PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

As a 40-year veteran of politics, it would be logical to believe it would not be possible for me to grow teary over an election result.  After all, I have seen too many of them up close and personal.

But, last night was different.

With tears in my eyes, I watched President-Elect Joe Biden and Vice President-Dlect Kamala Harris address a throng of supporters in Biden’s home state, Delaware.

• Possibilities.

• Decency.

• Truth.

• Empathy.

Good words. 

Good words that would never have been uttered by Donald Trump who continues to eschew the normal rite of conceding defeat for the good the country and enabling a solid transition of power.

The reality is that he may have to be evicted from the White House.

So it was that, as Biden and Harris gave what amounted to victory speeches, I had tears in my eyes.

They have an unbelievably tough job to turn the country from indecency and division to decency and cooperation – and, as Biden put, to avoid viewing opponent as enemies, for they are all Americans.

Events of the last hours, verify that Biden and Harris have the wherewithal to pull off the recovery task if, as Biden said, all of us as Americans demonstrate the ability to choose cooperation over confrontation.

To commemorate this new day in America (despite what will surely be Trump’s intention to disavow defeat), I cite these paragraphs from commentators.

FROM THE LEAD WASHINGTON POST STORY ON THE ELECTION RESULT:  “Although transitions of power can always include abrupt changes, the shift from Trump to Biden — from one president who sought to undermine established norms and institutions to another who has vowed to restore the established order — will be among the most startling in American history.”

FROM COLUMNIST DANA MILBANK IN THE WASHINGTON POST:  “Donald Trump has lost the presidency.   Americans have sent packing the man who made the lives of so many a hell for the past four years with constant chaos, unbridled vitriol and attacks on the foundations of democracy. There may be difficulty in the days ahead because of (gratuitous) court challenges and (baseless) claims of fraud. The rage he has induced in supporters and opponents alike will take time to dissipate. But for a moment, let us rejoice: Our democracy has survived.”

FROM WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL WRITERS:  “Biden’s victory — and Trump’s defeat — is a testament to the resilience of American democracy.  In other countries, at other times, bullies like Trump have succeeded in becoming strongmen by promising security from dangerous outsiders, demonizing cultural elites and sowing enough confusion and apathy that people failed to resist the slide into illiberalism.

“Trump tried all of these tactics.  But Americans resisted. They did so in an overwhelming yet orderly fashion, at the ballot box, when it was their turn to have another say, despite the fact that Trump and his allies adopted a strategy of disenfranchisement when they realized they could not win fairly.

“They answered his four years of divisiveness by electing a woman — a woman of color — to be vice-president for the first time in the nation’s history.  Citizens in unprecedented numbers stood in line for hours to vote, starting weeks before Election Day.”

After celebrating the election win, Biden and Harris face daunting tasks that will focus first on controlling the coronavirus, then turn to stimulating economic growth.  Sources say they also will move to rejoin the Paris climate accords, to reverse Trump’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization, to repeal the ban on almost all travel from some Muslim-majority countries, to reinstate the program allowing “dreamers,” who were brought to the United States illegally as children, to remain in the country.

Back to the word “possibilities,” a keynote of Biden’s victory speech.  Nothing illustrates the word more clearly than the rise of the first Black women from an immigrant family to the second highest political office in the land.

“While I may be the first woman in this office, I will not be the last,” Harris, wearing all white, said to raucous applause (as she joined Biden on the victory podium.

“Because every little girl watching tonight sees that this is a country of possibilities.”

I say “possibilities,” too as we embark on a task to renew America’s spirit and inspiration.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

There’s that word again – “take-ways.”

No problem with it (notice that I like a hyphen in it), but headline writers and journalists love to use the word to convey overarching results of an election such as the one we just had – or, better put, “are still just having.”.

I will avoid postulating – proposing take-aways – for the national election, for there are enough prognosticators to go around without adding my words to the mix.

But I will propose some take-aways to glean from Oregon’s election, which is essentially over.  I do so because I always think it’s good to take an overall look at election results rather than just tabulate totals in individual races.

Implications are important in the aftermath of any election.  Here are mine.

VOTE-BY-MAIL WORKS

The process worked very well again in Oregon – and that is no doubt a result of the process having worked well here for 20 years.  It was designed initially to produce higher turnout and that, too, has worked. 

The turnout a record 2.3 million-plus Oregon voters when to the polls, or, it could be said, sat at a kitchen to fill out their ballot.  The total exceeded 2016 at about 80 per cent.  Here are two amplifications of vote-by-mail success.

As the Oregonian newspaper put, “unlike nationally, few Oregon races are undecided after election night.”

“Oregon’s well-oiled vote-by-mail system delivered decisive results in the vast majority of contests Tuesday night.  Oregon’s six contested seat in Congress, its three races for statewide state office, nearly all legislative races and key money measures — all were decided shortly after the balloting deadline, thanks to swift action by voters and election officials.”

DEMOCRATS REMAIN IN CHARGE NEARLY EVERYWHERE, THUS AGGRAVATING THE URAN-RURAL SCHISM

Again from the Oregonian newspaper:  “Oregon has tilted blue for some time.  But this year’s election results reinforced the state’s Democrat voters’ dominance.  The statewide votes for former Vice President Joe Biden to become president and incumbent Senator Jeff Merkley to serve another term were overwhelming, as were the votes to install the three Democrat candidates in statewide offices — incumbents Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and Treasurer Tobias Read and newcomer Shemia Fagan as Secretary of State.”

And, with Democrats preserving super-majorities in both the House and the Senate, the Ds can raise taxes on their own, without any Republican votes, if they choose to do so.  They have not yet announced any tax increase proposals, but you can bet supermajorities will provide a major incentive.

The Ds charge come almost exclusively from urban Oregon which means the urban-rural divide will continue to be a dominant issue in Salem.  Not just the divide, but rural Republicans claim Ds don’t even listen as they pass bills that harm or could harm rural Oregon.

In my past, both as a lobbyist and deputy director of the Oregon Economic Development Department, I have see that to be true more often than not.

The Ds wanted to expand super-majorities by two votes in each chamber to avoid Republican walk-outs when the Rs wouldn’t provide a quorum.  The Ds did not succeed, so walking out remains an option for the Rs when they feel that doing so is a last resort.

One of my friends the other day claimed that walking-out shirked the duties of those who were elected.  I responded yes, that’s true, most of the time.  But, if you represent rural Oregon and urban leaders want to pass bills that would harm your constituents, walking-out could be your only option.

Those you represent in rural areas likely would applaud your action.  And, whatever is the case, both Rs and Ds have walked-out in the past, so, if disdain is warranted, it goes to both sides.

OREGON VOTERS PORTRAYED INDEPENDENT STREAKS

The two best examples are the votes to decriminalize possession of most street drugs and the other to allow supervised use of psilocybin from mushrooms.  Both are nationally notable, as they mark the first time any state has permitted the non-prosecuted possession or use of substances.

To be fair, the Oregonian newspaper says “backers of the measure to decriminalize drugs, many of whom are former addicts with long records of hard-won sobriety, said they want people caught with small amounts of heroin, meth and other drugs to get assessed and treated to end their addiction, not to keep using.  But it would not be a crime for them to do so.”

Another independent streak occurred when Multnomah County voters endorsed tax increases or keeping property taxes at current levels to aid kids, library users, parks-goers and the like.

No bottom-line perception here.  Just recognition that, from a process standpoint, the election went well in Oregon.  And that is not true in some parts of the country.

Now, for Oregon, it’s on to the long regular legislative session at the Capitol and the major issue is whether the process will allow members of public to participate, given the pandemic.  If not, that will be a blot on the Legislature, which holds itself out as a beacon of democratic light.  Not always true.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Regardless of how the presidential election turns out, I am making a new pledge as I continue to write my blog.

I intend write no more about Donald Trump no matter if he wins or loses the presidency.  [I suppose this pledge could change if Trump does something so heinous that it compels a response.]

Overall, he doesn’t deserve any more of my time or my words.

If he wins, I fear for the future of this country because so many Americans bought his line, not to mention his character flaws, which reflect blatant narcissism.

If he loses, good riddance.  Here’s hoping that his huge debts and other illegal actions will catch up with him when he no longer has the protections of the presidency.

Meanwhile, it is likely the outcome of the election may rest with the U.S. Supreme Court.  Too bad.

Though I continue to hope the Supreme Court won’t decide the outcome on its own, but, rather, will assure that every vote, however its cast (by mail or in person) will be counted.  The future of U.S. democracy, under attack by Trump, deserves no less protection…as do voters.

At about mid-morning today, Biden operatives were quoted positively about the election outcome, though nothing will be sure for days, if not weeks.

This election was different for me, though I have been retired from my lobbying career for a few years.  In the past, I would usually stay up late to monitor results, including on-line, then join my colleagues to write assessments for clients.

This time, no.  I went to bed early.  One reason is that I already had far too much of national TV prognosticators plumbing the depths of every Florida county.  Time to turn off the TV and do what I do best the next day, which is read newspapers to get the best take on what happened or is happening.

And, about those polls…inaccurate for the second presidential election in a row.  I just think many of those called by pollsters don’t respond truthfully, especially when it comes to Trump because they are embarrassed by their support.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The extreme, over-the-top, illegal actions of one Donald Trump prompted the creation of something called “The Lincoln Project.”

On this election day, while we may not know national election results for several days, if not weeks, why would I write about something that may not matter for long.  Well, I believe it is timely to convey information about the initiatives like the Lincoln Project and compliment leaders for their strength and lack of timidity. 

Despite Trump, the fact is that there are Republicans who repudiate his leadership, if it can be called “leadership” at all.

The Lincoln Project was formed by several Republican consultants who had made their living working to elect candidates from that party.

But, with Trump, they could not countenance his behavior and his actdions, so they formed The Lincoln Project to go public with their opposition, which made them believe members of the public, if they knew the truth, also would repudiate the president and his core beliefs.

This is how the founders describe their quest:  “We do not undertake this task lightly nor from ideological preference.  Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain.  However, the priority for all patriotic Americans must be a shared fidelity to the Constitution and a commitment to defeat those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party.  Electing Democrats who support the Constitution over Republicans who do not is a worthy effort.

Or this:  “Your house is on fire. Do you care who the firemen are?

“That is a centralquestion of the 2020 election.  Donald Trump has managed to do one thing no other president has done:  Bring Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and progressives, boomers and millennials together in unprecedented numbers to try to defeat him. For Americans who believe the president is a raging threat to democracy, purity tests are out.  Results are in.”

From the Lincoln Project, viral videos and tweets mocking his leadership, his intelligence and his patriotism are aimed both at Republican voters who are waveringand Trump himself.  They have attracted millions of dollars, via donors from both parties.  

“Donald Trump is so completely at odds with every institution in America and so completely at odds with anything that the Republican Party allegedly stood for:  The rule of law, constitutional fealty, institutions, norms, traditions, all of those things are out the window,” says Rick Wilson, a co-founder of the group. “So you’re either going to make a choice between Trump or this country. We made the choice for the country, even if it doesn’t immediately seem to fit with all of our ideological or political priors.”

“Trump is a narcissist and he cannot help but react to threats to his delicate psyche,” explains George Conway, a columnist, a Lincoln Project member, and, notably, the husband of Trump sycophant Kelly Anne Conway.

“Trump is a very sensitive, weak human being who cannot take criticism.”  The other factor, George Conway adds, is that “he can’t think ahead. He merely reacts to things. And what we do is take advantage of both of those psychological defects.”

All of this came to my mind – not to mention my fingers on the keyboard – as I thought about a charge leveled by one of my partners in my old lobbying and PR firm.  With a stern voice, he told me that all – yes, all – Republicans were to blame for aiding and abetting Trump.

I disagreed, saying that many Republicans have disavowed the worst president in U.S. history – Trump.  If I was a Republican, I would be one of those disavowers just like those in the Lincoln Project.  But, since I am an independent, I already have disavowed Trump – and I say that no matter who the opposition is.

Anyone-but-Trump is better than Trump.  So, my vote goes to Biden.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Why would I write about this – the passing of movie star Sean Connery?

Well, let me just say this – Connery starred in my favorite movie of all time – “The Hunt for Red October.”

Plus, writing about this means that I do not have to write more about Trump, that guys who sits, inappropriately, in the Oval Office as we wait for election day or longer for him to depart.

Now, with Connery’s passing, there never will be a sequel to Red October.  Probably, though a sequel was never really in the offing.  Hard to do one when the last scene in the first epic shows the stars – Connery and Alec Baldwin – riding a Russian submarine down a river on the East Coast after it had been pilfered by U.S. military forces.

My mind was captured the first time I saw the movie and nearly was able to memorize lines from it as I saw repeats on TV over the years.

Here is the headline and the first paragraph of a story from the Washington Post on Connery’s passing:

“Sean Connery has died. The Scottish-born actor, who was cinema’s first James Bond, was 90. “In a career spanning more than five decades, Connery developed a screen magnetism that combined the seductive charm of his honey-thick Scottish brogue with an alluring physical presence.”

Perhaps I liked Connery because of the Scottish brogue, the “honey-thick” one.  I don’t have one, nor am I of Scottish ancestry, though my wife is and, through her, I have developed a love for all things Scottish, including, it must said, golf.

Connery won much of his fame and fortune for playing British spy James Bond in six films in the Bond series, which developed almost a cult following over the years for at least a couple reasons – the so-called “Bond girls” and the upscale weaponry, including fast cars and pounding guns.

Famously, Connery as Bond was asked by one villain “Do you lose as gracefully as you win?”  “I don’t know, I’ve never lost,” Connery replied.

Overall, Connery made more than 60 films — most of them in the leading role.  The Bond series aside, only a handful drew critical acclaim:  “The Untouchables,” “The Man Who Would Be King,” “The Hill,” “The Offence” and “Russia House.”  Many were flubs such as “Zardoz” and the “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.”

But, many were audience-pleasers such as “The Hunt for Red October,” “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade,” and the Bond films.

Count me as one of those pleased by “The Hunt for Red October.”

As an aside, the submarine used for scenes in Red October has been resting for some years as an attraction near the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry on the east side of the Willamette River.

Well, enough of that.  Back to waiting for election returns as a political junkie.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Money talks in politics.

Perhaps not always, but usually.

If you are running for political office, you want to have more cash than your opponent.

So it is that my former firm, CFM Advocates, reports that huge donations of cash have been made  in Oregon races – and will continue to be made – as everyone drives toward election day.

By the way, the phrase “election day” may not have the meaning this year that it has in the past.  At the close of election day Wednesday, we may know what happens in local, regional and state races, but national results may take days, if not weeks, to emerge.

Here’s how my old firm described the cascade of cash:

“In the 2020 general election, legislative Republicans want to erode Democrat supermajorities in the House and Senate.  Legislative Democrats want to enlarge their House and Senate majority so they have quorums without relying on any GOP member.

“Both sides are expressing optimism. Turnout will once again be the X-factor.”

Turnout appears to very high at the moment, perhaps compelled, at least in part by the presidential race between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Salem Reporter says that “more than half of registered voters in Oregon have already returned their signed and completed ballots. With 52 per cent of ballots already cast, Oregonians are voting earlier than in any of the past three presidential elections.  Oregon has a knack for high voter turnout — 80 per cent and 82 pr cent in the past two presidential elections.  Experts are predicting even larger numbers this year.”

Here’s what at stake in elections for the Oregon Legislature.

At the moment, Democrats control the Senate 18-12 and the House 38-22.  They need to pick up two seats in both chambers to have a quorum-proof majority.  If not that type of gain, Democrats need to retain all 18 seats in the Senate and at least 36 House seats to preserve supermajorities that allow them raise to new taxes without Republican votes.

House GOP Leader Christine Drazan, R-Canby, says it will be hard for Democrats to defend such a large majority.  But Senate Majority Leader Rob Wagner, D-Lake Oswego, predicts a “blue wave” of Democrat voters.

Election suspense centers on a handful of races in districts with retiring incumbents, appointed legislative replacements or areas with changing voter demographics.

The best example of the latter is House District 54 in Bend. The Republican incumbent is freshman Representative Cheri Helt who won in 2018 after her Democratic opponent was politically wounded by a sexual harassment charge.  Helt is a political moderate and was one of the Republicans who didn’t walk out in the special session earlier this year.

However, Democrats outnumber Republicans two to one in Helt’s

district.  Her Democrat challenger, Jason Kropf, a deputy district attorney, has raised $800,000 and may benefit from energized Democrat voters in a presidential election year.

Also in the Bend area, GOP Senator Tim Knopp has raised more than $1 million to defend his Senate District 27 seat against Eileen Kiely, a Navy veteran and retired Daimler Trucks executive who has collected $500,000 for her campaign.
Democrats have a registration edge in Knopp’s district, though not as large as House District 54.

A few other highlights a few hours before election day – and, for this list, I am indebted to colleagues at my old firm:

• Republicans are trying to flip back House District 52 in Hood River, which Democrat Representative Anna Williams captured in 2018, unseating Jeff Helfrich who was appointed to the formerly GOP seat.  Helfrich is mounting a comeback candidacy in a race marked by a combined $800,000 in campaign spending.

• The retirement of three Democratic incumbents on the Oregon Coast – Senator Arnie Roblan and Representative Caddy McKeown, both from Coos Bay, and Representative Tiffany Mitchell of Astoria – has created promising openings for Republicans in territory carried by Trump in 2016.

Republican candidates have tried to turn these races into referenda on “Portland politics.”  Democrat leaders have countered with charges of “Trumpian tactics.”

• Senator Denyc Boles, R-Salem, who was appointed last year to replace the late Senator Jackie Winters, faces a serious challenge from Deb Patterson, a pastor in her second bid for the seat.  Patterson lost to Winters by 8 percentage points in 2018.

Boles and Patterson both have raised $800,000, which has paid for some of this cycle’s most negative television advertising.

• A possible upset-in-the-making could occur in House District 47 in East Portland where Democrat Representative Diego Hernandez is seeking re-election to a third term, despite urging from House Speaker Tina Kotek to resign because of allegations he sexually harassed seven women at the state Capitol.

Hernandez is being challenged in the general election by community organizer Ashton Simpson of the Oregon Working Families Party.

If Simpson managed to win, he would be the first non-major-party candidate to win an Oregon legislative seat since Charles Hanlon, running as an independent in 1974, defeated incumbent Democrat Senate Majority Leader Bill Holmstrom, who was caught in a scandal.

• Congressman Peter DeFazio, seeking his 18^th term, is facing a stiffer-than-anticipated re-election bid from Alex Skarlatos, who vaulted to fame when he and his fellow soldiers thwarted a terrorist attempt on a French train.

Skarlatos has received $3.9 million in campaign contributions in his bid to unseat DeFazio, who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

• State Senator Cliff Bentz, who won a contentious GOP primary, is expected to coast to victory in the 2^nd Congressional District seat vacated by retiring Congressman Greg Walden.

Enough.  You get the picture.  A lot is at stake.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Consider this headline.

What would America be like if Joe Biden wins and Donald Trump loses?  Not perfect, of course, because no presidential administration ever is.  But, if only because of the qualities of Biden, we could return to a time when character mattered in the Oval Office.

With Trump, solid character is off the table.  So, we are left debating his egomania and his incessant tweets.  I say stop.

In a column in the Washington Post this morning, editorial page editor Fred Hiatt asked and answered the question.

“For the past three-plus years, the country has lived — and suffered — in Donald Trump’s America,” he wrote.

“With President Joe Biden, America would be starkly different.  To begin with, it would not be Joe Biden’s America, which in itself says something significant about the difference.

“The nation would return to a time when most Americans were not forced daily to contemplate the president’s latest provocation, government officials would be picked based on competence and commitment to service, not their capability to play the sycophant, and the president would judge his success based on legislative accomplishments rather than TV ratings.

“This is not to say that Biden would be a mere throwback to the years of President Barack Obama, or before, but that he would muster democratic norms and values to face an uncertain and dangerous future.”

Just think of it for a moment.  Without Trump and the Republicans who simply abet him, we could focus on crafting policies that make America better at home and around the world.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course. A PEW Research Center report asked this probing question the other day:   What can we trust 2020 election polls to tell us?   Well, the answer is we are not sure.  At least I am not sure. After what happened in 2016 — polls predicted Hillary Clinton would win, but Donald Trump produced what could be called an upset – it is hard to know whether polls can be accurate. As Election Day draws closer this year, PEW says, if we are trusting polls to predict the future, then our trust is misplaced. The best answer about polls, PEW contends, is to expect them to reveal our priorities and values – and why we vote the way we do – not the who-wins prediction. “Good pre-election polls try to get inside people’s heads.  They attempt to understand the reasoning behind Americans’ values, beliefs and concerns.  They explore how voters are reacting to major events such as the pandemic and economic downturn; how they feel about the candidates and policies; and which factors are motivating them to vote for a particular candidate, or whether to vote at all.” And, beyond that, I also wonder whether who-wins type of polls can be relied upon in these days of high tension and interpersonal argument.  I don’t know that people will respond accurately on controversial issues or candidates. Over my career in politics, I have witnessed the work of crummy pollsters – those who produce polls to confirm pre-poll perspectives.  We used to call them “push polls,” as in pushing respondents to a prearranged point of view. Push pollsters give a bad name to the solid operators. All of this came to mind as I read a story in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) story under this headline:

The Pollster Who Thinks Trump Will Win

Robert Cahaly foresaw the outcome in 2016. Will ‘social acceptability bias’ deliver another surprise?

In the WSJ interview, Cahaly defined “social acceptability” this way:

“The mainstream media and other authority figures have openly and aggressively contended that Trump is a white supremacist, a would-be dictator, a cretinous buffoon and an inveterate liar.  In such an environment, poll respondents who sympathize with the president, or who believe his administration has on balance done more good than harm, may be forgiven for not saying so to a stranger over the phone.

“Do people lie to pollsters?  ‘Yes,’ Cahaly says, ‘but they’re not necessarily doing anything wrong.  If a grandmother says, ‘This is my grandson, isn’t he a handsome boy?’ and you can see he’s anything but handsome—he’s sickly and weird-looking—you don’t say, ‘No, he’s sickly and weird-looking.’  You just say, ‘He sure is.’ ”

Let me underline a point I made earlier.  If you agree to a phone call from a pollster (by the way, I refuse all such calls), you might not respond accurately for fear that, in a controversial issue such as abortion, same sex marriage, capital punishment or the like, your response may end up being used against you, especially in a society marked by pervasive social media.

Or, you may just not want to admit support for a controversial issue or candidate.  

So, it’s tough for polling these days to be accurate because accuracy still depends on the honesty of respondents.

And that means that, in the current presidential race, I am trying to ignore all polls and just wait for the outcome next Tuesday or whenever it occurs.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The headline on this blog may not make much sense unless readers, like me, are political junkies.

Here is how the headline came to my mind.

I just finished reading a great political book, The Man Who Ran Washington:  The Life and Times of James A. Baker, III.  It was the story of a man who served multiple presidents, including as chief of staff, and managed three Cabinet departments.  It was when Baker led the Department of State that he oversaw the end of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and Middle East peace (which, like all such deals in the Middle East, did not last very long).

By contrast, the current chief of staff for President Donald Trump is Mark Meadows, a former Member of Congress, who has made a negative name for himself by saying the Trump Administration (there’s that word again, administration, which cannot be used about Trump) has given up on efforts to control the pandemic, even as it is a major blot on Trump’s record, one that could cost him re-election.

Meadows also has failed, intentionally, to convey to the American people the severity of Covid-19 infections among the president’s and the vice president’s staff at the same time as he provided misleading information on Trump’s own infection.

Thus, the contrast:

James A. Baker is one of most competent chiefs of staff in history and Mark Meadows is one of the worst.

Now, reasonable observers could argue that it is impossible to serve as chief of staff for Trump who won’t let anyone do the job, much less abide any staff member who does not display unthinking and continual loyalty to the top dog. 

For Meadows, media reports say he spends little in his office in the White House and has little, if any, focus on managing the processes by which information flows to the president.  Of course, even if Meadows performed this normal chief-of-staff-gatekeeper role, the chances are Trump wouldn’t listen, a contention buttressed by the fact he has cycled through four chiefs of staff in the last three-plus years.

This issue – the role and performance of chiefs of staff – matters to me for at least two reasons:

• First, Baker’s performance underlined what should be true of politics in general these days, which, as it was put in the book, “politics should be more about pragmatism than purity.”
• Second, I have worked under several chiefs of staff in Oregon who served governors here, so have seen first-hand how the competent ones perform under intense pressure.

Operating from my post in the cheap seats in Salem, Oregon, I list these five qualifications for a chief of staff.

1.  Demonstrate the ability to bring disparate interests together to solve public policy challenges.
2. Demonstrate the capacity to provide leadership, which can be known when it is seen, not when it has described in words in advance of its existence.
3. Demonstrate the ability to distinguish between what you and what you don’t know – and, for the latter ,rely on other members of the management team.
4. Demonstrate that you have the wherewithal, first, to challenge the boss when you think he may be wrong, and, second, implement, with skill and dispatch, any decision once it is final.
5. Demonstrate the critical judgment to know that government is supposed to work FOR the people, not for those in office.

At the national level, Baker demonstrated all of these and more.  Meadows does not.

And, in Oregon, one of the best was Gerry Thompson who served as chief of staff for the last Republican governor here, Victor Atiyeh.  In the spirit of full disclosure, I worked for Atiyeh, too. 

Does my bias show?  If it does, good.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

On occasion, I choose to devote my blog post to reprint a newspaper column that I consider to be especially relevant, not to mention the fact that the writer uses words better than I would use them.

This is such an occasion.

Therefore, below is a reprint of a column by Michael Gerson that appeared in the Washington Post this morning.

In cogent words, Gerson describes President Donald Trump’s “most profound failures in the pandemic.”

As election day approaches – and the word “day” may not mean as much as it once did given so much voting my mail – it is worth pondering Trump’s mistakes, which have been legion.  Could he have stopped Covic-19 in its tracks?  No.  Could he have done more to contain it?  Yes.

So, to help with pondering Trump’s failures, read on.

*********

On Election Day 2020, it is probable than more than 60,000 Americans will be newly infected with covid-19, in a pandemic that has taken at least a quarter-million lives and threatens many more.

This is the main context for the presidential election. Interviews with senior officials, who asked to maintain anonymity because they fear retaliation, offer the picture of a largely functional government betrayed by a deeply dysfunctional leader.

Taken together, their testimony outlines four failures of judgment and leadership that have worsened the trajectory of the pandemic in the United States.

···

The first is a sin of omission — the failure to act when clear duties arise.

The federal government’s response to covid-19 began poorly in early February. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention produced a test for the virus that was contaminated and initially useless. As errors go, this was a serious one. No country can shape an adequate pandemic response without some idea of the location and extent of infections.

Yet errors in the initial response to a complex national challenge are to be expected. Successful leadership adapts quickly and shifts course. But when testing faltered, the Trump administration did not rise to the moment, even though there were solutions at hand — employing the effective World Health Organization test, or allowing labs to develop and use their own. Weeks passed as the health bureaucracy churned.

The cost of this testing disaster was immediate and high. In February, plans were suggested for random testing in emergency rooms around the country. “It never happened,” recalls a senior administration official. “Testing was not available. We would have learned weeks earlier that this was out there in the country. We lost at least a month.”

It is doubtful that this information would have allowed for a comprehensive test-and-trace response on the model of South Korea. But getting testing right more quickly might have helped curb the spread early, saving many lives in the process. The White House had the ultimate responsibility to make the system work. But it didn’t.

···

The second error was a sin of commission — the direct betrayal of a duty.

Even as events rushed forward, the Trump administration actively and deceptively played down the extent and seriousness of the crisis. As the danger became undeniable, the president and others in his administration doggedly denied it. “It’s going to disappear,” said President Trump. “We have it so well under control.”

There was never a proper sense of emergency at the White House — an attitude that transferred downward across the administration. Some clearly viewed covid-19 as a political problem that could be managed by public relations — as though renaming it the “Wuhan virus” could shift responsibility away from the president. Instead of disease control, they focused on damage control.

This made little sense as a long-term political strategy. The reality of mounting deaths would inevitably intrude. But there was something else at work here — an attribute of Trump himself. He scorns the bearers of unfavorable tidings. He banishes uncomfortable truths. With Trump, a senior administration official told me, there is “punishment for delivering bad news.”

This creates a bubble of happy talk around the president. “It is sort of like being in an alternate reality,” another administration official said. “The numbers would tell us that 15 cities were on fire, and two were turning things around. The entire focus was on the two doing good. No focus on the 15 doing poorly.”

How do you successfully manage an unfolding crisis if you refuse to hear bad news? You don’t.

···

The third major error was the Trump administration’s early decision to shift burdens and blame to the states.

By April, an administration strategy had solidified: hand off responsibility for pandemic response to the governors and cease to “own the problem.” With the death toll around 58,000, the administration hoped to declare victory and be done with it. “We have met the moment, and we have prevailed,” Trump said on May 11.

The official handoff involved creating federal guidelines for the safe and careful reopening of states that had closed to fight the pandemic. Trump agreed to the CDC guidelines in an Oval Office meeting on April 15, and they were announced broadly the next day. “If they had been adopted universally,” a senior administration figure told me, “it would have saved tens of thousands of lives.”

The unofficial handoff came on April 17, when Trump tweeted calls to “LIBERATE” Michigan, Virginia and Minnesota. It was, according to one administration official, “the most profound shock of all.” Trump had cast his lot with the shutdown’s populist critics, some of them armed. He began criticizing governors for lacking courage and speed in the process of reopening. And he shelved a second round of more detailed guidance from the CDC.

Blaming the states gave Trump a convenient excuse not to have his own comprehensive, national plan. And sabotaging the reopening standards had the rebounding influence of politicizing public health itself. In a highly polarized environment, reckless behavior became viewed as patriotism. In a crisis requiring behavioral change on a vast scale — wearing masks, social distancing — Trump consistently treated behavioral change as a sign of weakness. “It was increasingly destructive,” a senior administration official said. “It led to thousands of deaths.”

···

The fourth mistake was the administration’s undermining of expertise.

The tendency is most obvious in Trump’s elevation of quack cures. He suggested hydroxychloroquine would be “one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine.” It has become one of the greatest jokes, with real damage done in the wasted time and resources that could have gone to productive medical purposes.

A greater danger in the midst of the pandemic has been Trump’s irrational trust in outliers. Neither Peter Navarro nor Scott Atlas is an expert in public health or infectious disease. But both gained influence with the president by massaging a portion of his preexisting beliefs — Navarro on rapid reopening, Atlas on herd immunity. These anti-experts have provided bad advice and sought to sabotage rival sources of information. “Not only does the president want to surround himself with yes-men,” a senior administration official told me, “he wants to use yes-men to discredit the reputations of truth tellers.”

Attempting to argue with Trump on scientific matters is a difficult enterprise. He doesn’t distinguish between anecdote and evidence, and political need outweighs actual science. “He only sees through the lens of his political fortunes,” said one official. “Nothing else counts.”

···

The past several months have not been without successes in the fight against covid-19. Because of improvements in treatment, fewer who get the disease die. Progress on vaccines has come more quickly than any precedent. These achievements may eventually mitigate some of the failures of the first eight months.

But today we start from a shockingly high level of new infections. Coming are holiday travel and increasing time spent indoors in winter. On Election Day 2020, the United States will be in another precarious place. Once again, Trump is insisting we are turning the corner on covid-19. One administration official responds: “We are turning the corner — into a dark alley.”

The covid-19 crisis does not have a single cause, but it has revealed Trump as he is. His leadership skills are nonexistent. He is not talented, effective or even particularly cunning. He is simply outmatched, and eager to shift the blame. In the past eight months, the United States has led the world in deaths from covid-19. Trump has led the world in the production of alibis. His failures of wisdom and judgment have imposed massive, tragic costs on our country. And justice will be served if they cost him reelection.