War of the women truly going to take down the GOP, no matter what they do

So Donald Trump decides to stomp all over what should have his big day of East Coast electoral victories by insisting the only reason Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is doing well is because of her gender.

Trump’s chief GOP challenger, Ted Cruz, retorts with an act of desperation by giving us his choice of a vice-presidential running mate – Carly Fiorina, the former HP CEO who had her own presidential dreams back in the days when there were 18 or so Republicans in the running.

I REALLY HAVE trouble figuring which of these two clowns comes across as more pathetic and which would be the most truly unpresidential person our nation could have as a choice for someone who deserves to legitimately live in the White House.

I’m inclined to think it’s Trump, just because he seems to have a lock on buffoonish behavior.

But you have to admit that the junior senator from Texas has truly adopted his state’s reputation for over-the-top behavior. He’d probably conduct himself with more decorum if he truly were a Canadian!

For it seems that as the Republicans are on the verge of having to admit failure in their effort to deprive New York real estate developer Trump of the ability to use their party’s presidential nominating convention in Cleveland into a personal pep rally for himself!

SO CRUZ COMES up with this image of his presidential campaign as something truly historic – a chance to have a top-of-the-ticket pairing that could put a woman in a place of significance.

It might, in their minds, make some people give up on the idea of voting for Hillary because her gender would be a political statement.

Reading through this probably makes you wonder what kind of medication I’m using to come up with such addled thoughts, and maybe the newly-prescribed blood pressure pills I have started taking is doing something.

But Cruz’ efforts to use the Fiorina image to bolster his own does little but drag him down.

FOR ONE THING, there were a few people who thought Carly would be fit for president. They may wind up provoking the concept that the wrong person was on top – just like it would have been a stupid mistake if Barack Obama back in 2008 had picked Clinton as a running mate.

Besides, we really don’t want to think about running mates until we know who the nominees are! I can’t believe Cruz thinks he can use Carly to bolster what has become his long-shot chances of stopping Trump from becoming the nominee.

Face it, 2016 will wind up being the year of Who Do We Hate More?!? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. It really makes me wonder if a viable third candidate will emerge who can take the votes of people who can’t bring themselves to cast ballots for either one of them.

And as far as the Republicans are concerned, I have to confess that back in the days when there were 18 candidates, Trump and Cruz were always the two who stood out in my mind as the absolute last ones I would want to see get the nomination.

THE FACT THAT they are the ones who have prevailed and that Cruz, the ultimate knee-jerk ideologue, is considered the more sensible of the two is – in my mind – the evidence as to why I can’t take seriously the modern-day Republican Party.

And why I wind up siding myself with a mediocrity like Hillary – who’s going to bring back the two-decade old lame gags about her husband.

I have to confess one potential joy to the notion of Trump feeling compelled to take pot shots at Hillary’s gender at a point when he’s on the verge of primary victory.

The fact that he feels this way means his defeat come November (losing to ‘that dame’) will probably hurt him deep down all the more.

  -30-

Could Illinois be the example of rational political thought after all?

All of the cheap rhetoric about the presidential campaigns has had one thing in common – it hasn’t involved anyone from Illinois.

BUSH: Land of Lincoln's front-runner?

It has been a whole lot of stupid talk doing their nonsense elsewhere. We don’t have any local angle on it.

PERSONALLY, I’M GLAD. I’d like to believe it is the evidence that it is the rest of the nation that is absurd, and that we in Illinois aren’t the ones who elevated anyone as vapid as Donald Trump to the ranks of a political front-runner.

Considering that it will be later this week (Thursday, to be exact) that presidential candidates can begin circulating the nominating petitions that ultimately will get them a spot on the ballots come the March 15 primary elections.

Candidates will have until mid-December to gather their signatures of support, and I don’t doubt that the likes of Trump, Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson can come up with people in Illinois who will work on their behalf to gather the support that gets them on the ballot.

But it says something that of the 15 or so candidates wishing to run for the Republican nomination for president in next year’s election cycle, the only ones that have the operations in place already are the candidates most detested by the ideologues who are jumping on board the Trump and Carson campaigns – and to a lesser degree, that of Fiorina.

COULD IT BE that we in Illinois have a lesser tolerance for nonsense talk and are more interested in officials who are capable of getting things done? Perhaps the reason why Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, still has his supporters for his refusal to give in to the trash talk of organized labor being spewed by Gov. Bruce Rauner?

KASICH: Backing a Great Lakes guv?

Or maybe it means Illinois Republicans had enough sense to realize that most of the 15 GOP presidential dreamers had no business being on the ballot, and are waiting for the field to boil down before committing to anyone.

Which is why Jeb Bush (who will be in suburban Geneva on Thursday and Chicago proper Friday morning for political fundraiser events), Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and John Kasich are about the only ones that seem to have anything resembling campaign operations in Illinois to get themselves on the ballot.

Candidates can trash-talk all they want. But unless someone does the work of circulating petitions to show support, no one will be able to vote for them.

WHICH MAY BE for the best for society if come March, Trump’s name doesn’t even turn up on the ballot. Particularly since assorted polls show he’s not as dominant as he was a month ago.

RUBIO: Ill. preferred Latino pol (not Ted Cruz)

It’s just a matter of time before Trump’s ego no longer gets fed enough by the thought of running for president that he decides to go back to being just a real estate developer who builds really tacky-looking structures.

It would seem that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the brother and son of former presidents, is the Illinois favorite, with former Illinois House Minority Leader Tom Cross leading up his effort.

The late state Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka’s former chief of staff is heading up Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s presidential dreams, while state Sen. Michael Connelly, R-Lisle, is in charge of the Marco Rubio operation.

FOR WHAT IT’S worth, state Sen. (and constant political dreamer) James Oberweis, R-Sugar Grove, is also a backer of the guy whom Trump thinks of as a kid too young to take seriously as a presidential candidate.

TRUMP: Withering away to irrelevance?

Even though there are those of us who think that Trump himself is too old and foolish to have any credibility in electoral politics.

Not that I’m inclined to back anyone amongst Bush, Kasich or Rubio. Then again, I think the Democratic presidential field is filled with mediocrities – I haven’t found anyone I think is worthy of replacing Barack Obama come early 2017.

But it is reassuring to know that the Illinois primary election season is likely to be a little more logical than it has been thus far, or likely will be in other states.

  -30-

Trump’s money may serve one positive purpose – chasing out fringe opponents

I haven’t made it a secret that I don’t think much of the presidential candidacy of New York real estate developer Donald Trump, and wonder seriously about the mental stability of those people who think there’s anything presidential about him.

FIORINA: Could she really be the GOP nominee?

Yet I’m now thinking there’s one very positive aspect to the Trump candidacy – one that ultimately will benefit the electoral process in this presidential campaign cycle.

HE’S A WELL-funded (he can afford to pay the campaign bills out of his own pocket) candidate who will chase away the weaklings who probably had no right to have dreams of someday working at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W.

In a candidate field that has reached as large as 17, two potentially-serious candidates have already dropped out because they couldn’t even fake being competitive against the Trump juggernaut.

Those are former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and current Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker – the latter of whom announced this week he’s dropping out.

Both of those governors had the paper “credentials” to be taken seriously. Yet neither could get their act together enough to beat a guy who’s never held elective office and has such a blowhard ego that he’s likely to be an embarrassment if he were actually at the White House.

WALKER: Fell by the wayside

AND A GUY who’s got such a girl-chasing reputation that he makes Bill Clinton look like a prude. Perhaps it wasn’t that the ideologues of our society weren’t really offended by Clinton’s behavior with women – they were just upset he had that “D” connected to his name.

Walker thought he could take his union-bashing tactics in Wisconsin and apply them to the federal government. Yet it isn’t going to happen.

PERRY: Will his ego make him run again in '20?

Perhaps someone like Gov. Bruce Rauner ought to keep that in mind. He acts as though he wants to bring Wisconsin-style politicking to Illinois. But it would seem it’s not a universal trait.

Walker’s failure could become Rauner’s failure on a different scale. He could wind up an equal failure if he doesn’t back off.

BUT BACK TO the presidential campaign, which is now down to 15 candidates all scratching and scraping for a lead while the actual leaders wind up having something like 20 percent or so support.

Will we get this type of gaffe in '16?

There are bound to be more political dreamers dropping out, following the lead of Walker and Perry – who ought to learn that his serious presidential bid was in 2012 when there was a brief time period when HE was the GOP front-runner.

Of course, I remember back to all the times that Ronald Reagan ran for president before he finally caught on in 1980 – remember that Chicago Sun-Times headline saying that Reagan would take former President Gerald Ford as his V-P pick?!

So I’m sure his ego is determined to try again, and again and again yet again.

ALTHOUGH PERRY MAY be the polar opposite of Vice President Joe Biden, who now says he may hold off his own presidential aspirations to 2020. His time, if it is ever to come, IS now. Waiting could turn him into a “never was” with ease.

So what should we think of the presidential field on the Republican side? It could wind up that Trump, retired cardiologist Ben Carson and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina become the serious candidates – they’re the ones who show something beyond 1 or 2 percent support in the polls.

TRUMP: When will his $$ wither away

I can’t say I’d support any of them (if you ever meet my step-mother’s brother, he’s a California resident who still thinks Fiorina is a loon on account of her 2010 campaign for U.S. Senate from the Golden State). But the sooner the Republican field gets whittled down to a manageable number, the sooner people can figure out who to seriously vote for.

And then, people can start thinking for real in terms of whom the Grand Old Party can nominate for president – at which point, the Trump bluster withers away into the nothingness it deserves.

  -30-

Still way too early to learn much of substance about presidential dreamers

I didn’t bother to watch the Republican presidential debate that was televised Wednesday night – I just wasn’t in the mood to sit through political psycho-babble, particularly anything from the mouth of Donald Trump.

FIORINA: The winner?

Although after reading and watching the news accounts from those entities who felt the need to see the supposedly-top presidential dreamers stand in front of “Air Force One” (the closest most of them will ever get to that aircraft), I don’t think I missed much by waiting until Thursday morning to know what was said.

AND I ALSO don’t think anyone who bothered to watch it live is any better informed about its significance – unless they really needed to pretend that they were there to see it all happen.

My own quirk is that after having covered many political debates (including some that involved presidential prospects), they all seem alike.

So what’s the real point here? I still think this field is overly-broad, and that most of the people who blathered on and on will not be a factor next year when people are actually asked to cast ballots for who will get the right to be the next president come January 2017.

The overview I have heard from many is that former CEO Carly Fiorina somehow showed herself to be the most credible persona of the Republican presidential batch.

THAT MAY WELL be true, although I’d say the reason she stands out is that the rest of the batch is so mediocre – past political failures who are trying again, or people whose only qualification to be the nation’s chief executive is their own over-bloated ego.

BUSH: He's sorry

And as for the fact that the so-called most-tweeted moment was former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s apology to his mother for having smoked marijuana when he was young?

It was probably a more honest moment than Bill Clinton back in 1992 when he said he smoked, but “didn’t inhale.” Which all these decades later, I still don’t know what he thinks the difference is.

All in all, not the most enlightening of shows.

THE KEY, OF course, is Donald Trump, whose money and bluster enabled him to take large early leads – with some of the candidates coming in so low they barely register.

TRUMP: Will he still be relevant tomorrow?

Although it is interesting that the neurologist, Ben Carson, has had recent polls showing he is running neck-and-neck with Trump. It could be that about half of those who have an opinion back either of those two.

Evidence that the Republican hard-core wants a new name – no matter how much that person may not have a clue about what is actually involved in being president. It’s not all about having a personal jet plane to fly around on, and you don’t get to “bark” orders to Congress.

Just think how much happier Barack Obama would be if he could have told Congress what he wanted, and they would have been obligated to obey.

BUT THE MOST truthful thing I may have read in recent days was a poll in the Washington Post – 27 percent of people actually have an opinion about who should be president. It’s still early. We’re more than a year away from the general election.

The serious people will probably start giving all this a thought come January. Everything we’re reading or hearing these days is going to be so irrelevant by the time it matters. Don’t forget that Rick Perry, the former Texas governor, has already dropped out (his second presidential failure). More and more will fall to the wayside in coming weeks and months.

Would you mess with the U.S. if this man was present?

Which is why I didn’t feel compelled to watch on Wednesday.  The re-run of “Hill Street Blues” that I watched was more entertaining than learning that Trump tried to back away from his past sexist trash-talk about Fiorina.

I say “Capt. Furillo” for president ("Joyce Davenport" for first lady), with “Mick Belker” ("Grrrrrrr!!!!!") as his personal enforcer. It makes as much sense as any of the people who are really in the running.

  -30-

Who knows who will really run for president come the 2016 election cycle

I’m not getting too worked up over the debate controversy over whether the Fox television network is unduly influencing next year’s Republican presidential primary with the rules over whom is going to be allowed to partake in their Thursday debate.

BUSH: The front-runner?

With 17 people on the GOP side officially expressing delusions of someday becoming U.S. president, Fox has said it will allow only 10 to be included.

THOSE 10 WILL be the ones who rank on top in an average of five polls. Which could result in some people who might theoretically deserve a review being excluded from inclusion.

Which will result in the public perception that they’re not really in the campaign.

Considering that several polls are showing the real estate magnate Donald Trump at the top of most polls, he’ll probably wind up getting one of those spots. There are those who feel he’s taking a spot away from a more qualified person.

Personally, I think any campaign Trump winds up running will be as a political independent – that way he can make it all about himself and not have to put up with political operatives telling him he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.

BECAUSE ‘THE DONALD’ doesn’t take such insolence lightly!

For what it’s worth, it doesn’t surprise me to learn that a broadcast-mentality would not think it worthwhile to have every single candidate in their debate program.

FIORINA: The legitimate business exec

I still remember back in the days when I was a reporter-type person in Springfield, Ill., and a local TV type told me it was irresponsible to have all the candidates in a debate. Weeding out the fringe candidates who have no chance of winning a primary is part of the job, I was told.

I believe that if a candidate gets on the ballot, they deserve to be included – so that their stupid comments can shoot them down in the minds of the electorate and cause them to lose.

GRAHAM: The political pro

BUT AT THIS stage, we don’t have anyone on a ballot. It is still that early. I’m figuring that Fox thinks it will be impossible to include 17 people and give them all time to say anything significant.

Although I wonder if even 10 candidates creates that situation. I doubt we’re going to learn much about anyone, particularly since the focus now is on Trump and how the others will counter him.

RUBIO: The Cuban w/o Latino support

Trump’s money allows him to buy public perception, particularly since the story line being pushed is if any of the other candidates can boost themselves up to the Trump level in the election cycle.

The only reason I don’t get too bothered is because I’m realistic enough to know that most of the candidates who don’t get included in the Thursday debate will likely have faded out and be long-forgotten by Election Day.

HECK, EVEN MANY of the ones who make the debate (we’ll be told Tuesday night which ones will be included) will not actually be on the ballot come Nov. xx, 2016.

CHRISTIE: Noo Yawker for those who hate N.Y.

At this stage, a debate is more about comic relief – as Saturday Night Live once phrased it, a presidential debate is a “chance to avoid saying something stupid.” Thursday’s program is not about educating the electorate about candidates.

It’s more about making people think that the Fox News Channel is at the heart of the campaign action, and that we ought to pay mind to their political spin when deciding what to believe.

Besides, I can already hear the rants about the proposed CNN debate (which says they will split the program into two so they can include all 17 people) – all the people who get put into the program without Trump will complain that they’re on the political “B” team.

  -30-

WALKER: Campaign has $5M in Ricketts family cash

EDITOR’S NOTE: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina. Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore. Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. Former Ohio Gov. John Kasich. Former New York Gov. George Pataki. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Penn.  Real estate developer Donald Trump. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. The photographs used here are the ones I think are worthy of consideration. Not that I'd be inclined to vote for any of them.