What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread: all topics welcome. Here are some links that caught my eye during the past few days; excerpts from several of the articles and columns are after the jump.
Donald Trump’s advocacy for policies that serve Russian interests continue to set off alarm bells for those who are familiar with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s leadership style. In an op-ed for today’s New York Times, former CIA Director Michael Morrell explained why he is publicly endorsing a presidential candidate (Hillary Clinton) for the first time: “Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.”
At this writing, none of Trump’s most prominent Iowa Republican endorsers (Governor Terry Branstad, Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst, Representatives Rod Blum, David Young, and Steve King) have responded to my e-mails seeking comment on Trump’s Russia connections and other worrying aspects of his candidacy. UPDATE: Clinton’s campaign is now highlighting “Trump’s bizarre relationship with Russia.” Scroll to the end of this post for more.
If weakening the NATO alliance, running down parents of a veteran who died in wartime service, and refusing to release tax returns don’t raise enough red flags, Iowa Republicans could read up on the GOP nominee’s connections with organized crime figures. Timothy L. O’Brien reviewed some evidence for Bloomberg. Two journalists who covered Trump and the casino industry for decades have discussed Trump’s mob ties in greater detail: David Cay Johnston in this article for Politico and Wayne Barrett in an interview with CNN.
Fact-checkers have found that Clinton is much more truthful than Trump, or as Nicholas Kristof put it, “Clinton is about average for a politician in dissembling, while Trump is a world champion who is pathological in his dishonesty.” Former Wall Street Journal reporter Neil Barsky had more to say here about Trump’s lies and poor results in business.
Meanwhile, large segments of the Republican base remain convinced Clinton is a liar or worse. Chants of “Lock her up” are now a staple of Trump rallies in Iowa and elsewhere. Matthew Rezab reported for the Carroll Daily Times Herald on August 2 that at last weekend’s parade to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the fire department in the small town of Arcadia (Carroll County), children were encouraged to throw water balloons at one float, featuring “a man dressed in an orange jumpsuit and Hillary Clinton mask while standing on a platform inside bars, fencing and barbed wire above a ‘Hillary For Prison’ sign tacked onto the side.”
Several national polls, including today’s release by the Washington Post and ABC News, reinforce what Dan Guild noted here a few days ago: Clinton got a larger bounce out of her party’s national convention and is well-positioned going into the final months of the presidential campaign. No public polls from Iowa have come out since the conventions; I’m curious to see whether the state of the race has changed here. Iowa is expected to be among the most closely-contested states this fall. The Washington Post/ABC poll findings on support for Clinton and Trump by education level are stunning. I enclose excerpts from the write-up below.
Final note: Iowa’s annual two-day sales tax holiday is happening this weekend. In theory, the temporary break is supposed to stimulate the economy. The Iowa Policy Project’s experts have been saying for years that the policy is a sham. In her latest column for the Cedar Rapids Gazette, Lynda Waddington compiled more evidence for scrapping this 16-year Iowa tradition.
From former CIA Director Michael Morrell’s op-ed for today’s New York Times:
I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument. […]
In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief. […]
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.
Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States.
In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
From today’s Washington Post story by Dan Balz and Scott Clement:
Clinton and her running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.), now lead Trump and his running mate, Gov. Mike Pence (Ind.), by 50 percent to 42 percent among registered voters, double the four-point advantage the Democrats held on the eve of the Republican convention in mid-July. Among likely voters, the Democratic nominee leads by 51 percent to 44 percent.
In a four-way race that includes Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein, Clinton leads Trump by 45 percent to 37 percent, with Johnson at 8 percent and Stein at 4 percent. Before the Republican convention, she had a four-percentage-point lead in a four-way matchup. […]
Overall, Trump leads Clinton among whites by 52 percent to 40 percent. Romney led Obama among whites by 59 to 39. Among nonwhite voters, Clinton leads Trump by 57 percentage points (75 percent to 18 percent), which is only slightly smaller than the 61-point margin by which Obama led Romney among this group.
The survey highlights a potentially significant fault line within the electorate that could shape the outcome: the division based on education levels. Among whites without college degrees, Trump leads Clinton by 58 percent to 33 percent, while Clinton has a 50-to-44 edge among whites with college degrees.
Trump enjoys a roughly 40-point lead among white men without college degrees but only a high single-digit lead among college-educated white men. Among white women without college degrees, he leads by low double-digits but trails by nearly 20 points among college-educated white women. At this point, he is outperforming Romney among white men without college degrees but trailing Romney’s performance with the other three groups.
From an August 2014 blog post by Peter Fisher, research director for the Iowa Policy Project:
Iowa’s policymakers are selling you a pig in a poke. You’re told you’re saving money, but you’re buying dirty water, underfunded schools and fees for amenities such as parks. The cost is estimated at over $4 million.
For two days, Iowans will spend money on the same things they would have spent money on anyway, in those two days or others, so it doesn’t boost the economy. Sales taxes do hit low-income folks hardest, but those families would be better served by a break that went all year. They still have only so much to spend in these upcoming two days.
UPDATE: The Clinton campaign put up a blog post on August 5: “5 questions every voter should ask about Donald Trump’s bizarre relationship with Russia.” The questions address Trump’s “fascination with Vladimir Putin,” reliance on advisers “with links to the Kremlin,” Russia-friendly foreign policy proposals, possible financial ties to Russian oligarchs, and recent invitation to Russia to commit espionage.
From the second point of that post:
Trump’s top adviser and campaign manager Paul Manafort built his political career as a lobbyist for international dictators, rebel groups, and human-rights violators. Before signing on with Trump’s campaign, Manafort spent more than 10 years working for former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a close ally of Putin’s. Manafort has extensive business dealings with several Russian oligarchs, including two with ties to organized crime and one who is wanted by the FBI. And it’s unclear whether Manafort ended his work in Ukraine or whether he’s still on the payroll of pro-Putin forces.
Manafort isn’t the only Trump adviser with a cozy relationship with the Kremlin. Carter Page, a top Trump adviser, visited Moscow last month to deliver speeches criticizing American foreign policy. And Lieutenant General Michael Flynn—one of Trump’s convention speakers who was floated as a potential vice presidential pick—regularly appears on Russia Today, the Putin regime’s television network, and defends Putin’s actions on air. He even said [sic] at Putin’s table at an RT dinner in Russia.
Speaking of Page, check out this absurd blog post he wrote in early 2015: “New Slaves, Global Edition: Russia, Iran and the Segregation of the World Economy.” Excerpts:
Susan Rice recently gave a speech at Brookings which introduced the latest National Security Strategy of the U.S. One of the most accurate and insightful statements from Rice’s speech came when she said, “Without us, Russia would be suffering no cost for its actions in Ukraine.” It is indeed true that the revolution precipitated in Kiev by Victoria Nuland helped unleash these dramatic costs for Russia, Ukraine and damaged the reputation of the U.S.
Another point by Rice was equally true: “While the dangers we face may be more numerous and varied, they are not of the existential nature we confronted during World War II or the Cold War.” According to one estimate by the U.S. Veterans of Foreign Wars, the first Cold War which extended from the Truman Administration until the early 1990s led to a death toll of approximately 389. By comparison, the existential nature of the ongoing war in Ukraine precipitated by U.S. meddling in the Maidan revolution has already led to over ten times as many deaths.
Numerous quotes from the February 2015 National Security Strategy closely parallel an 1850 publication that offered guidance to slaveholders on how to produce the “ideal slave”:
1. Maintain strict discipline and unconditional submission. – “We will continue to impose significant costs on Russia through sanctions.”
2. Create a sense of personal inferiority, so that slaves ‘know their place.’ – “America’s growing economic strength is the foundation of our national security and a critical source of our influence abroad… We are now the world leader in oil and gas production. We continue to set the pace for science, technology, and innovation in the global economy.”
3. Instill fear. – “We will deter Russian aggression, remain alert to its strategic capabilities, and help our allies and partners resist Russian coercion over the long term, if necessary.”
4. Teach servants to take interest in their master’s enterprise. – “At the same time, we will keep the door open to greater collaboration with Russia in areas of common interests, should it choose a different path.”
5. Deprive access to education and recreation, to ensure that slaves remain uneducated, helpless and dependent. – “Targeted economic sanctions will remain an effective tool for imposing costs on irresponsible actors.”Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “You know, my friends, there comes a time when people get tired of being trampled over by the iron feet of oppression. There comes a time, my friends, when people get tired of being plunged across the abyss of humiliation, where they experience the bleakness of nagging despair. There comes a time when people get tired of being pushed out of the glittering sunlight of life’s July and left standing amid the piercing chill of an alpine November. There comes a time.”