Cleveland, Day Two
We are now halfway through the Republican National Convention, and I still have yet to hear a single policy proposal or thing that the Republicans or Donald Trump are for. Well, maybe that's a slight exaggeration, but not by much.
We are now halfway through the Republican National Convention, and I still have yet to hear a single policy proposal or thing that the Republicans or Donald Trump are for. Well, maybe that's a slight exaggeration, but not by much.
I'm writing this while watching all of Day One of the Republican National Convention. I apologize in advance for the rather stream-of-consciousness nature of the post, but I also caution that you should get used to it, because we are in for two weeks of convention-palooza.
We begin today with a warning. Our regularly-scheduled Friday Talking Points are going on hiatus for at least three weeks. Next Friday, we'll be heading to the Democratic National Convention, and the Friday after that we'll be heading back home. For both today and next Friday we're taking a look back (through the lens of our talking points) at the entire 2016 presidential campaign season so far. We have no idea what we're going to do the Friday after that (indeed, we can't even promise that there'll be a column at all on July 29th, at this point). Regular FTP columns will resume the first Friday in August, just in time for the traditional "Silly Season" of American politics.
In 1781, Benjamin Franklin wrote a satirical letter, purporting to be a proposal for a subject for European scientists to study. Franklin, an amateur scientist himself, was making a snide point about what he considered to be rather frivolous research by the Europeans. The equivalent today would be those American politicians who routinely point out some of the more far-fetched research the federal government now funds. This tongue-in-cheek document is now known by the title "Fart Proudly," although Franklin didn't actually use that phrase in his satirical essay.
Hillary Clinton got her long-awaited endorsement from Bernie Sanders today, in an event designed to unify the Democratic Party base heading into their national convention. Although there are still plenty of "Bernie or Bust" die-hards out there, Democrats had already largely unified behind Clinton, even before Sanders officially endorsed her today. Perhaps this all would have played out differently in a different election year, but Donald Trump is proving to be a powerful unifying force among Democrats -- because his elevation to president is seen as being downright unthinkable by both Bernie and Hillary supporters. Getting behind Hillary may be problematic for some Bernie supporters, but considering the alternative is a big motivating factor for most.
We're going to open this week's column by quoting a Southern rock band from a while back. We have to admit that we never thought we'd ever quote this band, because Molly Hatchet wasn't generally known for deep and insightful lyrics (indeed, they were mostly known for the bandleader's propensity for whistling during their songs). But after their big blockbuster album, the band put out a followup which had one song on it with both a haunting melody and the saddest of lyrics, written after John Lennon's death. Today, they seemed the most appropriate response to all the carnage we've seen this week. So, from "Fall Of The Peacemakers," here are the thoughts of Molly Hatchet:
Paul Ryan reluctantly took the job of leading the House of Representatives because he had a dream he thought he could actually achieve. Ryan's dream went something like this: he'd whip his Republican caucus into shape, then they'd fall in behind him and help pass his dream GOP agenda as a series of bills -- all of which would be sent to the Senate. Of course they'd never reach President Obama's desk (for an almost-certain veto), but that wasn't the point. The point was to show the American electorate that Republicans had many good legislative ideas that could become reality with the election of a Republican to the White House. The entire exercise was to be Ryan's own personal party platform, in other words, designed to help Republican candidates win in the election. It would be the fulfillment of the promise Ryan represented to many Republicans when they convinced him to take the job -- that he was a wonky kind of guy who understood the ins and outs of the budget better than any other Republican in Washington.
President Obama's job approval among the public hit a big milestone last month, as he wound up with a monthly average of exactly 50 percent. Half the public approves of the job he's doing, to put this another way. This was a rather dramatic improvement over Obama's rather flat May numbers. Let's take a look at the new chart, where his improvement is pretty easy to see.
We have to admit, we don't know where we heard that subtitle, and we certainly can't claim original credit for it. We think we read it in a comment to a Washington Post article, but we're not certain. In any case, as the stream of Republicans fleeing the Donald Trump candidacy becomes a flood, it does seem the appropriate metaphor to use -- the ships are leaving the sinking rat this time, not the other way 'round. We'll get to all of these amusing developments in the talking points this week, because we're devoting the entire section to the "Dump Trump" theme this week.
Either Elizabeth Warren just made Hillary Clinton's vice-presidential choice a lot harder or a lot easier, depending on how you see her strategic decision-making process and how much chance you think a Clinton/Warren ticket has of becoming reality. Warren appeared onstage with Clinton today and the Massachusetts senator wowed the Ohio crowd, proving without a shadow of a doubt she is unquestionably the best "attack dog" the Democrats have against Donald Trump. But is this enough for Clinton to select Warren as running mate? Or, perhaps is it too much? In other words, is there a danger that Warren could actually upstage the presidential candidate? And even if Hillary knows Warren is the best anti-Trump weapon around, will Clinton's choice ultimately hinge on this criterion or not?