Parenthetical Politics

(Political Ramblings from a Little Left of Center)

2018 Elections – My Report Card

Posted on by admin

It really hadn’t occurred to me to go back and evaluate my 2018 race analyses.  But when a reader asked, I thought it was an interesting question.  I’m currently online at a bar, so a little self-indulgence seems quite appropriate.

With respect to the Senate, I mostly just called a Democratic takeover improbable at best.  True enough.  I didn’t exactly go out on a limb there.

With respect to the House, however, I did rely on some rather complex custom data analytics.  I didn’t so much make predictions as I suggested where money could best be spent in the closing months of the campaign to guarantee that the Democrats took control of the chamber.

  • I said there were 11 races where the Democrats would win without much additional help.  Democrats won all 11 of those races.
  • I picked 20 races where I thought additional money should be concentrated to help the Democratic candidates who had a decent chance to win.  Democrats won 14 of those races and another 3 races have yet to be called.  To date, Republicans have won only 3 of the races that I picked.
  • In Texas, I said there were two seats that the Democrats should flip and, indeed, both flipped.  I saw an outside chance of Democrats taking two additional Texas seats and the Democrats took one of them.

Considering only the Democratic wins above, the Democrats would have taken the House.  While they won additional races to pad their margin, I think I can claim success.  I’ll give my analysis a “B” in the unlikely scenario where the Democrats lose all three of the outstanding races but I think I deserve an “A” if they win them all.

That’s not too bad for my initial attempt at political data analytics and I have the data to tweak the model for the next cycle.

Cheers!

2018 Elections – By The Numbers

Posted on by admin

Rather than doing “real” work, I’ve found myself digging through initial election results data.  Yeah, I’m a geek.  I could do this all day.  All night.  Whatever.  However, I thought I’d best share a snapshot of what I have and try to move on for now.

As every political commentator has constantly noted, a lot more people voted this year than is normal for a mid-term election.  Nationwide, 49.2% of eligible voters cast ballots earlier this month.  Yeah, okay.  While I personally don’t find a cause for celebration in the fact that half of the electorate couldn’t bother to vote, I guess I should be happy with the improvement from the 36.7% turnout in 2014.

Beyond the raw voter totals, however, there’s really not a whole lot that we know for sure quite yet.  Despite a ton of pundits citing mid-term voter breakdowns to make various prognostications, the numbers we have are based on very preliminary data – and those numbers are open to interpretation.  That, of course, didn’t stop me from taking a peek.

I cobbled together my current take from numerous sources, each with their own issues.  As such, I suggest that no one look too hard at the exact numbers since some things won’t quite add up.  In an attempt to compare apples-to-apples, I did try to only consider available data in U.S. House races – since all voters had an opportunity to vote in exactly one of those races.  Of course, candidates really do matter and the breakdowns are thus not necessarily indicative of any generic preference.  However, this is what we have.  Consider this an extremely rough first take of a very broad (D) vs. (R) voter profile for 2018:

In brief:

  • Men favored Republicans but more women voted and they favored Democrats by a wider margin.
  • White voters outnumbered non-white voters and they favored Republicans, but non-white voters favored Democrats by much wider margins.
  • White men went heavily Republican but white women were evenly split.
  • College-educated voters favored Democrats and the parties split the rest.
  • Protestants favored Republicans but non-Protestants favored Democrats by wider margins.
  • Older voters outnumbered younger voters and they favored Republicans, but younger voters favored Democrats by much wider margins.
  • Democrats took the cities, Republicans took the country, and the parties split the suburbs.
  • Self-identified independents favored Democrats.

Got all that?  Now forget it.  While the above is certainly fascinating (at least to me), it’s just not as enlightening as you might expect going forward.

Yes, the above data is minimally useful to derive early projections with respect to the 2020 House races.  The current numbers look decent for Democrats and it’s always easier to defend a majority than to build one.  However, the dynamics of a concurrent 2020 Presidential election will most certainly have a huge impact that is as yet unknown.  Also, the up-ticket Senate and Governor races will be quite different in 2020 than they were this year.

In the Senate, it’ll be a brand new game with a different set of 33 seats on the table – 21 held by Republicans and 12 held by Democrats.  At least one reasonable scenario has the Democrats flipping just enough net seats to split the Senate 50-50.  In that case, with the VP potentially casting decisive Senate votes, the 2020 Presidential election becomes even more important – if that’s even possible.

And so.  Everything comes down to the 2020 Presidential election.  That election, of course, will be decided solely by Electoral College votes.  Given that most states allocate all of their electors to the victor in their state, overall popular vote totals don’t matter and state-level margins don’t matter.  State wins and state elector counts are the whole game.  Thus, Democrats need to look at voter profiles and turnout rates for each state completely independent of the others.  The above national analysis needs to be considered separately for every in-play state, state-level trends need to be estimated, state-level outreach strategies need to be defined, candidates need to be evaluated using state-based metrics, and, somehow, a Democratic ticket needs to be formed that can piece together a 50%+1 majority in enough states to get at least 270 electoral votes.  My head hurts.

Whether or not the Electoral College is still a good idea might well be the topic of a future blog post.  (Spoiler Alert:  It’s not a good idea.)  However, for now, we have to assume the rules we have.  At some point in the hopefully near future, I’ll take an early look at the 2020 Electoral College map along with some Democratic ticket options.

Sure, the 2020 elections are two years away.  But there’s a whole lot of work to do and the time to start is now.  Break’s over.

Recounts

Posted on by admin

Election results are still in doubt in Georgia, Florida, and Arizona.  Because, of course.

Look.  We’re quite obviously a pretty evenly divided country at the moment.  One side or the other isn’t going to be happy with any final results in these races.  It’s tough to lose and it’s even tougher to lose when it’s a close race.

But seriously.  Have we learned nothing?  In none of these races is there a pressing need to rush to any decision.  The two Senate races will not change the balance of power in the Senate even if both races eventually go to Democrats.  Florida and Georgia can survive without a called Governor’s race for at least a few weeks.  Everybody needs to take a deep breath.

Of course, I’d personally like to see the Democrats win every one of the races.  I’m an admitted partisan at this point and would thus be a horrible person to put in charge of the recounts.  That said, I like to think I’m a fair person.  Based only on what I’ve read, I’d guess that the Arizona Senate race is clearly a Democratic win and that the Georgia Governor race is clearly a Republican win.  Both the Florida Senate and Governor races are tight and I have no clue.  It’s Florida.

In any case, here’s my two cents:  If we’d object to similar vote counting practices in a third-world country, why the hell would we accept them in ours?  How hard is this?  Votes matter.  Rules matter.  Follow the rules and count all the votes.  Every damn vote.  Don’t rush it.  Do it right.  Do it transparently.

This is, unfortunately, not a job for the courts.  The Supreme Court lost a lot of credibility with a purely partisan vote in Bush v. Gore.  They should have stayed in session until they could have issued a ruling – any ruling – with no less than a 7-2 majority.  The 5-4 ruling deciding the American Presidency was an insult to democracy.  As a direct result, any decisive court decisions in the current races would be questioned in terms of the makeup of whatever court had jurisdiction. In my humble opinion, the best a court could do is to appoint a neutral third-party, acceptable to both sides, to interpret the rules and evaluate ballots as necessary in each race.

For the love of God, please don’t just call any race for either side just because you can.  We deserve better.

2018 Elections – Results

Posted on by admin

Well.  That was interesting.  I considered making a drinking game out of election night.  You know, like taking a shot whenever a seat flipped from (R) to (D).  Or pouring a drink whenever Wolf Blitzer reported a race’s results, with less than 5% reporting, as being a bellwether for the whole country.  Or whenever polling data was massively wrong.  Then I decided I’d just drink.  Good call.

Things aren’t over yet, but I thought I’d post a few raw impressions before I turn off the TV, close the laptop, recharge the iPad, and put away the Scotch:

  • There were, of course, numerous surprises in individual races.  At a macro level, however, things went pretty much as expected.
  • The great news is that Democrats will have a significant majority in the House.  There will now be at least some check on the Trump administration and an end to complete Republican control of the government.  I do see a Constitutional crisis in our future as subpoenas get issued by House committees and then get ignored by the White House.
  • The bad news is that Republicans will significantly increase their majority in the Senate.  Democrats were never going to win the Senate, but there’s no way to spin the lost seats as anything other than defeat.  Republicans will spend the next two years stacking the courts.  Pray for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  From a legislative perspective, however, there’s just not much the Senate can do without negotiating with the House.  Thus, another Constitutional crisis will likely be triggered as Trump attempts to govern solely by Executive order.
  • Democrats picked up a few Governors’ offices, but not two important ones that were on the table:  Florida and Ohio.  Their importance will be evident in 2020.
  • Incumbent moderates in both parties got creamed.  That is not a good thing.
  • A lot of women candidates won.  That is a good thing.
  • At the individual race level, I’m personally disappointed that some Democratic candidates didn’t win (Beto O’Rourke, Andrew Gillum, Richard Cordray, Amy McGrath, MJ Hegar, etc.), but I’m not particularly surprised about the results.  Pollsters, however, will be trying to figure out how to modify their methodologies since some of their predictions in these races were way off base.
  • Both Democrats and Republicans will claim victory.  Both have a point.
  • My bottom line is that I’m not throwing a party, but I’ll sleep just fine tonight.
  • Cue the prognostications about 2020.

October Surprise

Posted on by admin

There has long been an expectation that an “October Surprise” would impact the upcoming November 6 elections.  Even though October is now behind us, I know better than to assume that one or more major news events won’t occur before election day.  However, I will contend that the October Surprise has indeed already occurred.  It’s just not that much of a surprise.

October was a truly tragic month for sanity and humanity.

  • A Saudi Arabian journalist for the Washington Post was killed at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.
  • Packages containing apparent pipe bombs were sent to numerous Trump critics.
  • A racially-motivated shooting at a Kroger in Kentucky left two people dead.
  • A Jewish synagogue in Pittsburgh was the scene of a mass shooting.

At times like these, we look to our leaders for consolation and assurance.  In particular, we look to the President of the United States to provide comfort and perspective to a grieving nation.

To be sure, not all Presidents have had the same intrinsic abilities to command a moment and provide the necessary tonic to a nation thirsty for guidance.  It is phenomenally difficult for even the most talented orator to strike the right balances between anger and resolve, between sadness and compassion, between despair and hope.  And yet, past Presidents of both parties have risen to the occasion when tragedy struck:  Lyndon Johnson after the Kennedy assassination, Ronald Reagan after the Challenger disaster, Bill Clinton after the Oklahoma City bombing, George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks, Barack Obama after the Sandy Hook massacre.

Each of these leaders did more than simply read a script provided by a seasoned speechwriter.  It is largely in the unscripted moments (Bush’s extemporaneous bullhorn speech at Ground Zero, Obama’s voice cracking as he spoke of the murdered children in Newton) that each of these leaders rose above politics and self-interest to display a heartfelt personal empathy on behalf of us all.  That is what true leaders do.  Regardless of political persuasion, the President of the United States is unfortunately often called upon to be the Consoler-In-Chief.

How far we have fallen.

Donald Trump has proven yet again that he is temperamentally, intellectually, and spiritually incapable of performing this duty.  Indeed, he is only making things worse.

While occasionally straining to read a few throw-away “thoughts and prayers” Hallmark sentiments, Trump has then proceeded to provide almost daily servings of word casseroles, seasoned with dog-whistles to his political base.  These rants are simply falsehoods at best, inane policy pronouncements at the norm, and dangerous incitements to violent intolerance at worst.  There is no comfort here.  Only raw politics.

In the midst of all of October’s violence…

  • Trump demonized a caravan of mostly Honduran refugees slowly headed toward the United States.  These migrants, fleeing violence in their home countries and seeking a better life, are largely on foot with severely limited resources.  Nevertheless, Trump announced that he was sending over 5000 Army troops to stop the “invasion”.  For the subset of the migrants that somehow manage to eventually reach the U.S. border, they would have the right to apply for asylum, and the United States would have the right to deny that asylum.  That’s it.  The U.S. Border Patrol is perfectly capable of handling this relatively minor non-invasion.  In 2000 alone, an unassisted Border Patrol – with half of the agents it currently employs — arrested more than 1.6 million migrants.  If the Border Patrol needed the help, they could be ably assisted by over 2000 National Guard troops already at the border.  Lost in the politics is the fact that the United States Army is legally barred from directly enforcing immigration laws and can be used only in support roles.  The Army troops cannot themselves use force to stop anyone at the border.  Thus, active duty military personnel are being deployed as a political prop for Donald Trump.
  • Trump claimed that “Republicans will totally protect people with Pre-Existing Conditions, Democrats will not!”  In fact, it is the Obama-era Affordable Care Act that first protected people with pre-existing conditions.  (I know this personally as the only way that I can get coverage is via the ACA.)  The Republican Congress voted 54 times to repeal the ACA with no replacement and the Trump administration has made it their mission to weaken it as much as they possibly can.  There has never been a Republican plan to protect people with pre-existing conditions.  Trump’s claim is more than dishonest; it is dishonorable.
  • Trump announced the imminent introduction of legislation to enact a 10% tax cut for the middle class.  This despite the fact that Congress isn’t even in session and that Congressional leaders appeared clueless.  Trump also claimed, without any explanation, that the cut would be revenue neutral despite clearly providing 10% less revenue. The attempted pandering here is simply too obvious.
  • Trump announced plans to end birthright citizenship by Executive Order.  This despite the fact that the 14th Amendment makes it quite clear that he cannot.  Trump also claimed that the U.S. was the only nation that offered birthright citizenship when, in fact, about three dozen countries do so (including Canada and Mexico).
  • Trump claimed to be a “nationalist” – despite that word being very closely associated with the alt-right agenda.  Concurrently, Trump also specifically claimed to not be a “globalist” – which is just someone that acknowledges the fact that economic and foreign policies cannot be considered in total isolation in today’s inter-connected society.  Thus, Trump essentially said, “I’m a racist, not a realist.”
  • Trump continued his political rallies at full throttle.  He praised a sitting Congressman for physically attacking a journalist.  He claimed that the mail bombs were a Democratic “false flag” operation and then quickly pivoted to blaming the media after the Trump-enthusiast perpetrator was arrested.  He increased his attacks on CNN after they were targeted by the mail bomber.  He floated a ludicrous conspiracy theory about George Soros funding the caravan after Soros was targeted by the mail bomber.  He blamed the victims of the Pittsburgh massacre for not having armed guards in their synagogue.  He couldn’t even resist adding a political endorsement while speaking of the tragedy.  And yet, at every turn, Trump insists that he is the true victim.

Donald Trump is a failure as a leader and a failure as a human being.  For the moment, however, we are largely unable to hold him accountable.  Barring some miracle, it will be another two years before the electorate will have a chance to correct its 2016 mistake.  Our President obviously has no shame so there is little benefit in trying to shame him.  Donald Trump is who he is.  He is not going to change.  That’s unfortunate, but it’s not a surprise.

What we can do now is hold Trump’s enablers accountable.  Republicans, the majority of whom really do know better, have blithely looked the other way while Trump’s vitriolic rhetoric divides the nation.  They have traded their souls in blind pursuit of policy achievements.  Eventually, many will recognize that whatever political battles they won were not worth the destruction of what truly makes America great.

We need to have intelligent and spirited conversations about immigration, the deficit, health care, and gun rights.  There are strong and reasonable opinions on all sides of these and many other issues.  I personally look forward to the eventual return of sane Republicans with whom we can engage in passionate debates and tough compromises.  I look forward to a time when not everything needs to be a zero-sum game.

In the meantime, however, the only solution is to remove the current Republican enablers from their all-encompassing control of the legislative branch in the upcoming mid-term elections.  I pray for our nation and eagerly await a November 6 judgment.

Voting Begins

Posted on by admin

Across the nation, early voting has been pretty popular – beating 2016 thus far.  Texas is having record-breaking early voting turnout for a mid-term election.  That’s great.  It just doesn’t mean a whole lot yet.

People who were going to vote anyway this cycle could just be voting early.  I did.  Stuff happens and I wanted to make sure that I participated in this election.  If you don’t vote, you can’t complain.  And I like to complain.

Yes, large early turnout numbers could mean a broader election turnout of registered voters – which should help Democrats.  Yes, the numbers could mean more new voters are participating in the election – which should help Democrats.  But, sadly, Republicans simply vote more often than Democrats and the numbers could portend an enthusiastic GOP turnout.  The effect of the different early voting processes in each state is unclear but it’s bound to have an impact as well.

The bottom line is that no one knows anything at this point.  Despite pundits of all stripes wanting to read all sorts of crap into initial early voting patterns and statistics, it’s just way too early to make any end-game assumptions whatsoever using that data.

Based on polling data, however, Democrats nationwide still look to be in good shape to take the House but perhaps lose ground in the Senate.  In Texas, the fundamentals still heavily favor Republicans.  Unless Texas Democrats are consistently polling over the margin of error in their races (they’re mostly not), it’s not a good sign.  That said, there’s always hope for Texas.  On the flip side, there’s still a real chance that the GOP maintains control of the House.  The polling data could be wrong all around.  See: 2016.

In any case, polls are just semi-educated guesses at best.  It’s only votes that count.  If you’re reading a political blog, I presume you’re a voter.  But I’ll say it anyway:

PLEASE VOTE!!!

Democrats & Marketing 102

Posted on by admin

I’m not a marketing expert.  Don’t claim to be one.  In the course of my career, however, I’ve certainly done the job and I at least know enough to recognize good versus bad with respect to marketing efforts.

I say this because I’m about to complain about a piece of this cycle’s Democratic marketing strategy – although calling it a “strategy” is perhaps giving it too much credit.

As I’ve previously noted, I’ve donated to several campaigns and committees this cycle and I’ve sent multiple donations to some of them.  All of my donations have been made via ActBlue.  In addition to functioning as a great conduit for the money transfer, ActBlue collects donor contact information, as required by law, and obviously shares that information with the recipients.  The campaigns, in turn, are free to independently contact their donors.  That’s fair – as long as the data isn’t abused.  Yeah.

In one 7-day period, I received just shy of 300 emails from the campaigns to which I donated.  That’s over 40 emails a day.  On average, each campaign sent me 5 emails every single day.  The well-behaved Justin Nelson campaign averaged 1 email a day; the overly communicative Jacky Rosen campaign averaged a whopping 11 emails a day.  [ As an aside, the DCCC also sent me 12 texts during my test week.  No.  Just no.  Don’t do that.  Bad donkey! ]

First, some disclaimers:

  • I realize that the sheer volume of emails is at least partially my own fault since I donated to multiple campaigns.
  • I realize that prior donors are a sweet spot for getting additional money.
  • I realize that sending emails costs the campaign nothing.
  • I realize that Republicans may be just as bad at this and maybe even worse.

That said, here’s just a few helpful hints (read: irritated complaints) directed at the campaigns:

  • Don’t spam me.  One email a day from each campaign is a lot; more simply guarantees I’m hitting “Delete” with increasing force.
  • Don’t just constantly ask for money.  I’m not your dad.
  • Don’t lie to me.  About half of the 300 emails contained the word “deadline”.  Don’t tell me there’s an absolute deadline for contributions (usually midnight of the day of the email) and then produce a new one immediately after that one expires.  That’s not a deadline.  That’s the passage of time.
  • Don’t get basic facts wrong.  If you include poll numbers to bolster your message, make sure they’re correct.  You know I’m on a computer, right?  I can check them myself.  I did.  You were often full of shit.
  • Don’t make it look like you’ve never seen a computer.  While there’s nothing nearly as bad as the Cruz attempt at using Facebook Live, I did receive 17 emails from one campaign with subject lines over 80 characters long.  Seriously?
  • Don’t base your entire message on beating the Republicans.  I get it.  I know why that’s important.  But your message is mostly “I need to win because my opponent needs to lose.”  Occasionally, you need to tell people why they should vote FOR you.
  • Don’t claim that Senate/House control rests solely on your race.  Your race is important, but so is every other race.
  • Don’t regularly tell me that Armageddon is upon us.  Listen, Chicken Little, you’re depressing the hell out of me.  You could well be right, but some folks might just decide not to vote since, apparently, we’re all going to die.  Try some humor, for God’s sake!
  • Don’t be so damn pathetic.  “We don’t have much time” … “We’re IMPLORING you” … “We’re PLEADING with you” … “We’re BEGGING”.  Have some pride, people.  This is embarrassing.
  • Don’t focus your outreach entirely on television.  Almost all of the pleas for money are to buy more TV ad time.  While television is an important part of the equation, younger voters (a demographic you really, really need) use Netflix.  They’re much more reachable via digital strategies.  I haven’t done the analysis to see how well you’re doing in that arena but I sincerely hope that your overall digital strategy is better than your email strategy.

Folks, I’m a political junkie and donor who desperately wants you to win and, yet, you’ve managed to over-saturate me.  Not good.

TX-31 & Marketing 101

Posted on by admin

My gerrymandered TX-31 Congressional district includes Ft. Hood – the largest active-duty armored military installation in the country.  Hence, the military vote here is pretty important.  As I’ve noted in previous posts, the Democratic candidate for TX-31 is MJ Hegar.  She’s an Air Force veteran who served three tours in Afghanistan as a rescue helicopter pilot and who earned a Purple Heart after being shot down by enemy fire.  The Republican incumbent is John Carter, who never served in uniform.

Hegar has run a generally good campaign that raised almost $2M in Q3 – beating Carter’s fundraising by a 3-1 margin.  Unfortunately, this is Texas, TX-31 is a Republican stronghold, Carter’s been in his seat for 15 years, and Hegar’s running well behind in recent polls.  But that’s okay.  She’s trying.  She has my vote and I was a small part of her Q3 haul.  There’s always hope.

What’s not okay is this flyer mailed to my home address (front & back):

Let’s imagine an internal conversation by a typical voter at the mailbox.  This internal dialogue lasts mere seconds in real time:

Great.  A junk mail flyer.  There’s a soldier, holding his smiling daughter, holding an American flag.  Okay, got it.  This is a good thing.  Of course we need to take care of our military veterans.  Let’s flip it over.  The name “JOHN CARTER” stands out in all caps and there’s a picture of a smiling guy.  Guess that’s John Carter.  He must be taking care of the vets.  Good for him.  Elections are coming up.  Maybe I’ll vote for John Carter – if I vote at all.  But first I’ll trash this flyer.

Sure, if you actually read the smaller text, you’d see that the flyer claims Carter is actually making it harder for veterans to get health care.  If by some minuscule chance you read the even smaller text, you’d see that the flyer was paid for by the Texas Democratic Party.

Yes, that’s right.  This is a Democratic piece.

NEWS FLASH:  No one reads this crap (unless they happen to have a political blog).  You have a few moments at best to make an impression.  And, congratulations!!  You did.

Gee, guys.  Thanks for the help.  I know this independent “attack ad” wasn’t coordinated with Hegar’s campaign but did you have to spend good money to make it look like you coordinated with Carter’s?

 

Video Intermission

Posted on by admin

My work-in-progress modus operandi for this blog is to first simply collect random notes, articles, and references that I find interesting.  These artifacts occasionally combine to form the raw idea of a blog topic and a few of the collections eventually morph into an actual post.  This week, however, I’ve found myself largely unable to form complete sentences.  Turns out I’m still thoroughly pissed off.

In the wake of the Kavanaugh confirmation: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) took a victory lap proclaiming he wasn’t done remaking the courts; Sen. Tom Cotton (R) provided a detailed conspiracy theory that would make Flat-Earthers wince; Trump held a raw political rally with then-sitting Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh that was beyond disgusting; the latest polls are providing conflicting insights into whether the Kavanaugh Krap helps Democrats, Republicans, both, or neither; …

Breathe.

Anyway, instead of working on my blog over the weekend, I started firing off donations to several Democratic Senate candidates.  While flipping the Senate is still very unlikely, monetarily flipping off Senate Republicans did make me feel just a wee bit better.  Thereafter, in recognition that I violated my own advice to focus money where it can do the most good, I then felt the need to make additional donations to help flip the House.  Winning the House won’t help with any future Supreme Court vacancies but it’s still the most reasonable Democratic goal this cycle.

The end result was that I was poorer, I was still pissed off, and I still had no blog post.  Dandy.

In search of an idea that required minimal thought, I read through my notes and found a few video links that might not make it any further in my notes-to-blog process.  Since it doesn’t get much easier than just posting links to the works of others, consider this an intermission with a few random political videos (some perhaps NSFW) that I think are worth sharing:

  • Texas entertainer Lynzy Lab shot this simple but spot-on video of her response to Trump’s assertion that “it’s a scary time for young men in America“.
  • This Kavanaugh / Pulp Fiction mashup video made the rounds last month and has the approval of Samuel L. Jackson himself.
  • Richard Linklater (a native Texan) directed this video reminding voters why they should #FireTedCruz.
  • Here’s a Willie Nelson video with a new and quite relevant song he debuted at a recent Austin rally for Texas Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke (D).
  • This video seriously kick-started the campaign of MJ Hegar (D) in my Congressional district (TX-31).
  • Randy Rainbow did Gilbert & Sullivan proud with his video take on Donald Trump declaring himself to be a “very stable genius“.
  • This 2012 SNL video on undecided voters is still sadly relevant in 2018.

Brett Kavanaugh, Revisited

Posted on by admin

Thus far, I’ve purposely steered clear of the “Issue of the Day” when selecting blog topics.  My preference is to pick a topic that is important, but not one that is currently flying across cable news chyrons.  I find value in stepping back a bit to gain some perspective before weighing in.

But not this time.  This time, I’m angry.

Over the weekend, I tried to convince myself to wait to see how this story would develop.  It will most certainly develop quickly and in unforeseen directions.  But I restarted this blog to allow me to vent when necessary.  And I really need to vent.

I previously offered an opinion about Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court – an opinion that was decidedly unpopular among my more liberal friends.  I do wish that Democrats had pushed further on some of the issues that I raised, but they didn’t and that’s on them.  In any case, I stand by my original opinion that Kavanaugh should have probably been confirmed “barring any surprises.”

Well.  We’ve had a few of those.

During the first round of the confirmation hearing, Judiciary Committee members on both sides of the aisle were predictably partisan — 11 came into the process thinking Kavanaugh walked on water; 10 were predisposed to waterboard him.  No surprise there.  At this point, I’d have seen no reason to update my original post.

And then came the allegations.

While I’ll spare everyone a romp through the details of Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault accusation, the relevant timeline is as follows:  the accusations became public soon after Kavanaugh’s appearance before the Judiciary Committee, all hell broke loose, Ford got to testify, Kavanaugh got to respond, additional hell broke loose, and a limited FBI investigation is now grudgingly underway.

Thrust into the national spotlight on live television, Ford was clearly a competent witness.  No sane person listening to her could have doubted her sincerity.  She was relatively calm, obviously very nervous, but quite confident in her testimony.  Did she offer concrete proof of an assault?  No.  But she wasn’t a witness in a criminal trial; she was a witness in a confirmation hearing.  She was a sympathetic figure with no apparent agenda other than telling her story.

In response, Kavanaugh came out swinging.  SNL’s subsequent parody of his statement was sadly a bit too accurate.

While Kavanaugh’s performance seems to have endeared him to Trump and most Republicans, it was perhaps the most politically tone deaf approach humanly possible.  Before that speech – and the accompanying GOP cheers – I saw both sides of this unfortunate situation.  I saw the obvious pain of the accuser but also understood the horror that someone wrongfully accused might rightly feel.

Had Kavanaugh himself firmly requested an independent FBI investigation into this matter, he could have immediately silenced most everyone.  While still forcefully stating his innocence, he could have recognized the valid emotions on both sides, disregarded all political implications, and calmly reminded an attentive nation that facts matter and that a full investigation was both appropriate and necessary.  You know… LIKE A JUDGE IS SUPPOSED TO DO.

But no.

Kavanaugh’s whole statement is well worth viewing and reading.  However, here’s just a few highlights:

“The behavior of several of the Democratic members of this committee at my hearing a few weeks ago was an embarrassment.”

”No one can question your effort, but your coordinated and well-funded effort to destroy my good name and destroy my family will not drive me out.”

“This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.”

“The 10-day delay has been harmful to me and my family, to the Supreme Court and to the country.”

“You’ll never get me to quit.”

Wow.

Is the confirmation process political?  Of course it is.  The Judiciary Committee members – on both sides of the aisle – are all career politicians.  For better or worse, that’s their job.  As a sitting judge, however, it is specifically Kavanaugh’s job to NOT be political.  His party-focused diatribe was insulting, infuriating, and wholly inappropriate.

Is the confirmation process fair?  I don’t give a damn.  That process is all we have standing in the way of a lifetime appointment to one of nine positions on our nation’s top court.  This is not an elected position; it is not term-limited.  It matters a whole lot and it will matter for a very, very long time.

Make no mistake:  This was a job interview.  Elevation to the highest court in the land is not a birthright.  Kavanaugh could have taken the high ground that we expect a sitting judge to inhabit.  Instead, he chose to become a politician himself – and a poor one at that.

The SNL parody included a line that, while unspoken in Kavanaugh’s rant, certainly seemed to be implied:

“If you think I’m angry now you just wait until I get on that Supreme Court because then you’re all going to pay.”

It no longer matters what the FBI probe may or may not reveal.  It no longer matters whether or not Kavanaugh was a “sloppy drunk” as his contemporaries have recently claimed in contrast to his testimony.  It no longer matters how members of either party attempt to spin his nomination.

This is now a simple matter of Kavanagh’s temperament, judgment, and ability to remove himself and his personal opinions from the deliberative process.

Kavanaugh’s own response has independently and definitively disqualified him from serving on the United States Supreme Court.  He does not deserve the honor.  And we deserve better.