BloggeRhythms

Once again, much of today’s headline news concerns the upcoming presidential election, and more specifically, this coming Monday’s debate. 

As far as the bigger picture’s concerned, Peggy Noonan’s column today @wsj.com, suggests that she senses a very strong voter trend toward Trump. 

Ms Noonan writes: “The most arresting sentence of the week came from a sophisticated Manhattan man friendly with all sides. I asked if he knows what he’ll do in November. “I know exactly,” he said with some spirit. “I will be one of the 40 million who will deny, the day after the election, that they voted for him. But I will.” 

Along the same lines of voter reluctance to divulge their presidential preferences at present, Ms Noonan continues: “A high elected official, a Republican, got a faraway look when I asked what he thought was going to happen. “This is the unpollable election,” he said. People don’t want to tell you who they’re for. A lot aren’t sure. A lot don’t want to be pressed. 

“That’s exactly what I’ve seen the past few weeks in North Carolina, New Jersey, Tennessee and Minnesota. 

“Every four years I ask people if they’ll vote, and if they have a sense of how. Every four years they tell me—assertively or shyly, confidently or tentatively. This year is different. I’ve never seen people so nervous to answer. It’s so unlike America, this reticence, even defensiveness. It’s as if there’s a feeling that to declare who you’re for is to invite others to inspect your soul.” 

Despite voter’s reluctance to readily disclose their preference, Ms Noonan then goes on present further evidence of her Trump victory expectations, as follows: 

“I feel like this is the most controversial election ever,” said a food-court worker at La Guardia Airport. She works a full shift, 4 a.m. to noon, five days a week, then goes full-time to a nearby college. We’d been chatting a while, and when I asked the question she told me, carefully, that she hasn’t decided how she’ll vote, and neither have her family members. I said a lot of people seem nervous to say. She said: “Especially Trump people. They’re afraid you’ll think they’re stupid.” 

“Which is how I knew she was going to vote for Donald Trump. 

“It’s true: Trump voters especially don’t want to be categorized, judged, thought stupid—racist, sexist, Islamophobic, you name it. When most of them know, actually, that they’re not.” 

Support for Ms Noonan’s conclusions regarding Trump came from reader, Eric G Raymond, who commented: “I came to the same conclusion in 2008 with McCain having just named Palin as his VP. 

“The one advantage he had was experience, and he blew it with a single decision. My prínciples wouldn't allow me to vote for an idiot. 

“So...I chose NONE OF THE ABOVE for President, thinking "what do we have to lose?" I still voted...just left the top line blank, which is my Constitutional Right. 

“8 years later I'm able to honestly admit that when it comes to a binary choice, it's time to look at who's best going to be able to implement the policies that I like most. With Scalia's seat still sitting empty...dwell on that. 

“I hate Trump. I despise him and think he's a blowhard. But...I'm going to vote for him. Not because of him, but because he is a useful tool for me to see the government do the things I want it to do for me..instead of to me.” 

In very much the same vein, Pat Buchanan’s latest column @wnd.com, presents his suggestions as to how Trump ought to proceed to capitalize on his non-traditional candidacy.   

“Beat the point spread” is a good description of what Donald Trump has to do in Monday night’s debate. 

“With only a year in national politics, he does not have to show a mastery of foreign and domestic policy details. Rather, he has to do what John F. Kennedy did in 1960 and what Ronald Reagan did in 1980. 

“He has to meet and exceed expectations, which are not terribly high. He has to convince a plurality of voters, who seem prepared to vote for him, that he’s not a terrible risk and that he will be a president of whom they can be proud. 

“He has to show the country a Trump that contradicts the caricature created by those who dominate our politics, culture and press. 

“The Trump on stage at Hofstra University will have 90 minutes to show that the malicious cartoon of Donald Trump is a libelous lie.” 

In support of his conclusions, Buchanan writes: “Even George W. Bush, who, according to most judges, did not win a single debate against Al Gore or John Kerry, came off as a levelheaded fellow who was more relatable than the inventor of the Internet or the windsurfer of Cape Cod.” 

Most importantly: “The winner of presidential debates is not the one who compiles the most debating points. It is the one whom the audience decides they like, and can be comfortable taking a chance on. 

“Trump has the same imperative and same opportunity as JFK and Reagan. For the anticipated audience, of Super Bowl size, will be there to see him, not her. He is the challenger who fills up the sports arenas with the tens and scores of thousands, not Hillary Clinton. 

“If she were debating John Kasich or Jeb Bush, neither the viewing audience nor the title-fight excitement of Monday night would be there. Specifically, what does Trump need to do? He needs to show that he can be presidential. He needs to speak with confidence, but not cockiness, and to deal with Clinton’s attacks directly, but with dignity and not disrespect. And humor always helps. 

And then, Buchanan hammers home his well-informed, logically presented conclusion.

“Clinton has a more difficult assignment. 

“America knows she knows the issues. But two-thirds of the country does not believe her to be honest or trustworthy. As her small crowds show, she sets no one on fire. Blacks, Hispanics and millennials who invested high hopes in Barack Obama seem to have no great hopes for her. She has no bold agenda, no New Deal or New Frontier. 

“Why aren’t I 50 points ahead?” wailed Hillary Clinton this week. 

“The answer is simple. America has seen enough of her and has no great desire to see any more; and she cannot change an impression hardened over 25 years – in 90 minutes.”  

Buchanan's expectations were confirmed to a great degree by Annie Karni and Glenn Thrush @politico.com, in today’s update  on Bill Clinton’s wife regarding the upcoming match-up Monday night. 

“The fear is that she’ll get lost in the moment, and no one is better at seizing the moment than Trump,” said a longtime adviser to both Clinton's. 

“Indeed, that’s what’s worrying Clinton’s inner circle – that victory will come down to something like tone, which she has always struggled with, vacillating between cold and severe to thoughtful and wry. But the traditional, substantive sessions now underway are key to settling the candidate’s head, longtime aides said. "The prep matters because it gives her the confidence to know she is armed,” said one longtime Clinton ally. “She will feel more comfortable if she's prepared the way she likes to prepare.” 

However: “They know that Trump – a quick-study political novice participating in the first one-on-one debate of his life – is a wild card who can turn weeks of pouring over briefing books into mockery with a single, brilliant and bullying punch.” 

And there’s the rub in a nutshell. Because from the outset of Trump’s presidential run, sixteen experienced, hardened, Republican politicians were sliced, diced and overrun by an unskilled upstart arriving out of political nowhere. And now, today, those same Republican leaders have lost the party control once held, whereas he's taken that as well.

Which means that, much like what Trump’s done to his nomination competitors, he now has the chance to outperform his Democrat rival. And in that regard, he’s got plenty to work with because, according to an article by the Staff @theblaze.com:

53.5% of Americans Think U.S. Is Headed in Wrong Direction

55.3% Disapprove of How Obama Handled U.S./Iran Relations

52% of Americans Disapprove How Obama Handled the Economy

54% of Americans Wanted Congress to Reject The Iran Deal

56% of Americans Disapprove of How Obama Handled Foreign Affairs

54% of Americans No Longer Want U.S. to Be An International Peacekeeper

Americans Blame Iraq On Obama Almost as Much as Bush. 41.5% Obama,  42.5% Bush

53% of Americans Do Not Want to Close Gitmo

55.5% of Americans Disapprove of How Obama Handled Health Care, With Only 42.5% In Favor

55.5% of Americans Disapprove of How Obama Handled Terrorism

Americans Changed Their Perspective On Refugees After The Paris Attacks. 61% are now opposed versus 44% before.

61% of Americans Also Thought a December Terrorist Attack Was Likely

56.8% of Americans Disapprove of How Obama Handled Gun Policy. Only 38.8% Approve.

54% of Americans Disapprove of Obama’s Executive Orders on Guns

61.5% of Americans Disapprove of How Obama Handled ISIS. “In by far Obama’s worst polling result among the nine broad topics on this list, 61.5 percent of Americans disapprove of how the president has handled ISIS. Much of the criticism surrounds the assertion that Obama has been too cautious, dismissing the Islamic State as the “JV” (junior varsity) team. ISIS has since claimed responsibility for the terrorist attacks in both Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.

A Clear Majority of Americans, 78.5%, Believe ISIS Terrorists Are Currently in the U.S.

68% of Americans Believe the U.S. Military Response to ISIS Was Not Aggressive Enough

And if that isn’t enough, there’s Benghazi, the disastrous nuclear deal with the Mullahs of Iran, failure to secure the borders where Illegals continue bringing guns, drugs and diseases across unhampered, and then there’s the Bowe Bergdahl swap

As far as the economy’s concerned, there’s now the lowest Labor Force Participation rate of 62.7%, a record 92,898,000 Americans over 16 years not working, the highest percentage of Americans are now on food stamps and Medicaid, economic stimulus plans have failed and the price of healthcare has drastically risen for those purchasing it. 

Solyndra was a total bust and misjudgment, as was the handling of Syrian Red Line, the $9 trillion dollars more in debt, passing on the Keystone pipeline, returning the bust of Churchill to the Brits and paying tribute to the Japanese at Hiroshima on Memorial Day.

Thus, without the need for anything more than simple presentation of historical fact, there’s little else that Trump really needs to do in Monday’s debate. Whereas, in the examples above, Bill’s Clinton’s wife was right alongside the POTUS, agreeing with each of them. Either in practice when secretary of state or political philosophy before and afterward. 

All of which means that Trump has a significant advantage over his current rival, who very well might have considerable problems defending herself and her positions. Leading to the ongoing question again: Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are you guys reading this?  

That's it for today folks.   

Adios