Don't Be A trump!

Donald Trump's actions to hide history are well documented. He signed executive orders directing the National Park Service to make sure that information at parks focused on American successes and not on facts that, in his mind, might inappropriately disparage Americans (at least white Americans) or our history. He wouldn't put Joe Biden's picture on the wall outside the Oval Office with all the other presidents. He made sure the free days at national parks no longer include MLK's birthday or Juneteenth. His unbelievable hatred of and attacks on DEI. The list is long.

All of my life I've known there are good presidents and some not-so-good ones. There are great presidents and there are terrible presidents. But until Trump, most, if not all, wanted to make America better. Not Donald Trump. No matter what he says, his goal in leading is not to make America great again; it is to make America Trumpier. Trump's goals in life have always been to do what pleases Trump, especially if he can antagonize or harm his enemies. He also loves to put his name on things. The more consequential the building or action, the better.

Since Trump is the worst president in the history of our country, I think that once he is no longer president we should reverse, as much as possible, the damage he has done and paint a truer legacy of his presidencies. His name or likeness should be used only in cases that document what happens when you elect a president who is ignorant of expected presidential behavior, incompetent, lawless, corrupt, and seemingly incapable of normal human emotions.

I don't mean just reversing his many anti-history actions and executive orders. I mean taking his name off everything his demented ego forced him to put it on. First on my list are the buildings and institutions that bear his name. His presidential portrait should be hung in the basement, where people will only stumble upon it when they get lost. Tear down any monuments he has built, like the ballroom and the triumphal arch if it gets built. Take down all the gold, melt it, and use it to pay off the national debt.

We all know the name Mudd (the doctor who treated John Wilkes Booth). That name carries a stigma to this day. How about a new saying? I suggest, "Don't be a trump." Depending on the context, it would mean something like, "Don't be an idiot," or "It doesn't always have to be about you," or "You're not as smart as you think you are," or "Stop lying," or "You stink."

I'm OK with putting his name on buildings that would make him mad. How about "The Trump Sewerage Treatment Plant"? Or, "The Trump Memorial Hospital for the Criminally Insane"?  I would like to see an executive order acknowledging that DEI has been and should be an important goal of our country and calling it "The Trump Memorial DEI Restoration Act."

Trump should be included in the history of this country, but that history should truthfully document what he did—the good (there must be something) and the bad (the Smithsonian will need a new wing to hold it).

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Elect A Clown And Get A Horror Show

 Elect a clown

Trump the clown

And get this!

Trump the horror show

  Liar

  Incompetent

  Lawless

  Corrupt

  Chaotic

  Unstable

  Amoral

  Cruel

  Narcissistic

  Nonempathetic

  Vindictive

  Wannabe king

  Megalomaniac

  Insurrectionist

Masks Protect Lawlessness. That's The Point.

Fear is the goal.
Hate is the result.

We are in a partial government shutdown because Democrats are insisting on changes to the way ICE operates.

One of the Democrat's demands are that ICE, Border Patrol and other agents carrying out Trump's mass deportations not wear face masks.  Officials in Homeland Security say removing masks in not negotiable because the threats on federal immigration agents have skyrocketed.  According to ICE on October 30, 2025, the number of death threats had increased by 8000%.

What I have not heard anyone in the government say is when this increase started and what might have caused it.

Do they not think that the increase may have been a result of the unlawful, thuggish and violent actions by immigration agents?  These actions seem to be planned actions to terrorize people.  I think the agents who wear skull masks are a prime example.

You want to counter the death threats?  Then require immigration agents to conform to accepted rules of conduct that are required by respected police organizations from around this country.

I'm old, but I remember when streaking (running around naked at public events) was a thing.  Laws were changed so that people who wore masks to hide their identity while streaking were subject to more severe penalties.  

I think the wearing of a mask by immigration agents to hide their identities and evade legal responsibility for unlawful actions is an admission of guilt.

When ICE agents start behaving like other respected police organizations, they won't need masks.

All Talk, No Action

During his State of the Union speech last night, Trump said he would really like to stop the war in Ukraine.  He said that 25,000 people a month are dying in the war.

I've heard that number from other sources, but that is the number of Russian troops dying in a month.  That number of deaths is completely under the control of Putin.  Putin can stop the deaths of Russian troops any time he wants.

Trump said nothing about the number of Ukrainian civilians that are being targeted and killed by the Russians.

Russia is the aggressor and the war will end only when Putin decides to stop his aggression.  Trump knows this.

What the hell is wrong with Trump that he can't put more direct pressure on Putin to stop this war now?

The Burger King Tells Whoppers.

Whopping Liar

Painful as it was, I watched all of Trump's State of the Union speech last night.  Actually it was more like an end of year wrap up of his proudest moments and lies.

I never watched the Apprentice, but he does have a talent for acting like he cares about people.  He gave awards to some people who deserve the attention and he shared the stories of people who have endured terrible losses.  Of course he didn't really care about any of these people.  He just wanted to use their stories to bolster his self-image and pretend to show how much he cares about them.  Trump has repeatedly shown that empathy is not an emotion he understands.  These people were just props for him.

He again claimed that tariffs are great and that foreign countries pay for tariffs.   He said he liked tariffs because he could use them to make other countries do what he wants them to do, they bring manufacturing jobs back into the U.S. and they raise a lot of money.  He even said that someday tariffs could replace income taxes. 

But two of his tariff goals are contradictory.  The more manufacturing that occurs in the U.S. rather than a foreign country, the less revenue generated by tariffs.  Imported manufactured goods generate tariff income.  Without an income tax those same goods made by workers in U.S. factories do not generate any tax revenue.

As would be expected, Trump lied continuously and outrageously.  If he is talking he is lying, so in a speech that lasted an hour and forty seven minutes he could spew a lot of lies. 

And the burger king tells whoppers.

The Ultimate "Owning The Libs"?

Have You No Shame?

Magettes and Trump love to "own the libs".  Are the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by ICE and the refusals by the FBI and DOJ to share evidence about these crimes the ultimate examples of owning the libs?

Are Magettes and Trump proud of these crimes?

Magettes should be ashamed, but like their boss, DJT, they don't know the meaning of the word.

What Is It? An Imposter Or Madness?

I Am Not A Liar!

In June of 2017, at the start of Donald Trump's first term, Sean Spicer, then the White House Press Secretary, said that Donald Trump's tweets "are considered official statements by the President of the United States."  I did a search and could find no policy change from the White House that retracted or disavowed that statement.  

I just read that the actor Kelsey Grammer said he liked President Trump, adding "I've never seen a more transparent presidency in my life".  I'm not sure that publicly and continuously lying qualifies as transparent, but what are we to make of the recent racist post picturing President Obama and his wife?

Was that post and picture an "official statement" from the President of the United States?

Trump now claims that he didn't make the racist post.  It was posted on his account by some unnamed staff member and the post has now been taken down.  Is this follow-up statement a transparent clarification or just another lie?

So which is it?  Are his posts still supposed to be taken as policy?  Trump clearly intends them to be taken seriously.  Or, are there staff members who are free to make official presidential announcements without Trump's knowledge?  Or, are these posts just the ramblings of a seriously damaged mind?

Finally, should Trump still be in control of the nuclear codes?  I wonder if some un-named staff member also has the codes.

Attack Greenland! Is he Crazy?

Troops from allies of the United States, including France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden, are being sent to Greenland to prevent an invasion of Greenland by the United States.

That is a fact, not some insane conspiracy. Actually, it is not the United States that wants to invade and seize Greenland; it is just Donald Trump.

He recently told all of us that the only constraints on him as president are his morality and his mind. He is telling us that the Constitution, laws, Congress, the courts, international law, voters, treaties, and so on do not apply to him.

I do not know what his rationale is for asserting that he is unconstrained, but it is clear that he is physically and mentally impaired.  He must be stopped. The only people who can stop him are his MAGA supporters and the feckless Republican Senators and Representatives who have, up to now, failed to honor their oath of office and their constitutional duties as an equal branch of government to provide a check and balance on an out-of-control president.

What The Hell Did Trump Take Before His Speech?

I watched Trump's speech to the nation last night (Wed, 12/17/2025).  As others have explained, this was Trump trying to convince the nation that he is a better president than the polls show him to be.  No one not already in the cult was convinced.

Trump frantically tried to convince us that as president he is so much better than what people think.  He was speaking so quickly that I became convinced he was hyped up on something.  I don't know what he took to hide his failing health and make sure he didn't fall asleep during his speech, but they should have given him a smaller dose.

Don't Cross This Line Or Else...

Somethings are becoming very clear.

Trump thinks that he can do anything he wants. 

•     Break any law he wants. 
•     Ignore the Constitution.
•     Make Republican law makers do whatever he says to do.
•     Ignore any of the norms that would apply to any other president.
•     Defy the courts.
•     Destroy the DOJ and FBI.
•     Prosecute anyone who opposes him without any proof of wrong doing.
•     Spend any money he wants without authorization.
•     Harm people and institutions when it suits his needs.
•     Use our military in any way he wants.
•     Threaten our allies.
•     Pardon without explanation people who do not deserve it.
•     Use the power of the presidency to enrich himself, his family and his friends.

He thinks a critical number of his voters will support him no matter what.

Trump has lost his mind.

The Supreme Court has said that Trump cannot be prosecuted for anything pertaining to his core duties as president. They've also basically said anything Trump does while in office is part of his official duties.  That means the only control over the president is impeachment.

Voters, Republicans, Democrats and independents, need to draw some lines that clearly state things that they believe will necessitate Donald Trump's impeachment.

These include:

• Starting a war without Congressional approval.  Venezuela will not start a war with us.  If there is a war it is because Trump wants one.
• Using the government or military to manipulate or overturn election results.
• Unleashing the military against citizens.
• A pardon or commutation for Ghislaine Maxwell.
• Impeding the release of the Epstein files.

I'm sure there will be more impeachment lines that will need to be drawn.  It is important we make these red lines bright and clear.  Trump has to believe that Republicans, Democrats and independents will impeach him if he crosses any of these lines.

Update 01/17/2026

I would like to add another red line.  Any overt act take control of Greenland.  Articles of Impeachment should already be written so they can immediately be sent to the House if he makes a move.

The King Of Corruption

Show Me The
Money

Donald Trump cannot claim to be the King of the United States.  He cannot claim to be the best president ever of the United States.  

But I can prove he is the most corrupt president of the United States.  Ever!

It is estimated that Donald Trump's net worth was $4.3 billion on election day in 2024.  Forbes estimates his net worth was $7.3 billion in September, 2025.  So between November 5, 2024 and September 30, 2025, 273 days, Trump's net worth increased by $3.0 billion dollars.

That's $10,989,011 per day!  And it would be a lot more if we removed all the days he spent playing golf and not playing president.

But in fairness, I'd wager he spent most of his time (when he wasn't playing golf or remaking the White House) worrying about that new word, affordability. 

25th Amendment Conspiracy Options

JD Vance

Donald Trump has acknowledged he will (or may) not be on the ticket in 2028 and that there are a lot of candidates to take his place.   JD Vance and Marco Rubio are at the top of the list.

I suggest that Trump watch out for JD.

JD will be watching to see what the chances are that Trump will be out of office before his term ends. If Trump leaves the presidency early, JD will take over for the rest of Trump's term and may be able to be elected to two more terms of his own. All challenges by other candidates like Rubio will be over before they can start.

If necessary, JD can work behind the scenes very, very quietly to fuel and support the 25^th Amendment to get Trump out of office early so he can be elevated to the presidency. Maybe a leak of a bad Trump physical or mental health diagnosis would be enough to get the ball rolling. JD would initially claim that talk of forcing Trump out of office is treasonous, but after awhile he will reluctantly concede it may be best for the good of the country.

Magettes will destroy JD if there is any hint he is working to get Trump out of office early. Even more likely, if Trump decides JD is working against him, Trump will make sure JD leaves office before he does. How does Don Jr as a replacement VP sound?

Rubio has to know all this, so it will be interesting see what he does to foil JD's plans. Maybe a cabal of Republican presidential candidates would work together to block JD.

BTW, in a previous post I said I didn't want to see Trump harmed or killed because the MAGA conspiracies on what “really” happened will be insane.  Simple logic says JD will have to get his fair share of scrutiny if any thing happens to Trump while he is in office.

White House Ballroom, Who Is Stupid?

Trump and his administration think the American people are really stupid.  Or at least dumber than they are.

When asked if they consulted anyone for permission and guidance before destroying the East Wing of the White House, their answer was they were told you don't need permission to tear something down.  You only need permission for "construction — vertical build".  So by that rationalization Trump wouldn't need permission to tear down the entire White House?  He'd just need permission to construct a new White House?  You mean the new gold plated "Donald Trump Executive Mansion"?

The "vertical build" is not some technical jargon, it is word shit to keep the paving of the Rose Garden and the erection of the new White House flag poles out of the discussion.

Trump claims that he and some of his friends will pay for the new ballroom (originally estimated to cost $200 to $250 million).  He may extort money from his "friends", but I don't believe he will put any of his own money into the venture.  Trump also just filed for a $230 million payment for the suffering he took because of his two indictments for the January 6 riots and the national security documents he stole and hid at Mar-a-Lago.  Indictments that he would have probably been convicted on if he hadn't won the 2024 election.  He filed the suits knowing that he and his surrogates have the sole legal authority to authorize the payment to him (you can't make this stuff up).  Does the $230 million sound close to any current project Trump might like to fund?  If it is not needed for the ballroom, he can take a tax deduction and give it to his presidential library to cover the expenses of flying around in his Qatari jet until it is needed to go in the library. 

When asked about what the new ballroom would be called, Trump said something like he hadn't really thought about it, but probably  "The White House Ballroom".  BS!  The whole purpose of  the new ballroom is to get his name on it.

Trump claims the country needs the new ballroom so Presidents don't have to erect big tents on the South Lawn every time for the large, lavish dinners required for a foreign leader's state visit.

I did some checking.  I could only find about a dozen such events in the last 10 years.  I also checked about roughly how many venues there are in DC that could house 800 people.  The estimate was about 30 to 60 locations.  Even many more if you include the areas surrounding DC. 

I can understand there might be some security issues using some building not on the White House grounds, but they hold national political conventions in public buildings.  And there are some government buildings that are already big enough.

How much more would it cost to build a dedicated national ballroom at a different location?  The ballroom could then more easily be used for other large governmental events.  It might also make it easier to implement another of Trump's goals for the new building.

My instinct is, as Deep Throat said, "Follow the money".  I've got to believe Trump has got some plan to monetize the new ballroom.  Imagine how much magettes would pay to be able to say, I had my wedding, wedding reception, birthday party, bar/bat mitzva, funeral, etc. in "The Donald J. Trump White House Golden Ballroom". Cha-ching!

To Win War, Promise Trump The Peace Prize

President Zelensky may now have an opportunity to win the war with Russia.

It is widely believed that Trump was able to get a cease fire in Gaza and the return of the hostages because he put maximum pressure on all leaders in the Middle East, especially Israel and Hamas . He put the pressure on these leaders not because he had some altruistic goal to end the fighting and suffering. He did it because he so badly wants a Nobel Peace Prize. The fact that he didn't win this year may have provided an opening for a new approach to the issue.

President Zelensky should contact the Nobel Peace Prize Committee and tell them they have a chance to not just reward people working for peace after the fact, they can actually encourage peace themselves. Zelensky should talk to the Committee and ask for a commitment to give Trump the peace prize if he gets Putin to agree to and implement the following:

• Complete cease fire and removal from all hostile troops from Ukraine.

• Return all Ukrainian territory Russia has taken. That includes Crimea and the areas taken before the most recent Russian invasion of Ukraine.

• Return all the Ukrainian children that were kidnapped.

• Allow Ukraine security measures like joining the European Union and NATO, and allowing U.S. and European troops to train in Ukraine.

Zelensky could then go quietly to Trump and explain if he can get Putin to agree to these four items, the Nobel Committee has committed to give Trump the peace prize. All the parties can agree to keep the agreement secret if that is needed.

Trump's ego will demand that he make whatever effort is needed to accomplish the task.  Full sanctions on Russia.  Unlimited funds.  Cruise missiles and other sophisticated equipment.

Given Trump's declining mental abilities, I think he should be warned that starting a nuclear war with Russia will invalidate the whole agreement.  

Zip Ties For Children

This cartoon is not intended to be funny.  It may seem disingenuous and outrageous, but not if you've been following the news.

ICE agents stormed an apartment house in Chicago the other night.  They were allegedly looking for two gang members.  From what was reported, they had no warrants.  They broke down doors for each apartment, stormed in and rousted people from their sleep, beds and apartments.  They dragged people, including children, outside.  Some were in pajamas, some were naked.

People were handcuffed.  Children had their hands zip tied together.  Many were kept outside for hours.  Included were U.S. citizens.  Citizens were released only after ICE independently confirmed that they actually were citizens.  In some cases that took hours.  I guess you have to keep your passport in your pajama pocket.

When you couple that with Trump telling our top generals and admirals that they should consider using U.S. cities and citizens for military training, the cartoon doesn't look so outrageous.

Maybe ICE should get some hand ties made just for kids so they won't be so traumatized when they are cuffed.

The sooner Republicans wake up and demand Trump be removed from office, the better off our country will be.

Would You Accept Tickets To White House UFC Fight?

What idiot decided it is a good idea to hold a UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) at the White House?

Oh yeah, our idiot king.  Oops, I meant our idiot president, but why?  And are there no adults in the White House that can tell Trump this is a bad idea?  Are there no Senators or Representatives who love and respect our country and our White House enough to speak up and try to stop this?  So far it looks like they are all expecting ring side seats.

I've heard the fighters are going to walk out of the Oval Office on their way to the ring.  What The Hell!

I think that Trump is a very sick man and I am worried about the damage he is doing to our country.  

If you were offered a seat at this UFC fight, would you say "Yes" or "No" or "Hell No!".

If you said "Hell No", please call and/or write your Senators and Representative to tell them they need to speak up and help save our country.  We really need Republicans and MAGA to stand up and say "Enough is enough".  The app "5 Calls" will help you with understanding issues and contacting politicians.

There is another nation wide protest on October 18th.  Please attend a protest and let MAGA know Trump is hurting the country much more than he is helping it.  We don't need or want a king.  I've got to believe much of MAGA knows this and it is not what they signed up for.  The country needs their help now.

One more thing, I read the purse for the fight is $100 million.  Where is all the money to stage this event coming from?  There better not be even one cent from the U.S. government.  How much is the U.S. going to receive for use of the White House and the grounds?  Who is going to pay for any damage done to the White House or the grounds?  How much money will go to Trump or his family or his friends?  Again, the "not one cent" rule should apply (lot's of luck with that).  

Who is going to pay for the damage done to the reputation of the United States of America, once known as a super power and the leader of the free world?  I hope that will be Trump and Republicans in November, 2026.

Trump, What The Hell!

Are You My Enemy?

During his speech to the generals and admirals today I heard Trump say something that shocked me.  He said something about the military fighting enemies, but said he also had to fight his enemies.  He said it is easier for the military to fight their enemies because they wear uniforms.  

Then he said his enemies are:

"No different than a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways because they don’t wear uniforms. At least when they’re wearing a uniform you can take them out.”

What the hell!  Trump frequently talks about Democrats as "the enemy from within".  So he would like to be able to "take out" his enemies (Democrats) like the military takes out their enemies?

Keep in mind,  Trump brags about bombing and shooting boats in the Caribbean that HE says are carrying drugs.  He provides no proof.  It seems to be based just on his judgement.

So when Republicans talk about Democrats encouraging violence let them listen to that part of his speech.  Trump wants to "take out" anyone he judges to be his enemy.  Is that a hint?

Hegseth's Very Important Speech

Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth (he is only Secretary of War in his imagination which is also the only place where he is are qualified to hold his current job) held an urgent meeting to make sure our top generals and flag officers know that there are new rules they are expected to obey.

Hegseth talked about several changes to the military.  He basically told these officers that if they didn't like these changes, they should do themselves a favor and just resign now.  Listen up dimwit Hegseth, you didn't get your current position based on merit,  you got it for lying and kissing Trump's ass.  These generals and admirals have spent years and decades getting to their positions and will still be there when you are on the trash heap of history.  Do yourself a favor and resign now.

Hegseth said there is no place in the military of over weight generals.  What about an overweight Commander in Chief who delivers a long rambling speech filled with lies?  What kind of image is he setting?

Hegseth also basically said there were too many women in the military who are not up to his physical requirements.  Pete, I would bet there are women in the military that could whip your ass.  And why just limit it to physical qualifications?  I'll bet there are a lot of women in the military with better brains, judgement and overall intellectual ability than you'll ever have.  Do yourself a favor and resign now.

The war man wants to change the rules so that anonymous complaints to inspector generals will no longer be allowed.  Anonymous complaints were allowed because pin heads like Hegseth would fire anyone who complained about something he didn't want to hear about.  Leaders can't address problems they don't know about.  

What a waste to bring all of these officers from around the world to listen to a lot of nonsense.

Will Trump Make It To Heaven?

Trump "Golden"
Pearly Gates

Recently Trump seems to be thinking more about his mortality and what he might need to do to increase his chances of getting into heaven.   I don't want Trump to die anytime soon, although a stroke from his terrible diet would be OK.  Preferably one that leaves him unable to speak, whine or insult others.

From what I remember from Sunday school as a kid, I think he will need to admit his past sins and ask for forgiveness.  Admitting he is wrong is not something he has had a lot of practice doing. Given that and his knack for long rambles, he will need a lot of time to make his case that he shouldn't be sent straight to hell.  He just might need to live to 200 to accomplish this.

Given his absolute need for the lime light, I think he has provided evidence that he has broken at least nine of the ten commandments. Maybe he can squeak through on commandment five, “Honor Thy Father and Mother”.

If he should make it to heaven, you can bet he'll immediately suggest to God that changes need to be made. Remember, Trump is right about EVERYTHING. Since Jesus is already the right hand of God, it might be a stretch for Trump to accept being the left hand of God. 

Trump would probably start his changes with what he considers is his supreme expertise and suggest the Pearly Gates be painted gold. Only then moving on to finding his enemies that got to heaven before him and having them all deported to hell.

Trump Is Such An Embarrassment, Again

Loser King of Chaos

I just watched the live joint press conference with British Prime Minister Starmer and Trump.  As an American I am deeply embarrassed. 

Trump was on television for so long acting like this genius business person even though he declared bankruptcy six times. You would have thought someone could teach him how to act like a president.

In his responses to questions, Trump spent more time bragging about his imagined successes and blaming Biden for leaving him such a disastrous country than he did on thoughtful answers.  It didn't help him to have some mindless American reporters (are were some of them influencers?) asking him questions.

Starmer, unlike Trump, came across as a knowledgeable, reasonable politician that understood what was required in this situation.

At one point I believe Starmer was in the middle of answering a contentious question from the press and he said something Trump really liked.  Trump reached over and slapped Starmer twice very firmly on the back.  I thought the act was very rude and a typical Trump move to always try to steal the lime light. I don't think Starmer appreciated Trump's interference.

Trump tried to take control of the questioning, but Starmer, who was the host, stood his ground.  I don't think Trump liked that, but at least on this he was in better control than he often is.

Trump is such and embarrassment, again.

It's All About The Glitz

Trump's Idea Of A Perfect Air Force One

In May, Qatar gifted a 747 jet to the United States.  It is unclear whether it is the property of the United States or the Air Force, but will undoubtedly end up as the property of Donald Trump, (aka Commander of Grift).  It is also unclear how much the upgrades will cost, how long they will take and exactly where the money will come from.

Newsweek reported that an official with information about the contract to modify the Qatar plane to be an Air Force One, referred to the jet as "executive airlift" and not "presidential transport,". This suggests requirements may differ.  It was also suggested this may mean fewer security, communications or defensive systems.

If this "new" Air Force One is not up to the standards of a real Air Force One, it will probably not be used overseas.  So we will pay somewhere between 400 million to a billion dollars for a plane that will be more ostentatious, but not as capable or safe.  But that is the Trump style.

Image from  ChatGPT.

I Saw Nothing

I Saw Nothing

Several weeks ago magettes were in an uproar about people in the Biden administration who they thought hid the cognitive decline of President Biden.  They wanted investigations and legal charges.

It is clear that Trump's physical and mental health is declining quickly yet the White House insists that Trump is fine.  He has minor health issues and shakes too many hands.

What the hell are magettes going to say when Trump finally completely falls apart?  We all know they'll do a Schulz.  "I saw nothing"  Schulz is from Hogan's Heroes for those under 60.

I suggest magettes start reading up on the 25th Amendment.  At Trump's rate of decline I think it will be needed before the end of the 2025.

Voting For A Presidential Third Party Is Bad

The U.S. political system is currently structured for two parties.  Voting for a third party presidential candidate is not a good idea.

At best, a vote for a presidential third party candidate is potentially bad for one of the two major party candidates.  It is a common belief that Ralph Nader prevented Al Gore from winning Florida in 2000.  The thought is that without Nader, who received thousands of votes in Florida, more Nader voters would have voted for Gore than would have voted for Bush.  We can't know that for sure, but it does make sense given the platforms of each candidate.  Bush beat Gore in Florida by only about 800 votes while Gore won the national popular vote by more than 500,000.  If Gore had won Florida he would have been the next president.  Imagine how that might have changed world history. Like no war with Iraq.

There are some people who think that third party voters kept Clinton from beating Trump in the 2016 race.

But worse than that is what happens if a strong third party candidate divides the vote totals so that no presidential ticket gets a majority of the electoral college vote (>=270).  This situation is called a contingent election and it will get ugly very quickly.  

According to ChatGPT here is roughly what would happen:

If nobody secures a majority of the electoral votes for president, the U.S. House of Representatives chooses the president from the top three vote-getters, with each state delegation casting one vote, and a candidate needs 26 state votes to win. Meanwhile, if there’s no VP majority, the Senate chooses the vice president. If the House hasn’t selected a president by Inauguration Day, the vice president-elect acts as president, or if there’s no VP-elect either, the Speaker of the House becomes acting president.

Read that paragraph carefully.  It is just a summary, but even this exposes several issues with this process.  

Representatives from each state vote as a group to determine their single vote from their state to elect the next president.  Do you see any possible problems with that?  The Representatives that vote are those from the new Congress just elected.

That means in a contingent election the state of California with 54 electoral votes (and approximately 16 million voters) has the same power to elect the next president as Wyoming with 3 electoral votes (and approximately 300,000 voters).   

The vice president is selected by a similar process, but with a separate vote in the Senate.  Senators must vote for one of the top two vice presidential candidates (the House chooses from the top three presidential candidates).  Each Senator gets one vote. Fifty-one votes are needed (not just a majority of the Senators present at the time of the vote).  So the vice president selected by the Senate could come from a different party than the president selected by the House.   

I believe if the Senate selects a vice president elect, but the House has not selected a president elect by Inauguration Day, the vice president-elect is the acting president until the House selects a president-elect.  If neither chamber has made their selections before Inauguration Day, the Speaker of the House is the acting president.  

The Constitution originally had the presidential election and vice presidential election as separate.  The 12th Amendment changed that.  Now a party chooses a team of a presidential candidate and a vice presidential candidate, but the contingent election process still sees the presidential race and the vice presidential race as separate.  

Without going into great detail, we might see candidates try to form coalitions to get the necessary votes in the House.  Building a coalition might force a presidential candidate to elevate the power of some minor party or selected Representatives just to get enough votes to win the presidency.  For an example, look at how Israel has had to suffer with the extreme religious right's hold on Netanyahu.  He absolutely needs these extremist in his coalition so he must accept some of their absurd demands.  

My point is, we don't want to ever get into a situation where the election goes to the House.  Voting for a third party presidential candidate that can't possibly win is not just your way of making a statement, it could allow a candidate you would never vote for win.

If you think gerrymandering is a hot topic now, hold your breath if no candidate gets a electoral majority.  Given that Trump thinks he is above the law, who knows how he (or a subsequent Republican presidential candidate) would deal with an election that went to the Congress. Again, it will get ugly very quickly.  And if a third party is strong enough, contingent elections could become the norm and generate seismic changes to the political landscape.  Small state Representatives will receive huge increases in campaign contributions since they will probably elect the next president.

I don't have a problem with third parties.  I think the country would benefit from a more robust discussion of issues. But we need to abandon the Electoral College and change the presidential selection process.  Allowing the House and Senate to determine presidential elections results seems like a very bad idea.  

You can double check my information by asking ChatGPT or your AI for information about Presidential contingent election rules, Election & contingent election timeline, Electoral College rules.

Why Did Trump Give ICE 180 Billion Dollars?

The OBBB (One Bodaciously Bad Bill) recently passed by Republicans gave ICE a 180 billion dollar budget (some expenditures are spread over a 3 year period but I don't think we know the actual annual amounts).  Only two countries have annual national defense budgets that are larger than than 180 billion, the U.S. and China.  Russia's annual defense budget is estimated to be 149 billion dollars.  Germany annually budgets about 89 billion.

So ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) has an average annual budget (60 billion) which puts it in range of the annual defense budgets of countries like Ukraine, France and Japan.  Only seven countries have annual defense budgets greater than 60 billion dollars.  Canada spends about 35 billion dollars a year on defense.

The current yearly funding by the Department of Defense for the U.S. National Guard is about about 40 billion dollars a year.  

The estimate of the total amount spent on state and local law enforcement in the U.S. is estimated to be approximately 135 billion dollars a year. 

What the hell does Trump really plan to have ICE do with 180 billion dollars? 

Keep in mind that ICE is going after "illegal" aliens which are not accorded the same rights as U.S. citizens.  When they grab you they don't ask you if you are a citizen.  How would you prove it anyway?  Do you normally carry your passport?  We know most detainees don't have warrants for their arrest.  ICE can treat you as illegal until you find a way to prove you are a citizen after you've been hauled away. 

Do you think Republicans in Congress know or care about what Trump is doing? 

Dollar figures come from ChatGPT.

Liberal Democracy Constitutional Changes

The United States is governed by our Constitution which I believe contains many of the ideas behind the concept of a liberal democracy (click on this for a description of a liberal democracy).  The "liberal" in "liberal democracy" is not directly tied to the Democratic Party, but I suspect that Democrats agree with many of the core principles that would define a liberal democracy. 

I asked ChapGPT "How should the US Constitution be changed to make it more in tune with the ideals of a liberal democracy?"  Its responses are below.  I provide ChatGPT's response here because it provides a starting framework for a discussion of changes that Democrats should think about enacting when they once again get control of the presidency and Congress. 

I've added some additional suggestions after ChatGPT's list.

 

The U.S. Constitution is already a foundational document that reflects many liberal democratic ideals, such as the protection of individual rights, the separation of powers, and the rule of law. However, there are several potential changes or reforms that could make it more in tune with modern liberal democracy, ensuring it aligns better with evolving standards of fairness, inclusivity, and accountability. Here are some suggestions:

1. Electoral Reforms

• Abolishing the Electoral College: The Electoral College can distort the will of the people, as a candidate can win the presidency without securing the popular vote. A direct popular vote for president would align better with democratic principles of majority rule.

• Reforming or Expanding Voting Rights: Making voting more accessible by eliminating voter ID laws that disproportionately affect marginalized groups, restoring voting rights to people with felony convictions, and ensuring automatic voter registration for all eligible citizens.

• Proportional Representation: The U.S. operates under a "winner-takes-all" system in most elections. Implementing proportional representation (for Congress or local elections) could better reflect the diversity of political opinions and allow for more minority party representation.

2. Strengthening Civil Liberties

• Guaranteeing Economic and Social Rights: While the Constitution emphasizes political and civil rights, it does not explicitly guarantee rights related to healthcare, education, or economic security. Adding these protections could enhance the liberal democratic promise of equality and human dignity.

• Privacy Protections: In the age of digital information, stronger constitutional protections for privacy and data security would align the document with modern values around personal freedom and security.

3. Campaign Finance Reform

• Reducing the Influence of Money in Politics: Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United have led to the proliferation of "dark money" in politics, undermining democratic accountability. Constitutional amendments or reforms that limit campaign spending and increase transparency in political donations could help reduce the influence of wealth on the political process.

4. Judicial Reform

• Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices: Currently, Supreme Court justices are appointed for life. Introducing term limits or a set retirement age for justices could prevent the court from becoming too politicized or entrenched in ideologies for too long. This could help ensure that the court remains in touch with contemporary values and challenges.

• Increasing Judicial Accountability: Implementing reforms for greater oversight of judicial actions and ensuring that courts reflect broader societal diversity could help make the judicial branch more responsive to the evolving principles of liberal democracy.

5. Clarifying or Expanding Rights for Marginalized Groups

• Strengthening LGBTQ+ Rights: Although the U.S. has made strides in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals, clearer constitutional protections could further protect against discrimination and ensure equal treatment under the law.

• Addressing Racial Justice: Amendments could be made to specifically address systemic racism, ensuring that equal protection under the law applies robustly and with focus on rectifying historical inequalities.

• Women’s Reproductive Rights: After Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, an amendment to explicitly protect a woman’s right to choose could strengthen reproductive freedoms and align with liberal democratic ideals of bodily autonomy.

6. Decentralizing Power

• Strengthening Local Governance: A stronger emphasis on federalism could allow local governments to make more decisions that directly affect their communities, increasing political participation and ensuring that diverse viewpoints are represented.

• Reforming the Senate: The current system gives disproportionate power to smaller states due to equal representation for all states, regardless of population. This could be reformed to ensure that the Senate better represents the people, reducing the influence of smaller, less populous states.

7. Improvements to the Impeachment Process

• Clearer and More Accessible Accountability: The impeachment process could be clarified to ensure that it is not used for partisan purposes and that presidents and other high-ranking officials are held accountable for serious misconduct. This would reinforce checks and balances, a key feature of liberal democracy.

8. More Inclusive Amendments Process

• Making Constitutional Amendments More Accessible: The current amendment process is intentionally difficult, requiring either a two-thirds majority in Congress or a constitutional convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures. Making this process more accessible could allow for the Constitution to be more responsive to the evolving needs of a liberal democracy, especially as social and political dynamics change over time.

Conclusion:

Changing the U.S. Constitution to make it more in tune with the ideals of a liberal democracy would require balancing the foundational principles of democracy with modern concerns around equality, accountability, and inclusion. Many of these changes would make the political system more responsive, transparent, and representative of the diverse population, ensuring that the Constitution continues to serve its purpose as a living document in a modern democratic society. 

Above are the suggestions from ChatGPT to the question "How should the US Constitution be changed to make it more in tune with the ideals of a liberal democracy?".

Other constitutional or legal changes I would suggest:

• Restrictions on gerrymandering.
• Restrictions on presidential power.  The Supreme Court was obviously wrong when it said that a president could not be held accountable for illegal actions taken as part of his official duties.  The failure of Republican congressional men and women to perform their constitutional requirement to provide checks and balances on the executive branch shows the need for some way for citizens to demand change more frequently than every two years.
• Better restrictions to prevent presidential influence over or dismantling of independent agencies.  For example, The Department of Justice and FBI should not report to the executive branch.

Feel free to comment if you have any additions or issues with the improvements suggested in this entry.  Anonymous comments are allowed, but please keep them civil.

Why Do Republicans Hate CPB, PBS and NPR?

The Republicans in Congress just voted to de-fund the public media organizations CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), PBS (Public Broadcasting System, domestic TV service) and NPR (National Public Radio).  These media organizations were established by Congress decades ago.  For much of the time since then Republicans have complained that they are biased "liberal" media and they are unfair to Republicans and Conservatives.  

As a long time regular viewer of PBS and a listener of NPR, I disagree.  PBS shows a wide variety of shows including Sesame Street, Daniel Tiger, Ken Burns documentaries, Master Piece Theater, and some news, political and cultural shows.  The news shows seem to me to be very fair and balanced unlike FOX news or MSNBC.  NPR provides many shows including news, weather, science, entertainment, etc.  In many rural areas NPR may be a primary provider of news and weather.

I have been confused by the vehement hatred of these public media outlets by Republicans/Conservatives.

I think I've figured out why Republicans hate them. 

I asked ChatGPT to summarize principles of Democrats and  Republicans.  You can click on the links to see its answers.  I also asked ChatGPT to make a summary list to compare Democratic and Republican principles.  Finally I asked ChatGPT to define the principles of a Liberal Democracy.  You can read these to get a more detailed description of each.

According to ChatGPT":

Democrats tend to emphasize:

• Collective responsibility through government action,
• Equity and inclusion for historically marginalized groups,
• Public investment in health, education, and the environment,
• And a belief that government can and should help level the playing field for all Americans.

In essence, a liberal democracy blends majority rule with minority rights, ensuring that even unpopular groups have their basic freedoms safeguarded.

The principles of the "liberal" Democratic party seem to more closely align with ChatGPT's description of a liberal democracy.  So Republican's consider any institutions that believe in the ideals of a liberal democracy to be biased towards and aligned with Democrats.  But sorry Republicans, the U.S. Constitution was designed to define a liberal democracy for the United States.  This was long before the Democratic Party was created.  The founders fell short of a liberal democracy in some areas (slavery, universal suffrage), but until recently we have been moving forward to complete the project (more about this in future posts).

We have a First Amendment which guarantees free speech, but which party likes to ban books?  Which party believes in an historical interpretation of the Constitution and then chooses to ignore the opening clause of the Second Amendment?  

Which party is the worst proponent of gerrymandering?  I know Democrats have also been guilty of gerrymandering, but it is Texas Republicans who are trying to take gerrymandering to a new level.  

Which party would like to implement universal health care?  Which party wants to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, SNAP?  In the current environment, which party is standing up for rule of law and due process?  Which party is trying to destroy the principle of separation of powers?  Which party has neutered congressional oversight?  Which party is trying to make courts impotent?  Which party is trying support medical science? Which party is trying to keep independent agencies like the DOJ and FBI truly independent and not subject to executive pressure? Which party believes in the unitary executive?  Which party is trying to mitigate climate change?  Which party has been more willing to get big money out of politics? Which party is more interested in funding early education (like Head Start).   Which party is trying to fund food for school children?  Which party is trying to destroy our world class higher education system?

So Republicans hate CPB, PBS and NPR because these organizations work very hard to provide objective information and services that reflect the ideas of Constitution and the people of this country.  They may not always be perfect, but they are always working to be provide facts and objective truth. 

And Republicans hate them for this.

What is a Liberal Democracy?

The United States is governed by our Constitution which I believe contains many of the ideas behind the concept of a liberal democracy.  The "liberal" in "liberal democracy" is not directly tied to the Democratic Party, but I suspect that Democrats agree with many of the core principles that would define a liberal democracy. 

I asked ChatGPT for a definition of a liberal democracy.  Below is its answer.  I provide it here because I want to use it as a reference in future posts.

A liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy characterized by:

1. Free and fair elections – Government officials are elected through regular, competitive elections where multiple parties can run and citizens can vote without coercion.

2. Rule of law – Laws apply equally to all citizens, including government officials. Legal processes are transparent and independent.

3. Protection of individual rights and freedoms – Civil liberties such as freedom of speech, religion, press, and assembly are guaranteed and protected by law.

4. Separation of powers – Government power is divided among branches (executive, legislative, judicial) to prevent abuse.

5. Pluralism and political participation – Multiple viewpoints and interest groups are allowed and encouraged to compete and participate in the political process.

In essence, a liberal democracy blends majority rule with minority rights, ensuring that even unpopular groups have their basic freedoms safeguarded.

Above is the description of a liberal democracy as provided by ChatGPT.  You may or may not agree with this analysis.  Feel free to comment if you have issues with this description.  Anonymous comments are allowed, but please keep them civil.

 

 

Differences Between Conservative and Liberal Beliefs

I asked ChatGPT to do a side-by-side comparison of typical Republican and Democratic party principles.  The answers are provided below.  I included them here because I want to reference this in a later post. 

Principle	Republican Party (Conservative)	Democratic Party (Liberal/Progressive)
Role of Government	Limited government; more power to states and individuals	Active government role in addressing social and economic issues
Taxes & Economy	Lower taxes, deregulation, pro-business	Progressive taxation to fund public services and reduce inequality
Healthcare	Market-based solutions; repeal/replace the ACA	Healthcare is a right; expand ACA or pursue universal healthcare
Social Safety Net	Reduce size of welfare programs; encourage self-reliance	Strengthen programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid
Individual Rights	Emphasize gun rights, religious freedom, property rights	Emphasize civil rights, voting rights, and protections for marginalized groups
Abortion	Pro-life; support restrictions or bans	Pro-choice; support access to abortion and reproductive healthcare
LGBTQ+ Rights	Mixed; some support traditional definitions of gender/marriage	Strong support for legal equality and protections for LGBTQ+ people
Climate and Environment	Skeptical of regulations; favor fossil fuels and energy independence	Support strong environmental regulations; invest in clean energy and climate action
Immigration	Emphasize border security, reduced legal immigration, strict enforcement	Support path to citizenship, protections for Dreamers, more humane policies
Education	School choice, parental control, charter schools, reduce federal role	Invest in public schools, affordable college, universal pre-K
Gun Policy	Defend Second Amendment; oppose most gun control laws	Support background checks, red flag laws, limits on certain firearms
Law and Order	Strong support for police and tough-on-crime policies	Criminal justice reform, address systemic racism, community policing
Foreign Policy	“America First,” military strength, skeptical of global institutions	Multilateralism, diplomacy, alliances like NATO, global leadership
Judicial Philosophy	Originalist interpretation of Constitution	Living Constitution; support judicial decisions that expand rights
Voting Rights	Emphasize election integrity, voter ID laws	Expand voting access, oppose voter suppression, support automatic registration

Notes:

• These are general trends and do not apply to all individuals in either party. Both parties include moderates, libertarians, populists, and progressives. 
• Platform positions may shift depending on current leadership, national events, or generational changes.

Above is the side-by-side comparison of care principles of Conservative Republicans and Democrats as provided by ChatGPT.  You may  or may not agree with the results of this comparison,  Feel free to comment if you have issues with this description.  Anonymous comments are allowed, but please keep them civil.