Presidential Election Of 2004

Howard Dean’s Statement About Generational Differences Of Presidents We Elect Brings Up Interesting Point About 2016!

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Vermont Governor, 2004 Presidential competitor, and Democratic National Committee head Howard Dean was on MORNING JOE yesterday, and brought up an interesting point about generational differences of Presidents we elect to the Oval Office.

Dean said it is highly unlikely that we will see Hillary Clinton have no competition for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2016, because for the nation to go back a generation in birth from one President to the next is unusual—in this case to go back to a “Baby Boomer” born in the late 1940s after electing a President born in the early 1960s. Therefore, Dean states that he believed someone born closer to the birth year of Barack Obama would be more likely to be the nominee, a person such as Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley or New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as examples–with O’Malley one and a half years younger than Obama and Cuomo three and a half years older than Obama.

So Dean has brought up the age issue, just as Republicans have, with their numerous potential candidates in their 40s and early 50s–including Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul among others.

This statement by Dean caused this author to check out how often has America elected a President much younger than his predecessor, and has uncovered the following:

William Henry Harrison—nearly ten years older than Martin Van Buren
Zachary Taylor—eleven years older than James K. Polk
James Buchanan—thirteen and a half years older than Franklin Pierce
Ronald Reagan—thirteen and a half years older than Jimmy Carter

A few other Presidents have been a few years older than their predecessor, but these are the only four cases of “generational” differences of Presidents we elect, although not precisely a “generation”, which is described as twenty years.

If Hillary Clinton was elected, she would be nearly 14 years older than Barack Obama, more difference than even Buchanan or Reagan from their predecessors.

If Joe Biden was elected, he would be nearly 19 years older than Barack Obama, the greatest difference between two Presidents in American history, and literally a “generation”!

This is food for thought, and realize that Harrison and Taylor were elected for their war exploits as generals, and all the cases mentioned above were before the Civil War, more than a century and a half ago, with the one exception of Ronald Reagan.

The question is whether, and said in irony, is either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden another Ronald Reagan? Again, this is said with tongue in cheek by a writer who has never been a big fan of Ronald Reagan!

George W. Bush And Immigration Reform: Is Bush The Last GOP President We Will Ever See?

Ronald 6 Comments

Former President George W. Bush, who has been very quiet, and stayed out of the public spotlight for four and a half years, has come out in full support of the Senate bill on immigration reform, a cause he lost in 2007, but feels deeply about, and he was able to gain 44 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2004, compared to Mitt Romney’s 29 percent in 2012.

Bush spoke of a “benevolent spirit”, of a “confident and successful nation” which embraces immigration, but the Republican Party of 2013 is very different than the “compassionate conservative” image that Bush cultivated, and he has little clout or respect among Republicans today.

So it is clear that unless the Tea Party Movement cancer is overcome, we are likely going to look back in the future, and say that George W. Bush was the last Republican President we would ever see take the oath of office as the occupant of the Oval Office!

A new moderate, centrist political party will eventually arise to replace an extremist, right wing party that fails to understand that the American people will not accept their mean spirit, their refusal to accept the demographic changes in America, their desire to make the rich wealthier and push the middle class into poverty, and denounce those who are poor, blaming them for their own degradation!

The American people want an optimistic spirit, a compassionate government, and on this issue, at least, former President George W. Bush; his brother Jeb Bush; Senator John McCain; former China Ambassador Jon Huntsman; and a small percentage of Republican Senators and others affiliated with the party understand this, and could be the basis of a new party which gets the message of the vast majority of the American people!

Age Vs Youth: Will The Republicans And Democrats Be Switching On Their Presidential Nominees In 2016?

Ronald 2 Comments

When one analyzes the two major political parties in the past forty years, it has been a general reality that the Republican Party has run Presidential candidates who tend to be much older than the Democratic Party nominees for President.

Witness Richard Nixon, nine years older than George McGovern in 1972; Gerald Ford eleven years older than Jimmy Carter in 1976; Ronald Reagan thirteen years older than Jimmy Carter in 1980; Reagan seventeen years older than Walter Mondale in 1984; George H. W. Bush eight years older than Michael Dukakis in 1988; Bush twenty two years older than Bill Clinton in 1992; Bob Dole twenty three years older than Clinton in 1996; John McCain twenty five years older than Barack Obama in 2008; and Mitt Romney fourteen years older than Obama in 2012. Only in 2000 and 2004 did we see George W. Bush older than Al Gore by only two years and in 2004 actually younger than John Kerry by three years.

This phenomenon is maybe just a coincidence, but it has often been said that the Democrats go for youth and the Republicans for experience in their Presidential nominees.

Well, if that is the case, it is about to be switched dramatically in 2016 if one assumes that either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden are the likely front runners for the Democratic Presidential nomination, as Hillary will be 69 in 2016, and Joe will be 74 in 2016. Clinton would be the second oldest first time nominee, behind Ronald Reagan, and Biden would be the oldest first time nominee.

The Republicans are certain to nominate a candidate decades younger, such as Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal, or Ted Cruz, all born in the early 1970s, being therefore mid 40s in 2016. If you consider Chris Christie, Scott Walker, or John Thune, they were born in the 1960s, so would be in the mid 50s. Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann all were born in the 1950s, so would be in their late 50s or in the 60s. There is no candidate born in the 1940s seriously mentioned, unless one expects Newt Gingrich to try again for the Presidency, being just a year younger than Joe Biden and four years older than Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats have alternative possible candidates in Martin O’Malley and Amy Klobuchar born in the early 1960s, so either would be mid 50s in 2016, but Andrew Cuomo and Mark Warner, born in the mid 1950s would be nearing or at the age of 60 when running in 2016, and Elizabeth Warren, born in 1949, would be 67 in 2016, only about two years younger than Hillary Clinton.

So we are seeing a likely switch from an older to younger Republican nominee, and a younger to an older Democratic nominee, and the difference in years could be massive, as it was in the past forty years in most Presidential elections.

A final thought: In the nine elections between 1972 and 2012 when the GOP nominee was always older than the Democratic nominee, the Republicans won the election four times, and the Democrats five times, so basically, trying to determine whether age or youth are an advantage is clearly a pure guessing game!

The Smearing And Character Assassination Of Bill Clinton And John Kerry Reversed: The Rewriting Of History By The Right Wing

Ronald 12 Comments

Many people have very short memories, and many Republicans and conservative right wing activists have the amazing ability to rewrite history, and make former “demons” suddenly seem acceptable.

So is the case with President Bill Clinton and 2004 Presidential nominee John Kerry, both of whom have suddenly become “acceptable” and “mainstream”, as the smearing and character assassination of Barack Obama continues in earnest!

Bill Clinton was savaged, accused of every scandal imaginable, brutally mistreated by the opposition party for eight years, and put through the torment of an impeachment, which everyone knew would NOT lead to removal from office, but was designed to besmirch his historical accomplishments.

John Kerry was bitterly attacked, his record distorted, his Vietnam War service trivialized because he had the gall to challenge the war as a mistake, in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 42 years ago, and made out to be an unpatriotic American, while his opponent, George W. Bush, sat out his military service in the National Guard reading magazine, and often not showing up at all, all due to family connections.

Now, suddenly, you cannot hear enough praise about the Bill Clinton Presidency, including Paul Ryan this morning saying how different things would be now if only Clinton was President. This is an amazing statement, but only the most recent of laudatory comments by Republicans and conservatives toward the 42nd President.

And, suddenly, as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry is nominated to be Secretary of State, the praise and compliments from his former Republican enemies is overwhelming, and he faces little opposition for confirmation. Nothing is said about his supposed “anti American” statements on the war in Vietnam before the committee he now heads, and how he will now be leading our foreign policy, an idea which would have shocked his critics just eight years ago.

The right wing is rewriting history, hoping that the memory and ignorance of most people about past events is forgotten.

Instead, the attention is given to making Barack Obama a demon, a threat to the nation, to make him out as a man unwilling to negotiate, when it is the opposition which has been intransigent for the past four years, and is still engaged in smearing and character assassination greater than either Bill Clinton or John Kerry experienced!

One would have thought any greater assault was not conceivable, but here it is in full throttle!!

And since Obama will not be coming back for a third term, one can already see the revival of the attacks on Hillary Clinton, as the Benghazi, Libya tragedy is politicized for all it is worth. And since she is a woman, of course she must be trashed, destroyed, eviscerated as the likely future enemy, as the right wing assault machine goes into full gear to elect someone they want, to reverse things back to the “good old days” of Ronald Reagan!

But of course, Chris Christie, by working with Barack Obama, is also, already, being smeared and trashed, because he actually has some “moderate” elements in him, and some views on some issues that does not fit the mold of the far right. Chris Christie, if he runs for President in 2016, will discover just how venal and vicious the attack will be on him for being a “traitor” to the cause, just as much as Colin Powell has been experiencing recently, because of his view that the Republican Party must change its tune, its views, its image, its principles, or face extinction.

It is often said that the media are tilted to the left, when in reality, the right wing media is very much in a time of prosperity and growth, with Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden helping to energize their conspiracy theories, the image that the Republic is in danger of destruction all because we have a person of color, a woman, and a man of principle and convictions, playing major roles in the development of our domestic and foreign policy!

Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey The Best Choice To Replace John Kerry In The US Senate!

Ronald 1 Comment

Democratic Congressman Ed Markey of Massachusetts has announced his candidacy for the US Senate seat that will open up when John Kerry is confirmed as Secretary of State by the time of the inauguration of Barack Obama for his second term as President.

Markey has a distinguished record as one of the longest lasting members of the House of Representatives, having first been elected 36 years ago in 1976.

In a normal situation, Markey might have been able to run for the Senate years ago, but his misfortune was to come from Massachusetts, with two sterling Senators, Ted Kennedy, who served 47 years, the fourth longest service in Senate history, and John Kerry, who has served 28 years, and was the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee against George W. Bush.

Markey has been a leader on climate change legislation, and now is speaking up vigorously for gun control legislation, and has always served his constituents with devotion, and has a reputation as a hard working liberal, who deserves this opportunity at age 66 to become a Senator. He could certainly serve a theoretical 14 years, two years of the Kerry term, and two more elections, and would then be retiring at the age 80, with the assurance that he would be a star figure in the Senate in the tradition of Kennedy and Kerry.

It is not that Massachusetts does not have other outstanding Congressmen, and others, who could fill the position, but Markey truly deserves the chance to be the nominee this coming summer, with a very good chance to defeat former Republican Senator Scott Brown, who would likely be his opponent. All good fortune to Ed Markey as he pursues the Senate seat!

The Case For A Team Of John Kerry And Chuck Hagel As Barack Obama’s National Security Team

Ronald 1 Comment

President Barack Obama has already faced problems with his thought to appoint UN Ambassador Susan Rice to the State Department, and she dropped out and allowed him to move toward the appointment of Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, to be his Secretary of State, but not yet announced officially.

But now, his planned but unannounced appointment of former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska to be his Secretary of Defense in his second term as President is meeting resistance.

The point to be made is that any President should be able to choose his team, particularly a National Security team, that fits his desires, and therefore, automatically, the President should be given slack to pick who he wishes.

The opposition to Hagel comes from those in the Pentagon who do not like that Hagel has said in the past that there is waste in the Defense Department that can be cut, a statement which has absolute validity. It is clear that Hagel would widh to “clean house” if he came to the Pentagon, but that is good, and should not be a reason to deny him the post.

Also, the Pro Israel Lobby, and particulary AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), is against Hagel because he has, at times, in the US Senate, been critical of Israeli policy in the West Bank, building Jewish settlements.

While certainly AIPAC can have its views on any nominee, it should not be allowed to deny a President who he wants, and the important point, that is necessary to say again and again, is that under no circumstances will Barack Obama and his government ever allow any harm to Israel, and this was made very clear in the recent Gaza Strip events when the IRON DOME system provided and financed by the United States, saved Israel from greater attack. But our government cannot and should not feel that it can be dictated to by ANY foreign government or pressure group to have to agree one hundred percent on every action and statement of a foreign government!

Also, in favor of Hagel, as well as Kerry, is that both were Vietnam War veterans, and understand the horrors of war, and it is great to have two such men, both having served in the Senate, and possessing great principles and courage, to head our National Security team under President Obama in his second term.

So, hopefully, the soon announcement of the appointments of Kerry and Hagel will be forthcoming!

John Kerry Joins Distinguished Company Of Seven Former Presidential Nominees Who Have Served As Secretary Of State

Ronald Leave a comment

The indication that President Barack Obama has decided to nominate Massachusetts Senator John Kerry as the next Secretary of State adds dignity and statesmanship to that office, particularly in light of the exceptional leadership of the present Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

Kerry has had a distinguished career as a United States Senator for 28 years, and is the tenth most senior member of the present Senate, and was, of course, the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, losing a close race to George W. Bush, because of the electoral result in Ohio.

Kerry has been Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the past four years, and had he won the Presidency in 2004, he would have been responsible for our foreign policy for the past eight years, assuming he had won a second term.

He becomes the eighth Presidential nominee to lose the White House and become Secretary of State, following Henry Clay (under John Quincy Adams); Daniel Webster (under John Tyler); John C. Calhoun (under John Tyler); Lewis Cass (under James Buchanan); James G. Blaine (under Benjamin Harrison); William Jennings Bryan (under Woodrow Wilson); and Charles Evans Hughes (under Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge).

These Secretaries of State stood out as major figures in their times, and in our history long term, and John Kerry will be seen the same way when he retires from the State Department after serving Barack Obama.

The Susan Rice Controversy: The Final Disgrace Of John McCain And Lindsey Graham!

Ronald Leave a comment

The announcement by Susan Rice, the United Nations Ambassador, that she is withdrawing her candidacy to be Secretary of State, due to the controversy over the Libyan terrorist attack in Benghazi, which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others on September 11, is a great tragedy.

It is the character assassination of a woman who has devoted her career to public service, and was only stating what was known on September 16, five days after the attack.

If anything, the CIA head, David Petraeus, now disgraced by an affair with his biographer, should be held accountable for this mess, but of course, he is so much idolized by many that he is given a free pass by politicians, and just allowed to resign, when he should be investigated for the danger he represented as our chief spy, allowing himself to be compromised!

It is not a question of whether Susan Rice is the best qualified person to be Secretary of State, as this author truly believes that Senator John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, is the best person available.

But to trash the reputation of Susan Rice over something she was not responsible for is a human tragedy, and shows how far Republicans are willing to go to destroy others in their desire to damage President Obama, even after his second term victory!

Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham both had reasonable reputations before now, but what they have done is enough to destroy their historical image and their effectiveness for the rest of the time they might serve in the upper chamber!

They are two bitter men who have become negative forces, and are part of the problem of the Republican Party for the future!

If these two men have become destructive forces, that is a sign that the Republican Party is dying, and will soon be replaced by a new, moderate centrist party!

Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Dwight D. Eisenhower are all in deep mourning in the afterlife, wondering how their beloved party became so self destructive and hateful, and the dirty deeds of McCain and Graham will, likely, be two of the final nails in the coffin of the “Grand Old Party”!

And the best thing Barack Obama could do now is select Susan Rice to be National Security Adviser, a position not subject to the whims of the US Senate for confirmation! Prove that John McCain and Lindsey Graham have been upended by putting Rice in a position on an equal footing with the Secretary of State, and make the Republicans scream and yell in protest! It would be just desserts!

Best Team For America’s Future Security: John Kerry For Secretary Of State, And Chuck Hagel For Secretary Of Defense

Ronald Leave a comment

In the midst of the “Fiscal Cliff” battle, President Obama is also deep into Cabinet selection, and it was heartening to hear that former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican who served in Vietnam and became an acknowledged expert on foreign policy in his years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been at the White House, and is a hot candidate for Secretary of Defense.

This author has long raved about the credentials of Hagel, and suggested him for the cabinet in the first term, and it now seems more likely that he might become the head of the Pentagon when Leon Panetta leaves soon.

This would be continuing the tradition of past Democratic Presidents to decide to choose reputable Republicans for the Defense Department, and it even goes back to when it was called the War Department before 1947.

The historical record shows Franklin D. Roosevelt having Henry Stimson, former Secretary of State under Herbert Hoover, as his Secretary of War, along with Frank Knox, who had been the Republican Vice Presidential nominee in 1936, being named Secretary of the Navy, both in 1940, when Great Britain was being attacked by the German Air Force in World War II, and the threat to America was seen as dire by many as a result.

John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson utilized Robert McNamara as Secretary of Defense in the 1960’s.

Bill Clinton had former Maine Senator William Cohen, a responsible and reputable Republican Senator, as his Secretary of Defense in the second term, and he received kudos for his performance.

And Robert Gates, George W. Bush’s second Secretary of Defense, became Barack Obama’s first Secretary of Defense, and did a wonderful job for more than two years.

So the reasoning to pick Hagel is clearly there, but to make the foreign policy-defense team complete, the President also needs to choose Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, a Vietnam War veteran too, and 2004 Democratic Party Presidential nominee, to replace Hillary Clinton at the State Department, after 28 years of service in the US Senate, and chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Kerry has had a distinguished career, and would be an excellent choice, and the team of Kerry and Hagel would be sensational.

In a time of trouble and turmoil, America needs its strongest team on national security, and Kerry and Hagel fit the bill, without any question or doubt.

Susan Rice, the UN Ambassador, is also outstanding in many ways, but quite frankly, is not on the same level as Kerry, and her nomination would cause unnecessary turmoil over the issue of Libya, a sad commentary, but a distraction which should not be allowed to continue by choosing her, when Kerry is really a better choice!

So, Mr. President, pick John Kerry for State and Chuck Hagel for Defense, and America will be very well served at Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon!

Obama Reelection Victory Surpasses Bush Reelection Victory In 2004!

Ronald 1 Comment

As the vote count continues, Barack Obama’s reelection victory becomes ever more impressive, as now he has a 4.5 million vote lead, and 50.9 percent of the vote, as compared to Mitt Romney’s 47.4 percent–3.5 percent more.

Obama has passed the George W. Bush totals against John Kerry in 2004–when Bush received 50.7 percent of the vote, and Kerry had 48.3 percent–Bush having 2.4 percent more. And Bush’s popular vote lead was only about 3 million over Kerry.

So Democrats and Barack Obama have a lot to be proud of, with Obama’s two victories having the highest popular vote percentage of the last six Presidential elections, remembering that Bill Clinton never won a majority of the popular vote in 1992 or 1996, and that Bush did not even win the popular vote against Al Gore in 2000.