Republican Crisis Management

Now that Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, many party stalwarts are so upset with the billionaire businessman that they are considering backing an independent party candidate.   Others believe that the party will take a such a severe shellacking at the polls in November with Trump that the party could lose control of Congress.   

Trump himself put Republicans on notice Sunday in an interview on ABC when he said,  "This is called the Republican Party, it's not called the Conservative Party."  Trump later added, "I think it would be better if it were unified...there would be something good about it, but I don't think it actually has to be unified in the traditional sense."  The question for many Republicans is how can they embrace a candidate who is not a true conservative, and whose extensive use of personal attacks has dragged the campaign into the gutter?

Conservative commentator William Kristol says the answer is don't support Trump.  Kristol called Trump unqualified for the presidency, on CNBC Monday, because of his lack "character and temperament."   While ruling out voting for Democrat Hillary Clinton, Kristol said, "We don't need a binary choice.  The system is set up to allow independent candidates to get on the ballot." Actually, he is misinformed on the last point.  For instance, the Texas deadline for independent candidates to file an application to be included on the November ballot is Monday, May 9.  And the application, "must contain 79,939 signatures of registered voters who did not vote in the presidential primary of either party." 

Kristol met in Washington last week with former GOP standard-barer Mitt Romney to discuss the prospects for a third party candidate.  Romney has been critical of Trump's candidacy, but he has said he is not interested in a third party run.  The Washington Examiner reported Romney said he currently could not support either party's candidate.  Nonetheless, he lamented, "I am dismayed at where we are now, I wish we had better choices, and I keep hoping that somehow things will get better, and I just don't see an easy answer from where we are."

Many establishment Republicans have decided to focus their attention on the down-ballot races that may be jeopardized with Trump at the top of the ticket.  Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in a statement Friday posted on Facebook, said, "In November, I will not vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, but I will support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, as I have done my entire life."  Neither his brother or father, both former Republican presidents, will endorse Trump.  Trump called Jeb Bush "dishonorable" for reneging on his pledge to support the GOP candidate.  

The Trump candidacy has left many incumbent Republican Senators and Representatives squirming.  Arizona Senator John McCain, the party's 2008 presidential candidate, in in a tough reelection bid this year in a state with a large Latino population.  McCain, perhaps walking a fine line on Trump, told CNN, "You have to listen to people that have chosen the nominee of our Republican Party."  He concluded, "I think it would be foolish to ignore them."  McCain has stressed he is running his own campaign, but recent polls show he is tied with Democratic opponent Ann Kirkpatrick.

Meanwhile, rhetoric involving Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan has reached the boiling point.  Ryan said last week he is not yet ready to endorse Trump.  Trump supporter and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin told CNN she would work to defeat Ryan by supporting his primary opponent in his Wisconsin district.  Trump is scheduled to meet with Ryan and other party leaders in Washington Thursday, and he has said he would not rule out removing Ryan as the chair of the Republican Convention.  

The ongoing political battles involving Trump and other Republicans are taking attention away from the still unresolved Democratic primary.  They are also unsettling for GOP efforts to raise campaign funds.  Do donors put their money behind Trump, or instead only target down-ballot races?  And while Trump has "expanded" the party base during the primaries, he has also alienated many traditional Republicans. 

Following Thursday's meetings in Washington, no doubt the participants will all say they had a good meeting, and that they have agreed to work to unite the party.  But, given the tenor of the Republican campaign, how can they really unite?   Of course, these are politicians.

   

Immigration By The Numbers

The immigration issue has roiled the Republican Party as its presidential candidates attempt to appeal to the conservative, anti-immigration wing of their party in order to win their party's nomination.  But the GOP is going to pay a heavy toll in the 2016 national elections.  

Businessman Donald Trump fired the opening salvo last June when he announced he would run for president.  "When Mexico sends its people they're not sending their best," he said. "They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us.  They're bringing drugs.  They're bringing crime.  They're bringing rapists.  And some, I assume, are good people."  Trump has proposed building a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico (with a nice door) and promises he will get Mexico to pay for it.   

Trump raised the stakes this past Wednesday on MSNBC when he said, "You're going to have a deportation force, and you're going to do it humanely."  But he has yet to offer any specific details on how he will send an estimated 11 million undocumented workers out of the country.  It is hard to picture a "deportation force" humanely separating a Latino mother from her American born children.   

Nonetheless, Trump's position on immigration has resonated with party members.  In a national poll published in Roll Call, 49% of those identifying themselves as Republican agreed that Trump would best handle the immigration issue.  Trump's percent was five times higher than the second place finisher, Sen. Marco Rubio.  Trump has been so successful exploiting immigration to the Republican Party base that Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz are now publicly quibbling over each other's prior positions on the issue.  

The Republican National Committee following Gov. Mitt Romney’s loss in the 2012 national election identified immigration as a critical issue.   Romney had received just 23% of the Latino vote in his defeat.  By contrast, President George W. Bush received 44% of the Latino vote in his 2004 re-election.  The RNC released an autopsy report in early 2013 that called on Republicans to reach out to Latinos.  "Among the steps Republicans take in the Hispanic community and beyond, we must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform," the report stated. "If we do not, our Party’s appeal will continue to shrink to its core constituencies only. We also believe that comprehensive immigration reform is consistent with Republican economic policies that promote job growth and opportunity for all."

Many Republican strategist have amplified this position.  Steve Schmidt, who ran Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign in 2008, has observed, "The long-term problem for Republicans is that in every demographic that is growing in the country, Democrats are gaining market share," he said last year in the Los Angeles Times, and "in every demographic group in the country that is shrinking, Republicans are gaining market share."

Romney beat President Barack Obama by 20% among white voters according to exit polls.  A Gallup Poll, released just ahead of the GOP autopsy report, showed that Non-Hispanic whites made up 89% of Republican self-identifiers, while Hispanics were only 6% of that group.   The problem for the Republican Party is that the Non-Hispanic white population is shrinking.  Meanwhile, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that here are more than 55 million Hispanics and their number is growing.  

The GOP may think that Senators Rubio and Cruz, both Cuban Americans, can help the party appeal to more Latinos, but each of their stands on immigration has hurt them among this voting segment.  Further, nearly 65% of the Latino population is Mexican American, while only 4% is Cuban American, and most live in Florida.  Nationally Latinos, especially Mexican Americans, prefer Democrats over Republicans.  And 81% of Latinos believe that unauthorized immigrants should not be deported.  As Gov. Rick Perry once said, "Oops."

Donald Trump's talk of a border wall and deportation squads may play well with conservatives in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, but it has seriously damaged the Republican brand with most Latinos.   It is likely that the Republican candidate will have to receive 40% of the Latino vote in order to be elected president.   

So don't count on the ultimate GOP standard bearer to maintain the hard-line position on immigration in the general election that was needed to win the nomination.   For instance, over the last few years both Rubio and Cruz have each changed their prior position on immigration for political expediency.   

Unless, of course, that nominee is Donald Trump.  Then who knows what will happen?  Except it will be humane and huge!

GOP Traffic Jam

Governor Chris Christie has finally gone on the offensive to defuse "bombshell" revelations that he knew about the Ft. Lee lane closures at the time they were happening.  "The Governor first learned lanes at the George Washington Bridge were even closed from press accounts after the fact," the 700-word email from the governor's office said Saturday.  

The email attacked the press for publishing the story, and attacked the story's source, former New York & New Jersey Port Authority official David Wildstein, who is seeking immunity in the investigation. "Bottom line -- David Wildstein will do and say anything to save David Wildstein," the email said.  But the attack on Wildstein got unusually personal, "He was publicly accused by his high school social studies teacher of deceptive behavior."  Really?  This schoolyard retort reveals a frustrated and desperate man.    

Even if Governor Christie's story stands up through the rigorous legislative and federal investigations the incident has triggered, in the end his 2016 presidential aspirations will be snuffed out.  Questions about the way he ran his office, about the people he surrounds himself with, and his management style will dog him for years.  Conservative Republicans already did not support him for higher office.

So, with Governor Christie out of the mix, the race to be the Republican presidential nominee is wide open.   Whomever they choose will likely face a difficult challenge in the 2016 election. A recent Washington Post poll shows Hillary Clinton has a 6 to 1 lead among Democrats over all other potential candidates for the party's nomination.  Further complicating the Republican's task are the divisions within the party between the Tea Party faction and those who hew closer to the center.

The Hill reported that Florida Senator Marco Rubio is now getting a lot of attention, especially since Representative Paul Ryan said he would not run for the White House in 2016.  "A group of Republican fundraising heavyweights and wise men in Washington's business community are solidly behind Rubio, and see him not only as someone who could win the White House, but someone they can work with," The Hill said.  Senator Rubio, who counts himself a Tea Party member, has had his eye on this prize for some time.  He has recently amplified his positions against President Barack Obama, Obamacare, immigration and education.  Ultimately, his role in the immigration debate will have an important impact on whether he can secure his party's support.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has been outspoken on everything from Obamacare to NSA surveillance.  He is a proud libertarian, and aligns himself with the Tea Party on most issues.  But he has recently made controversial statements, and has been accused of plagiarism for lifting parts of his speeches from Wikipedia.  He may prove to be too independent minded for the ever buttoned down Republican Party.

The Republican Party has several governors who could rise to the challenge; Ohio Governor John Kasich and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker are among the strongest.   But neither has a national profile, and both have taken controversial positions on state issues.

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush would probably be the favored candidate if he decides to throw his hat into the ring.  Last week Bush said, "I'm deferring the decision to the right time, which is later this year."  A recent Washington Post poll shows him only behind Ryan among Republicans as the favored candidate.  Former First Lady Barbara Bush has said she doesn't believe her son should run.  Despite the fact that he is getting a lot of calls from top Republicans urging him to announce, he seems reluctant.  Should he decide to stay on the sidelines, Marco Rubio will benefit most.

Former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been appearing everywhere.  Even though some of his supporters have called for him to run again in 2016, he has said he won't.   His running mate in 2014, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, would be a long shot for obvious reasons, as would former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

Texas Senator Ted Cruz has thrust himself into the national limelight on issues like Obamacare, immigration and raising the federal debt ceiling.  The Harvard educated and overly ambitious Cruz is distrusted by many of his colleagues, especially Republicans.  His failed tactics led to last year's government shutdown.  His "never in doubt" attitude makes him a polarizing figure in Washington.  While the Canadian born senator is a darling of the Tea Party, it is unlikely that he could win his party's nomination.

At this point, the field of candidates for the Republican presidential nomination is wide open.  Governor Chris Christie's plight may not have altered the outcome of the Republican presidential nominating process, but it sure has led to another major traffic jam.

Growing Republican Irrelevance

The Republican Party's refusal to accept the fact that the United States is evolving socially and demographically will drive the party to irrelevance on the national political scene.    

The debate over immigration reform is the latest example of how the party is seems to be out of step with the nation.  Hispanics make up the largest minority in America.  They voted overwhelmingly for President Barack Obama in the 2012 election, by a margin of 71% to 27% for Governor Mitt Romney.  In 2012, Asians became the fastest growing minority population in the U.S., edging out Hispanics.   President Obama also got 71% of the Asian vote last November.

While only 39% of the white vote went for President Obama in 2012, the white population is declining as a share of the country's total population.  The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that whites will become the minority by 2043.    

There are currently more than 50 million Hispanics in the United States.  According to the Census Bureau, that number will grow to 132 million by 2050, or about 30% of the projected U.S. population.  

Faced with the stark reality of these numbers, many leading Republicans have spoken out in favor of immigration reform.  Earlier this week, former President George W. Bush said, “I do hope there is a positive resolution to the debate.”  He added, "At its core, immigration is a sign of a confident and successful nation.”  Bush's relatively strong showing among Hispanic voters in 2004, about 44%, helped him win reelection.  

But many Republicans in the House of Representatives don't care; especially those who occupy gerrymandered districts with small minority populations.  None has been more outspoken that Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).  Speaking of the Senate's comprehensive immigration plan, he said, “It would hurt Republicans, and I don’t think you can make an argument otherwise.”  Why?  “Two out of every three of the new citizens would be Democrats,” he said.  

King's candid reasoning is exactly why House Republicans are trying to kill immigration reform. Instead, they are proposing a piecemeal approach to immigration that will leave out a pathway to citizenship.  Their first priority is securing the border because there has been a recent increase in illegal immigration in some Southwestern states.

There are 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the United States.   The Senate's bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill, which includes a "border surge" to secure the Southwest border with Mexico, would decrease illegal immigration by up to 50% according to the Congressional Budget Office.  The CBO further projected that the bill would cut federal deficits by $158 billion over the first ten years after enactment.

It would seem that the Senate bill would at least be worthy of consideration by the House.  But House Speaker John Boehner refuses to do so citing the Hastert rule, which means a majority of the majority House Republicans must agree.  So the Senate bill appears dead.

Following the Republican's disappointing results in the 2012 elections, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said, "When Republicans lost in November, it was a wakeup call."  He issued a report that included the following recommendation: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform. If we do not, our party's appeal will continue to shrink to its core constituencies only." 

Apparently House Republicans didn't get the message.  

Be Bold Mr. President

The din of Democracy, which ebbs and flows according to election cycles, has calmed as most Americans now focus on their normal lives. They had witnessed a historic amount of campaign spending, about $6 billion, more than one million political ads, and seemingly endless news coverage. After all the shouting was over, and the ballots were counted, the political balance of power did not change in Washington.

Yet one could conclude that the 2012 presidential election had two outcomes. President Obama was given a second chance to fix entitlements, tax policy, the economy, deficits and immigration. The American people empowered the president to stand up to the extremes of both parties, if necessary, to come up with reasonable and balanced solutions to these daunting problems. The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party was knocked back on its heels.  So it is time for the president to be bold and use an "all hands on deck" approach in order to galvanize Congressional support around solutions. The president should also be transparent with the American people, in effect, "crowdsource" ideas, and include them in the process.

President Obama has a small window in which to act before the midterm campaign begins. He should first start building momentum by working out a balanced solution to the so-called fiscal cliff. Congress must have a budget agreement by the end of the year or the Bush tax reductions will expire and deep cuts will be made to the defense budget. It is time for a grand bargain, a compromise, that includes budget cuts AND some revenues.

Meanwhile, for Republicans, it is mourning in America. The party of Lincoln failed to recognize that the country is a melting pot with diverse voices and evolving needs. Instead, the GOP is hanging on to a Norman Rockwell vision of America.  Republican members of Congress have been unwilling to budge on tax increases for the wealthy because they fear of losing the Tea Party's support.

Now Republicans have a chance to show all Americans that they are willing to compromise.  Reaching an agreement on the fiscal cliff will be an important first step for them to reach out to all segments of the population. Republican House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday, "I think the members understand that the fiscal cliff... is unacceptable."  And earlier this week he said, "The issue here is the president wants revenue. I'm willing to put revenue on the table."  But the speaker will not agree to rate hikes for high-income earners, rather just closing loopholes and eliminating deductions.  The Democrats don't agree with his approach.

If the president and Congress do not make a deal on the fiscal cliff by the end of the year, the U.S. economy will likely spiral into another recession. With so much at stake, the stock market has been sharply lower out of concern for what Washington will do. A solution requires compromise from both parties, and compromise will send a strong message to all Americans that both parties agree their country comes first.

One final note, President Obama received 9 million fewer votes than he did in 2008, while Mitt Romney received about 2 million fewer votes than Senator John McCain did when President Obama defeated him. It is likely they were turned off by the negative campaigns waged by both candidates, their misleading claims, and the sheer magnitude of the political advertising.

Among the losers this election year were billionaires David and Charles Koch, and Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate. They spent millions of dollars trying to defeat the president and failed.

Perhaps the biggest loser was Fox News contributor and GOP strategist Karl Rove.  His political groups, American Crossroads/Crossroads GPS, spent about $325 million of other people's money trying to elect Romney and other Republicans to office with little success. He also had an embarrassing meltdown on television when Fox News called Ohio for the president.

Rove was unapologetic about his dismal campaign results, explaining in a conference call to donors Thursday, according to one press report, that the Republican losses would have been bigger without him. No doubt his financial supporters believe him.

And no doubt Rove is laughing all the way to the bank.

Who Can You Trust?

With fewer than 100 hours remaining before the election, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been visiting swing states selling his 5-point plan to fix the economy and promising "real change on day one." Meanwhile, a desperate Romney campaign has been flooding the airwaves with false advertising in an effort to squeeze out a last minute victory.

No Republican in modern time has won the presidency without carrying Ohio. President Barack Obama has been able to maintain a lead in the polls despite heavy campaigning by his opposition. This is in part due to the fact that the president's bailout of the American auto industry saved thousands of jobs in the Buckeye state. Romney opposed the bailout, instead calling for Detroit to go bankrupt.

But now Romney's supporters have gone to the airwaves in key Ohio cities with a patently false ad. "Under President Obama, GM cut 15,000 American jobs, but they are planning to double the number of cars built in China, which means 15,000 more jobs for China. And now comes word that Chrysler plans to start making Jeeps in, you guessed it, China." Both Chrysler and GM immediately took the unprecedented step of harshly refuting the ad. Nonetheless, the Romney campaign is still airing it in Ohio and Michigan. 

The presidential election will be close in Florida, where the rapidly growing Hispanic population is likely to determine the outcome. So the Romney campaign has gone to the Spanish language airwaves with this outrageous spot featuring Venezuela's President and tyrant Hugo Chavez:

NARRATOR: Who supports Barack Obama?
CHAVEZ: "If I were American, I'd vote for Obama."
NARRATOR: Raúl Castro's daughter, Mariela Castro, would vote for Obama.
CASTRO: "I would vote for President Obama."
NARRATOR: And to top it off, Obama's Environmental Protection Agency sent emails for Hispanic Heritage month with a photo of Che Guevara.
CHAVEZ: "If Obama were from Barlovento (a Venezuelan town), he'd vote for Chávez."
ROMNEY: I'm Mitt Romney, and I approve this message.

The Romney campaign needs the overwhelming support of white voters in order to win the election. So the campaign is still running an ad that falsely claims, "If you want to know President Obama's second term agenda, look at his first: (he) gutted the work requirement for welfare." In fact, the president gave those governors who requested it more flexibility on welfare in exchange for higher targets for reducing their state's welfare rolls. (Romney had made such a request when he was a governor.) 

In an effort to get attention away from the GOP plan to voucherize Medicare, Governor Romney has time and again claimed the president has cut Medicare by $760 billion to "pay for Obamacare." Once again the Republican candidate is lying. The president's Medicare reductions target providers not individuals, and some of the funds are being reinvested into programs that benefit seniors. Never mind that Representative Paul Ryan, Romney's running mate, supported the exact same amount of Medicare reductions. 

Even Romney surrogates are misleading voters in order to help their candidate. Romney is on record, and on tape, promising that he will overturn Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that currently governs abortions. In a last ditch effort to close Romney's gender gap, surrogate and former Senator Norm Coleman, said in Ohio of Roe v. Wade, "It's not going to be reversed." What is Coleman's rational? "President Bush was president eight years, Roe v. Wade wasn't reversed. He had two Supreme Court picks, Roe v. Wade wasn't reversed." But, wait, that's not what Romney said!

Of course, Romney is a flip flopper who will say whatever it takes to win over an audience. Like at a Florida fat cat fundraiser earlier this year, when he said that, "47 percent of the people who will vote for the president...believe they are victims and government has a responsibility to take care of them?" When he found out the "47 percent" includes senior citizens, members of the military, veterans and millions of other hard working Americans, he changed his tune. "In this case I said something that's just completely wrong," he told Fox News. But does he really think he was wrong?

Romney claims to have been a bipartisan governor who succeeded in Massachusetts. If Romney was so successful as governor, why is President Obama currently leading him in three recent statewide polls by an average of about 25 percent? If Romney was so bipartisan, why did he have a separate elevator designated for his use in the state capitol in order to avoid Democrats? No wonder he was only a one-term governor.

Candidate Romney's 5-point economic recovery plan includes few specifics. One key point is a 20 percent personal income tax cut, which he says will be offset by ending some deductions and closing loopholes that he will not specify. That's $5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years. Romney says he doesn't want to give up any negotiating power with Congress by naming what deductions he intends to eliminate. Or does he have a conflict of interest? After all, he has released only 2 years of his own personal tax returns, despite the outcry from members of both parties. Romney has also failed to explain how he created a $100 million trust fund for his sons, $10's of millions more than the IRS allows someone to legally set aside. 

It is comforting to know you can trust someone, even if you disagree with some of their ideas. One earns trust by being honest, truthful and consistent. There is only one candidate who has been trustworthy throughout this campaign. And then there is the other candidate, who once said, "I'm not familiar precisely with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said. Whatever it was."