No, It Wasn't A Blue Tsunami - But A Genuine Blue WAVE ("Pussy grabber payback") - Update

Dems celebrate with yet another big House win on Tuesday night.

The Reepster codger clique at the local BK this morning could barely contain themselves as they spat out invective at the midterm election results.  They babbled such predictable effluent as the following in one exchange.

"Yeah, just imagine, them damn Dems put a gay guy in as governor!"

"What'cha expect? It was the cemetery vote, and that's why them Demo-crats got the House too! I kept seein' all that blue on the tube, state after state."

"Heck, that's all them minorities  and migrants votin' who want free stuff. They like socialism and the Dems promised 'em lotta benefits."

Of course, that's why the Reepturds will soon be going the way of the dinos and Whigs. It's a cult party populated by  too many ossified oldsters, incapable of rational thought, and also doting Trumpster cultists who worship at the altar of the Dotard Joker: 


As gratifying as it was to hear these old farts piss, whine and moan - even if the basis was moronic- things did not initially look good on the home front last night. At around 6:30 James Carville appeared on MSNBC's 'Your Vote' and began pontificating that he "didn't really see a blue wave coming". This was soon after results showed the FLA governor's race likely going to Trump toady Rick DeSantis and Bill Nelson possibly losing to Rick Scott.  At that point Janice burst into tears, and I had to do some major psychological damage control by telling her Carville's definition of a blue wave was too excessive - likely 50 or 60 net seats gained.

As another commentator (Chris Matthews) appeared, he confirmed my take that Carville defined a "blue wave' too extravagantly."  In Matthews' opinion a 30 seat win in the House qualified as a wave and I agreed. It now looks like that's exactly what transpired with the Ds at 230 seats - or 22 more than needed to take the House back. Indeed, there were major House flips - from red to blue- in hard red Texas as well as Oklahoma. As I told Janice, "That should cheer you up!"  To which she replied, "Yeah, but Beto still lost to that damned Cruz."

I turned in by 11:30 MT  but Janice stayed up hoping to see if John Tester would win in Montana, but that contest still seems too close to call. Even if Tester loses, I will tell Janice that it's more or less offset by Jacky Rosen's win in Nevada over Dean Heller.  (Update: Tester ultimately won by a very narrow margin, reported the next morning. Needless to say, it almost made J's day - until the news of the Dotard appt. of Whitaker came on and she burst into tears once more- see next post.)

But MSNBC political commentators Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace put it best: "This is like an earthquake because the Democrats now control the House and can mount investigations" (Even though idiot Dotard barked this a.m. if the Dems do he will "mount investigations of them".  LOL!)

Also, Schmidt made no bones about the fact it marked a repudiation of Trumpism, at least from the nation's suburbs and cities - from which most House districts derive their political support. The rural areas? They predictably went for Trump Reeps, and that led to expanding the GOP margin in the Senate.   Never mind! Taking back the House, even in spite of gerrymandering and voter suppression was huge  - and it took at least a generic blue wave to do it!

The takeaway from all this is that enough American voters  (mainly women) brought a semblance of  sanity back to the nation, realizing that a one party state doesn't redound to any citizen's benefit.  Look, the GOP while it had all branches of gov't didn't do diddly or squat to control or check Trump's excesses, they merely enabled him. This required intervention by the adults in the room and arrived when the Democrats recaptured the House of Representatives.  At last now we are done with the enabling traitor goon  Devin Nunes, e.g.

Who as head of the House Intel Committee had been in charge of a third column effort to make the special prosecutor the target of his own bastardized, specious House probe, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/03/house-intel-committee-case-closed-no.html

Now the jig is up for Trump as the Democrats sweep into Washington in January with significant new power to shape the national agenda and especially to mount  REAL investigations for the first time that could change the nature of the Trump presidency. Make no mistake as one female firned of wifey's put it, "This is pussy grabber payback, for that Access Hollywood tape!") Indeed and now women are on track to take over 100 seats in the House.

At the top of the list of  House initiatives will be efforts will be getting Trump's tax records.  After that, the House Intelligence Committee will likely  reopen its investigation of Trump to do the job that Nunes and his traitor collaborators refused to do.

As Adam Schiff  had to say concerning the then GOP mock investigation:

"By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its action harshly."

Now Schiff gets to shine a spotlight on  Trump as well as GOP House chicanery in enabling him, which every red blooded American ought to cheer. Yeah, Dotard the past few weeks has displayed a bunker mentality, sensing attack from all sides – Democrats, TV talking heads, distant caravans, hidden conspirators, the media. BUT...now he is about to face an opposition with actual teeth, many of them female.

In the end, let's be clear the House vote was a much needed referendum on the disruptive and disgraceful presidency of  Trump. The Dotard himself on Monday admitted that “even though I’m not on the ballot, in a certain way I am on the ballot.” The press, he whined, considers the election “a referendum on me.”  Well, it was and he failed the test as the sane contingent of Americans restored checks and balances.  That majority comprised mainly of women voters holding their fire for two years to issue payback - and they did- with votes still being tallied.

Thw  “blue wave” didn’t reach tsunami, so never reached the Senate, but it attained massive wave level on a pace to flip almot 40 Reep House seats. . Note also this massive flip occurred despite the supposedly "great" economy: low unemployment, rising DOW etc. under the Reepo reign.  In other words, the big D- House win likely should never have occurred under a normal presidency in such economically beneficial times. As one commenter (Ezra Klein)  put it: "Republicans managed to make people angrier even despite the low unemployment of only 3.7 percent.This  is a political failure of a startling proportion."

 Apart from that,  the Dems had  to overcome monumental gerrymandering,  as well as the earlier SC decision to shelve the Voting Rights oversight, and even more recently ruling against Native Americans voting in North Dakota because they lived on reservations and lacked a street address. (At the last minute, the ACLU came to the rescue in court but it wasn't enough to pull out a win for Ms. Heitkamp). Meanwhile, Reep degenerates voted for three soon -to -be jailbirds to keep their House seats: Duncan Hunter (CA),  Chris Collins (NY), and Ken Paxton(TX) - the latter for AG.

As one Dem observer in Texas put it: "If Paxton can't follow the law, how can he enforce it?"

Good question.  But see the Trumpies don't care about laws or norms.  Look at the shenanigans of Kemp in Georgia.

The shift in the House clearly constitutes a repudiation of Trump’s reckless policies, his violation of political and ethical norms and his repeated falsehoods. It is also an unmistakable rejection of the contemptible rhetoric of fear and prejudice that he has resorted to in recent weeks to rile up his base, especially his claim that a caravan of dangerous asylum-seekers from Central America was heading north to the border to “invade” the United States.

As for Colorado, the Dems took the governorship with Jared Polis besting Walker Stapleton by nearly 5 points.  They are also set to regain a “trifecta” of elected power for the first time since 2014.
As of 9:30 p.m last night, Democrats held strong margins in all five of the critical Senate races. This would give Dems the state Senate, state House and the governorship.

It was also gratifying to see Wayne Williams lose Secretary of State to Dem  challenger Jena  Griswold.  Williams is best known for punishing the Hamilton electors in Colorado, as well as other missteps. He deserved to go down in flames.

Another biggie was Reep House Rep Mike Coffman going down to Dem newcomer Jason Crow.  As all these results from state Senate, House results poured in Democratic strategist Steve Welchert, declared:

"Those are huge numbers. This is a royal blue wave in Colorado.  Colorado is going to be a blue thumb sticking out of the country a little bit.”

Another big win:  Coloradans voted Tuesday for Amendment A,  to officially abolish slavery.  See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/10/yes-ive-just-voted-to-abolish-slavery.html

On the downside, the Amendment 73 to fund schools, education, failed to pass, as well as Proposition 112 which would have increased offsets to fracking wells by 2,500 ft.  It is  an unfortunate outcome, not only because the noise and odor adversely impact home owners located within 500' of wells (currently the limit) but also because of the attendant health issues. (The Colorado School of Public Health showed in 2012 that those living less than a half mile - 2, 680 feet- from a fracking site, were at greater risk for neurological and respiratory diseases as well as congenital birth defects.)

Well, maybe next time around - especially as more newcomers moving into our state feel the adverse effects to their well being, as well as on property values. Just two years ago the slavery prohibition item failed in Colorado, but passed this time around. So who knows?

Update:  Nov. 9: As the size of the Dem Blue Wave continues to  increase to mini-tsunami level, with Kyrsten Sinema now ahead of Trump troll Martha McSally in AZ, and Stacy Abrams staying faithful to voters in GA - to count every damned vote -  despite Kemp's and Trump's pressure to cease.  Let's be clear the Reeptards, Trumpies, and GOOPr stooges are playing their usual card - calling "Fraud!"  Do not be surprised, as these fuckers are incapable of winning fairly and squarely, without putting their grubby paws on the scale. If they can't cop seats via voter suppression, omitting absentee or provisional ballots, or machine tricks  they play the vote fraud card.   Hopefully, enough citizens, including in the Dem party  - raise a hue and an outcry against these anti-democratic, nee fascist forces.  It is bad enough that a minority government controls most branches (SC, Senate, Presidency), we can't allow it to tilt even worse.

See also:

Steven Rosenfeld

Article Tools E-mail | Print Comments (0)

2018 Elections

It Was a Blue Wave Election—And the Republicans Are Feeling the Fallout

And:

Autocrats, Incorporated: Thoughts on Election Day 2018

Why The "Hamilton Electors" Would Be Right To Reject Trump

Alexander Hamilton - after whom the Hamilton electors derive their name.

Even as Colorado's Republican Secretary of State  Wayne Williams unleashed a mad attack on "unfaithful" electors, calling them "evil" and "arrogant", there is a small but growing movement within all the electors to overturn the designation of Trump as President. As The Denver Post has noted (yesterday, p. 2A) the mission is to "persuade Republican electors in other states to vote for a third option candidate to keep Trump from receiving 270 electoral votes."  The Colo. Dem electors are even offering to shift their votes from HRC to a "consensus pick" if it means stopping Trump.

These electors call themselves moral electors, also "Hamilton electors"- after Alexander Hamilton - which I will get to in a bit.  This is not based on pique but principle: assessing  the character of the man who would be President,  not to mention his convoluted business entanglements (which violate the emoluments clause of the constitution) pose a clear and present danger to this Republic. Indeed, his military picks for key offices show how close he plans to veer in respect of undermining the Posse Comitatus Act, e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act


The "Hamilton electors" refers to a set of electors from different states, red and blue, now ready to vote against Donald Trump in the Electoral College casting of votes on December 19th. As one pointed out on Chris Hayes two nights ago, there are a number of reasons why these electors believe Trump is unqualified and needs to be prevented from any inauguration on January 20th.  But he particularly pointed out Trump's evident flouting of the Emoluments clause of the Constitution.

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution states that no American officeholder shall, “without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” The clause is not a historical quirk. Gordon Wood, an American historian, argues that America’s founding fathers were obsessed with the problem of corruption, which they believed had doomed earlier republics. Hence, they inveighed against even the appearance of being "gifted" by foreign interests, nations.

In the case of Trump, in the last few weeks we've seen move after move that Trump has retained his business interests instead of divesting them (as the Office of Ethics in Government has warned). And hence exposed the nation, his future administration and government to foreign influence.  As President these influences and "emoluments" will reach fever pitch and likely set the future stage for his potential impeachment. For example,  The Industrial and Agricultural Bank of China, whose majority stakeholder is the Chinese government, rents office space in New York City’s Trump Tower. The 35-storey Trump Office Buenos Aires development is awaiting approval from that city’s government.

TIME - which  designated Trump "Person of the Year" -  did the same for Adolf Hitler in its Jan. 2, 1939 issue (the choice is based on the person most impacting the world for good or ill), e.g.



Also exposed (in its Dec. 12, 2016 issue, p. 18) , that Trump in May (and with little fanfare)  invested in a potential hotel in Jedda, Saudi Arabia with the "help of the Saudi Binladen Group". That is the construction firm founded by the father of Osama bin Laden. Make of it what you will.

Then there is the newly announced deal by Trump, with a Japanese outfit - Softbank - which has pledged $50 billion to Trump and also claims to have 50,000 potential jobs for U.S. workers. When or where they will materialize we've no idea, nor how the job number was even determined.  However, it is understood the money will be coming from a $100 billion investment fund the Japanese CEO is setting up with Saudi Arabia' wealth fund.  So does this mean most of the $50 billion coming our way is supposedly coming from Saudi Arabia?  And more importantly, what are they going to want in return for this investment?

These are just a few of the unprecedented conflicts of interest presented by Trump’s decision to retain his business empire and hand its management over to his children. (He claims that doing so is effectively a "blind trust" but it's nothing of the sort. A blind trust means a totally independent entity holds such assets so there is no possibility at all of learning what's in them.)

Of course, Trumpeters will not hesitate to point out there is no law that obliges Trump to sell his assets or place them in a blind trust, though nine of the 12 presidents since the second world war have done so. But when his businesses accept money (or anything of value) from foreign governments or state-owned entities,  Trump may nevertheless be breaking the law. In fact, he may be violating the Constitution of the United States. This very potential ought to raise the hackles of electors of conscience and set off early warning bells.

Beyond the issue of Trump flouting the Emoluments clause in his potential Presidency, there is the issue of his character. It is clear to me, on reading The Federalist  #10 (by James Madison) and #68 (by Alexander Hamilton) last night, that Trump is precisely the type of populist "passion inciting" demagogue that the Founders feared, and trusted the Electoral College to keep from power.  Madison in the Federalist 10 exposed the nature of the problem while Hamilton in Federalist 68 discussed the remedy.

Madison's concern was  "mischief of faction" in an election whereby "citizens - whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole - are united and actuated by a common impulse of passion (to cast their votes) adverse to the rights of other citizens or the permanent and aggregate interests of the community".  This is exactly what the Trump voters did, motivated by passion and recklessness via Trump's often violent rallies to give a middle finger salute to the rest of the country - thereby militating against the majority's interests. And by the latest tally HRC is now a full 2.7 million votes or two pct. points ahead of Trump in the popular vote.

Hamilton for his own part was blunt and to the point and his words bear directly on Trump's entanglements with foreign businesses and diplomats:

"Nothing is more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to a cabal, intrigue or corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.

How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?

Hamilton then lists the measures to ensure safeguards from overt foreign influence in our councils,  including, e.g.   no senators, representatives or others holding a position of trust shall be named as state electors, i.e. to the Electoral College.

However, later he leaves open the possibility that the same electors can ensure the integrity of the office through their own discretion which may, at some extreme points, diverge from what the people themselves voted for (particularly if motivated by passion as opposed to reason).

Thus we read:

"The process of election (by state electors) affords a moral certainty that the office of President shall never fall to the lot of any man who is not to an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications...It will not be too strong to say that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."

Would Hamilton (or Madison) regard Trump as such a character? Hardly! His display of rank passion alone - as in his unhinged tweets, would disqualify him. His very campaigning mode in encouraging violence ("punch 'em  in the face"), would leave all the Founders gasping for air, foundering at the spectacle of a madman's approach to power -  as well as the very passions inflamed in his followers to push him there-- that they so feared.

His crude words caught on tape about proudly assaulting women ("ya grab 'em by the pussy') would confirm once and for all that such a character lacked the virtue to hold the highest station. Add in his entanglements with foreign interests and it would be a slam dunk.

The Hamilton electors need to do what Hamilton and Madison would have and reject this unstable, narcissist autocrat whose antics threaten the very foundation of the Republic. And yes, my ancestor Conrad Brumbaugh, who fought in the Revolutionary War (as one of the Pennsylvania Regiment), would side with my stance totally.. Moreover, he'd be appalled that so many Americans could so recklessly toss their franchise away on a character unfit to even run a dog kennel - never mind he claims billionaire status. (Mostly via constant bankruptcies of  his casinos).  Conrad would have no qualms - if he were a state elector- turning the tables on a potential Trump despotic presidency.

The electors of today can do no less. Look at it this way: while we may undergo some upheaval and possibly a constitutional crisis in the wake of upending Trump's ascension to power, it's preferable to the alternative. That is, Trump likely ordering martial law before the next election, shutting down all dissent and imprisoning people by invoking the "continuity of government" provisions in the Patriot Act. Not to mention that, given all his military picks,  one expects the Posse Comitatus Act will have been terminated by then.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/bill-hare/70169/stop-calling-him-president-elect-trump

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/70181/donald-trump-can-erase-your-rights-with-a-bar-napkin

Excerpt:

"Here is a man who won the election according to the rules as they stand. Donald Trump is about to become president of the United States of America, and yet he cannot stand the fact that he lost the popular vote. Result? He went on a Twitter tirade and completely undermined the validity of his own victory by bleating some balderdash about millions of illegal votes. It wasn't a one-off tweet, either; he just kept going and going and going like some cross between the Energizer Bunny and a character from Mortal Kombat.

Then, out of a clear blue sky, Trump became the defender of the American flag, tweeting that, perhaps, anyone who burns that flag should either be thrown in prison or stripped of their citizenship. The First Amendment, augmented by the Supreme Court's 1989 Texas v. Johnson decision, defends the burning of the flag as an act of free speech. The Fourteenth Amendment specifically prohibits the government from stripping a citizen of their citizenship. This is all black-letter law, making Trump's flag tweet just another burp in the void … but for this: His casual recommendation for addressing something so picayune as a burned flag is imprisonment or exile.

Put it all together. A man with the temperament of an earthquake, utterly devoid of self-control, with no one around him apparently capable of reining him in, a man who admittedly lives for revenge and retribution, who is completely incapable of absorbing criticism without having a very public meltdown, who knows little of the world, and who thinks nothing of throwing people who commit minor acts of dissent in prison … this man is about to be invested with astonishing legal powers."