Month: March 2016

The baby seal convention

by digby

“I think we’ll win before getting to the convention. But I can tell you, if we didn’t and if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re 100 short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400, because we’re way ahead of everybody, I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically. I think you’d have riots. You’d have riots…

“I’m representing a tremendous, many, many millions of people, in many cases, first time voters. If you disenfranchise those people, and you say, ‘I’m sorry, you’re 100 votes short’ … I think you’d have problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I wouldn’t lead it but I think bad things would happen.”

You’ll recall that Ana Navarro of CNN described it this way:

A brokered convention would be the equivalent of the political “Hunger Games”. And I am not exaggerating. Take a look at what’s going on at Donald Trump events. Take a look at what happens to protesters. They get basically assaulted. If you think people aren’t going to get clubbed like baby seals on the floor of the convention you haven’t been watching what’s been happening.

They argued on The Five for half an hour today over whether he was telling his people to riot or not and the consensus was that his followers are all good upstanding citizens, cops and firefighters, shop owners and workers who, unlike Occupy Wall Street and other leftists fascist thugs, would never commit violence. So it won’t happen.

But if something does happen it will be the left’s fault for sure. Because that’s how they are.

Trump spokeswoman on CNN just now: “Riots aren’t necessarily a bad thing.” 😮

— Stacey Shick Samuels (@StaceyShick) March 16, 2016

by digby

The Atlantic’s Molly Ball interviewed some GOP establishment figures coming to terms with Trump. This one is astonishing:

“There’s two ways to handle the Trump situation,” John Feehery, a D.C. lobbyist and former Republican congressional aide, told me. “You can contain the damage and try to unify. Or you can start a third party. I’m of the containment mindset.” As he spoke, a third-party effort was under way, with a group of conservatives planning a meeting in the next week to discuss the possibility. But that was not for Feehery, who preferred to look on the bright side. 

“If it weren’t for all the idiotic and racist comments, he would be kind of a breath of fresh air,” Feehery said. “He’s someone who wants to get stuff done—a politician who’s not beholden to any kind of ideology, not beholden to special interests. I don’t think he is George Wallace in his heart of hearts. He’s not a strategic threat to the future of the republic. He’s just a buffoon and a political opportunist.”

Hey, he just wants to make the trains run on time, people! Seriously, if it weren’t for all that wacky, kooky racist stuff we’d be thrilled that he doesn’t have the faintest fucking clue about how anything works and sounds like he wants to tear up the constitution and violate every law and norm we have! He wants to get things done. He’s just a buffoon.

Maybe Feehery should take heed of what Charlie Chaplin said later about “The Great Dictator” which treated Hitler as a buffoon and made people laugh all over the world. Until they stopped laughing.

Had I known of the actual horrors of the German concentration camps, I could not have made The Great Dictator, I could not have made fun of the homicidal insanity of the Nazis. —Chaplin, Charlie (1964). My Autobiography. p. 392.

It is a great film and a great satire. But there is an argument, which Chaplin himself apparently believed as well, that it has in some ways trivialized Hitler, the lesson being that one has to be very careful not to dismiss homicidal insanity as clownish hyperbole, especially in the hands of someone who is garnering a great deal of public support and could possibly head a powerful nation. Bad idea.

Update:

A Donald Trump presidency poses a top-10 risk event that could disrupt the world economy, lead to political chaos in the U.S. and heighten security risks for the United States, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit. 

Electing Trump could also start a trade war, hurt trade with Mexico and be a godsend to terrorist recruiters in the Middle East, according to the latest EIU forecasts. 

The well-respected global economic and geopolitical analysis firm put a possible Trump presidency in its top 10 global risks this month, released Wednesday. Other risks include a sharp slowdown in the Chinese economy, a fracture of the Eurozone, and Britain’s possible departure from the European Union. 

Trump’s controversial remarks on Muslims would be a gift to “potential recruiters who have long been trying to paint the U.S. as an anti-Muslim country. His rhetoric will certainly help that recruiting effort,” said Robert Powell, global risk briefing manager at EIU. 

Until Trump, the firm had never rated a pending election of a candidate to be a geopolitical risk to the U.S. and the world. The firm has no plans to include Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz or John Kasich on future risk lists. 

Tweety’s daydream

by digby

Last night featured one of the most inane Chris Matthews bit of advice in many a moon:

Kasich would be a wonderful choice for Clinton’s VP.  Except for the fact that he is one of the most zealous anti-choice politicians in America who just signed a bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood in his state, he’s perfect.  Other than that and the anti-union crusade and the pro-gun fetish as well as a dozen other reasons why it would make her ticket the most incoherent mess in history, it’s a fantastic idea.

This is the “mainstream” commentary MSNBC is featuring on its wall to wall election coverage these days. If you want Villagers and wingnuts you know what channel to watch. Personally, I don’t want either but I really can’t stand them together.

At least CNN has an equal number of women.  Poor Maddow is often the only one on MSNBC.  But then, they seem to be going for the minuscule Villager men-over-60 audience and they don’t seem to recognize yet that Ailes has that one wrapped up. (And we know that he features some nice visuals for the duffers in their Lazyboys to oggle.) It’s a sad end to a noble experiment.

.

This just in from the fringe

by digby

And I’m going to guess it will shortly be front and center in the campaign. Trump’s been signaling all along that this would be a big part of his message. From the fever swamps:

America’s police are in the crosshairs. Emboldened by the anti-cop rhetoric spewing from the Obama administration and their surrogates in the mainstream media, violent thugs have declared “open season” on policemen and women. One of the most dangerous professions has now become even more dangerous.

That’s why I am emailing you today. Your local police officers and sheriff’s deputies need your help. And they need it today!

Please take a few minutes right now to:

1. Complete the brief War on Police National Survey; and

2. Sign the open letter to President Obama;

The Obama administration, and a compliant media, would have you believe America’s police are Public Enemy Number 1.

But you know differently. It’s time for true patriots to let the ruling elite know there are no better friends than those who “serve and protect.”

Since the explosive events in Ferguson, Missouri when patrolman Darren Wilson defended his life against a 300-pound assailant, President Obama . . . his Justice Department . . . big city mayors . . . the usual race-baiters . . . and the mainstream media have conspired to stir up a national feeding frenzy aimed at the brave public servants who risk their lives to protect you and your family.

It is time to set the record straight. And that’s just what the Law Enforcement Action Network will do. But we need your help.

You know as well as I do police aren’t the problem. The criminals are! The vast majority of your fellow citizens know this as well but are intimidated by the mob tactics of the Left to let their voices be heard. In the next 90 days, The Law Enforcement Action Network (LEAN) plans to send this War on Police National Survey to 10,000,000 Americans. Because you believe in law and order, you have been selected to be among the first in your state to participate in this important national survey.

My name is Ron Hosko. I am the president of LEAN, a national organization dedicated to reclaiming our country’s justice system-a justice system that should empower local law enforcement instead of the criminals.

LEAN also rallies much-needed public support for America’s police who are losing their lives in record numbers thanks in part to the political and media War on Police.

For over 20 years LEAN’s sister organization, The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, has provided legal assistance to police officers unjustly prosecuted for doing their jobs. On their salaries, they simply cannot afford to hire the $500-per-hour defense attorneys to fight the trumped up charges against them.

The media is quick to cover the violent protests and riots of those who want to lynch our nation’s police officers. But they don’t give nearly as much attention to the stories of police officers like . . .

Officer John Moynihan who was shot in the face at point-blank range.

Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos who were both shot in the head execution-style while eating lunch in their squad car by a man who said he was out to avenge the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner.

Officers Benjamin Deen and Liguori Tate who were gunned down while making a routine traffic stop.

These are but a few of the policemen and women who came to a violent end in the line of duty. Since President Obama signed his executive order creating “The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing,” more than 100 police officers have perished in the line of duty.

And unless things change, and change fast, there will be many more dead police officers. Why? According to Milwaukee County’s nationally respected African American Sheriff, David Clarke, police officers are putting their lives in greater jeopardy by being forced to hesitate in life-or-death situations because they fear reprisals for doing their jobs.

While President Obama . . . liberal big city mayors like Bill DeBlasio . . . agitators like Al Sharpton . . . and a carping media can’t be accused of pulling the trigger they can be accused of contributing to the dangerous anti-police fervor that puts a target on every policeman and woman’s back.

Despite what they would have you believe, the vast majority of police officers are not racist goons out to get people of color. The facts tell a totally different story.

For example, the chances of a black person being shot by a white police officer are about .0000023%. And those who are shot are almost always violent, armed criminals who threaten police officers or citizens with serious harm or death.

As a former FBI agent who has worked alongside local law enforcement officers, I can personally attest that police are not trigger-happy racists. And I can also attest to the fact that most members of minority communities feel the same way.

So when race-baiters like Al Sharpton, who have made their fortunes by exploiting unfortunate incidents such as the death of Michael Brown, vilify the police, they do not speak for the entire black community. With black-on-black violent crime on the rise, law-abiding minorities rely on the police to keep their families safe. Many neighborhoods are begging for more police patrols, not fewer!

I can’t help but believe the liberal politicians in Washington have an ulterior motive for demonizing local police and sheriff’s deputies. Under the guise of solving a problem their inflammatory rhetoric has created, they want to take over state and local law enforcement.

It has become crystal clear President Obama craves more power. He has consistently abused his office and issued executive orders to circumvent Congress, to end-run the will of the people, and turn his liberal agenda into law! From attempting to grant illegal immigrants amnesty to killing America’s energy industry, President Obama has used his pen as a sword to take power away from the people and consolidate it in the White House.

Now he has set his sights on local law enforcement.

When campaigning for president, Barack Obama advocated a national “civilian police to match the size and power of our armed forces.” He also suggested expanding the U. S. Marshal’s service into a “stability police.” These aspirations can mean nothing less than yet another effort to nationalize local police departments and to grow an out of control federal government even bigger.

What would a nationalized police force mean to local law enforcement? According to syndicated radio commentator and constitutional scholar, Mark Levin, “Every miscreant and malcontent would suddenly have his say over how our police officers are supposed to conduct themselves.”

I, for one, do not want to see this happen. Law enforcement in your community should be accountable to the people who live there, not a bunch of Washington bureaucrats who think they know better.

But unless we act decisively, your local police and sheriff’s departments could be saddled with excessive procedural regulations that will put patrolmen and women in greater danger and make your streets far less safe.

For example, President Obama would like to take away one of the greatest tools local police have to prevent violent crime. It’s called stop-and-frisk. It grants local police and sheriffs the ability to stop and frisk suspicious persons who may be armed and intent on doing harm.

Police officers feel this proven technique helps prevent violent confrontations that often result in the wounding, or death of law enforcement personnel and private citizens. Yet the Obama administration is critical of stop-and-frisk procedures because it contends they are implemented based on racial biases.

It is a crying shame President Obama would choose to play the race card rather than prevent violent crime. But it is what it is. That’s why the President . . . Attorney General Loretta Lynch . . . Congress . . . federal judges . . . Presidential candidates . . . and all the major news outlets need to hear from you.

Sincerely,

Ron Hosko, Law Enforcement Action Network
Former Assistant Director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division

Implicit in Trump’s appeal is his racism, we know that. He gave that away a long time ago when he took out a full page ad condemning the (innocent) Central Park Five to death row and saying “your civil liberties end where our safety begins.”

He has not changed. His angry white base agrees with him. It’s going to become a much more explicit part of his campaign. This has already been bubbling up and he’s poised to take advantage of it.

I don’t know if this will be a big deal or not, but it’s something to keep an eye on. If Trump finds out about it, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him show up:

Why Trump is so happy for John Kasich

by digby

Trump ran the table last night, except for one state: Ohio. And he couldn’t be happier he lost that one. At least he shouldn’t be because it is the path to winning the whole enchilada. That seems counter-intuitive but the weird delegate math of the GOP explains it.

Here’s Nate Cohn from the New York Times:

Mr. Trump’s large vote share in Florida was a pattern throughout the night. He got at least 39 percent of the vote in every contest except Ohio, where he faced its strong governor, John Kasich. The higher share of the vote for Mr. Trump is important because it’s the sort of tally that would easily allow him to win a three-way race.

Mr. Trump’s loss in Ohio may have cost him a lot of delegates, but it may nonetheless help him from this point onward by assuring a true three-way race. Mr. Kasich will almost certainly stay in the race, which will help split the anti-Trump vote, especially in the blue states that predominate in the second half of the primary season.

The results in Illinois — and Michigan last week — hint at how Ted Cruz’s blue-state weakness and Mr. Kasich’s strength might help Mr. Trump amass a majority of delegates.

Mr. Trump won Michigan and Illinois by wide margins, with less than 40 percent of the vote, since Mr. Kasich and Mr. Cruz neatly split the preponderance of the non-Trump voters.

Donald Trump at an election-night news conference in Palm Beach, Fla. He won Florida in a rout.
Under the delegate allocation systems that will become increasingly common over the second half of the primary season, Mr. Trump would win lopsided delegate tallies if he prevailed by anything like the margins he carried in Illinois and Michigan. Mr. Trump could easily collect nearly all of the delegates in Illinois.

The results in Illinois and Michigan are so telling because they wound up being bigger victories for Mr. Trump than many of the other races since Super Tuesday.

He won an even larger share of the vote in places like North Carolina, Missouri, Louisiana and Mississippi, but found himself in some closer races. There, Mr. Cruz ran far stronger and Mr. Kasich ran far weaker.

The problem for Mr. Cruz — and the good news for Mr. Trump — is that there are far fewer states like North Carolina and Missouri from this point on. The contest now turns to the blue states, where Mr. Kasich and Mr. Cruz will more equitably split the vote. Mr. Trump is often fairly strong there himself — as the results in Massachusetts suggest.

The combination of Mr. Trump’s blue-state strength, of the more evenly divided opposition in the North and of delegate rules that increasingly favor winners makes it easy to imagine how Mr. Trump could amass an outright majority of delegates.

The path is fairly straightforward. By my rough estimate, Mr. Trump ended Tuesday night needing around 600 delegates to win the nomination. He could get 350 of them from states where he’s clearly favored: Indiana, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, West Virginia, Delaware, Rhode Island, New York and New Jersey. Mr. Trump will undoubtedly earn more delegates from a variety of states that award their delegates proportionally, like Washington or New Mexico.

Whether Mr. Trump can win the rest comes down to states where Mr. Trump might be weaker, but where a divided field might let him emerge nonetheless as the winner. At the top of the list is California, a state where there are plenty of reasons to think that Mr. Trump might struggle, but where both Mr. Kasich and Mr. Cruz can count on considerable support.

Who knows whether a divided field will allow Mr. Trump to win California and its 172 delegates, or the other states where he might be relatively vulnerable — Arizona, Maryland, Wisconsin, Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska? A strong showing in these states, especially in the winner-take-all contests, could let him clear the 1,237-delegate threshold.

It’s a tangled web but that’s exactly what works for him.

Cruz’s poor showing convinces me that he’s not going to be able to compete in any serious way going forward to the big states and the west, even if the rest of the establishment holds their noses and throws 50 million dollars into it.  His best states are behind him. Kasich is … Kasich. So it looks like it’s going to be Trump.

Fasten your seatbelts.

.

Hillary Clinton: beyond word
by Tom Sullivan

Speeches by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Ohio’s Governor John Kasich came back to back last night during election night coverage. I was listening on the car radio between local watch parties, so I didn’t see the visuals. Putting aside their histories, parties and policies, what struck me hearing the audio only was the gut feel of the two speeches.

Clinton has improved as a candidate since 2008 and over the course of this campaign. She has adopted some of Bernie Sanders’ populist themes. She also knows she does not have her husband’s skill at delivering speeches and stirring crowds. And yet she still structured last night’s victory speech point-point-point. Here is an excerpt:

And so our next president needs to be ready to face three big tasks. First can you make positive differences in people’s lives? Second, can you keep us safe? Third, can you bring our country together again?

Now making differences in people’s lives comes first because Americans everywhere are hungry for solutions. They want to break down the barriers holding them back. So we can all rise together. Ask any parent, you’ll hear nothing is more important than making sure their kids have a good school and a good teacher, no matter what zip code they live in. They deserve a president who understands that when we invest in our children’s education, we’re investing in all of our futures.

And young people across America struggling under the weight of student debt find it difficult to imagine the futures they want. And they deserve a president who will help relieve them of that burden and help future generations go to college without borrowing a dime for tuition.

And grandparents who worry about retirement deserve a president who will protect and then expand social security for those who need it most, not cut or privatize it.

Families deserve a president who will fight for the things that are our priorities at home but too often aren’t priorities in Washington: affordable child care, paid family leave, and, something we have waited for long enough, equal pay for equal work for women.

And above all, above all, hard working Americans across our country deserve a president with both the ideas and the know how to create good jobs with rising incomes right here in our country. And I am absolutely convinced that we have the tools to do that.

Clinton went on to take swipes at Donald Trump without naming him. America needs a commander-in-chief who will “defend our country, not embarrass it.” She referenced some average American’s she had met along the campaign trail and spoke of their struggles, etc., etc. It was solid, but formulaic. I agreed with her. The problem was I didn’t believe her.

Kasich has not received much time on the debate stages dominated by Donald Trump and the other GOP front runners. Last night was perhaps the most we have heard from him in one dose during the entire campaign.
Here is an excerpt:

You know, when I became governor of Ohio, I went to New York, and I met with some of the rating agencies. Things were bad. We had lost 350,000 jobs: we were $8 billion in the hole, and our credit was hanging in the balance. And they told me: we’re about to cut up your credit card and give me a new one where you can’t buy as much.

I said, “You don’t understand Ohio; you don’t understand Ohioans.” So I can’t wait to go back again. We’re now up 400,000-plus jobs. We’re running a $2 billion surplus. Our pensions are secure. We have cut taxes by more than any governor in this country, and we are leaving no one behind. Not the mentally ill, the drug addicted, or the working poor.

And I don’t know whether you can actually serve a meal of words, but I would like to go back to those credit rating agencies where they can learn to eat their words about doubting Ohio, huh? And you know, ladies and gentlemen, you know, look, my whole life has been about trying to create a climate of opportunity for people.

You know, as my father carried that mail on his back — and his father was a coal miner, and I just was told by my cousin, I can’t realize this, that my mother, one of four, was the only one to graduate from high school. The other three barely made it out of the eighth grade because they were poor. As I have traveled the country and I look into your eyes: you want to believe, you want to believe again that we can have job security, you want to believe again that wages can rise, you want to believe that your children are going to have ultimately a better America than we got from your mothers and fathers. That’s the great American legacy: that our kids will be better than we are.

And I want people in Ohio to know, as I think you do … I want people around the country to know that I understand these tough issues. I grew up in these situations in that little blue collar town in McKees Rocks — and in my mind’s eye is the need to forget the politics, forget the pollsters, forget all the focus groups. Because, you see, I represent you, and it’s my job to look at these situations and these problems and to listen to you, and that it’s my job to go and fix them.

And if that means at times I have to take some heat, then that’s just the price of leadership in America. Okay? Now I want you to know: the campaign goes on. And I also want you to know that it’s been my intention to make you proud.

In contrast to Clinton’s boilerplate and Donald Trump’s egoist bombast, Kasich was aspirational. Folksy. He spoke of Americans being “all part of a giant mosaic, a snapshot in time.” He seemed touched by the faith Ohio had placed in him, finishing with “This is all I got, okay?” This is who I am and I’m giving it to you. However one might dissect his actions as governor of Ohio, his stances as a Republican, or his chances going forward, the contrast with Clinton was marked. Kasich seemed authentic and sincere. I believed him.

Hillary Clinton? Not so much. It was not lost on me that had Sen. Elizabeth Warren given the very same speech as Clinton, I would have believed her. There’s passion in her. When Bernie Sanders speaks, you believe him even when you don’t agree with him. You cannot focus-group that. You cannot bottle it. After last night’s victories, Clinton is firmly in control of the race for the Democratic nomination. But Hillary Clinton doesn’t seem ever to have cracked the code for moving an audience, and it has not rubbed off from Bill. Going into the fall, she is going to need it. Maybe the NSA can help?

Obama’s toast

by digby

Trump makes you appreciate what you have:

Right about the time – almost to the day – that Obama bottoms out and starts to regain his footing, Donald Trump pulls away from his rivals. He led retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson by a bit more than three points on November 21 and by nearly eight percentage points the next day. Since then Trump has completely dominated the GOP field and Obama’s steadily climbed in the public estimation.

Look, I get that public polling is not nearly so precise as to be able to treat these figures as to-the-day-and-decimal reflections of public attitudes, and certainly correlation does not prove causation; but the coincidence of the two trends is striking. And it intuitively makes sense that as more people started to focus on the primary season and it became clearer that dopey Donald Trump – the vulgar, bullying, xenophobe who more than 3 in 5 Americans currently view unfavorably – truly was the front-runner for the GOP, “No Drama Obama” would suddenly look very appealing.

Gallup’s Andrew Dugan and Frank Newport, noting last week that Obama had hit a three-year high in that organization’s survey, observed that Obama’s recent gains (in their poll) have come among Democrats. (Republican and independent approval ratings are at their averages while Democrats are above.) “The unusual status of the Republican primary race – exemplified in particular by front-runner Donald Trump’s campaign style and rhetoric – may serve to make Obama look statesmanlike in comparison,” they write. “The campaign season also may activate latent partisan loyalty among those broadly in the Democratic camp.” So yeah, Democrats horrified by the rise of the anti-Obama remembered why they fell in love with the real deal. (Bonus tidbit: Per Gallup, Obama’s approval rating at this point in his term is right around where the sainted Ronald Reagan was at the same time in his.)

And, by the way, President Obama said this today at the annual congressional St Patrick’s day celebration:

I hope that you’ll forgive me — indulge me for one second as I comment on our domestic politics, just for a moment.

In my State of the Union address, I remarked that many of you have told me you’d like to see more cooperation and a more elevated debate in Washington, but everyone sometimes feels trapped by their politics. I understand that feeling. I served with many of you in Congress. And so I know that I’m not the only one in this room who may be more than a little dismayed about what’s happening on the campaign trail lately. We have heard vulgar and divisive rhetoric aimed at women and minorities — at Americans who don’t look like “us,” or pray like “us,” or vote like we do. We’ve seen misguided attempts to shut down that speech, however offensive it may be. We live in a country where free speech is one of the most important rights that we hold.

In response to those attempts, we’ve seen actual violence, and we’ve heard silence from too many of our leaders. Speaker Ryan, I appreciated the words on this topic that you shared with us this morning. But too often we’ve accepted this as somehow the new normal.

And it’s worth asking ourselves what each of us may have done to contribute to this kind of vicious atmosphere in our politics. I suspect that all of us can recall some intemperate words that we regret. Certainly, I can. And while some may be more to blame than others for the current climate, all of us are responsible for reversing it. For it is a cycle that is not an accurate reflection of America. And it has to stop. And I say that not because it’s a matter of “political correctness,” it’s about the way that corrosive behavior can undermine our democracy, and our society, and even our economy.

In America, there aren’t laws that say that we have to be nice to each other, or courteous, or treat each other with respect. But there are norms. There are customs. There are values that our parents taught us and that we try to teach to our children — to try to treat others the way we want to be treated; the notion that kindness breeds kindness. The longer that we allow the political rhetoric of late to continue, and the longer that we tacitly accept it, we create a permission structure that allows the animosity in one corner of our politics to infect our broader society. And animosity breeds animosity.

And this is also about the American brand. Who are we? How are we perceived around the world? There’s a reason that America has always attracted the greatest talent from every corner of the globe. There’s a reason that “Made in America” means something. It’s because we’re creative, and dynamic, and diverse, and inclusive, and open. Why would we want to see that brand tarnished? The world pays attention to what we say and what we do.

And this is also about what we are teaching our children. We should not have to explain to them this darker side of politics. We should not be afraid to take them to a political rally or let them watch political debates. We should be teaching them that this democracy is a vibrant and precious thing. And it’s going to be theirs someday. And we want them to elevate it.

I had the cast of “Hamilton” at the White House yesterday, who are doing an incredible job getting our young people excited about the possibilities of democracy and the power they have to play a part in it. And these young people drawn from every race and every background from all across the city, you could just see the excitement that they had, the notion that they were somehow connected to the story of a Hamilton, or a Washington, or a Franklin, or a Madison. And so we should be asking ourselves — as those in power with this incredible legacy — whether we are delivering that same message to our children. Are we making them excited about being citizens of this great country?

So when we leave this lunch, I think we have a choice. We can condone this race to the bottom, or accept it as the way things are and sink further. Or we can roundly reject this kind of behavior, whether we see it in the other party, or more importantly, when we see it in our own party, and set a better example for our children and the rest of the country to follow. It starts with us.

Speaker Ryan, you and I don’t agree on a lot of policy. But I know you are a great father and a great husband, and I know you want what’s best for America. And we may fiercely disagree on policy — and the NFC North — (laughter) — but I don’t have a bad word to say about you as a man. And I would never insult my fellow Irish like that.

The point is, we can have political debates without turning on one another. We can disagree without assuming that it’s motivated by malice. There are those here who have fought long and hard to create peace in Northern Ireland and understand what happens when we start going into these dark places, the damage that can be done, and how long it can take to unwind.

So we can treat one another as patriots even if we disagree, as fellow Americans who love this country equally, because it’s a place that frees us to have different ideas and different points of view.

So I reject any effort to spread fear, or encourage violence, or to shut people down when they’re trying to speak, or turn Americans against one another. And I think as a citizen who will still be leading this office, I will not support somebody who practices that kind of politics. And any leader worthy of our support will remind us that even in a country as big and diverse and as inclusive as ours, what we have in common is far bigger and more important than any of our differences.

That’s what carried us through other times that were far more tough and far more dangerous than the one that we’re in today -– times where we were told to fear the future; times where we were told to turn inward and to turn against each other. And each time, we overcame those fears. Each time, we faced the future with confidence in who we are and what we stand for, and the incredible things that we’re capable of together.

And we do this because we are America. It’s a place that sees opportunity where others see peril, and that drew so many Irish and other immigrants to our shores. Our unbending belief that we make our own destiny and our unshakable dream that if we work hard and live up to our responsibilities, and if we look out for one another, then there is a better day lying right around the bend.

That dream has always come true in America. It is what provided hope and comfort and opportunity for so many that traveled across the Atlantic. It always will — so long as we nurture it.

Happy St. Patrick’s Day, everybody. Let me make a toast.

I have a couple of acquaintances who growl angrily every time they see him come on TV because they loathe him for allegedly “apologizing for America.”

They are voting for Trump, of course.

.

The highly educated Trump supporter

by digby

All you magic people, rally ’round the magic man …

Do these people know that Hitler’s measures after the Reichstag Fire —  measures suspending political and civil liberties for the ‘protection of the people and state’ — were all supposed to be temporary? That they…. uhm, weren’t?  I’d guess not because they’d know how obscenely idiotic they sound when they scream “temporarily” whenever anyone says that Trump wants to ban Muslims.

Recall that Trump went there after the rather, shall we say, localized San Bernardino attack. Imagine what he will do if something more organized than a workplace shooting happens on his watch?

One more observation: Samantha pointed out their “inconsistency” on guilt by association with the white supremacists vs Muslims and they didn’t even blink. These people aren’t the Trump “poorly educated.” This is a function of conservatism.

Update: Here’s one of Trump’s poorly educated

Actually, he has been educated. By right wing media. He is a prize student.

.

They dogwhistle back

by digby

Trump says what they are thinking. But they’ve been trained in how to talk about it for years:

#VoterVoices: Ohio Republican Lori Huffman likes @realDonaldTrump because he’ll “back this country.” 📹@awhcolumbus pic.twitter.com/fQeSA1ygtb

— AP Eastern U.S. (@APEastRegion) March 15, 2016

Nationalism, xenophobia, racism. Also, the political system is corrupt and putting money into the “wrong” pockets. (I won’t speculate who the wrong people are.)  And we need a white man back in charge.

.

Where did they get these ideas: Part XXV

by digby

Dana Milbank went to the front of the crowd at a Trump rally instead of staying in the media pen. These are his impressions:

Trump mentioned one of his opponents, Florida’s Marco Rubio. This produced a chorus of boos and insults: “He sucks!” “Deport him!” “Send him back!”

He mentioned another opponent, Ted Cruz. The crowd answered with a chant of “Lyin’ Ted!” and cries of “Liar!” and “He’s full of s—!”

Trump mentioned Hillary Clinton. Audience members shouted: “F— Hillary!” “Put her in jail!” “Waterboard Hillary!”

He bemoaned the trade imbalance with China. One man rolled up his “Silent Majority Stands With Trump” sign and bellowed through it: “F— China!” The crowd chanted: “Build the wall! Build the wall!”

To get a better sense of the Trump crowds, I watched Sunday night’s rally here not from the penned-in press section but up front, in the crush of the crowd. I entered with the public and stood silently for four hours, near the woman whose cap said “Infidel” in English and Arabic, running my digital recorder.

A couple of dozen people protested before and after the event, and a few people were removed during Trump’s speech because of shoving.

But it was relatively tame for a Trump rally, in part because Trump supporters fingered suspected infiltrators in the crowd and had them removed by private security guards before Trump spoke. In one of several such incidents I witnessed, Trump supporters signaled for security after a young man in a baseball cap who identified himself as “John” got into a political argument with some Trump fans. “Get him out!” one shouted.

“I didn’t say anything!” John pleaded as guards, taking the word of his accusers, led him away.

An announcement before events advises participants not to harm those who “have taken advantage of Mr. Trump’s hospitality.” But Trump has sent a different message, declaring Sunday that he might pay the legal fees of a man who sucker-punched a demonstrator and said his victim might need to be killed next time.

The crowd Sunday evening apparently purged suspected “disrupters” too thoroughly. “Do we have a protester anywhere?” Trump asked. Trump and his advisers seem to delight in the confrontations, which fuel the crowd’s energy. Before Trump arrived, Trump aide Stephen Miller had just begun speaking when a woman near the front fainted. “Medic! Medic!” people shouted, waving signs and pointing. Miller, suspecting a protest, righteously condemned the “kind of person” who would “sow chaos and disorder.”

Those around me were almost all white and mostly men. Their T-shirts and caps said they were gun owners, veterans, Marines and Harley riders. I heard nothing racist or angry or paranoid in their conversations. But once Trump arrived, they became ominously transfixed and aggressive. They pumped their fists, flashed thumbs up, mouthed “Thank you,” chanted “Trump! Trump! Trump!” and hung on the candidate’s every word — often with looks of ecstasy and some visibly trembling.

Trump captivated them with words that were alternately desperate and violent: “Our country is going to hell. . . . We’re sitting on a very big, fat, ugly, bubble. . . . We’re like the lap dog for the world. . . . Drugs are pouring across. . . . They’re chopping off heads. . . . You see so many people being killed. . . . The jobs are being sucked out. . . . We’re losing with everybody.”

Before Trump spoke, a woman warmed up the crowd by reading tearfully from the autopsy report of her son, killed by an illegal immigrant (“slipknot around his neck”). “The media is in an uproar about the tone of Mr. Trump’s campaign,” she said, but not that “we’re burying our children every day at the hands of illegal aliens.” She accused Rubio of spending “blood money” and asked the senator which of his children he “would give up for a foreigner to have a nicer life.”

But happily for Trump’s supporters, deliverance was at hand. The orchestral theme from the movie “Air Force One” played, and a helicopter flew low above the Trump fans, who raised signs and fists heavenward.

Trump stepped out moments later to offer salvation. Twice he said that in a Trump presidency they could “relax” while he defeated the Islamic State and beat the world in trade. “We’re gonna become rich again,” he promised. “We’re gonna become great again.”

I don’t know if this is a representative rally. But it probably is.

Molly Ball at the Atlantic offered this analysis:

After a young black protester was dragged out of one of his rallies last week—getting sucker-punched by a 78-year-old white man on his way out—Donald Trump looked out at the jeering, seething, booing crowd in front of him. “Nasty, nasty!” he said. A plaintive look came over Trump’s face.

“Why are they allowed to do things that we’re not allowed to do, can you explain that to me?” he said fretfully, pointing his right index finger upward and jouncing his hand up and down. “Really a disgrace.”

It was a potent summary of the identity politics that seem to form a significant part of Trump’s appeal: the idea that they, the others, enjoy privileges, resources, and status to which we are denied access. It is a sentiment I have repeatedly heard from the dozens of Trump supporters I have met over the past eight months I have spent covering his campaign. More complicated than the overt bigotry of, say, the Ku Klux Klan, it is a form of racial resentment based on historic white entitlement and a backlash to the upsurge in leftist identity politics that has marked American politics in the age of Obama.

I was with Trump in Alabama and Georgia last month, in the days after he caused an uproar by briefly declining to disavow the support offered to him by David Duke. When I asked his fans about it, they repeatedly brought up the Black Lives Matter movement, asserting that politicians should be pressed to denounce all race-based agitators, not just those representing white people. Why are they allowed to do things that we’re not allowed to do?

“Democrats won’t renounce hate groups like Black Lives Matter, which are just as extreme on the other side as the Klan,” Randy Lawson, a 48-year-old business owner in Moulton, Alabama, told me.

READ FOLLOW-UP NOTES
How Much Are Far-Left Activists Fueling Trump?
“The Black Panthers stood outside voting booths and turned people away and the administration didn’t prosecute them,” said Clayton Burns, who owns a timber company in Tifton, Georgia. “For Barack Obama to side with the Black Panthers would be like my president siding with the KKK. The outspoken racial groups, the media doesn’t ask Hillary or Bernie to disavow them.”

“It used to be majority rules, but now just one or two people get to decide for everyone,” said Jan Brice, a 62-year-old who works at a retirement community in rural Georgia. “We should be respectful of everybody, but look at what’s happening with the Oscars, with the [minority-representation rules for] government contractors—it’s reverse discrimination. People shouldn’t be hired because of that when they’re not qualified.”

Trump’s supporters have told me that minorities commit crimes with impunity, that illegal immigrants get benefits at higher rates than Americans, that gays and Muslims are afforded special status by the government. They lament that Confederate symbols, and the people whose heritage they represent, are sidelined while diversity is celebrated. They don’t understand why Democrats can campaign on overt appeals to the interests of blacks and women and Latinos, but Republicans are deemed offensive if they offer to represent the interests of whites and men. They hear, incessantly, on talk radio and the Internet, that they are under attack by the emboldened legions of minorities who, in the age of Obama, seek white domination and reparations and race war.

The right wing media have fomented this nonsense for years. Trump is the result.

Recall Megyn Kelly’s crusade against the “New Black Panthers”

The last week or so of her work — her one woman crusade against the New Black Panther Party — has been truly riveting television. Kelly widens her eyes in a way that bespeaks both horror and anger at the subject she’s reporting on. “Shocking new video,” she’ll say, introducing a clip of the Panthers acting like idiots and yelling about “crackers” at a Philadelphia street festival. “We have a DOJ whistleblower alleging there is a discriminatory policy at the DOJ voting rights section,” she’ll say, “and no one seems to give a darn.” It’s the “darn” that ties this together — she’s not just a journalist, she’s a concerned citizen who has to bring you this story before it’s. Too. Late.

The people who grab these videos for the web use the same cliches to title them. “Megyn Kelly DESTROYS Kirsten Powers on New Black Panther Case” says one of them; “Megyn Kelly schools lib pundit over New Black Panthers Party.” But why is she doing so many stories on the Panthers? It’s because Fox News uses the Panthers the way that Phil Donohue used to use the KKK or G.G. Allin. They’re good on TV. The difference between the Panthers and other freakish groups that look good on the air, of course, is that that they threaten white people.

How often does Fox bring on the Panthers, or talk about them? A Lexis-Nexis search finds 68 mentions of “Malik Zulu Shabazz,” a leader of the NBPP. The majority are appearances on Fox News, where Shabazz is repeatedly brought on to act as a foolish, anti-Semitic punching bag. Among the segment titles: “Professor’s Comments on Whites Stir Controversy” and “Black Panthers Take a Stand on Duke Rape Case.”

Laura Ingraham:

On her Tuesday radio show, Ingraham said that a Fox News analyst who was touched because immigrant children wept when they were provided food needed to put his emotions aside.

“I would say that his big heart is messing a little bit with his head,” she argued. “We have something that is going on here that is profound, and our sovereignty, our rule of law, our financial resources, our military bases.”

She pointed out that some of those children had complained about burritos and eggs at the detention center making them sick.

“So, they’re complaining about the food,” Ingraham noted. “I bet there are a lot of American kids who would like free food before they go to bed at night.”

“They’re already complaining,” she added, followed by a sound bite from a 1990-era Taco Bell commercial that prompted calls for a boycott from the Latino community.

Day and day out they’ve been fed this malignant bigotry by very wealthy celebrities who’ve been counting their profits and laughing all the way to the bank. Why wouldn’t they listen to a malignant celebrity who promises to do something about it?

And by the way: while all this was going on, the mainstream media pretended there was nothing unusual about any of it. Indeed, they often portrayed this stuff as an illustration of noble Real America and fatuously declared that “both sides do it.” There’s plenty of blame to go around.

.