RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Ash writes: "For the second time in the fledgling 21st century, we are set upon by a right wing radical assuming the power of the US presidency without having won the popular vote."

New York, mass demonstrations continue for a second night in the wake of the U.S. elections. (photo: Pacific Press/Shutterstock/Rex)
New York, mass demonstrations continue for a second night in the wake of the U.S. elections. (photo: Pacific Press/Shutterstock/Rex)


Does Trump Have a Mandate?

By Marc Ash, Reader Supported News

12 November 16

 

or the second time in the fledgling 21st century, we are set upon by a right wing radical assuming the power of the US presidency without having won the popular vote.

In the instance of George W. Bush, he proceeded as though a mandate were his birthright. Thus far there is no indication that Donald Trump has any greater concern for the majority that rejected him than George W. Bush did.

In addition, Mr. Trump assumes power under black personal storm clouds. According to USA Today, Trump is today facing no fewer than 75 concurrent lawsuits. A fraction, however, of the estimated 4000 business and personal legal actions he has been involved in throughout the years. On the order of 100 times what the Clintons have faced.

This too speaks to mandate. How can any elected official so encumbered with legal burdens be entrusted to determine the fate of the nation? In fact, radically alter it.

While the lack of a mandate meant nothing to Bush and may mean less to Trump, it returns moral authority to the majority that opposed him and legitimizes their opposition to him. It was Bush’s willingness to “reorder America and the world” without majority consent that gave rise to the Obama presidency. If Trump ignores the American majority he surely strengthens it, and inevitably dooms his agenda as well.

Trump, of course, can quite easily alleviate these problems with one simple action on his first day in office: choose a Supreme Court nominee that is seen as fair and moderate. The unifying effect that would have on the nation would be immeasurable and would set him on a course to a successful presidency and imbue him with the legitimacy the American majority did not grant him on Election Day.

There is no question that Donald Trump assumes the presidency without majority consent. No legitimate argument for a mandate can stem from that. He can only achieve a mandate through unifying action.

What will it be: unification and success, or division and failure? The choice is yours, Mr. Trump.



Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+24 # Jayceecool 2016-11-12 10:41
As a narcissistic, know-nothing, Trump's response to your final question should be obvious by now, Mr Ash...
 
 
+33 # grandlakeguy 2016-11-12 10:52
Trump has no mandate.
His victory should be seen as a repudiation of the Democratic Party (dino) leadership and their illegitimate candidate Hillary Clinton!

When the DNC derailed the phenomenal movement of change and progress that was embodied in Bernie Sanders by denying his nomination through the deployment of election thievery and disenfranchisem ent of their own voters they sealed their fate.
It was not their place to decide who the nominee was to be.

The mandate here is to replace that Republican light party leadership that has the audacity to claim they are Democrats or form a Progressive party.

The DNC and the Clintons OWN this election result!
 
 
+26 # carp 2016-11-12 11:13
If only the DNC had allowed the "real" nominee to take it, be it HRC or Sanders like the RNC did then we might be looking at an entirely different scenario. and back to the MAshe's premise I think that Trump has one hellava mandate. His presidency unleashes the hellstorm of Mike Pence and his ilk. There goes 50 years of progressive gains. I am sick to my stomach.
 
 
+14 # lorenbliss 2016-11-12 15:57
@carp: Sorry, but "50 years of progressive gains" is a Big Lie, an effective weapon in the One Percent's paralysis of USian political consciousness.

The era of "progressive gains" ended when President Roosevelt died on 12 April 1945. The era of revenge fascism now culminating in Trump, Pence and the resurrection of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee began immediately thereafter. The maliciously anti-worker Taft-Hartley Act became law on 23 June 1947. Any hope the U.S. might achieve economic democracy thus died forever, leading to the despair that, as in Weimar Germany, prompted the hopelessly oppressed 99 Percent to embrace fascism.

President Kennedy tried to revive the New Deal but was murdered on 22 November 1963 -- the day future historians (if indeed there is a future) will cite as the date USian liberty died forever.

"Peace President" Johnson's so-called Great Society was ultimately nothing more than massive bribery to suppress resistance to his murderous Vietnam War. President Nixon, a fascist felon, began his second term by dropping all pretense of support for the 99 Percent's well-being, and our standard of living has declined steadily ever since.

True, there have been a few identity-politi cs gains since then, but these are mere Ruling Class giveaways. They have no impact on the increasing savagery of capitalism and capitalist governance, do nothing to alleviate our ever-worsening economic suffering and are therefore not "progressive" at all.
 
 
-5 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 18:38
No, the deliberately ignorant millennial 'purists' own it. Not knowing or learning about history (or giving a rat's a$$ about it) means we are doomed (and damned) to repeat it. Learn what happened in the 1930s and HOW the Nazis came to power. Learn what WWII was all about and who and what got hurt/destroyed/ tortured etc.
Stop operating in a bubble.... being pragmatic actually helps one succeed at what one is trying to accomplish.
Not knowing and paying attention to history means you will have to repeat it!!
Enjoy your 4 years of Trumpster hell! Too bad the rest of us are going to suffer for your self-serving 'conscience' and your inability to see Teapug repetition ad nauseum of such 'truths' as Hillary is a 'crook' for what it was--- a perfect example of Goebbels' maxim... that repeating a lie over and over and over and over again... makes it seem to be obviously a 'fact'!!
[You might also want to have an 'examined' life too --- your lack of misogyny might seem a bit farfetched when the only woman candidate you can bring yourself to support was not even on the ballot in all 50 states-----]
 
 
-12 # jdd 2016-11-12 10:56
Hard to believe Ash is asking about unification, as Soros manipulates the gullible with street protests which at times are violent. Are these the same people that lectured us all about accepting the results of the democratic process? Just a bit hypocritical. In any case, the American people are more unified than the MSM would have us believe, as the Trump vote is simply a reflection of the hatred for Wall Street and the endless wars of the past two administrations . This was clear long ago as Bernie showed in his near toppling of the Establishment pick and the most disliked candidate in modern Democratic Party history.
 
 
+4 # reiverpacific 2016-11-12 11:10
Quoting jdd:
Hard to believe Ash is asking about unification, as Soros manipulates the gullible with street protests which at times are violent. Are these the same people that lectured us all about accepting the results of the democratic process? Just a bit hypocritical. In any case, the American people are more unified than the MSM would have us believe, as the Trump vote is simply a reflection of the hatred for Wall Street and the endless wars of the past two administrations. This was clear long ago as Bernie showed in his near toppling of the Establishment pick and the most disliked candidate in modern Democratic Party history.

How d'you reckon votes for an alleged and much-vaunted and ill-gotten billionaire is a vote against his buddies in Wall Street?
Granted, he's a bit less of a war monger than HRC, so it's just another loss-loss election for the many-headed.
 
 
+14 # gdsharpe 2016-11-12 11:52
Yeah. The Trump vote might have been a reflection of disaffection with Wall Street, but it appears that Trump and his new Republican cronies are dismantling the very things that were starting to make a dent in that disaffection.
 
 
-4 # Texas Aggie 2016-11-12 12:06
Quick! WalMart is having a sale of tin foil. Get a lifetime supply now and you'll never run out of caps to protect you from government control of your brain.
 
 
+14 # dascher 2016-11-12 14:17
The ignorant, self-obsessed, delusional, and supremely unintelligent Donald J. Trump will almost certainly bring about an era of peace and prosperity. He says so, and he has no reason to lie, right??

We can see that in his initial list of choices for various positions - the peace advocates John Bolton and Newt Gingrich, the civil libertarians Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie, the champion of women's rights Mike Pence, the savior of the environment (climate change denier) Myron Ebell, etc. etc. etc. It's not really Trump's fault - he is more interested in having the White House bathroom fixtures painted gold than in all that heavy-duty policy stuff.

If the Trump vote was a repudiation of the politics we've endured for the past 16 years, then why were almost all the incumbents in Congress re-elected?? If this was a repudiation of anything, why did Trump manage to win fewer votes than Clinton? And if this was a repudiation of "Wall Street and endless wars", then why is Trump rushing to deregulate the financial industry?? and appointing known jingoists and sabre rattlers to his Defense and State Departments??

Maybe his brain is just so big that we mere mortals cannot comprehend his clever plans.
 
 
+13 # ericlipps 2016-11-12 11:08
Quoting Jayceecool:
As a narcissistic, know-nothing, Trump's response to your final question should be obvious by now, Mr Ash...

But Trump can't imagine that he'll fail. After all, according to him, he's the best at everything.
 
 
0 # MD426 2016-11-12 11:17
Yeah, With moral authority and $2.50 I can get a cup of coffee.
 
 
+8 # gdsharpe 2016-11-12 11:53
Soon to be $5.
 
 
+4 # skylinefirepest 2016-11-12 15:42
Get over it Marc...if you hadn't nominated a lying criminal you might have gotten it. If you hadn't nominated a person who put the security of this country at risk and then laughed about it you might have gotten it. If you had simply nominated someone who wasn't a class A bitch you might have gotten it. If you had listened to the American public and made some small changes to policy you might have gotten it. If your media had not incessantly beaten on trump and ignored hillary's transgressions you might have gotten it. Just think, if the demo party had not screwed Bernie...
 
 
+35 # Marshalldoc 2016-11-12 10:44
Some statistical observations:


The U.S. population is 316,128,839 persons.

77% (242,470,820) are over 18 years old.

94% of those eligible (227,019,486) are registered to vote (27% Repub., 32% Dem.)

Only 52% (118,522,912) of registered voters voted for either Clinton or Trump.

Clinton won 50.1% of the votes cast (59,344,081) or 26.1% of registered voters, and only 24.5% of all U.S. Adults, and only 4 of 5 (81.7%) of registered Democrats… i.e. 20% of registered Democrats could not hold their noses sufficiently hard as to vote for her.

Trump won 49.9% of the votes cast (thus losing the popular vote), winning only 26.1% of all registered voters, only 24.4% of all U.S. adults, but 96.5% of all registered Republicans.

A president elected by less than 1 out of 4 of the population he's to represent has no 'mandate' although he'll claim one.

In summary; one half of the American public found neither candidate of the Dimopublican duopoly acceptable.
 
 
+15 # Adoregon 2016-11-12 13:58
Get rid of the electoral college. Winners determined by majority of the popular vote.

Make voting mandatory.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/22-countries-voting-mandatory/

Vote by mail. No standing in line.

Have the choice of "none of the above" on all ballots for elective office. If "none of the above" wins, a new field of candidates must be offered to the voters.
 
 
+5 # Depressionborn 2016-11-12 19:29
new latest numbers

Final #Election2016 numbers #PopularVote: #Trump: 62,972,226 #Clinton: 62,277,750 #ElectoralColle ge vote #Trump 306 #Clinton 232
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-11-12 23:54
Thanks! Been hunting, but no luck. Where did you find it"
 
 
+10 # Bic Parker 2016-11-12 10:59
"In summary; one half of the American public found neither candidate of the Dimopublican duopoly acceptable."

So they gave the country and the world to Trump.

Thanks!
 
 
0 # skylinefirepest 2016-11-13 16:42
And remember, Bic, that the left will get absolutely nowhere by continuing to riot and burn businesses and beat on people. You're making the demo party look like a bunch of whiny idiots. Trump may "MAY" do a decent job...so why don't y'all just shut up and see what happens. As I've already said, trump is a class A slob but hillary is a lying criminal who put this country at risk. I'll remind you that all the smart people in this country are not on the left of the line. I'll remind you that hillary lost this election...trum p didn't win it. She lost millions upon millions of votes by telling coal miners they were going to be put out of work and telling the world that she was going to shut down the NRA. She also said she was going to promote liberal Supreme Court justices and that's not the smartest comment she ever screeched. Personally I am not looking for "progressive" or conservative justices...I'm looking for Constitutionali sts. Your progressives in the demo party screwed Bernie who probably would have beaten trump. Like a lot of politicians before her she let her running mouth get away with the election.
 
 
+17 # Interested Observer 2016-11-12 11:03
It depends on your point of view. Anyone who watched Frontline "The Choice 2016" knows that in his mind, and the mind of many if not all those who voted for him, he does.

In Trump-think. Failure is success.

In Trunp-think the narrowest win is a mandate, not just a mandate but the greatest mandate in history, a yuge mandate.

And so thinks just 1/3 of 1% short of half the entire electorate.

In my view it is time for a historic mutiny in the electoral college. I don't expect it to happen.

Have you considered the possibility of a GOP backup plan, given control of both houses of Congress, to impeach and convict Trump at the first plausible opportunity to install the theocrat Pence? The ultimate payback and humiliation at the peak of his self-glorificat ion. There is no happy ending here if any part of the GOP ticket takes office.

Mandate's just a word here, he has the presidency and a majority in both chambers of Congress, the house very much infected with the recent Tea Party disease that is most sympathetic to his darkest campaign themes, and a majority in the Supreme Court particularly if he gets to fill Scalia's seat. (Although I having been reading that Obama might be able to simply appoint in the absence of Senate corroboration.)

We all know it was all about "N" and "B" words and we get SOB as a result, no matter what labels and euphemisms have been pasted over it. America voted its putrid gut.
 
 
+6 # gdsharpe 2016-11-12 11:57
Quoting Interested Observer:

Have you considered the possibility of a GOP backup plan, given control of both houses of Congress, to impeach and convict Trump at the first plausible opportunity to install the theocrat Pence?

I said that from the very first day of Pence's selection.
 
 
+1 # Interested Observer 2016-11-13 11:41
Not unlike the role of Dick Cheny in the Dubyah administration with no need to bother with impeachment.

The schadenfreude attached to watching the supreme affirmation of the narcissistic hateful bullshit artist that is the President-elect turn into utter humiliation at the hands of his own party is yuge indeed.
 
 
+2 # Interested Observer 2016-11-13 19:41
The main defect with that theory is that it gives the GOP way too much credit.
 
 
0 # Interested Observer 2016-12-25 09:52
Since this post.
The popular vote gap grew to near 3 million.

When it passed 2 million Trump finally got around to what I thought he would do immediately, dismiss that gap, and more, as vote fraud to claim not only a clear plurality but a net majority of "real votes".

He then went on to claim a "landslide" almost invisibly qualified with "in the electoral college". This was immediately called as bullshit since his win ranks 46th of 58 in history. It is very disturbing that Trump doesn't even have good judgment in his choice of bullshit.

The electoral college failed to redress this travesty, and thus should be abolished as useless.

So the nation is going forward, one tweet from oblivion, until the impeachment installs President Pence, a religious right wet dream, and by a political alchemy using the basest elements of American culture as catalyst turned 2016 Primary excrement into gold.
 
 
+23 # ericlipps 2016-11-12 11:05
Even without the statistical breakdown by Marshalldoc above, it's clear Trump has no mandate.

It's true that the election-night map was a sea of red with a few blue islands, but that reflects only the number of states, not the number of voters. And it's people who vote, not acreage.

There's an online petition, reportedly signed by millions, asking the electoral college to bow to the will of the voters. Too bad it doesn't have a prayer of success.

And before the inevitable swarm of Bernouts weighs in, let me point out that EVEN if Clinton "stole" the Democratic nomination (which I don't believe), that doesn't justify Trump winning the presidency with fewer votes than she got. Trite as it sounds, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yes, I know the Constitution allows such an outcome. That doesn't make it right. And the fact that this is the second time in less than twenty years that such a thing has happened should sound alarms even with those conservatives who care more about democracy than about seeing the GOP take and hold power. (I'm sure there are a few left.)

The electoral college must be either eliminated or reformed so that its ballots accurately reflect the will of the voters. Until then, the United States can call itself a democracy but it won't be one.
 
 
+8 # allfive 2016-11-12 12:31
Quoting ericlipps:

The electoral college must be either eliminated or reformed so that its ballots accurately reflect the will of the voters. Until then, the United States can call itself a democracy but it won't be one.


Change can happen on the individual state level, as 11 states have already done.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/305420-we-dont-need-a-constitutional-amendment-to-eliminate
 
 
+3 # Patriot 2016-11-12 23:57
But the United States is NOT a democracy; it is a democratic republic.
 
 
+5 # suntortise 2016-11-12 11:51
Why would he have a man date, he isn't even gay!
 
 
+7 # Ruth1940 2016-11-12 12:23
Quoting suntortise:
Why would he have a man date, he isn't even gay!


He's too busy figuring out how to do all the things he promised to do the first day in office
to have any dates.

www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/donald-trump-first-day-in-office
 
 
+6 # sea7kenp 2016-11-12 12:09
How can a person lie their way to a Mandate? Give me a break!

Google "trump four pinocchios", to find the Washington Post article, that outlines the *59* *Times*, that Trump lied, badly enough to "earn" 4 Pinocchios!
 
 
+2 # Interested Observer 2016-11-13 19:45
It happened in 1933.
 
 
+4 # Ruth1940 2016-11-12 12:20
In 2012, Trump called for abandoning the electoral college, claiming it is undemocratic.

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/40224-millions-sign-petition-urging-electoral-college-to-elect-hillary-clinton
 
 
+5 # Ms M 2016-11-12 12:54
He has no mandate when a majority of Americans (Trump voters included) support progressive policies: choice, marriage equality, holding wall street accountable, minimum wage, making the rich pay taxes, universal health care, civil rights, environmental rights, strengthen social security and medicare and the list goes on. We need to unite around the issues we agree on and make them mainstream. If we build it, candidates and third parties will come. Politicians will support what gets them elected.

Drumpf built a following based on blaming demographic segments for our ills. He "won" by playing the ongoing shell game politicians have been playing for-ever: "Look at _____, that's where the problem is - not over here where we are destroying your rights, livelihood and environment." He infected this country with a rabid hatred of "others" being the problem. Well Drumpf, just remember. That mob isn't going away. Right now, it's backing you, but if you pursue policies that help you and your cronies (as you are already starting to do), that mob will turn. (And you insisted that they keep themselves armed!) The people who picked you did it only because you presented yourself as different - not because they believed in your nonexistant platform. Yet you are setting up an administration that will only continue to screw your own supporters and will infuriate your voters who simply made a protest vote. Be warned.
 
 
-4 # aljoschu 2016-11-12 13:40
Dear Marc,
you should choose your words more wisely! Of course Trump has a mandate - he has a mandate by the American people. There are rules and according to those Trump has won. Period. Even Hillary Clinton conceded that. Is it a civil war you want in America? Look at the former Yugoslavia, look at Syria or Libya to understand what civil war means. So stop fussing and grow up! We may not like Mr. Trump, but don't forget: Clinton has caused enough hostility and misery in the world already. That much we know. Now we have to give Trump a chance. And we do need to reestablish a little respect here toward the American voters, first of all, toward the democratic process and toward the presidency of the most powerful country in the world.
 
 
+3 # m s 57 2016-11-12 14:01
Trump has no popular mandate -- he has something far more powerful: the reactionaries hold the Congress and the Presidency, and soon will be appointing someone to the SC who will make Scalia seem like a moderate.

What is coming will be a deluge of undoing and destruction, of rolling the clock back as far as the '30s to undo everything people take for granted as social progress and the social safety net (paltry as it is). The Koch Suckers, following their father, see it as the evil of Socialism.

Duck!
 
 
0 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 18:45
At which point a plan to delay and filibuster and use all the usually Teathuglican sneaky methods should be applied!
 
 
+6 # dascher 2016-11-12 14:23
John Gotti would have made a more palatable President. He didn't lie as much as Trump and was not delusional. He was somewhat less amoral than Trump. He had better taste than Trump. (OK, that is not really important, but I couldn't resist.) He was smarter and less ignorant than Trump.

Gotti is probably spinning in his grave cursing himself for not having thought to run for President as a Republican.
 
 
+5 # lorenbliss 2016-11-12 16:10
@dascher: Carlo Gambino likewise. With Joseph (Bayonne Joe) Zicarelli as secretary of state, Albert Anastasia as secretary of defense and Meyer Lansky as secretary of the treasury.

:-)
 
 
+6 # MindDoc 2016-11-12 15:31
It's an almost universal target (or "bogeyman") for many on all sides: "Wall Street", as symbol for "the elite". IMHO the true elephant in the room, hardly ever spoken aloud in "the media", is .... Congress! It's not only banking but also big business (think Koch, Monsanto, oil, media, war industry, etc. who lobby & write policy). Congress itself - THAT who is elite in giving itself health care and pensions it would take away from all mere-mortal tax-paying citizens.

Trump will be dependent on his "drained swamp" remnants (Gingrich, Giuliani, Christie, even Sarah Palin!) to guide him or at least render opinions, though he famously will act on his own. He will have immunity while in office from some (civil) law and I see little hope of the electoral college casting Trump-beholden votes for Clinton, as some are hoping/encourag ing. We may be stuck. And Congress?

Many people, IMHO, are still in various stages of "shock" or "mourning". Ryan has already re-proposed replacing Medicare with a voucher-system. Tell me how that will work for elderly people living in assisted living or unable to negotiate all the necessary steps to attain do-it-yourself insurance care. We need actual "healthcare" as a right, not a challenge. ACA extended the solvency of Medicare by 11 yrs, contrary to Ryan's claim of depletion.

One of our best options may be to pursue having Congress under the same American health system as we the (non-elite) people. Be "for and of the people". Drain the swamp!
 
 
+1 # Caliban 2016-11-12 20:01
"Congress itself - THAT who is elite in giving itself health care and pensions it would take away from all mere-mortal tax-paying citizens" --

Great insight. You absolutely deserve the "Doc" in "#MindDoc".
 
 
+7 # Charles3000 2016-11-12 15:50
Of the 200 million registered voters Trump received support of less than 30% of them. That is definitely not a mandate. Trump got fewer votes than Romney who lost in 2012.
 
 
+4 # Depressionborn 2016-11-12 19:43
i would like to see mr ash speak to policy and platform instead of person and politics. Also he speaks of right wing radical as if he never heard of classical liberalism. It could be a good way to unify a divided people. i do not know what a right wing is.
 
 
+1 # r_pickett@hotmail.com 2016-11-13 10:18
Trump's mandate is clear. All you have to do is look at who will be his chief of staff and who will be appointed to his principal cabinet positions. His mandate is to make America Great Again, which is returning the nation to a period when "whiteness" was the normative standard, and societal relationship were overwhelmingly racialized. Minority communities are coming to grips with this mandate and are quickly realizing that our futures are eminently connected if we are to ever truly eliminate the vestiges of discrimination and confront the onslaught of the "Trump movement". We need to approach this problem collectively and cautiously tread amongst those that call themselves progressives.
 
 
+2 # Interested Observer 2016-11-13 19:44
New Republic printed a very important insight into Donald Trump. This applies to those who continue to call him a liar. He is worse than that.

https://newrepublic.com/article/124803/donald-trump-not-liar
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-11-15 17:10
Very thought-provoki ng article, Interested. Thanks for posting the link.
 
 
-5 # Robbee 2016-11-13 21:59
Does Trump Have a Mandate? - who canceled 60 minutes? - somebody has a mandate from somebody
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-11-15 17:33
No, Marc, neither Trump nor the Repubs have a mandate: They won less than have of the votes cast, and a very large percentage of the electorate declined even to participate.

So, everyone, sit down and write those letters to Dems, telling them to get busy and FIGHT for progressive programs and fight against more fossil fuel extraction and more environmental damage and more war. Then write the Repubs and let them know they still have no support for more fossil fuel extraction, selling of public lands for corporate gains, and failing to insist that the wealthy and business pay their share of the costs of running this country. Don't forget to remind them that turning Medicare and Social Security into a feeding trough for Wall Street isn't going to cut it. Remind BOTH parties that restoring Glass-Steagall is in BOTH of their platforms.

Then get busy and build a fire under your state and local politicians; we are just as much--and perhaps more--affected by the actions of those two groups as by the Beltway crowd.

Write to Trump and tell him what you want and need from him.

Send your letters by both postal and e-mail. Keep them civil and as brief as you can. Make serious, sober, credible comments. Sending a flaming torch will not do any good.

If they all receive huge numbers of bags full of mail from the public, we may be able to disabuse them of the notion that they have carte blanche to finish destroying the middle class, the planet, and the Constitution.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN