Hillary and Bernie have taken the White House together? Possibly. But, again, there was just too much anger out there in the real world about Obama’s entitlement programs. Working class people were getting tired of having to break their backs to make ends meet while anyone who didn’t want to do anything could get a check and free healthcare just for being lazy. I know, that’s not the reality, but that’s the perception ignored by the Dems in the media.

If the Democrats are going to try to oust the current administration in 2020, they’d better get a move on. So far, very few they have suggested as a challenge to Trump could even get past the primaries, let alone win the Oval Office. Right now, the list of potential candidates that might have a chance includes Senator Elizabeth Warren, Bernie (again, please no), Michelle Obama, and Joe Biden. Getting Mrs. Obama or former Vice President Biden to run would be a challenge. They both seem to be done with day-to-day Washington, but who knows.

Elizabeth Warren is a bit too far to the left to drag any moderates over to pull the lever for a Democrat. And you need moderates right now. Alienating them is something that Bernie did really well. You can’t be a massive, outspoken socialist, even a democratic one, and pull anyone from the middle, it will just never work.

I mentioned perception a few paragraphs before, and that’s the key word here. It’s a perception problem with the Democrats. They’re seen by the moderate and conservative public as the bleeding-heart, all-or-nothing left-wingers who want only to cater to minorities, let in any Mexican who wants to come north, criminal or not, and punish people for being white and earning a paycheck. Sounds bad when you put it like that, doesn’t it? Well, that’s the perception to be challenged.

In short, the 2020 election will not be about politics, a border wall or Obamacare, but a fight between nationalism and socialism, about smart and ignorant, about bigotry and acceptance. There must be some way to restore some dignity to the White House and I guess it’ll be up to the Democratic National Committee to figure out who can do it. Oh, my, we’re in trouble.

Gery L. Deer is an independent columnist and business writer. Deer In Headlines is distributed by GLD Enterprises Communications, Ltd. More at deerinheadlines.com

Advertisements

Public perception and the dusty GOP

In Economy, history, Opinion, Politics, Uncategorized on July 7, 2015 at 3:02 pm

Deer In Headlines

By Gery L. Deer

 

DIH LOGOIt seems the republican field of presidential candidacy is bursting at the seams, not to mention getting a little ridiculous. At the time of this writing, there are a dozen GOP candidates hoping to sway voters, and the RNC, before next year’s primary season, while only four democrats have officially tossed their hats into the ring.

At this point in the game, it’s anyone’s race. Until the democratic field shakes out, it’s unlikely there will be many republican endorsements. Before that can happen, supporters need to see is how their favorite conservative candidate stands up against the opposition.

Most early candidacies are a function of money – how much they have, how much is coming in and where to spend it for the best return on the investment. Media is critical to political perception, and expensive, but, at this point many of the candidates will have to spend time doing the old grip and grin just to introduce themselves to key voters in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Iowa. It seems old school in a world of nonstop social media, but it’s necessary.

1280px-Republican_National_ConventionThere are too many GOP candidates with little to no name recognition and that will be an obstacle. Keep in mind, most of the country had no idea who Barack Obama was until the eleventh hour and, two terms later, he has repeatedly made history. But, can the Republican National Committee change the perception of the GOP as the tired, dusty party to something more progressive?

Dem forerunner Hillary Clinton has experience, but not in the same “boots on the ground” role as Jeb Bush or one of the other candidates who have been state governors. Still, just having been a governor isn’t enough to guarantee any sort of mileage in a presidential campaign, especially when accomplishments in office have been lackluster, to say the least.

Ohio Governor John Kasich, for example, has announced that he will officially launch his 2016 White House bid in late July. To hear Kasich describe it, he’s earned his seat at the table having been single handedly responsible for Ohio’s economic recovery following the recession. But, economists have been clear that Ohio’s recuperation is consistent with the rest of the country, resulting instead from federal stimulus packages, short term interest rate reductions and bail outs.

Assuming respectable advancement in the primaries, the candidates could experience secondary problems based on their choice of running mate. While the announcement comes much later in the game, everyone is thinking about it now and those interested in the job are quietly knocking on the door behind the scenes.

Hitching a ride on Kasich’s coat tails as a running mate would most likely be Ohio’s attorney general, Mike DeWine, an obvious choice for the short list. Although he served in congress for a time, DeWine’s name recognition is relatively useless beyond the borders of the Buckeye State.

If Kasich chooses DeWine, he would probably also have to deal with conservative backlash for the AG’s many liberal-leaning policies, the least of which is gun control, including his sponsorship of legislation against assault weapons and personal firearm ownership. Though carefully kept out of any published information, DeWine is also rumored to have been a democrat before changing sides in order to make a political name for himself in Ohio’s largely conservative Greene County. If true, that could further impede any national conservative support of a Kasich-DeWine ticket.

But even if the GOP candidacy field narrows, republicans are still stuck with the public perception as a “rich white guys club,” despite the fact there are two minorities on the list; an African American, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, and a woman, former business exec Carly Fiorina. Historically, the GOP has great difficulty connecting with younger voters and minorities and, so far, nothing has happened to mitigate that problem.

Republicans are largely seen by young voters as bigoted, gun-happy, greedy and stuck in the1950s. Until one of the many conservative candidates manages to offer an alternative to that perception for a mass audience, Americans might be looking at another term under a democratic administration.

 

Gery L. Deer is an independent columnist and business writer. Deer In Headlines is distributed by GLD Enterprises Communications. More at gerydeer.com.

Voters don’t care about dishonesty  

In history, National News, Opinion, Politics on May 11, 2015 at 11:33 am

Deer In Headlines
By Gery L. Deer

DIH LOGOA recent Associated Press poll found that only four in ten Democrats would describe Hillary Rodham Clinton, the liberals’ leading presidential hopeful, as “honest.” The data also indicated that about the same number see her as uninspiring and not especially, “likeable.”

As the AP article reported on May 1, 2015, “Americans appear to be suspicious of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s honesty, and even many Democrats are only lukewarm about her presidential candidacy, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.”

Yet, it’s still likely these uninspired voters will likely pull a lever next to her name through the primaries and on to the 2016 ticket. Doesn’t the voting public care whether or not a president is honest? The short answer is, no.

Regardless of whether they call themselves Democrat, Republican or Independent, many voters would describe the phrase, “honest politician” as a contradiction in terms. Unless they are a tireless idealist or go through life wearing blinders and ear plugs most people have come to expect politicians to be dishonest to some extent.

Presidents "swear" an oath then spend a good part of their term lying.

Presidents “swear” an oath then spend a good part of their term lying.

The reality is that Americans have made an unconscious decision that all political lies are not created equal. A lie to the media or the public in the interest of national security is generally accepted. For example, President Kennedy hid the fact that he ended the Cuban missile crisis by making a deal with Khrushchev for U.S. missile removal from Turkey. Was it a lie or something the public simply didn’t need to know? Is a political lie of omission still wrong?

Other types of political lies can have more sinister grounds. In the 1980s, President Reagan mislead the country about his involvement in the Iran Contra affair, the secret arrangement to supply arms to Nicaraguan contra rebels using profits generated by selling weapons to Iran. And does Watergate even need a mention here?

This kind of dishonesty is certainly not limited to the executive branch. The level of deceit and back-door dealing that likely takes place on Capitol Hill would stagger the imagination. But, if dishonestly is a hot-button issue against Hillary Clinton during the upcoming primaries, the GOP certainly has no room to play innocent.

George W. Bush, for example, was largely regarded as most dishonest, not about what he had already done, but in an effort to persuade the public to go along with what he had yet to do. Can anyone say, “W.M.D.?” Still, he was re-elected, as were so many of the biggest liars to ever sit behind the Resolute Desk.

Looking back, it seems that some of the deepest deceptions appear to have come from presidents who served more than one term. From FDR to Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama, the longer they serve, the more lies they tell.

It’s clearer than ever that a large part of the voting public couldn’t care less about a presidential candidate’s honesty. Oddly, it seems like the higher the office, the more dishonesty is tolerated. At the ground level, even school board members or the mayoral candidates of the tiniest towns are taken further to task over honesty issues than any presidential candidate. To some, that seems – backwards.

Put very simply, “Laws (and governments) are like sausages. You don’t want to see how they’re made.” It’s hard to say who originally uttered those words, but the sentiment is as true today as ever. There is a level of blind eye turned toward some of this behavior just because of an inherent expectation and acceptance.

The modern media plays also into this problem a bit. With instantaneous information, literally at everyone’s fingertips, word spreads before anything can be properly vetted. Rumor and innuendo can rapidly become “Internet fact.” It’s tough for the average person to know the difference between reality and hype without doing some digging.

Regardless of what people might prefer, given the state of American politics, it’s unlikely that any operative would be able to function without mastering some level of deception towards his or her rivals or constituents. It would be refreshing, however, if the voting public demanded more honesty from presidential hopefuls and if even one of them could meet that expectation.

 

Gery L. Deer is an independent columnist and business writer. GLD Enterprises is distributed by GLD Enterprises Communications. More at gerydeer.com.

 

 

 

 

 

Clinton and the lesser of “who cares.”

In Economy, history, National News, Opinion, Politics on April 14, 2015 at 7:37 am

DIH LOGONow that Hillary Clinton has finally confirmed her run at the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, there is growing concern that the next election will be all about electing a woman, rather than choosing the right candidate for the job.

America’s political landscape has changed a great deal since Clinton’s first run at the Oval Office in 2008. After eight years with a Democrat in the White House, and with Barack Obama’s job approval numbers struggling to maintain a tepid 47-percent, the country may simply be ready for a change. But is a female president too much change?

Back in 1984, the Democrats put the first woman on a presidential ticket, selecting former Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro as the vice presidential candidate alongside former Vice President Walter Mondale.  Despite her strong political background and experience many saw her as somewhat of a publicity stunt, designed to appeal to women and a rising number of younger voters.

Ferraro’s albatross, however, turned out to be, not the indecisive voter, but Walter Mondale, a stale, crusty relic of the 1960s who really had no chance against an incredibly popular incumbent by the name of Ronald Regan. Many experts still suggest that the democrats might well have prevailed had the ticket been reversed, with Ferraro as the presidential candidate.

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin suffered a similar problem having been anchored to old-guard republican, John McCain. But Palin also lacked Ferraro’s professionalism, legal education and political clout and she was often viewed as little more than a tactic to draw votes from Hillary Clinton.

clintonWomen always seem to be held back from being in the real fight. Vice president is obviously a great job – the photo ops, the ribbon cuttings, the pacifiers. But if anything is going to be accomplished in the name of social evolution, the female candidate is going to have to be strong enough to lead the ticket; a trait Hillary has certainly demonstrated in her various roles throughout the last couple of decades.

However, if the next election turns out to be all about social popularity, breaking the glass ceiling of the Oval Office and a long campaign of “he said,” “she said,” then the smartest thing the GOP could do to increase their chances of winning in 2016 is go out and find an African American republican woman with impeccable professional and personal credentials. Actually, they already have someone in their camp that fits all of those qualifications – Condoleezza Rice.

Former Secretary of State Rice is one of the few conservatives (male or female) who could potentially give Clinton a real challenge. A republican ticket led by Rice could very well offer conservative voters something besides the lesser of “who cares.”

Unfortunately, based on her previous statements, she would be unlikely to run at all and, from a public relations standpoint, she’s been out of the limelight for some time. With such a hard-hitting campaign expected, Rice would simply not have the time to help voters get reacquainted with her and her platform.

In the opinion of objective observers, President Obama may have achieved a few things, but his current approval demonstrates that he fell short in many ways. If a well-suited opponent ever surfaces from the conservative sea, Hillary Clinton will have a tough time convincing people another democrat can improve things further.

Sadly, if the voting public is true to their tunnel-versioned pattern, they will once again miss an incredible opportunity to elect the right person for the job, rather than simply pulling the lever to motivate an agenda. Regardless of how seriously Americans want social evolution, it will never be a good idea to vote for someone – to any office – solely because of race, gender, religious background or party affiliation.

For once, if politicians would speak honestly and if voters would take just a moment to consider qualifications, character, and intent, American politics might finally be productive, compassionate and properly serve the people. But, as long as human beings still act with more emotion than good sense, any change would be nothing less than a miracle and Hillary is a sure thing.

Gery L. Deer is an independent columnist and business writer. Deer In Headlines is distributed by GLD Enterprises Communications. More at gerydeer.com.