Reagan Painted a Pretty Gloomy Picture in 1980

In a New York Times article titled "Gloomy Republican Campaigns Leave Behind Reagan Cheer," Jeremy Peters claims that GOP candidates are painting a gloomy picture of the country, in contrast to the Gipper's optimism.

This article distorts history very badly.  In the 1980 campaign, Reagan did what out-party candidates always do:  talk at length about the country's problems and blame the in-party for them.  Here are just a few examples:

• "Double-digit inflation has robbed you and your family of the ability to plan.  It has destroyed the confidence to buy and it threatens the very structure of family life itself as more and more wives are forced to work in order to help meet the ever-increasing cost of living.  At the same time, the lack of year growth in the economy has introduced the justifiable fear in the minds of working men and women who are already over extended that soon there will be fewer jobs and no money to pay for even the necessities of life.  And tragically as the cost of living keeps going up, the standard of living which has been our great pride keeps going down." (Announcement of candidacy, November 13, 1979)
• "Never before in our history have Americans been called upon to face three grave threats to our very existence, any one of which could destroy us. We face a disintegrating economy, a weakened defense and an energy policy based on the sharing of scarcity.: (Acceptance speech, July 17, 1980)
• "Soviet leaders talk arrogantly of a so-called “correlation of forces” that has moved in their favor, opening up opportunities for them to extend their influence.  The response from the administration in Washington has been one of weakness, inconsistency, vacillation and bluff.  A Soviet combat brigade is discovered in Cuba; the Carter Administration declares its presence 90 miles off our shore as “unacceptable.”  The brigade is still there.  Soviet troops mass on the border of Afghanistan.  The President issues a stern warning against any move by those troops to cross the border.  They cross the border, execute the puppet President they themselves installed in 1978, and carry out a savage attack on the people of Afghanistan.  Our credibility in the world slumps further.  The President proclaims we’ll protect the Middle East by force of arms and 2 weeks later admits we don’t have the force." (VFW speech, August 18, 1980)
• "Eight million out of work.  Inflation running at 18 percent in the first quarter of 1980.  Black unemployment at about 14 percent, higher than any single year since the government began keeping separate statistics.  Four straight major deficits run up by Carter and his friends in Congress.  The highest interest rates since the Civil War--reaching at times close to 20 percent--lately down to more than 11 percent but now going up again--productivity falling for six straight quarters among the most productive people in history." (Speech at Liberty State Park, NJ, September 1, 1980)
• "They're leading us into an economic dark ages," (Speech in Houston, October 29, 1980)

California Senate Denounces Trump

The California Senate has passed a nonbinding resolution denouncing Donald Trump. Alex Koseff reports at The Sacramento Bee:

“Support this resolution to send a clear message that bigotry and racism and hatred is [sicnot tolerated in the state of California,” urged Sen. Isadore Hall, D-Compton, the measure’s author. “It’s time quite honestly to dump Trump.”

Senate Resolution 39 was introduced in July, following Trump’s controversial presidential announcement where he said that Mexico was not “sending their best” to the United States.

“They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us,” Trump said. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Companies like NBC, Macy’s, NASCAR and the PGA have already severed ties with the real estate mogul and reality television star. But Senate Republicans didn’t bite on SR 39, which passed by a vote of 25-1 and has no legal authority; all but one abstained and declined to speak on the measure.

The original version of the measure denounced Ted Cruz as well, but final version deleted references to him:

35WHEREAS, Presidential candidates including Donald Trump
36
begin deleteand Ted Cruzend delete have unfairly demonized and falsely blamed
37undocumented immigrant families for a range of problems and
38challenges facing the United States; and

39WHEREAS, Presidential candidate Donald Trump recently
40stated that, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending
P3    1their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and
2they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs.
3They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists,”;
begin delete andend deletebegin insert now, therefore, be
4itend insert

begin delete

5WHEREAS, Presidential candidate Ted Cruz has defended
6Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s racist remarks against
7immigrant families and people of Mexican descent; and

end deletebegin delete

8WHEREAS, Presidential candidate Ted Cruz characterized
9United States immigration as “policies [that] have encouraged
10drug smugglers, child abusers, murderers, and other dangerous
11criminals”; now, therefore, be it

end delete

12Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, That the Senate
13condemns discrimination in any form on the basis of race, ethnicity,
14national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or
15disability; and be it further

16Resolved, That the Senate calls for an end to hate speech and
17racist rhetoric by all presidential candidates; and be it further

begin delete

18Resolved, That the Senate condemns in the strongest terms
19possible the racist rhetoric against immigrant families made by
20Presidential candidate Ted Cruz; and be it further

end delete

21Resolved, That the Senate condemns in the strongest terms
22possible the racist rhetoric against immigrant families made by
23Presidential candidate Donald Trump; and be it further

24Resolved, That the Senate calls upon the State of California to
25divest from Donald Trump, The Trump Organization, and any
26affiliated entities; and be it further

27Resolved, That the Senate calls upon private businesses and
28individuals throughout California to end all business ties with
29Donald Trump, The Trump Organization, and any affiliated
30entities; and be it further

31Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of
32this resolution to the author for appropriate distribution.

ead more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35021343.html#storylink=cpy

The California Constitution, like the US Constitution, forbids bills of attainder.  Technically, this measure does not fall into this category because it is a nonbinding resolution that does not directly impose a punishment.  Still,it sets a bad precedent by using official state resources to take a position on a private citizen running president.

Sanders: Surge or Premature Peak?

A release from Quinnipiac University:

In a come-from-behind rally, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is the choice of 41 percent of Iowa likely Democratic Caucus participants, with 40 percent picking former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and 12 percent backing Vice President Joseph Biden, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to results of a July 2 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe- ack) University showing Clinton at 52 percent, with 33 percent for Sanders and 7 percent for Biden.

Today, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley gets 3 percent of Iowa likely Democratic Caucus participants, with 3 percent undecided.

There is a wide gender gap among Democrats today as Sanders leads Clinton 49 - 28 percent among men, with 16 percent for Biden, while Clinton leads Sanders 49 - 35 percent among women, with 9 percent for Biden.

Sanders and Biden have a higher net favorability rating than Clinton and higher ratings for honesty and empathy. Clinton has the best scores for leadership and temperament to handle an international crisis.

"Sen. Bernie Sanders has become the Eugene McCarthy of 2016," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "He is the candidate of the Democratic left, against his own party's bosses and their prized presidential candidate, Secretary Hillary Clinton.

"Sanders has seized the momentum by offering a message more in line with disproportionately liberal primary and caucus voters."

"But unlike the late Sen. McCarthy, who came on strong just before the 1968 primaries, Sen. Sanders has seized the momentum, five months before voting begins in Iowa. History will eventually tell us whether he has made such a large move too soon," Brown added.

Trump and Sanders: The Differences

Nate Silver says that Trump and Sanders are both outsiders, but quite different types.  Whereas Sanders's voting record is quite similar to that of other Democrats, Trump diverges from party orthodoxy.  The trouble here-- as Silver himself hints below -- is that roll-call votes are only a partial measure of positions.  By definition, they omit proposals that have never come to the floor, such as nationalization of US industries.

Why, then, have so few Democrats officially endorsed Sanders? First, because Clinton is extremely popular with both elite and rank-and-file Democrats. Her relative lack of competition is a sign of strength, not weakness — she won the “invisible primary” stage of the campaign. Second, because Democrats are right to be concerned about the general election prospects for Sanders, a 74-year-old self-described socialist. Third, because Sanders’s agenda is hostile to moneyed interests within the Democratic Party.

But if Sanders eventually overtook Clinton, the establishment might resign itself to the prospect of nominating him. There are some loose precedents for candidates like Sanders winning their nominations, especially George McGovern in 1972 and Barry Goldwater in 1964. If you’re going to sacrifice a presidential election — and Sanders would be unlikely to prevail next November4 — you’d at least like to shift the window of discourse in your party’s preferred direction.

A Trump nomination would be more of an existential threat to the Republican establishment. He bucks the establishment’s consensus on issues as fundamental to the GOP as taxation and health care, and he’swobbly on abortion. Splitting with the party on any one of those issues might ordinarily disqualify a candidate. Trump potentially destabilizes the Republicans’ “three-legged stool”: The coalition of fiscal, social and national security conservatives have dominated the party since 1980 or so. But on the issue on which Trump is most conservative — immigration — establishment Republicans worry that he might be so reactionary as to cause long-term damage to the party brand.

Meanwhile, Trump has picked fights with sacred cows like the Club for Growth and Fox News. Most of the conservative media — from the National Review to RedState to Glenn Beck — is anti-Trump.

In certain respects, Trump is engaged in an attempted “hostile takeover” of the Republican Party. Because the downside of nominating him might be so enormous — lasting beyond a single election — the GOP establishment may fight to the death to prevent him from being chosen, even at the price of a brokered convention and a fractured party base.

The State of Play

At RealClearPolitics, David Brady and Douglas Rivers analyze polls about Trump and the GOP nomination race, reaching these conclusions:

• First, that most of his support comes from candidates already in the race and not from newly inspired voters. 
• Second, his campaign drew from both the front-runners and the second-tier candidates and hurt Ted Cruz among the front-runners and Rick Perry among the second-tier candidates the most.
• Third, his support comes from across the full range of Republican identifiers but is slightly higher among those who are less well educated, earn less than $50,000 annually and are slightly older.
• Fourth, Tea Party respondents supported Trump at slightly lower levels than the totals for Cruz and Fiorina but higher than for the rest of the field.
• Fifth, if his candidacy falters or he quits the race, no single candidate benefits in more than the low double digits, and those he hurt the most—Cruz and Perry—probably do not make up their losses, notwithstanding Cruz’s machinations

Charles Cook writes at National Journal:

Clearly, something pro­found is hap­pen­ing in the usu­ally staid and or­derly party. Don­ald Trump is in first place not only in Iowa and New Hamp­shire, but in na­tion­al polling as well, av­er­aging more than a quarter of the vote. Ben Car­son, the re­tired neur­o­lo­gist, is now in second place in Iowa and na­tion­wide, and in a stat­ist­ic­al tie in New Hamp­shire with Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a more tra­di­tion­al can­did­ate. That Jeb Bush is av­er­aging single-di­git per­form­ances in both cru­cial states and na­tion­ally is just as per­plex­ing.

Should we see this as a re­bel­lion against ca­reer politi­cians and the GOP es­tab­lish­ment? Or, is roughly 40 per­cent of the GOP elect­or­ate throw­ing a tem­per tan­trum? The an­swer is: both.

...
Not all Re­pub­lic­ans are rebels, however. Na­tion­ally, al­most 60 per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans are still the philo­soph­ic­al and styl­ist­ic des­cend­ants of the party that pro­duced Pres­id­ents Eis­en­hower, Nix­on, Re­agan, and both Bushes—the GOP that once ap­proved of Ger­ald Ford, Bob Dole, John Mc­Cain, and Mitt Rom­ney. Even Re­agan, not to men­tion the Bushes, would have trouble meet­ing the GOP’s new lit­mus tests.

...
Among the tra­di­tion­al Re­pub­lic­an can­did­ates, the Bush cam­paign is start­ing to air tele­vi­sion ads—and he had bet­ter hope they work. Con­ven­tion­al Re­pub­lic­an voters are still win­dow-shop­ping, but they don’t seem prone to linger be­fore Bush’s win­dow; they just keep mov­ing on. Kasich has shown signs of get­ting trac­tion, par­tic­u­larly in New Hamp­shire; he has already out­per­formed the ex­pect­a­tions that his late start would doom his cam­paign. It was Bush’s poor per­form­ance, the Kasich camp ex­plains, that drew the Ohio gov­ernor in­to the race.

What a Jerk! Continued

Michael Barbaro reports at The New York Times:

Donald J. Trump, who received draft deferments through much of the Vietnam War, told the author of a forthcoming biography that he nevertheless “always felt that I was in the military” because of his education at a military-themed boarding school.

Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”

That claim may raise eyebrows given that Mr. Trump, now a Republican presidential candidate, never served in the military and mocked Senator John McCain, a decorated naval aviator, for his years long captivity during the Vietnam War.

Former Marine responds to Trump's assertion that he "always felt I was in the military". pic.twitter.com/VyDNr0Prv6

— Michael Barbaro (@mikiebarb) September 8, 2015

Kasich and Same-Sex Marriage

Chrissie Thompson reports at The Cincinnati Inquirer:

John Kasich, who opposes gay marriage, thinks a Kentucky clerk should issue same-sex marriage licenses despite her religious beliefs.

Rowan County clerk Kim Davis is sitting in jail indefinitely after defying court orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Conservatives have cheered her for standing on her personal religious beliefs, saying the government is persecuting her.

Even though Davis personally opposes same-sex marriage, she's a government employee, Kasich told ABC's This Week on Sunday.

"She's not running a church. I wouldn't force this on a church, but in terms of her responsibility, I think she has to comply," said Kasich, Ohio governor and a GOP presidential candidate. He doesn't think she should sit in jail, he said, but "I think she should follow the law."

Battles over same-sex marriage might turn young people away from Christianity, said Kasich, a Protestant.

"When we see these kind of battles going on, I get a little bit afraid that it turns people off to the idea of faith in God," he said. "I think we need to talk a lot about the do's, about humility, about helping our neighbor, about the need to live a life bigger than ourselves."