Should I remain in bed, leave my country or fight against the dragon?
( see also the story by Wolfgang Hampel,
' Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say ' )
Betty MacDonald's sister Alison Bard Burnett
Betty MacDonald's mother Sydney with grandchild Alison Beck
Betty and Don MacDonald in Hollywood
Betty MacDonald fan club fans,
Betty MacDonald fan club event voting will be very exciting.
Tell us your favourite city please for International Betty MacDonald fan club event 2017.
My favourite is Seattle.
I'll contribute a Betty MacDonald letter to Betty MacDonald fan club letter collection.
I own a very important letter of Betty MacDonald.
I wished there was a relative in my family who met Betty MacDonald and Mary Bard Jensen.
However I'll share a very interesting Betty MacDonald letter which was inside a book I bought.
You'll be able to find my Betty MacDonald fan club contribution in Betty MacDonald fan club newsletter November.
I love the Betty MacDonald fan club motto:
Sail away and find new treasures every day!
That's exactly what Betty MacDonald, Mary Bard Jensen, Alison Bard Burnett, Mr. and Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and Wolfgang Hampel did/does.
I had the very same feelings when I saw Betty MacDonald's letter inside the book.
As I adore the Betty MacDonald items by Betty MacDonald Memorial Award Winner Wolfgang Hampel I'm going to forward a copy of the letter for Betty MacDonald biography and Betty MacDonald fan club letter collection.
The subject of Betty MacDonald's letter is her family, friends and favourite authors.
Betty MacDonald especially wrote about her very beautiful daughter Joan, who seemed to be her favourite.
New Betty MacDonald documentary will be very interesting with many interviews never published before.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli shares his autobiography.
He is a real Casanova but this magical guy got fans from all over the world.
I belong to Mr. Tigerli's devoted fans.
Thank you so much for sharing this witty memories with us.
Wolfgang Hampel's literary event Vita Magica is very fascinating because he is going to include Betty MacDonald, other members of the Bard family and Betty MacDonald fan club honor members.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel wrote a great story of Pike Place Market.
It's simply great to read Wolfgang Hampel's new very well researched stories about Betty MacDonald, Robert Eugene Heskett, Donald Chauncey MacDonald, Darsie Bard, Sydney Bard, Gammy, Alison Bard Burnett, Darsie Beck, Mary Bard Jensen, Clyde Reynolds Jensen, Sydney Cleveland Bard, Mary Alice Bard, Dorothea DeDe Goldsmith, Madge Baldwin, Don Woodfin, Mike Gordon, Ma and Pa Kettle, Nancy and Plum, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and others.
The next Vita Magica events will be on November 25 and November 29, 2016.
Don't miss Letizia Mancino and Wolfgang Hampel on November 29, please.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel and Letizia Mancino are reading from her delightful book ' The cat in Goethe's bed '.
Linde Lund, our families, friends and I adore this funny sketch by Wolfgang Hampel very much although my German isn't the best.
I won't ever forget the way Wolfgang Hampel is shouting ' Brexit '.
Don't miss it, please.
It's simply great!
You can hear that Wolfgang Hampel got an outstandig voice.
He presented one of Linde Lund's favourite songs ' Try to remember ' like a professional singer.
Thanks a million!
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli and our 'Italian Betty MacDonald' - Betty MacDonald fan club honor member author and artist Letizia Mancino belong to the most popular Betty MacDonald fan club teams in our history.
Their many devoted fans are waiting for a new Mr. Tigerli adventure.
Letizia Mancino's magical Betty MacDonald Gallery is a special gift for Betty MacDonald fan club fans from all over the world.
Don't miss Brad Craft's 'More friends', please.
Betty MacDonald's very beautiful Vashon Island is one of my favourites.
The very witty Betty MacDonald satire Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say by Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel is really great.
Hillary Clinton would be the winner in many other democratic countries.
She won the popular vote.
This system should be changed.
Hillary Clinton now leads the national popular vote for president by roughly one million votes, and her victory margin is expanding rapidly.
When a candidate who wins the popular vote does not take office, when a loser is instead installed in the White House, that is an issue.
Don't miss this very interesting article below, please.
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel sent his brilliant thoughts.Thank you so much dear Wolfgang!
Hi Libi, nice to meet you. Can you feel it?
I'll be the most powerful leader in the world.
Betty MacDonald: Nothing more to say
Copyright 2016 by Wolfgang Hampel
All rights reserved
Betty MacDonald was sitting on her egg-shaped cloud and listened to a rather strange guy.
He said to his friends: So sorry to keep you waiting. Very complicated business! Very complicated!
Betty said: Obviously much too complicated for you old toupee!
Besides him ( by the way the First Lady's place ) his 10 year old son was bored to death and listened to this 'exciting' victory speech.
The old man could be his great-grandfather.
The boy was very tired and thought: I don't know what this old guy is talking about. Come on and finish it, please. I'd like to go to bed.
Dear 'great-grandfather' continued and praised the Democratic candidate.
He congratulated her and her family for a very strong campaign although he wanted to put her in jail.
He always called her the most corrupt person ever and repeated it over and over again in the fashion of a Tibetan prayer wheel.
She is so corrupt. She is so corrupt. Do you know how corrupt she is?
Betty MacDonald couldn't believe it when he said: She has worked very long and very hard over a long period of time, and we owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to our country.
Afterwards old toupee praised his parents, wife, children, siblings and friends.
He asked the same question like a parrot all the time:
Where are you? Where are you? Where are you?
I know you are here!
Betty MacDonald answered: No Pussy they are not! They left the country.
They immigrated to Canada because they are very much afraid of the future in the U.S.A. with you as their leader like the majority of all so-called more or less normal citizens.
By the way keep your finger far away from the pussies and the Red Button, please.
I'm going to fly with my egg-shaped cloud to Canada within a minute too.
Away - away - there is nothing more to say!
I can understand the reason why Betty MacDonald, Barbara Streisand, other artists and several of my friends want to leave the United States of America.
I totally agree with these comments:
Daniel Mount wrote a great article about Betty MacDonald and her garden.
We hope you'll enjoy it very much.
I adore Mount Rainier and Betty MacDonald's outstanding descriptions
Can you remember in which book you can find it?
If so let us know, please and you might be the next Betty MacDonald fan club contest winner.
I hope we'll be able to read Wolfgang Hampel's new very well researched stories about Betty MacDonald, Robert Eugene Heskett, Donald Chauncey MacDonald, Darsie Bard, Sydney Bard, Gammy, Alison Bard Burnett, Darsie Beck, Mary Bard Jensen, Clyde Reynolds Jensen, Sydney Cleveland Bard, Mary Alice Bard, Dorothea DeDe Goldsmith, Madge Baldwin, Don Woodfin, Mike Gordon, Ma and Pa Kettle, Nancy and Plum, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and others - very soon.
It' s such a pleasure to read them.
Let's go to magical Betty MacDonald's Vashon Island.
Betty MacDonald fan club organizer Linde Lund and Betty MacDonald fan club research team share their recent Betty MacDonald fan club research results.
Congratulations! They found the most interesting and important info for Wolfgang Hampel's oustanding Betty MacDonald biography.
I enjoy Bradley Craft's story very much.
Don't miss our Betty MacDonald fan club contests, please.
You can win a never published before Alison Bard Burnett interview by Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel.
This CD is a golden treasure because Betty MacDonald's very witty sister Alison Bard Burnett shares unique stories about Betty MacDonald, Mary Bard Jensen, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle and Nancy and Plum.
Do you have any books by Betty MacDonald and Mary Bard Jensen with funny or interesting dedications?
If so would you be so kind to share them?
Our next Betty MacDonald fan club project is a collection of these unique dedications.
If you share your dedication from your Betty MacDonald - and Mary Bard Jensen collection you might be the winner of our new Betty MacDonald fan club items.
Thank you so much in advance for your support.
Thank you so much for sending us your favourite Betty MacDonald quote.
More info are coming soon.
Wolfgang Hampel's Betty MacDonald and Ma and Pa Kettle biography and Betty MacDonald interviews have fans in 40 countries. I'm one of their many devoted fans.
Many Betty MacDonald - and Wolfgang Hampel fans are very interested in a Wolfgang Hampel CD and DVD with his very funny poems and stories.
We are going to publish new Betty MacDonald essays on Betty MacDonald's gardens and nature in Washington State.
Tell us the names of this mysterious couple please and you can win a very new Betty MacDonald documentary.
Betty MacDonald fan club honor member Mr. Tigerli is beloved all over the World.
We are so happy that our 'Casanova' is back.
Another rare episode (from March 21 1952) of the short-lived comedy soap opera, "The Egg and I," based on best selling book by Betty MacDonald which also became a popular film.
The series premiered on September 3, 1951, the same day as "Search for Tomorrow," and ended on August 1, 1952.
Although it did well in the ratings, it had difficulty attracting a steady sponsor. This episode features Betty Lynn (later known for her work on "The Andy Griffith Show") as Betty MacDonald, John Craven as Bob MacDonald, Doris Rich as Ma Kettle, and Frank Twedell as Pa Kettle.
Betty MacDonald fan club exhibition will be fascinating with the international book editions and letters by Betty MacDonald.
I can't wait to see the new Betty MacDonald documentary.
Enjoy a great breakfast at the bookstore with Brad and Nick, please.
Betty MacDonald fan club fan Greta Larson supports Betty MacDonald fan club on Facebook and does a great job.
Greta will be very happy to hear from you.
Have a great Saturday with lots of fun and joy!
Wolfgang Hampel - LinkFang ( German )
Betty MacDonald fan club
Betty MacDonald forum
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Wikipedia ( English ) - The Egg and I
Wolfgang Hampel - Academic ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - cyclopaedia.net ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - DBpedia ( English / German )
Wolfgang Hampel - people check ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Memim ( English )
Vashon Island - Wikipedia ( German )
Wolfgang Hampel - Monica Sone - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Ma and Pa Kettle - Wikipedia ( English )
Wolfgang Hampel - Ma and Pa Kettle - Wikipedia ( French )
Wolfgang Hampel - Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle - Wikipedia ( English)
Wolfgang Hampel in Florida State University
Betty MacDonald fan club founder Wolfgang Hampel
Betty MacDonald fan club interviews on CD/DVD
Betty MacDonald fan club items
Betty MacDonald fan club items - comments
Betty MacDonald fan club - The Stove and I
Betty MacDonald fan club groups
Betty MacDonald fan club organizer Linde Lund
Heide Rose and Betty MacDonald
Betty MacDonald fan club fan Greta Larson
Hillary Clinton’s Popular-Vote Victory Is Unprecedented—and Still Growing
Her margin is now bigger than the winning margins for John Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
But one thing is certain: Clinton’s win is unprecedented in the modern history of American presidential politics. And the numbers should focus attention on the democratic dysfunction that has been exposed.
When a candidate who wins the popular vote does not take office, when a loser is instead installed in the White House, that is an issue. And it raises questions that must be addressed.
So let’s address them:
WHO WON THE NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE? AND BY HOW MUCH?Clinton is winning it. The only question now has to do with the size of the win. You will see different numbers in different counts because keeping on top of the national totals requires constant monitoring of the results from 50 states and the District of Columbia. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report maintains one of the most frequently updated spreadsheets on the race. One week after the election, it had Clinton with 62,403,269 votes to 61,242,652 for Trump. That puts Clinton ahead by 1.16 million votes. Another able chronicler of the count, Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, also puts Clinton ahead by more than one million votes.
The million-vote figure is a baseline from which to analyze Clinton’s popular-vote victory. But it is only that—a baseline—as her margin will continue to expand.
HOW COME NO ONE IS GOING OVER 50 PERCENT?The previous three US presidential elections saw the winning candidates win actual majorities of the popular vote. But that won’t happen this time. As in 18 previous presidential elections, the winner of the popular vote in this year’s election will achieve only a plurality of the votes.
More than a million votes have already been counted for Libertarian Gary Johnson, Green Jill Stein, independent Evan McMullin and others, according to various counts. The totals for third-party, independent, and write-in candidates will rise as the tabulation continues—providing a powerful indication of the desire for a broader democracy and political alternatives. The high level of support for third-party and independent candidates also guarantees that neither major-party candidate will do this year what Barack Obama did in 2008 and 2012: win a majority of the popular vote.
WHY AREN’T ALL THE VOTES COUNTED A WEEK AFTER THE ELECTION?The United States has no clear and consistent national standard for holding elections or for counting votes. The rules differ radically from state to state. In some states, election officials are already engaged on the process of establishing a final official count. In other states, ballots are still being counted. The big distinction is between states that do most of their voting on Election Day and states that rely heavily on “absentee” ballots and mail voting. It happens that many of the bigger states that make it easier to vote (at the polls and by mail) are states that favored Clinton.
The biggest of these is California, where Clinton is ahead 62-33 percent at this point. California election officials explain: “It typically takes weeks for counties to process and count all of the ballots. Elections officials have approximately one month (28 days for presidential electors and 30 days for all other contests) to complete their extensive tallying, auditing, and certification work (known as the ‘official canvass’) Most notably, voting by mail has increased significantly in recent years and many vote-by-mail ballots arrive on, or up to three days after, Election Day (vote-by-mail ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received by the county elections official no later than three days after the election are included in the canvass). In processing vote-by-mail ballots, elections officials must confirm each voter’s registration status, verify each voter’s signature on the vote-by-mail envelope, and ensure each person did not vote elsewhere in the same election before the ballot can be counted. Other ballots that are processed after Election Day include provisional ballots (processed similar to vote-by-mail ballots), and ballots that are damaged or cannot be machine-read and must be remade by elections officials.”
As on November 11, according to the state’s updated “Estimated Unprocessed Ballots” report, more than one million ballots were as yet uncounted in Los Angeles County. Two days later, San Diego County reported that it has more than 600,000 ballots to count.
BUT THE HEADLINES JUST TALK ABOUT DONALD TRUMP WINNING?Elite media outlets do not, for the most part, have an interest in vote counts and what they mean. Coverage of the 2016 election campaign confirmed the extent to which major media are more interested in personalities than facts on the ground. The television networks like to declare a “winner” and then get focused on the palace intrigues surrounding a transition of power. Those intrigues are worth covering. But perspective on the will of the people get lost. Election-night numbers get locked in, and that’s that. There may be a notation that Clinton won “a narrow popular-vote” margin, but rarely is there a deep dive—even as the “narrow” margin grows to something much more substantial.
It was announced on election night that the Republican nominee had secured a sufficient number of Electoral College votes to claim the presidency. With the counts continuing, and with recounts a possibility, the Electoral College totals as of one week after the election project that Trump will win 306 electoral votes, as opposed to 232 for Clinton. The Trump figure is 36 more than is needed to reach the 270 total that is required to claim the presidency. Trump will almost certainly stay above the 270 threshold, although he could still lose a state (such as Michigan, where he leads by less than 13,000 votes) or win one (such as New Hampshire, where Clinton is up by around 3,000 votes). The results in a number of battleground states were so close that a shift of around 55,000 votes in three states (Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) would align the national popular vote result with the Electoral College result for a Clinton win.
What is important here is to recognize that there was no Trump mandate, in the popular vote (which he lost by a significant margin) or in the Electoral College (which he won narrowly, thanks to close results that tipped a handful of states in his favor). Notably, Trump’s total fell below 50 percent in the majority of states; he lost 20 states and the District of Columbia, and in at least seven additional states he leads, but without a majority of the vote.
IS CLINTON’S POPULAR-VOTE VICTORY UNPRECEDENTED?Yes. Clinton has already won the popular vote by a dramatically larger number of ballots than anyone in history who did not go on to be inaugurated as president.
There have been cases in the past where popular-vote winners have not become president. Three of them occurred in the 19th century, before the majority of Americans were allowed to vote. Before this year, there was only one instance in the modern era when a popular-vote winner was denied the presidency by the Electoral College. That was in 2000, when Democrat Al Gore beat Republican George W. Bush by 543,816 votes nationally.
Clinton’s popular-vote margin over that of Trump is now greater than that of Richard Nixon over Hubert Humphrey in 1968, and that of John Kennedy over Nixon in 1960.
Clinton is now winning roughly 47.8 percent of the vote, according to David Wasserman’s count for the Cook report. That’s a little less than the level reached by Gore in 2000. As Clinton’s popular-vote margin increases, so, too, will her percentage. It is possible that she will win the popular vote with the highest percentage of anyone who has not taken office.
But the percentage that matters is Trump’s. The Republican nominee will become president with less popular support than a number of major-party candidates who lost races for the presidency. Trump is now at 47.0 percent of the popular vote, according to the Cook count. That is a lower percentage than were won by Mitt Romney in 2012, John Kerry in 2004, Gore in 2000, or Gerald Ford in 1976.
IS THIS ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON AND DONALD TRUMP?No. Supporters of Clinton and critics of Clinton can kvetch about the virtues of her candidacy, and about what remains of the Democratic Party, for as long as their voices hold out. And Trump supporters can certainly announce that “the rules are the rules.” But this is about a higher principle than partisanship, and about something that matters more than personalities. This is about democracy itself. When the winner of an election does not take office, and when the loser does, we have evidence of a system that is structurally rigged. Those who favor a rigged system can defend it—and make empty arguments about small states versus big states that neglect the fact that many of the country’s smallest states (Delaware, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) backed the popular-vote winner. But those who favor democracy ought to join their voices in support of reform.
There are national movements to address the mess that is made when the Electoral College trumps democracy. There are petitions that call for abolishing the Electoral College. California Senator Barbara Boxer this week proposed a constitutional amendment to do just that, saying: “This is the only office in the land where you can get more votes and still lose the presidency. The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately.”
There is also the bipartisan National Popular Vote initiative. Promoted by the reform group FairVote, it commits states to respect the national popular vote (as part of a multi-state compact in which states with a majority of electoral votes commit to assign them to the candidate who gets the most votes) and to ending the absurdity of elections in which losers can become presidents.
IF SOMEONE TELLS ME I SHOULD “GET OVER IT,” HOW SHOULD I RESPOND?Just tell them that you agree with Donald Trump, who in 2012 described the Electoral College a “disaster for democracy.” On Sunday, he told CBS’s 60 Minutes that he still agrees with himself—even if he is not prepared to defer to the will of the people in this instance. “I would rather see it where you went with simple votes,” Trump explained. “You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win.”
“There shouldn’t be any doubt in anybody’s mind,” he says, “This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation state to achieve a specific effect.”
As our colleagues at Gizmodo have extensively covered, Julian Assange has sworn up and down that he wasn’t trying to influence the U.S. election, and the United States already formally accused Russia in October of stealing emails from the Democratic National Committee and elsewhere.
But while President Obama might have some form of retaliation in mind, he has less than 70 days before his burnt sienna successor takes office. Putin and Trump already had a friendly phone call two days ago pledging to fix relations between their two countries, after which Russia promptly launched air strikes in Syria. (It’s unclear if Trump and Putin managed to get around to talking about Syria, or if Donald Trump has been briefed on what Syria even is.) John McCain, of all people, has warned that a change in U.S. policy towards Russia would amount to “complicity in Putin and Assad’s butchery of the Syrian people.”
It is also worth noting, of course, that Rogers just publicly criticized the process by which his next boss came to power:
Boiling the election results down to Russian interference alone is ridiculous, of course; we’re dumb and racist enough to have shot ourselves in the dick all on our own. And Clinton has blamed the loss, in part, on the the FBI reopening an investigation into her emails.
But all this also calls to mind the Washington Post’s report on how Breitbart chair Steve Bannon subtly manipulated Donald Trump in a series of radio interviews earlier this year. It’s almost as though Donald Trump is getting played in ways he can’t possibly understand, by people with much bigger goals than merely being his friend.
Obama urges Donald Trump to stand up to Putin and warns of 'cyber arms race'
US President Barack Obama has called on Donald Trump to “stand up” to Russia if it deviates from American “values and international norms”. Speaking at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin, Mr Obama urged the President-elect to emulate his administration in seeking a “constructive relationship” with the Kremlin where possible, but also to be “realistic in recognising there are some significant differences in how Russia views the world and how we view the world”. Mr Trump has repeatedly expressed admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin; the two men spoke by phone on Monday. “I don’t expect that the President-elect will follow exactly our approach,” Mr Obama said.
“But my hope is he does not simply take a realpolitik approach and suggest that ... if we just cut some deals with Russia, even if it hurts people or even if it violates international norms or even if it leaves smaller countries vulnerable, or creates long-term problems in regions like Syria, that we just do whatever’s convenient at the time.”
Mr Obama also said he had spoken to Mr Putin about cyber attacks, amid claims that Russia was responsible for hacks of emails from the Democratic National Committee and from Hillary Clinton’s campaign that caused significant damage to the former US Secretary of State’s presidential bid. Cyber warfare is “something we have to work on,” Mr Obama said. “We need to develop frameworks and international norms so that we don’t see a cyber arms race.”
With the forces of populism and nationalism on the rise on both sides of the Atlantic, Mr Obama and Ms Merkel mounted a firm defence of liberalism and globalisation as they met for the last time before the US President leaves office. Globalism “needs to have a human face,” Ms Merkel told reporters. With Britain in the throes of Brexit negotiations, French President François Hollande facing a tough electoral battle against Marine Le Pen’s populist Front National and the Obama era coming to a close, Merksl is now the most prominent face of globalism. The German Chancellor admitted that with Donald Trump in the White House, the TTIP trade deal between the EU and the US would no longer be completed, but said she was “absolutely certain one day we will come back to what we have achieved and build on it”.
After meeting with Mr Trump at the White House last week, Mr Obama said that he believed the President-elect was committed to Nato, contrary to some of the Republican’s comments on the campaign trail. Speaking in Berlin, Mr Obama warned that without a “strong transatlantic alliance” the world would become “meaner, harsher [and] more troubled”.
Mr Obama praised Ms Merkel as "tough" and an “outstanding partner” on the world stage, noting that she “is perhaps the only leader left among our closest allies that was there when I arrived”. The German Chancellor, who has been in power for 11 years, will face an electoral challenge of her own as she seeks a fourth term in 2017, with the far-right Alternative for Germany party rising in the polls following a string of state election victories. “If I were German and I had a vote, I might support [Ms Merkel],” Mr Obama said.
The US President also pleaded with young people to remain engaged in the political process outside of election years, warning that democracy was under threat from a combination of low participation, online propaganda and extremist thinking.
“Do not take for granted our systems of government and our way of life,” he said. “Because we have lived in an era that has been largely stable and peaceful, at least in advanced countries ... there is a tendency to assume that that’s always the case. And it’s not. Democracy is hard work.”
Losers: Clinton Campaign Ignored Bill’s Advice And Felt White Working Class Voters Weren’t Worth The Time
In February of 2016, The New York Times reported that everyone in Clinton land thought they were going to slaughter Donald Trump. It was hubris. It was typical elitism from the liberal elite. And in the end, the Trump campaign smashed the face of the Clinton operation with a brick, doused it in gasoline, and set it on fire. It was an upset that no one, except for white working class America and die-hard Trump supporters, saw coming, which explains the epic temper tantrums emanating from the Left. Old, sick Hillary lost and Donald Trump is now president-elect. But there was one person who potentially saw this coming: Bill Clinton. Bill, a governor from Arkansas who was able to tap into the economic distress of America’s working class and ride that to the presidency, saw that Trump was onto something. At the same time, his strategy to tackle this vulnerability failed miserably (via NYT 2/29/16):
Several Democrats argued that Mrs. Clinton, should she be her party’s nominee, would easily beat Mr. Trump. They were confident that his incendiary remarks about immigrants, women and Muslims would make him unacceptable to many Americans. They had faith that the growing electoral power of black, Hispanic and female voters would deliver a Clinton landslide if he were the Republican nominee. But others, including former President Bill Clinton, dismissed those conclusions as denial. They said that Mr. Trump clearly had a keen sense of the electorate’s mood and that only a concerted campaign portraying him as dangerous and bigoted would win what both Clintons believe will be a close November election.The problem here was Clinton’s email fiasco. You may say Trump is incapable of being president, but you had an unauthorized and unsecure email server that possibly put America’s secrets at risk. How is that presidential? It’s not. It’s possibly illegal. Moreover, the notion that Trump is so thin-skinned to the point where he would launch nuclear missiles is just not believable. It’s cartoonish in the extreme. Most of these attacks, especially the ones involving Trump’s remarks about women, bounced off voters outside urban areas; locker room talk became an acceptable reason. Also, the Clinton Foundation being under FBI investigation, the alleged unethical dealings, and the six-figure paychecks they received for speeches just undercut their whole working class hero line of attack. On that front, it’s hard for anyone to believe that you understand their economic hardship when you make in one 20-minute speech more than what most Americans earn in a lifetime. Yes, Trump is a billionaire, but he’s not shy about it.
That strategy is beginning to take shape, with groups that support Mrs. Clinton preparing to script and test ads that would portray Mr. Trump as a misogynist and an enemy to the working class whose brash temper would put the nation and the world in grave danger. The plan is for those themes to be amplified later by two prominent surrogates: To fight Mr. Trump’s ability to sway the news cycle, Mr. Clinton would not hold back on the stump, and President Obama has told allies he would gleefully portray Mr. Trump as incapable of handling the duties of the Oval Office.
There’s the permanent majority hubris at play here too. Clinton, Obama, and the Democrats think they have it made in national elections. The coalition consists of college-educated women, blacks, Hispanics, and the cities, except that we forget that the nonwhite vote only makes up roughly 30 percent of the electorate and these folks live in areas and states that aren’t competitive in national elections. California isn’t turning red and Texas isn’t going blue. Seventy percent of the electorate, on average, is majority white. A marginal swing could have a game changing impact on the election. The Clinton operation didn’t get that, which seems to be the most obvious fact. White votes matter. Black votes matter. Hispanic votes matter. They all matter when it comes to winning elections. It’s this mindset that I feel paints the Democratic Party as un-American. They worry about the groups that can get them a win, but they don’t care, literally, about any other group. So, out comes the big electoral cookie-cutter and the balkanization begins. Given the progressive vein of the party, whites are the problem with the country. All the sexism, racism, and misogyny comes from straight white males, right? Well, 53 percent of white women voted for Trump; 42 percent of all women voters cast their ballot for Trump. I don’t think it’s white people, Democrats. I think you just had a terrible candidate. The New York Times also noted that Clinton actually turned down an invitation to address the St. Patrick’s Day gathering at Notre Dame; something that Obama and Biden had attended in past years. The Clinton team turned it down; white Catholics weren’t a priority. The end result was the realization that perhaps a demographic that makes up 70 percent of the electorate sort of mattered…big league:
Last year, a prominent group of supporters asked Hillary Clinton to address a prestigious St. Patrick’s Day gathering at the University of Notre Dame, an invitation that previous presidential candidates had jumped on. Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr. had each addressed the group, and former President Bill Clinton was eager for his wife to attend. But Mrs. Clinton’s campaign refused, explaining to the organizers that white Catholics were not the audience she needed to spend time reaching out toClinton isn’t Obama. She’s far from it. Remember, Obama beat her in the 2008 primaries. She doesn’t have a message for hope or change. Heck, her time in Washington already disqualifies her from taking that mantle. And her email issues further disqualified her from higher office. There’s talk that FBI Director James Comey’s letter informing Congress that the bureau would review 650,000 more Clinton-related emails from top Hillary aide Huma Abedin cost her the election. The fact is the momentum towards Trump began prior to Comey’s October 30 letter. Also, it’s still her fault. If she hadn’t set up that unprecedented email system to conduct State Department business, none of this would have happened. The white working class formed the foundation of the Obama coalition and the Clinton campaign missed that fact. They missed the fact that Obama won these people because of the caliber of candidate he was; Clinton can’t come anywhere near him. She sucks. Democrats don’t have to win white working class voters; they just need to be competitive. They were not this cycle. If you have a solid turnout with nonwhites, college-educated women, young people, and get enough working class whites to vote Democratic, you can win an election.
But as the dust settled, Democrats recognized two central problems of Mrs. Clinton’s flawed candidacy: Her decades in Washington and the paid speeches she delivered to financial institutions left her unable to tap into the anti-establishment and anti-Wall Street rage.
And she ceded the white working-class voters who backed Mr. Clinton in 1992. Though she would never have won this demographic, her husband insisted that her campaign aides do more to try to cut into Mr. Trump’s support with these voters. They declined, reasoning that she was better off targeting college-educated suburban voters by hitting Mr. Trump on his temperament.
Instead, they targeted the emerging electorate of young, Latino and African-American voters who catapulted Mr. Obama to victory twice, expecting, mistakenly, that this coalition would support her in nearly the same numbers. They did not.
Mrs. Clinton had defeated Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the primary race by rallying older African-American voters and Democratic women, but she seemed disconnected from the white working class that delivered Mr. Sanders’s victories in Michigan and Wisconsin. Mr. Trump won Wisconsin on Tuesday and appeared to have narrowly won Michigan, as well.
He won 67 percent of the vote among non-college-educated whites, compared with 28 percent for Mrs. Clinton, according to exit polls.
Early on, Mr. Clinton had pleaded with Robby Mook, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, to do more outreach with working-class white and rural voters. But his advice fell on deaf ears.
The sophisticated data modeling Mr. Mook relied on showed that young, Latino and black voters would turn out as they had hoped. But while they favored Mrs. Clinton overwhelmingly, she could not run up the score with them like Mr. Obama had in 2012.
With voters 29 and younger, for example, Mrs. Clinton won by 18 points, down from Mr. Obama’s 22 points in 2012, and 29 points in 2008, according to exit polls conducted by Edison Research.
Instead, what we got was the revenge of the white working class, coupled with millions of Obama supporters who flipped for Trump this year. Moreover, 2012 analysts lowballed the actual working class vote total by 10 million. Trump wining a fraction of those voters would be enough to win the election. In the end, the Democrats thought white votes didn’t matter, though they were the glue to the whole 2008, 2012 operation; that they would get the same turnout with their traditional allies to break for Clinton; and probably spent an ungodly amount of money trying to find those voters who might breaking Clinton through big data operations. As two former senior advisers to Bernie Sanders mentioned that maybe organizing thousands of volunteers doing canvassing and going door-to-door would have given you a better gauge of the voter climate and the messaging Clinton used that was falling flat. In fact, Clinton’s turnout operation definitely turned out Trump voters. Amy Chozick, who wrote the article about Clinton’s miscalculations, showed a campaign tortured by her weaknesses. She can’t press the gender card too much on the first female president because it might alienate male voters. She also tried to run on unity, though record numbers of voters thought she was untrustworthy. As Kimberly Strassel wrote in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, what we got was a complete and total rejection of the Democratic Party from these very people Fallon, Mook, and others ignored:
One exit poll shows Mrs. Clinton won union households by 2 percentage points, when Mr. Obama carried them by 18. Of the 207 swing counties that went for Mr. Obama only once (in 2008 or 2012), Mr. Trump won 194. This is an utter abandonment of the Democratic Party that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton led.Oh yeah, Trump won the Catholic vote as well.
Perhaps most troubling for Mr. Trump, several ethics lawyers said, is a relatively obscure provision of the Constitution, called the Emoluments Clause, which prohibits any government official from taking payments or gifts from a foreign government, or even from sharing in profits in a company that has financial ties to a foreign government.
Mr. Trump has had business deals with foreign governments or individuals with apparent ties to foreign governments, including multimillion-dollar real estate arrangements in Azerbaijan and Uruguay. His children have frequently traveled abroad to promote the Trump brand, making trips to Canada, the United Arab Emirates and Scotland. Closer to home, the Bank of China is a tenant in Trump Tower and is a lender for another building in Midtown Manhattan where Mr. Trump has a significant partnership interest.
“Doing business with a foreign corporation, be it in Azerbaijan, Turkey or Russia, if is it owned in part or controlled by a foreign government — any benefit that would accrue to Mr. Trump could well be a violation of the Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution,” said Kenneth A. Gross, a political ethics and compliance lawyer in Washington.
Mr. Tigerli's memories
Mr. Tigerli in China
Copyright 2016 by Letizia Mancino
translation by Mary Holmes
All rights reserved
Is this Mr. Tigerli?
info to: Sandra Lorinda Traci Petr Dana Jana Michaela Rebekah Swiss Charrd Tru John Darsie Darsie Toby Jeanine Carol Justin Lila Daniel Mo Nika Steve Neal Jitka Jitka Tami Pete Laurie Maia Nancy Kelly Pam Mary Jan and all our other friends
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 18 hrs