FarmerJohn
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Winning more endorsements from wary GOP foreign policy experts presents a big opportunity.
By NAHAL TOOSI 08/08/16
As Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign reaches out to Republicans alarmed by Donald Trump's national security blunders, there’s a group of high-profile GOP hold-outs whose endorsement would be a major coup if the Democrat could win them over.
Condoleezza Rice, James Baker, George Shultz and Henry Kissinger are among a handful of so-called Republican “elders” with foreign policy and national security experience — people who have held Cabinet-level or otherwise high-ranking positions in past administrations — who have yet to come out for or against Trump.
A person close to Clinton said her team has sent out feelers to the GOP elders, although it wasn't clear if those efforts were preliminary or more formal requests for endorsement, or if they were undertaken through intermediaries. Clinton campaign aides did not respond when asked if they had solicited endorsements or tried to persuade the elders to speak out against Trump.
POLITICO also reached out to Rice, Baker, Kissinger and Shultz for comment, but either did not get a response, was told the person would not comment or was told they had not yet taken a position on Trump. (An aide to Rice said, “We have not been in touch with the Clinton campaign,” but did not elaborate further.)
The elders' hesitation to take a position on Trump is notable given that dozens of foreign affairs intellectuals and former officials on the right have already spoken out against the Republican presidential nominee, with some crossing party lines to endorse Clinton.
In the wake of Trump's more recent comments on everything from NATO to nuclear weapons, some critics are arguing that the elders’ silence is no longer acceptable.
“I think it is terribly disappointing,” said Robert Kagan, a prominent historian often described as a a neoconservative. “They are some of the most respected people in the country, as well as in the party, and their words would carry real weight. For them to sit this crisis out is, to me, a real abdication of responsibility.”
Clinton has sought to capitalize on the broader discontent in GOP circles. Her campaign released an ad Friday that featured a number of conservative voices, including former CIA Director Michael Hayden, questioning Trump's abilities. The ad was released the same day that former acting CIA Director Michael Morell, who has worked for both Republican and Democratic administrations, published an op-ed endorsing Clinton and casting Trump as a national security threat.
Stephen Hadley, a national security adviser to then-President George W. Bush who also is considered an elder, dodged when asked to answer “yes or no” on Thursday whether Trump has the temperament to be president. Hadley's response, however, offered a glimpse into the dilemma facing Republicans wondering whether to back Trump: By casting him off, do you undermine your chance to shape the party’s future?
“It's a very difficult position that a lot of Republicans are in and it sounds easy so a number of my Republican friends have said, 'He does not have the temperament, and therefore, I endorse Hillary Clinton.' And that is a legitimate approach," he said during a POLITICO Playbook Breakfast. "The problem with that approach is that Republicans will then say, 'Well, you know, you really weren't a Republican anyway' and shelve them. And you then deal yourself out of the debate within the Republican Party about what does the Republican Party stand for."
Some GOP elders in the national security and foreign policy realm already have spoken out against Trump. In June, Brent Scowcroft, who served as a national security adviser under Republican presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, went so far as to endorse Clinton. Richard Armitage, a deputy secretary of state under George W. Bush, also has said he will back Clinton over the real estate mogul.
Michael Chertoff, former secretary of homeland security under George W. Bush, and Michael Mukasey, attorney general in the same administration, are among the 121 conservative national security leaders who signed a March letter declaring their opposition to Trump.
Since that letter was released, Trump's comments and actions have only further heightened anxiety on the right about what the Manhattan billionaire would be like if handed the nuclear codes. He has suggested the United States should not automatically come to the aid of its NATO allies, called on Russia (sarcastically, he later claimed) to commit espionage against Clinton, and indicated that he won't chide autocratic allies of the U.S. for their human rights abuses. Trump's apparent fondness for Russian President Vladimir Putin is of special concern to GOP hawks.
Several of the holdouts served as secretary of state. That's a plus for Clinton, who served in that role during President Barack Obama's first term, if she seeks out their endorsements.
"Clinton has very good relationships with Baker and Kissinger, and benefits from the camaraderie among the former secretaries of state," a former Obama administration official told POLITICO. "It's an elite club, and they lean on one another and respect Democrats or Republicans who lived that difficult job."
The former official said Clinton turned to Kissinger for insight during her efforts at the State Department to increase American involvement in Asia, so a Kissinger endorsement of Clinton isn't out of the question.
Baker and Rice might be more challenging.
Baker, who has met with Trump, is very close to the Bush family. During this year's primaries, Trump vanquished the White House dreams of Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose father and brother served as presidents, and Jeb Bush has said he will not vote for either Clinton or Trump. But Baker also is a long-standing GOP pillar, and abandoning his party's nominee, even if he doesn't endorse Clinton while doing so, may be a bridge too far.
Rice, who has kept a relatively low public profile in recent years, also is close to the Bush family. She's an expert on Russia, and she may have concerns about Trump's unusual affection for Moscow. At the same time, Rice is closely identified with George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq. Clinton voted in favor of the war, and Trump, who claims he opposed the invasion, can try to use a Rice endorsement against her.
Shultz, who served as secretary of state in the Ronald Reagan administration and is in his 90s, has said little about how he feels about his party's presidential nominee, but he is reported to have spoken kindly of Clinton in the past and, according to the former administration official, the two have a warm relationship.
Another notable GOP elder who hasn't yet taken a stand is Colin Powell, a former secretary of state under George W. Bush. Powell said in July that he was not yet ready to endorse a candidate, but few would expect him to back Trump. The retired general jolted the political scene by crossing party lines to endorse Obama in 2008 and 2012.
Some of the signatories of the March letter say Rice, Kissinger and other luminaries should speak out, if not to endorse Clinton, then at least to oppose Trump.
"Failure to do so is a dereliction of duty," said Max Boot, a conservative commentator who has been very outspoken about his anti-Trump views.
Others, however, insist it's not their place to tell others when to take a stand, or what stand to take.
"People are complex and have complex views and differing views of whether they have a responsibility to become part of the public debate," said Elliott Abrams, a former deputy national security adviser in the second Bush administration.
"Remember also that 'national security types' are citizens, concerned about much more than just foreign and defense policy, and may oppose Clinton on very many issues" such as trade deals or Supreme Court appointments.
Danielle Pletka, a top official at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said the holdouts may be showing "wisdom in keeping their powder dry," especially as it has become clear that Trump's isolationist-leaning, anti-trade views appeal to so much of the party base.
"Not every person needs to be 17-year-old girl and share their every whim with the public," Pletka said. "There's no point alienating Republican voters by piling on against Trump. Better to remain judiciously silent and avoid angering the very people who will be vital to rebuilding the party."
Even if Clinton gains endorsements from the likes of a James Baker or a Henry Kissinger, it may not make much difference in a race where Trump is trying to appeal to a largely white, working class base by casting himself as an outsider who will overthrow the Washington establishment
But if any of the elders do wish to speak out against Trump or go all in for Clinton, they may plan to do so closer to the Nov. 8 election, in hopes of making a bigger impact. Powell, for example, endorsed Obama in the of October in both 2008 and 2012. Still, those elders who wait also run the risk of looking like Johnny Come-Latelys if Clinton widens her lead over Trump in the coming weeks.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...lder-statesmen-kissinger-226680#ixzz4GlaEGQLb
By NAHAL TOOSI 08/08/16
As Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign reaches out to Republicans alarmed by Donald Trump's national security blunders, there’s a group of high-profile GOP hold-outs whose endorsement would be a major coup if the Democrat could win them over.
Condoleezza Rice, James Baker, George Shultz and Henry Kissinger are among a handful of so-called Republican “elders” with foreign policy and national security experience — people who have held Cabinet-level or otherwise high-ranking positions in past administrations — who have yet to come out for or against Trump.
A person close to Clinton said her team has sent out feelers to the GOP elders, although it wasn't clear if those efforts were preliminary or more formal requests for endorsement, or if they were undertaken through intermediaries. Clinton campaign aides did not respond when asked if they had solicited endorsements or tried to persuade the elders to speak out against Trump.
POLITICO also reached out to Rice, Baker, Kissinger and Shultz for comment, but either did not get a response, was told the person would not comment or was told they had not yet taken a position on Trump. (An aide to Rice said, “We have not been in touch with the Clinton campaign,” but did not elaborate further.)
The elders' hesitation to take a position on Trump is notable given that dozens of foreign affairs intellectuals and former officials on the right have already spoken out against the Republican presidential nominee, with some crossing party lines to endorse Clinton.
In the wake of Trump's more recent comments on everything from NATO to nuclear weapons, some critics are arguing that the elders’ silence is no longer acceptable.
“I think it is terribly disappointing,” said Robert Kagan, a prominent historian often described as a a neoconservative. “They are some of the most respected people in the country, as well as in the party, and their words would carry real weight. For them to sit this crisis out is, to me, a real abdication of responsibility.”
Clinton has sought to capitalize on the broader discontent in GOP circles. Her campaign released an ad Friday that featured a number of conservative voices, including former CIA Director Michael Hayden, questioning Trump's abilities. The ad was released the same day that former acting CIA Director Michael Morell, who has worked for both Republican and Democratic administrations, published an op-ed endorsing Clinton and casting Trump as a national security threat.
Stephen Hadley, a national security adviser to then-President George W. Bush who also is considered an elder, dodged when asked to answer “yes or no” on Thursday whether Trump has the temperament to be president. Hadley's response, however, offered a glimpse into the dilemma facing Republicans wondering whether to back Trump: By casting him off, do you undermine your chance to shape the party’s future?
“It's a very difficult position that a lot of Republicans are in and it sounds easy so a number of my Republican friends have said, 'He does not have the temperament, and therefore, I endorse Hillary Clinton.' And that is a legitimate approach," he said during a POLITICO Playbook Breakfast. "The problem with that approach is that Republicans will then say, 'Well, you know, you really weren't a Republican anyway' and shelve them. And you then deal yourself out of the debate within the Republican Party about what does the Republican Party stand for."
Some GOP elders in the national security and foreign policy realm already have spoken out against Trump. In June, Brent Scowcroft, who served as a national security adviser under Republican presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, went so far as to endorse Clinton. Richard Armitage, a deputy secretary of state under George W. Bush, also has said he will back Clinton over the real estate mogul.
Michael Chertoff, former secretary of homeland security under George W. Bush, and Michael Mukasey, attorney general in the same administration, are among the 121 conservative national security leaders who signed a March letter declaring their opposition to Trump.
Since that letter was released, Trump's comments and actions have only further heightened anxiety on the right about what the Manhattan billionaire would be like if handed the nuclear codes. He has suggested the United States should not automatically come to the aid of its NATO allies, called on Russia (sarcastically, he later claimed) to commit espionage against Clinton, and indicated that he won't chide autocratic allies of the U.S. for their human rights abuses. Trump's apparent fondness for Russian President Vladimir Putin is of special concern to GOP hawks.
Several of the holdouts served as secretary of state. That's a plus for Clinton, who served in that role during President Barack Obama's first term, if she seeks out their endorsements.
"Clinton has very good relationships with Baker and Kissinger, and benefits from the camaraderie among the former secretaries of state," a former Obama administration official told POLITICO. "It's an elite club, and they lean on one another and respect Democrats or Republicans who lived that difficult job."
The former official said Clinton turned to Kissinger for insight during her efforts at the State Department to increase American involvement in Asia, so a Kissinger endorsement of Clinton isn't out of the question.
Baker and Rice might be more challenging.
Baker, who has met with Trump, is very close to the Bush family. During this year's primaries, Trump vanquished the White House dreams of Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose father and brother served as presidents, and Jeb Bush has said he will not vote for either Clinton or Trump. But Baker also is a long-standing GOP pillar, and abandoning his party's nominee, even if he doesn't endorse Clinton while doing so, may be a bridge too far.
Rice, who has kept a relatively low public profile in recent years, also is close to the Bush family. She's an expert on Russia, and she may have concerns about Trump's unusual affection for Moscow. At the same time, Rice is closely identified with George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq. Clinton voted in favor of the war, and Trump, who claims he opposed the invasion, can try to use a Rice endorsement against her.
Shultz, who served as secretary of state in the Ronald Reagan administration and is in his 90s, has said little about how he feels about his party's presidential nominee, but he is reported to have spoken kindly of Clinton in the past and, according to the former administration official, the two have a warm relationship.
Another notable GOP elder who hasn't yet taken a stand is Colin Powell, a former secretary of state under George W. Bush. Powell said in July that he was not yet ready to endorse a candidate, but few would expect him to back Trump. The retired general jolted the political scene by crossing party lines to endorse Obama in 2008 and 2012.
Some of the signatories of the March letter say Rice, Kissinger and other luminaries should speak out, if not to endorse Clinton, then at least to oppose Trump.
"Failure to do so is a dereliction of duty," said Max Boot, a conservative commentator who has been very outspoken about his anti-Trump views.
Others, however, insist it's not their place to tell others when to take a stand, or what stand to take.
"People are complex and have complex views and differing views of whether they have a responsibility to become part of the public debate," said Elliott Abrams, a former deputy national security adviser in the second Bush administration.
"Remember also that 'national security types' are citizens, concerned about much more than just foreign and defense policy, and may oppose Clinton on very many issues" such as trade deals or Supreme Court appointments.
Danielle Pletka, a top official at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said the holdouts may be showing "wisdom in keeping their powder dry," especially as it has become clear that Trump's isolationist-leaning, anti-trade views appeal to so much of the party base.
"Not every person needs to be 17-year-old girl and share their every whim with the public," Pletka said. "There's no point alienating Republican voters by piling on against Trump. Better to remain judiciously silent and avoid angering the very people who will be vital to rebuilding the party."
Even if Clinton gains endorsements from the likes of a James Baker or a Henry Kissinger, it may not make much difference in a race where Trump is trying to appeal to a largely white, working class base by casting himself as an outsider who will overthrow the Washington establishment
But if any of the elders do wish to speak out against Trump or go all in for Clinton, they may plan to do so closer to the Nov. 8 election, in hopes of making a bigger impact. Powell, for example, endorsed Obama in the of October in both 2008 and 2012. Still, those elders who wait also run the risk of looking like Johnny Come-Latelys if Clinton widens her lead over Trump in the coming weeks.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...lder-statesmen-kissinger-226680#ixzz4GlaEGQLb
