CALIFORNIA YANKEE

Justice Ginsburg Regrets Trump Comments

 

Cariciature Cedit: DonkeyHotey via Flickr Creative Commons

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she regrets her recent criticisms of Donald Trump, calling them “ill-advised” and vowing to be “more circumspect” in the future:

In a statement issued by the court Thursday, she said that judges “should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office.”

The Court must have conducted an intervention because Justice Ginsburg, aka "Notorious RGB," has appeared to be anything but repentant. As the New York Times put it:

In an interview with The Times published Sunday, Justice Ginsburg said, “I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president,” joking that if her husband were alive, he might have said, “It’s time for us to move to New Zealand.”

Earlier, in an interview with The Associated Press that appeared on Friday, when asked to consider a Trump victory, Justice Ginsburg replied, “I don’t want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs.”

On Monday Justice Ginsburg doubled down, calling Mr. Trump “a faker,” who “has no consistency about him.” In that interview, with CNN, she added: “He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego.”

By then, Donald Trump had enough and tweeted that Ginsburg should resign:

Justice Ginsburg of the U.S. Supreme Court has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot - resign!

Justice Ginsberg's regret, sincere or not, only came after scathing criticism from editorial boards such as the New York Times', which used the headline"Donald Trump Is Right About Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg." Then there was today's Cover of the New York Post [click the link below] picturing "Darth Bader":

Today's front page https://t.co/crhYyWGZJfpic.twitter.com/hjuE6SHpE3

— New York Post (@nypost) July 14, 2016

That the GOP Establishment Cannot Choose Between Cruz and Trump Speaks Volumes

It is now apparent to all except die-hard Kasich and Rubio fans that the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination is, as some have said since January, a two-man race between Sen. Ted Cruz and billionaire Donald Trump. It’s time for the Republican Establishment, after months and months of saying that Trump would not and could not be the Republican nominee because of his bellicose and hateful campaign rhetoric and Johny-come-lately but inconsistent conversion to some non-Liberal positions, to end their hand wringing and choose sides.

 

 

That the GOP Establishment — Party and Congressional leadership, the donor class and even the dreaded consultant class have not yet been able to make up their minds between supporting Cruz, the most consistent and principled Conservative to seek the presidency since Ronald Reagan, and Donald Trump, whose political ideology can only be described as chameleon-like, speaks volumes.

After wide range of interviews with more than a dozen senior Republican Party leaders, CNN’s Manu Raju reports the Establishment remains split:

On one side: The likes of Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former presidential candidate is now leading the pro-Cruz charge, arguing that having a life-long Republican with extreme message discipline at the top of the ticket will be less harmful than the highly unpredictable and brash Trump.

[. . .]

Yet for all the worries about Trump bringing down the GOP or losing a general election, a surprisingly large number of Republican senators are open to backing Trump. The billionaire businessman would dramatically boost turnout and help Republicans down-ballot, they say, pointing in particular to incumbent senators’ resounding primary victories in Alabama and Arkansas earlier this month.

It should be noted that there is much more concern that a Trump nomination would hurt, more than help, down-ticket Republican candidates by turning off key voting blocks such as Hispanics and suburban women. Not to mention the likelihood that the #NeverTrump folks would just stay on the sidelines and watch Trump lose. And consider how eager Democrats are to run against Trump.

Raju also notes that the GOP Establishment seems most concerned about self-preservation:

During closed-door GOP Conference lunches, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made clear that his sole focus is keeping the majority, pointing to 1996, when Republicans gained two Senate seats despite Bob Dole’s big loss to Bill Clinton, according to several senators. McConnell has made a similar case during meetings with donors, according to attendees.

That’s a point also made by Erick Erickson at the Resurgent. Erick wasn’t so delicate about it. In two different pieces Erickson made it very clear that even though they don’t think Trump can beat Hillary, the Establishment prefers Trump over Cruz in order to preserve their status quo because they hate Cruz. And as John Kass put it in the Chicago Tribune, that “GOP insiders despise Cruz, hate him for his unrepentant conservatism, hate him for calling them out as liars on the floor of the U.S. Senate, and hate him for lumping them all into what Cruz calls the corrupt ‘Washington cartel.’”

Yes, that the GOP Establishment can’t bring themselves to support Cruz over Trump speaks volumes about whom and what they are, what principles they embrace and what you can count on them to do going forward.

Cross posted from RedState.

Trump Wins Some Hispanic Immigrants

After Donald Trump called illegal immigrants drug-dealing, rapists, he went to the Mexican border and declared "the Hispanics love me." Entrance polls from Tuesday's Nevada Republican Caucus show that the Donald won the Hispanic vote. To be clear, Trump won the votes of some Hispanic immigrant voters. Not the votes of drug-dealing, raping illegals, because not even New York City has yet been able to get authorization to let illegal immigrants vote.

The Trump's share of  Hispanic voters almost as much as the combined share received by the two Cuban-American Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio:

• Trump - 44%
• Rubio - 28%
• Cruz - 18%

Trump was pleased with the finding:

"You know what I really am happy about, because I've been saying it for a long time," Trump told supporters in his victory speech early Wednesday. "46 percent with the Hispanics ... number one with Hispanics!"

Before we declare the efforts of some Hispanic organizations to defeat Trump a failure, remember that entrance polls are not that reliable. And especially in this case, the poll results need to be taken with a huge grain of salt. Only eight percent of Nevada Republican caucus voters identified as Latino, according to the entrance polls. And the Fox News Republican caucuses entrance poll consisted of surveys of 1,573 voters at 25 precincts across Nevada. As Henry Olson, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, cautioned the sample side was "[t]oo small to trust."

cross posted from RedState.

Someone Tell Trump, Cruz And Rubio That New York City Wants Illegals To Vote

The New York Post reports that "new legislation is being pushed that would give illegal aliens the right to vote" in certain New York City Elections. The proposal was recently discussed at a Black and Latino Legislative Caucus event in Albany and according to the Post, which is winning support from the city’s black and Hispanic activists. Fortunately New York Conservatives oppose this misguided attempt to further boost  Democratic Party enrollment. New York State Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long threw cold water on the idea:

This is outrageous . . . American Citizens have the right to determine the destiny of towns, villages, cities, states and the country.

The proposal would allow New York City's estimated 1.3 million non-citizen residents, about 500,000 of whom are undocumented, to vote in New York City’s 2017 elections for mayor, comptroller, public advocate, borough president and City Council.

Chairman Long has it exactly right. This is just another very bad, old idea that left-wing Liberal/Progressive extremists won't let stay dead.

During the last century this dumb idea was put to rest. By 1900, nearly one-half of the states and territories had some experience with voting by aliens. But then, anti-immigration feeling ran very high and States started to end the practice of aliens voting. According to Wikipedia, Non-citizen voting in elections became extinct when Arkansas became the last state to ban it in 1926. In 1931, political scientist Leon Aylsworth noted: "For the first time in over a hundred years, a national election was held in 1928 in which no alien in any state had the right to cast a vote for a candidate for any office – national, state, or local."

At least until the era of Barack Obama. According to a study by professors at Old Dominion University and George Mason University, approximately 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in the 2008 presidential election. The figure for the 2010 midterm elections was 2.2 percent. The Obama administration is fighting state-led efforts to ensure that only American citizens are electing our leaders. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) — a small federal agency that exists primarily to assist the states in creating the federal form citizens used to register to vote by mail, stopped Arizona and Kansas from requiring people to verify their citizenship before voting.

This dispute went all the way to the Supreme Court. In the 2013 case, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, a divided Court said that Arizona could not implement such a requirement unless and until the EAC agreed to change the instructions for use of the federal form to include the Arizona requirements. The majority opinion in that case, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, stipulated that if the EAC refused Arizona’s request to accommodate the proof-of-citizenship requirement, the state could sue the EAC and establish in court that "a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement and that the EAC is therefore under a non-discretionary duty to include Arizona’s concrete evidence requirement on the Federal Form."

From RedState.

Is Kasich ready to quit?

The Washington Examiner reports that during an appearance at Georgia's Kennesaw State University Tuesday, Gov. John Kasich was urged by a member of the audience to take the gloves off. In response, Kasich started to sound like he is ready to quit the Residential race. Watch the video:

I don't know if my purpose is to be president. My purpose is to be out here, doing what I think I need to be doing and we'll see where it ends up. And if it's not this crusade, then it will be another one. Maybe it will be a really small one somewhere in my kid's school. Who knows?

That doesn't sound like he still has that fire in the belly thing. This also comes as the Republican Establishment is pressuring Kasich to end his Presidential campaign.

Earlier today Kasich was confronted with the new Quinnipiac University Ohio poll that shows Kasich trailing Donald Trump 31% to 26% among likely Republican primary voters, which is within the poll's +/-3.6 percent margin of error. Kasich replied that at least he isn’t doing as poorly as Sen. Marco Rubio is in his home state of Florida. the Real Clear Politics average for the Florida Republican Presidential primary Has Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz ahead of Rubio:

• Donald Trump - 40%
• Ted Cruz - 19%
• Marco Rubio - 13.7%

All the polls considered in the RCP average were conducted in January.

Cross posted from RedState.

Hispanic Coalition Seek To Destroy Trump, Rubio and Cruz

Nine Hispanic so-called advocacy groups have formed a coalition to partner with Google, Fuze, Instagram and YouTube to urge Hispanics to register and vote. The coalition, the National Latino Civic Engagement Table includes:

• Hispanic Federation Labor
• Council for Latin American Advancement
• Latino Victory Foundation
• Mi Familia Vota Education Fund
• National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials
• Educational Fund
• National Council of La Raza
• Voto Latino

The announcement came just before Nevada caucuses where Latino voters are expected to play a key role. Latinos represent 28 percent of the state's population, and about 17 percent of eligible voters. So Tuesday's Nevada Republican caucuses will be the first true test of Republican Latino voters.

The coalition of nine left-leaning organizations claims to be nonpartisan, but the leaders left no doubt that they intend to go after Trump, Rubio, Cruz and others who have criticized illegal immigrants and comprehensive immigration reform. Brent Wilkes, national director of the League of United Latin American Citizens made it clear:

In 2016 our organizations are working to ensure that the state's 328,000 registered Latino voters are well informed, not only on where to vote, but also on the candidates' views on issues that matter to Latinos. Our efforts in Nevada will build on our recent success in Iowa.

[. . .]

In the end, we will demonstrate that the Latino vote matters and candidates who engage in hateful rhetoric will pay the price at the ballot box.

LULAC contacted nearly 50,000 Latinos in Iowa through phone calls, mailers and caucus training, attracting more than 10,000 Latinos to participate in the Feb. 1 Iowa caucus.

Contrast the confrontational attitude of the new coalition to the Conservative Latino organization The LIBRE Initiative, which last week criticized President Obama's proposed fiscal year 2017 budget for failing the Hispanic community. Daniel Garza, Executive Director of The LIBRE Initiative, said the following in a written statement:

The Hispanic community is a critical part of America’s success. Each day we play a greater role in the economy, and in our political leadership. Nevertheless, in yielding to federal policies and programs that rely on the power of the state, over the individual - with promises of improved well-being and increased opportunities in the private sector - we are left with greater debt, lower wages, and potentially a reduced standard of living and a diminished private sector for our children and grandchildren. We can no longer acquiesce to those who seek to double down on these failed policies that have only served to hold back minority communities – especially to those who pursue a big government agenda on a much grander scale of magnitude. Lawmakers need to recognize where the agenda of the last seven years has failed us, and take a new approach.

In the past, several of the organizations in the new coalition criticized LIBRE for opposing Latino candidates. Now they're out to destroy the Latino candidates Cruz and Rubio.

Cross posted from RedState.

Romney To Rally Establishment Around Rubio

Numerous sources are reporting Mitt Romney will endorse Sen. Marco Rubio.  That's a story Rubio denies:

"That report is false, I have no reason to believe he's anywhere near endorsing anyone. I would love to have his endorsement. It's important to nominate someone who can bring everyone together ... and that's one reason I think I'll be the nominee, and Romney could be a part of that," Rubio said on CNN's "State of the Union."

The Establishment hesitated to rally behind Rubio as long as Jeb Bush remained in the race. The Republican Establishment, seeing the Bush campaign's inability to gain traction, actually began to rally around Rubio last week. At the New York Times' "FiveThirtyEight," Harry Enten noted the Establishment movement to endorse Rubio:

Rubio has picked up the endorsements of Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas and Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina this week. Indeed, Rubio has greatly increased his endorsement pace since the Iowa caucuses, picking up 42 weighted endorsement points in the past two-and-a-half weeks, according to the FiveThirtyEight endorsement tracker. That’s nearly half of the 85 points he has overall.

FiveThirtyEight’s system gives 10 points for endorsements from governors, five points for endorsements from U.S. senators and one point for endorsements from U.S. representatives.

It's not clear how much endorsements help, But there can be little doubt that having Gov. Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott and Congressman Trey Gowdy, all TEA Party favorites, was a big boost for Rubio in South Carolina. But can you really consider that Establishment support?

Will Romney's support help Rubio? It may make him more acceptable to the Establishment voters -- the nearly half of the Republican primary electorate not voting for Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz, giving Rubio an edge over Kasich. Politico is calling Rubio Romney 2.0:

But strip away Rubio’s rags-to-presidential contender biography, and his candidacy has more than a little in common with Romney’s -- from policy platforms that are largely in sync to a braintrust that boasts a number of the same key figures. When it comes to the substance of what he’d try to do in the job, at least, Rubio is not promising a sharp break from the last establishment favorite the party put forward.

"I think that they are very much on the same place on most of the issues," Vin Weber, a former House member and special adviser to Romney in 2012, said approvingly. On foreign policy, taxes and economic growth, “their positions are very similar, and on most of the other domestic and social issues they come down the same place as well.”

Romney's former political director Rich Beeson serves as deputy campaign manager for Rubio. Lanhee Chen of the Hoover Institute worked as Romney's policy director and now serves as a policy advisor to Rubio. And Rubio's political director, Jessica Ennis, was Romney's deputy operations director. Rubio's finance people, Annie Baker and Eli Miller, also worked for Romney's 2012 campaign. And Rubio's outside strategists, including Poolhouse Digital, which is run by two Romney alums: Will Ritter and Tim O’Toole.

The difference between Rubio and Romney is the messenger. It's Rubio's American Dream story versus Romney's silver spoon and Rubio's gift of being perhaps the most articulate candidate since Ronald Reagan. As Politico puts it:

At every campaign stop, Marco Rubio calls it “the biggest lie in American politics” – the notion that Republicans are the party of the super wealthy, and hopelessly out of touch with the working class and minorities.

The party, in other words, that Democrats eviscerated with Mitt Romney at the helm in 2012.

[. . .]

We can’t afford to keep being your father’s Republican Party. And if you want to stop talking about expanding the GOP tent and actually do it – without compromising on principle – I’m your guy.

Sure, there is a huge connection between the defeated Romney campaign and Rubio campaign, But that hardly makes the once TEA Party favorite Rubio Romney 2.0. As Rubio continues to morph into the Establishment favorite the question remains, can he make a dent in the Trump and Cruz anti-Establishment voters. Will enough of those voters give up the grudge they continue to hold against Rubio for his Gang of Eight work on comprehensive immigration reform? Or as those voters refer to it -- Amnesty.

Cross posted from RedState.

Will Marcomentum Overcome Cruz And Trump

With a solid South Carolina debate performance, and the endorsements of Gov. Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott and Congressman Trey Gowdy, Sen. Marco Rubio's Marcomentum is back. Gov. Haley is one of the most popular governors in the country. She has earned national recognition for her handling of the mass shooting at a black church in Charleston last June, including her successful call to lower the Confederate battle flag from the state capitol’s grounds. Haley is often mentioned as a vice-presidential prospect.

Is that enough to overcome Donald Trump's double digit lead in South Carolina Republican primary polls? The Donald's support may be collapsing after his disastrous South Carolina debate performance.

Can Marcomentum overcome the South Carolina ground game of Sen. Ted Cruz, which the campaign says is making 50,000 calls a day and knocking on more than 7,000 doors each day? The Cruz campaign has over 11,000 South Carolina volunteers, along with hundreds of out of state volunteers helping in campaign centers throughout the state. In addition, the campaign has campaign chairs and faith leaders in each county including 300 plus pastors and faith leaders who endorsed Cruz. On Friday, Cruz was endorsed by Congressman Mark Sanford, the state’s former governor. Sanford’s backing may help Cruz in the southern part of the state, where Sanford’s district is located. Cruz is already strong in the more-conservative upstate area. Cruz is feeling confident enough to change his schedule and attend the funeral of Justice Scalia.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Cruz ground game is supplemented a Cruz-supporting Super PAC field operation consisting of more than 100 volunteers and paid workers are organizing in 10 counties in South Carolina. This is a new and more productive use of Super PAC resources than the usual role of "TV-driven attack dogs."

With the Marcomentum come higher expectations, Team Cruz is doing its best to dive Rubio's expectations higher saying Rubio now needs to win the South Carolina primary:

 “If he doesn’t finish first, this is a massive loss,” Jason Miller, a senior Cruz adviser, said hours after news reports began circulating that Haley would endorse Rubio at a rally Wednesday evening. “Rubio has to win here.”
 
[. . .]
 
“From the beginning, they had a 3-2-1 strategy of finishing third in Iowa, second in New Hampshire and first in South Carolina,” Miller said of Rubio’s campaign. “Anything short of a first-place finish in South Carolina for Marco Rubio is a loss.”

Right, it was Rubio who set the expectation that he would win the South Carolina Primary. But Trey Gowdy is now saying third is all Rubio needs [video report].

Cross posted from RedState.

Bush Staffers Looking For Work

Even as the Jeb Bush campaign announced Jeb's post-South Carolina schedule in an all too obvious attempt to tamp down reports that Jeb would finally throw in the towel, Politico reveals that Bush campaign staff are a shopping their resumes with Florida political consultants anticipating that their candidate won’t push on after South Carolina:

"I can unequivocally tell you that people are looking for work, because they say they’ve been led to believe that they won’t have a job because the campaign won’t be around any longer or their jobs won’t because the campaign won’t have any money," said one Republican who helps run one of the Florida campaigns.

[. . .]

"The people who work in the campaign business aren’t stupid. They can read the polls," said a third Republican consultant who backs Rubio and is involved with another Florida campaign. "A month ago, we had conversations with people and no one was interested. Now they are. They’re calling us asking 'Hey, want to talk? I think I’m going to be free on Monday.'All those people work for Jeb."

According to Politico the calls picked up Wednesday after Rubio was endorsed by South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley. Bush didn't handle Haley's endorsement very well.

Bush hasn't been the best presidential candidate. There were times when he could get out of his own way like giving four different answers in five days to whether, in hindsight, he would have supported the Iraq war. A question he should have expected and been prepared to answer.

It's time Bush realized what the Fox News national  poll released Thursday  confirmed, voters are suffering from "dynasty fatigue" -- 52 percent of voters say they are tired of Clintons running for president and 59 percent feel that way about the Bush family.

Cross posted from RedState.

Wouldn't You Like More Ads Like 'Stop'

The presidential Campaign of Sen. Ted Cruz is out with a powerful new ad entitled "Stop." But before we look at the ad, lets complain about negative ads. People hate and complain about negative political ads. When they ask why so many ads are negative the response is always that negative ads work. When campaign strategists say negative ads work they mean voters remember the negative ads more than they remember the positive ones.

If you think you are seeing more negative ads during this presidential campaign you are right. As of  April 9, 2015, 96 percent of the 321 2016 presidential election-related ads that had been on TV were negative:

That's right -- just 4% have been about promoting a positive message for the future. The rest have been about tarring the other side.

This is a change from previous presidential campaigns:

By this point in the 2008 and 2012 cycles, all the way-too-early ads that had aired (except for a few retreads from previous cycles that wound up on the air either by mistake or in haste) sought to build candidates up, not tear them down.

Fox News reports that in Iowa this presidential campaign, Trump and Rubio were each targeted in 13 negative ads, more than any of the other candidates. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush was only hit with five. Cruz produced more negative ads than any other candidate, but a single Trump spot attacking Cruz on immigration aired 1,377 times -- among the highest of all negative ads. The single most-aired negative ad was paid for by a Jeb Bush-supporting Super PAC attacking Rubio for flip-flopping on a variety of issues.

So it's nice to see ad like the Cruz Campaign's "Stop" -- a positive 60 second message launched Thursday. In the ad, Cruz restates his commitment to standing with the American people and not Washington dealmakers, while laying out his positive, conservative vision for America. You can watch the ad below:

 CRUZ: Washington deals. It's why we have a $19 trillion debt.
 
Some candidates have promised to cut more deals with the Democrats. Others already have. I won't.
 
Washington deals are bankrupting our kids and grand kids. It has to stop.
 
I’ve stood up to the Washington lobbyists – like when I took on the ethanol mandate in Iowa. They said it was political suicide. My opponents attacked me, promising more cronyism and more corporate welfare.
 
I didn't back down... and we won.
 
As President I will say no to amnesty, repeal ObamaCare, abolish the IRS and defend the Constitution.
 
When Washington deal makers push, I won't flinch.
 
I will stand firm with the American people, whether Washington likes it or not.
 
VOICEOVER: No wonder conservatives like Rush Limbaugh are saying:
 
RUSH: “…There is no other choice for you in this campaign than Ted Cruz.”
 
“This is the closest in our lifetimes we have ever been to Ronald Reagan.”
 
CRUZ: I'm Ted Cruz, and I approve this message.

The ad is currently running statewide in South Carolina. Let's hope we see more powerful and positive ads like this from all the campaigns.

Cross posted from RedState.