• Home
  • Blog
  • Contact
The Screaming Moderate

Conventional Wisdom is so...conventional

4/30/2016

2 Comments

 
Lessons to be learned so far in political punditry 2016:
  1. The impossible can become the inevitable. Everyone, and I mean everyone, said when Donald Trump announced he was a joke and his candidacy was doomed. His candidacy now is the talk of politics worldwide in 2016. For better or worse.
  2. Conventional wisdom is conventional. Conventional wisdom (CW) took a major hit. Of course, CW looks backward not forward. It reviews past voting trends and lays them over the future. Used to work. No more. Bernie Sanders was an issue candidacy but he caught fire. Trump was a joke. No more. Even after a big stumble in Iowa. And even after realizing he didn’t understand the rules of the GOP nominating process. He just keeps winning.
  3. A huge GOP field is blocking the true numbers. Not true either. Since the field has winnowed to three, Trump’s margins become greater, not smaller.
  4. Gaffes hurt candidates. Not Trump, for sure. He is Mr. Gaffe. Mr. Say The First Thing That Comes to Mind and never apologize.  And none of it has hurt him. At all. Ever.
  5. Polls rule campaigns. Well, unless we learn at some point that Trump’s campaign really was spending money on polling but not listing it on their disclosure forms, the Trump Campaign seems to be running on instinct, not data. And it’s winning.
What do those lessons mean for the general campaign, assuming Trump does win the nomination (which is looking more likely by the day) and assuming CW holds true, which it hasn't, this year:
  • Hillary will romp. Yes, that’s CW and that’s what the polls say versus Donald Trump, but please see lessons number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 when it comes to Trump. Toss the rule book out the window.
  • Women will save Hillary. We’ll see. Eight years ago, for sure. Today, the “woman thing” doesn’t seem to be The Most Important Issue to Women. But versus Trump? It’s hard to explain why any woman would support him based on his rhetoric on the trail. But he is getting votes from women.
  • Trump can’t steamroll Hillary. I don’t think so either. She’s smart. She’s tough. She’s been through the mill. But she hasn’t come up against anyone who will say anything and do anything. He calls her “crooked Hillary.” There’s no evidence that’s she’s “crooked” but it feeds the view of a lot of the Republican Party. They already believe that. He’s just giving it voice, true or not.
  • The establishment will abandon Trump. Not from what we’re seeing so far. If I were a potential VP candidate and Trump offered it to me, I’d turn it down. But I have a feeling there are many “legitimate” potentials who will gladly accept it. And, I have a feeling we’ll start to see more “establishment” folks endorsing Trump in the weeks ahead. Not because they support him, but because they are Republicans and because they like to be with a “winner.”
  • Trump is funding his own campaign. Well, he’s lending his campaign a lot of money but when the general election rolls around, my guess is he will start taking in more money from folks not named Donald Trump.
This is an amazing and unbelievable political year. It has altered the boundaries for presidential politics. Well, at least for Donald Trump. Will those boundaries remain changed in future cycles? The CW would say no. But the CW has been consistently wrong this year.

2 Comments

A moral obligation to keep Trump from the Oval Office

4/28/2016

2 Comments

 
If Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, as Carly Fiorina says, are “fighting for the soul of the Republican Party,” sign me up for the Aretha Franklin for President Campaign. First, neither of them has a bit of soul. Second, neither of them has a true vision for the party or the country other than they should lead them.

As Trump takes his impossible quest for the nomination to probable, he laid out his foreign policy “vision” yesterday and, while I am no expert in foreign policy, I can pretty much see the contradictions in many of his points. For example he’s going to reduce our $19 trillion deficit in eight years but he’s going to “rebuild” our military. Trump, like others, cites the diminution in the numbers of ships and other hardware without acknowledging that war has changed and we don’t need as many battleships as we used to. Wars are fought on a different level with different weapons these days. And how can you reduce our deficit to zero in eight years yet spend billions on the military? Where do you cut?

Or, he’s going to prove to the world that America can be a trusted friend but he is going to bail on international alliances if certain countries don’t belly up to the bar with their fair share of the funding. Now that's a trustworthy ally. And a short-sighted one because those alliances not only protect our partners in the alliances, they protect us too.

Donald, this is not a real estate negotiation. There are intricate and complicated issues intertwined in international politics and diplomacy. Success is not measured in dollars and cents. It’s measured in good sense and judgement and positive results. And security.

Trump oversimplifies issues so they are understandable to the folks who support him but he isn’t telling it like it is (as they think) because it is not about laying out a smarter political position to win support. It’s about laying out a position to win support to move the country and world forward, not backward. That is a far higher standard than the calculations Trump makes.

Donald Trump being on the brink of the GOP nomination is frightening, but it is reality. His only true opposition is Ted Cruz who, in another demonstration of his judgement yesterday not only named a vice presidential candidate as his candidacy is falling into the abyss, but named Carly Fiorina who’s only success so far at elective politics is getting off a good line in a presidential debate. She lost her bid for the Senate in California, a state Cruz apparently thinks she can help him in. Repeat: she lost her Senate bid…in California. And she won one delegate during her presidential bid. One.

The Republican Party truly is in disarray when these are the final two battling for the party’s presidential nomination.  Cruz’ only chance is to keep Trump from a first-ballot victory so Cruz can, maybe, pull off the nomination in later ballots. And poor John Kasich, a capable guy, is the third man on the date, fighting for a chance to maybe pull off the nomination on the 8th ballot at the convention. Lord save me. But, truth be told, I’m glad he’s holding on for dear life because at least he gives me hope in the immediate future of the party. At least he is a voice of reason. Albeit it barely heard voice.

As theWashington Post points out this morning -  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-republicans-still-must-not-rally-around-trump/2016/04/27/432f1aca-0c96-11e6-8ab8-9ad050f76d7d_story.html - keeping Trump from the nomination and, lacking that, from the Oval Office is a moral obligation for the Republican Party. He is not qualified to work on the White House staff, let alone lead the country. He knows nothing of governance; nothing of diplomacy; nothing about the ins and outs of what a government’s job is or how it operates. He has little respect for the Constitution, saying he will change free press freedoms to better suit his tastes. 

It is not a business, Donald. You can’t run it like you would your real estate operations. The “deal” isn’t the only thing at stake – lives are – and I’ve yet to hear you factor that into your equations. I hear about dollars but not about people. That's one thing that makes the job of governing difficult -- you need to provide services and protections and manage a budget. Far more complicated with far greater responsibilities and consequences than if you fail in a real estate deal.

How will you make the lives of Americans and the tranquility of the world better other they saying “believe me, I’m the only one who can do it.” I don’t believe you. I need to be shown how you plan to do it. I do not trust that you have the expertise, experience, compassion or skills to do it. You have to prove it to me. You haven’t even come close so far. 

Your best argument against Hillary Clinton is that she’s “playing the woman’s card,” whatever that is. Are you playing the “man’s card,” whatever that is?

One challenge with democracy is you have to vote for the choices you’re given. Looks like our choices will be Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Not my first two choices to lead the country. But, as the Post said, out of moral duty, it cannot be Donald Trump who thinks the most powerful person in the world is akin to being the most powerful person on a reality TV show.

Reality has to settle in at some point.

2 Comments

Trump can't change, he's type-cast himself

4/26/2016

1 Comment

 
There’s a lot of talk lately about Donald Trump acting more presidential now that he is close to the GOP nomination.

Even Trump himself talks in his rallies about when he’ll switch to presidential mode, admitting that if he switches he could lose the thousands who wait hours in line to attend his rallies, so he’s not ready to make the transition yet for fear of losing support in the final stretch of primaries that he needs to win to secure a first-ballot victory.

 I don’t want Trump to “act” presidential. I want him to “be” presidential. “Presidential” isn’t a role. It’s a way of being.

Ronald Reagan, an actor, wasn’t playing a role as president (though his acting talent sure helped him a lot overall). He was the president. John F. Kennedy did not “act” presidential. He was presidential.

Being presidential is how you carry yourself. How you act under pressure. Not blowing up in reaction to something. Not calling other people names like "crooked Hillary" or "1 for 38 Kasich." Presidential is being a leader, someone who can articulate a vision, not insult an opponent, or colleague.

Some presidents weren’t presidential when they were campaigning, and never could make the switch. Why? Because that was not their character. Jimmy Carter never quite hit that standard, for example.

No one is begging for Bernie Sanders, the quintessential quirky uncle at Passover dinner, to be presidential. His finger-waving, almost-never-smiling performances are who he is. He shouldn’t be otherwise. That would be fake. And I’ve seen no one calling on him to “be presidential.”

Donald Trump couldn’t be presidential if he tried without looking totally phony (uh, not that he doesn’t look totally phony already). It isn’t who he is.

Can you imagine Trump delivering a State of the Union and making that pushed-out-bottom-lip face when he makes what he thinks is a key point? Or, in the middle of his State of the Union saying that the Democratic Congressman in the fourth row is a “pussy?” Or that he’d like to punch that Republican who hasn’t been supporting him in the eighth row in the nose? Or demanding that female Congressman in the front row should have her seat changed because "who wants to look at a face like that?"

This, my friends, is not “presidential.” Trump knows if he could switch to presidential mode, his true supporters wouldn’t accept it. His angry voters don’t want “presidential,” they want the alleged “tell it like it is” act he is putting on now.

Indeed, if he has been playing a role up to know – he will find that he now has type-cast himself and couldn’t change that role if he tried.


1 Comment

The play's the thing, wherein I'll capture...the voters?

4/22/2016

0 Comments

 
The thing about hiring professional campaign staff is they sure “spin” more creatively than the amateurs.

Let’s look at the “new” Donald Trump staff. Led by the leader, Paul Manafort who was a “big” political consultant back in the day but more important, maybe, now is that he is a tenant in Trump Towers. Trump’s new political team is in Florida courting the very national Republican National Committee that their candidate is trashing on the stump every day about their “rigged” and “crooked” nominating system, a system he is leading.

The GOP "establishment" is not big on Trump both because of his personality and his stated views and opinions which they think will sink the GOP from the top office to the bottom this year.

Manafort’s explanation is the Trump has been “playing a role” so far and the “role” is about to change into a more adult, mature version of a political candidate.

Let’s think about that: Does that mean Trump has been lying to his “loyal” supporters up to now? That maybe he really doesn’t tell it like it is but tells it like he thinks it needs to be told to reach his ends (does the name Machiavelli mean anything to you?). And will we now see Trump – armed with his prepared and teleprompter-ready foreign policy and other promised substantive speeches – become a version, a serious, wonky candidate that the 70 percent or so who have a negative view of him now can say, “oh, that’s a guy I can back. He’s real…now”?

It defies logic. Will Trump’s up-to-now supporters who have made him the odds- on favorite to get the nomination buy his change in “roles,” as Manafort puts it? Or will they lose interest in just another lying politician? (Ironic in this telling that Trump calls Sen. Cruz "Lying Ted."

Manafort is doing the best he can with what he’s got but saying Trump has been “playing a role” doesn’t cut it. This is a candidate for President we’re talking about not a candidate for the lead role in a new TV drama.

Politicians emphasize certain things in one crowd and certain others in other crowds. I get it. But he’s going to have a “change in role” now? Manafort is a pro but I think he failed in this example. One of Trump’s problems is that the 70 percent or so who dub him Mr. Most Unfavorable Candidate Ever isn’t going to all of a sudden say, “Oh, he was playing a role, I like this role better. I support him.” And I doubt that other 30 percent or so who view him favorably will say, “oh, he was just playing a role…I knew that. I still support him. He tells it like (the script) is.”

Maybe Manafort’s ploy will work. Weirder stuff has happened this year. But the Trump team is playing to the entire voting population of American, not a slice. I can’t believe this works.


0 Comments

Sanders, Trump voters aren't wrong

4/20/2016

0 Comments

 
Before we even are positive who the two candidates will be for the two political parties (though Hillary is a sure thing and Trump is the favorite), there are key takeaways from this primary season. And they are takeaways that elected officials – at all levels – should take seriously. They are not one-year wonders.

Bernie Sanders has delivered a message of the inequities of the economic system – the 1 per cent getting richer and the 99 percent paying more taxes. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are delivering messages that the grassroots of the GOP want progress from their elected officials, not broken promises.

And these folks are correct. The winner will be the candidate who can do something with their complaints. And I mean the eventual winner of the election, not the primaries.

White males without a college degree, who are at the core of Trump’s support, are not stupid people.  They are angry people. They are angry that they have lost jobs – some to negotiated trade agreements, some to not being trained for the jobs of today. They are angry at the perception/reality that immigrants have filled the jobs that they used to fill. These immigrants may indeed be citizens but “they” are who those folks can point to and be angry at. They are angry about being forgotten. They have a right to their anger. They cannot be dismissed as racists. Some may be, but not all.

Young folks, liberals, people who earn under $50,000 and those with a high school diploma and maybe some college education are flocking to Sanders because he says things that make sense to them and promises free stuff. Free education, free health care. Opposition to trade agreements perceived to be costing the U.S. jobs. He rails against Big Banks and Wall Street and keeps hitting his note that the 1 percent is doing far better than the 99 percent. His aspirations and complaints are legitimate while his solutions are not realistic.

When you add up those angry folks in both parties, it’s a lot of people and they are people who have legitimate gripes. Legitimate gripes that they see Congress – and state legislatures – ignoring. Gridlock is the excuse elected officials use. They say that the extremes on each side are blocking progress. Fine. That may be true. But these people, on both sides of the political spectrum, were elected to solve problems, not create more. And there is a huge voting block – in both parties – now screaming for them to knock it off and find solutions to their problems, what a democratic government is supposed to do.

The new President had better find solutions or explain why trade agreements are good for us, not bad. Find ways to control the greed of the Big Banks, or explain why the Big Banks are good for the country. Trump and Sanders are showing that politics as usual is no longer acceptable.

Trump may be leveraging the situation to his benefit but he is not wrong pointing out what he sees as the economic challenges. He is channeling anger. Sanders is right when he says it takes a political revolution – one through the ballot box -- to make change. That doesn’t mean he has to be the vehicle to affect change. But he and Trump have been the messengers.

And if it doesn’t come through this year, then it will over the next couple of elections. Those angry people are not going away. They likely will get louder if their candidates lose and even angrier if their issues aren’t addressed.

Those message should be received loudly and clearly by those filling elected offices today and those aspiring to be President. If they don’t do something about those messages, they won’t be filling elected offices for long.


0 Comments

Changing rules in mid-stream?

4/18/2016

0 Comments

 
I’m upset at folks who have never really engaged in the political process (meaning at the party level) who, now that they  feel they have a stake in it through the affection they have for a particular candidate (be that Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders) yell that the process is rigged.

 I wish with my limited skills at poker, I could enter the world championship of poker and win its millions in prize money because I could alter the rules when I held what normally would be a losing hand but now I can make it a winning hand!

Ah, to live in fantasy-land. Or the netherworld of “reality” TV.

Back to politics – how is any of what I said about poker different from the political process? There are rules. Some are arcane. Some are ridiculous. But they are there for a reason – now that could be a diabolical reason but the rules were established through a process. A process led by people from the local to the national level who chose to spend some of their time involved with a political party. There aren’t one or two people pulling the strings, as some candidates would have you believe. This is a process built up over decades by hundreds of people in all 50 states. Each state sets its own rules. Should someone be able to ride in and say those rules are unfair and I want them changed now because I can’t win with these rules?

And, it’s true on both sides. Donald Trump, who is barely a Republican and has only been involved the last few years as he planned his run for president (and yes he did plan it, it didn’t come to him one day in a vision) – wins and he’s happy with the rules. Loses and the system is stacked against him. These rules have been in place long before a candidacy was a glimmer in his eye.

Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. He is an Independent. Yes, he caucuses with the Democrats, but he hasn’t been a worker in the party and has not lived by the party ideology, except on the leftist edge of it. Honestly, I didn’t know you could be an Independent and run for a party’s nomination. Can a Republican seek the Democratic nomination and vice versa? I know they’d have no chance but I assume it’s within the rules to do that? Seems silly, no? All these Bernie voters who aren’t true Democrats and they want to determine the party’s nominee?

Trump could just as easily have run as a Democrat but I think he sized up the two parties and figured he had a better chance to dominate the coverage on the GOP side. Would he dominate if his immediate opponent was Hillary?  He is the diabolical one.

I’m a Republican. I started out as a Democrat many years ago because I did not like the mayor of my home town. Since whoever won the Democratic nomination in those days won the election because Democrats outnumbered Republicans by far, I chose to register as a Democrat to vote against him twice – once in the primary and again in the general. I then turned independent because I became a journalist and believe that is the appropriate choice for a journalist to be objective.

I didn’t register as a Republican until about two years into my service in Ronald Reagan’s administration, figuring I did support him and it wasn’t fair that I wasn’t registered in the party.

I'm very happy that so many people, young and old, have gotten involved in this election and I hope their interest continues, no matter how the election comes out.

But you can’t just walk into a game and not know the rules, arcane as they may be. Tell the truth, I don’t even agree with independents being able to register, in some states, on the day of the primary to potentially alter the choice of years-long party members. Why? Parties are not the government, there to ensure justice for all. They have a point of view and if you don’t like their point of view you should join and do something about it.

0 Comments

NY, NY - a helluva town

4/7/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
I was going to post about Wisconsin, and where the GOP primary goes from here – but let’s save that for another day.

As I watched my Facebook feed today, others are starting to post headlines from New York like the one here. So, let’s just, instead of having angst over who’s up and who’s down and what outlandish thing Donald Trump has said or Twitter-ed, just sit back and enjoy the next almost two weeks and what an active primary in New York can provide for entertainment.

Trump will be (even more) unleashed because in New York City anything goes, so he can mock his opponents with even more abandon, even though that may conflict with his need to be more “presidential” as he tries to wrap up the nomination or ease the minds of the 80 percent or so of the voters who are scared to death what he might do as president.

For example, when Sarah Palin endorsed Trump back in January, the Daily News  ran a picture of the two of them and the headline Intimating Palin saying, “I’m With Stupid.” Or also in January when Ted Cruz accused Trump of having “New York values” and the News ran with “Drop Dead Ted” with the subhead, hinting at Trump’s allegation that Cruz was born in Canada and thus not a U.S. Citizen, “Hey Cruz, you don’t like N.Y. values? Go back to  Canada.”

Or when Trump lost his fist caucus ever in Iowa and the News ran a mock-up of Trump in sad clown face with the headline, “Dead Clown Walking” only to follow up a week later when Trump won New Hampshire with Trump in smiling clown face and the headline, “Dawn of the Brain Dead” and the subhead “Clown comes back to life with N.H. win as mindless zombies turn out in droves.”

Finally, a newspaper worthy of covering the Trump campaign.


0 Comments

BTW - Bizarro Trump World

4/4/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
When I come across folks who are supporting Donald Trump and ask them why, to a person they say it’s because he “tells it like it is.”  Fact is, proven by fact-checkers over these many months, Trump tells it like it is in the Bizarro world he lives in: if he believes it’s true, it is true. Problem is, it isn’t true

Let me give a couple of examples. He suggested that if he’s President, the Supreme Court will look into Hillary Clinton’s email problems. The Supreme Court. In Bizarro Trump World (BTW) the Supreme Court undertakes such investigations. In our world, governed by the U.S. Constitution, that’s not the Court’s job, nor should it be. Nor does the court take orders from the President. It’s called separation of powers.

What the rest of the world sees on the tape is Trump’s campaign manager assaulting a reporter. In BTW,  Trump sees nothing. His campaign manager was not grabbing her arm. While the rest of us see a fresh imprint of fingers on the reporter’s arms, Trump says he doesn’t know where those came from, they could have been caused at any time, he says, despite the video and eye witnesses saying they watched the battery take place. While the cops saw a crime on the videotape, Trump sees nothing on the tape but the reporter wielding her ball point pen which, he says, could have been a weapon for all he saw.

In BTW, Trump cannot release his taxes because the IRS is auditing him. But nothing prohibits him releasing them, especially since the IRS says its audits of Trump are complete through 2008.

Trump tells it not like it is, but as he sees the world. In BTW.

In BTW Trump apparently sees himself as a president who can follow a Bill of Wrongs, instead of the Bill of Rights. He can change the libel laws. He can build a wall and “make Mexico pay for it.” He can levy a 40 percent tax on China’s exports. Fact is, Trump can’t do any of that. And he never says that he’ll propose laws to do that – which the Congress gets a say in – he says he’ll do it. By executive order, I'm guessing, if he even knows what an executive order is.  If some folks are perturbed by the steps President Obama takes in executive orders, wait until they see what Trump would do. From what he says, he would run the country by fiat – by order of the King.

Trump displays an incredible lack of knowledge or even awareness of how our government works and that the president is not a king. Maybe in his various companies -- the ones that haven't gone bankrupt -- he rules the roost in such a way. He can manage his companies any way he chooses to, that's private enterprise. In the Oval Office, it wojuld be Bizarro Trump World.


0 Comments

Finally, we figured out who can beat The Donald

4/1/2016

0 Comments

 
It took Donald Trump to figure out the only person in the country who might be able to defeat Donald Trump. And that person is, Donald Trump.

All his mistakes, failures to apologize, bombast, manly proclamations, insults to women, Hispanics, African-Americans, Muslims, Jews and others alone didn’t do it. But the weight of it all of it is adding up.

Trump had a very bad week. He was pressed on a subject he clearly knows little about (well, one of the subjects he knows little about) – abortion On a 50-50 issue, he succeeded in getting about 90 percent of the population against him. He was asked if abortion is outlawed and a woman had one, should she be put in jail for breaking the law. Absolutely, he said, clearly taking a shot that was the right-wing answer.

But it’s a view with which neither the left nor the right wings agree. For the first time in his campaign, Trump recanted within hours. It was what, for Trump, passes as admitting a mistake. That on top of his horrible approval rating with women – who make up more than half the voting population – brings his total women's support to, at my estimation – two, his wife and his daughter. And if you think I’m exaggerating, we’ll never know – because I’m sure if asked his daughter and wife will say they are voting for him, even if they’re not.

Within a couple of days he was in D.C. meeting with the GOP national chairman, supposedly trying to make nice as he, finally, realizes (this is my assumption, nothing he has said) that if/when he doesn’t win enough delegates to claim a first-ballot nomination, he’s in deep trouble. Ted Cruz, reports have it, is, as expected, getting folks supportive to him. That's because delegates are pledged to a candidate only on the first ballot. After filling their obligation on that first ballot (based on how their state's primary or caucus went, they are free to vote for anyone they choose. Anyone.

Bombast doesn’t win among those people, loyalty – to either the candidate or the party – wins.
Which brings us to Trump’s loyalty. He demonstrated this week that he is loyal to his campaign manager who was charged for manhandling a female reporter who had the audacity to ask Trump a question AFTER a 45-minute press conference. She was armed, it must be noted, with a ball point pen that was in full view so Trump later said she was a danger to his safety.

He showed he is not true to his word because he said he no longer was going to keep his pledge to support whomever the GOP nominee is. Why? Because the party hasn’t been “nice” to him. You see, Trump is finally recognizing, I think, that nice doesn’t win in politics. But understanding the rules and following them does. Trump reportedly is losing so far to Ted Cruz in the choosing-the-delegates contest. His cries that if he is the leader after the primaries are over, he should win whether he wins 50 percent of the delegates plus one (which is the rule).  Not the way it works Mr. Trump. The delegates decide, and you need to be able to have delegates elected who will be loyal to you. Clearly, Trump has a problem understanding the word loyalty. And while he is scrambling to get good staff who understand the party's rules, he is late to that game.

So, while he still could be the nominee, I’m sticking to my guns and continuing to say he will not be. If he can’t win on the first ballot, I don’t think he wins. And, if he can’t be loyal to the party whose nomination he seeks, I don’t think he can win.


0 Comments

    RSS Feed

     
    Follow @bjaycooper

    Archives

    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013

    B. Jay Cooper

    B. Jay is a former deputy White House press secretary to Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He also headed the communications offices at the Republican National Committee, U.S. Department of Commerce, and Yale University. He is a former reporter and is the retired deputy managing director of APCO Worldwide's Washington, D.C., office.
    He is the father of three daughters and grandfather of five boys and one girl. He lives in Marion, Mass.

powered by bjaycooper.com