Campaign tactics – USA Gov Policy

Presidential elections are generally hard fought, no-holds barred contests. However, several disturbing occurrences in the 2016 campaign have gone far beyond the usual rough and tumble of the quadrennial slugfest.

The initial salvo began even before the start of the campaign season, and has already been widely discussed. The inappropriate opposition of the Democrat Party to common-sense measures to insure the accuracy of voter registration rolls and to verify that only qualified voters actually cast ballots has been clearly documented.

Several new strategies have recently been added.

The GOP has generally been identified as tougher on crime, and in favor of more stringent sentencing. It follows, then, that those on the receiving end of that philosophy have not been favorably disposed towards Republican candidates. That has not placed the GOP at a disadvantage, since convicted felons, under current law in most states, have forfeited their right to vote as a consequence of their misdeeds.

In late April, Terry McAuliffe, Governor of the key swing state of Virginia and a personal friend of Hillary Clinton, announced that he was restoring voting rights of more than 200,000 Virginians who were convicted of felonies such as murder, rape, armed assault and other crimes. Some analyses indicate that the governor’s restoration would be permitted despite the status of any unpaid fines or restitution requirements. A press release from McAuliffe’s office noted these ex-cons had “served their time and completed any supervised release, parole or probation requirements. Each of those Virginians will immediately regain the right to register to vote, to run for office, to serve on a jury and to serve as a notary public… The Governor implemented his action by signing an order restoring the rights of every Virginia felon who completed his or her sentence and all other requirements as of April 22^nd, 2016. The total number of Virginians impacted by the Governor’s order today is 206,000. He also instructed the Secretary of the Commonwealth to prepare a similar order monthly in order to restore the rights of individuals who complete their sentences in the future. Article V, Section 12 of the Constitution of Virginia grants the Governor the authority to “remove political disabilities consequent upon conviction” of a felony.” The governor’s action did not extend to restoring Second Amendment rights.
Be sure to get immediate medical cialis canada no prescription pdxcommercial.com care to address your injuries as well as to discover its possible side effects. The science has invented the medicine that is called generic medicine and this theory has been tablet viagra https://pdxcommercial.com/property/709-w-main-st-molalla-or/ used in the preparation of this herbal product. But, if you side effects cialis are facing erection trouble and need an instant solution, then popping one of the ED pills will definitely support your cause. You can simply visit the store to purchase prescriptions due to their health problems or https://pdxcommercial.com/property/1925-1935-se-powell-blvd-portland-97202/8-2/ buy brand viagra condition.
There has been harsh reaction. A National Review assessment questions whether the Governor can provide a blanket pardon, as opposed to a case-by-case action. The article quotes legal sources claiming that McAuliffe is essentially rewriting the state constitution. An Associated Press (AP) description left no doubt that the purpose of the move had less to do with the rights of released criminals and everything to do with the 2016 election. AP noted that at the announcement, left-wings groups were present, handing out voter registration forms. A BBC article quoted Republican Caucus Chairman Ryan T. McDougle: “Terry McAuliffe wants to ensure that convicted pedophiles, rapists, and domestic abusers can vote for Hillary Clinton.”

The Clinton campaign’s proclivity towards unusual tactics extends beyond enhancing the Democrat base using questionable means. It is also extending into areas that embrace bare-knuckled politics in innovative ways. A New York Post article found that a “pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC plans to spend $1 million responding to her online critics” by deploying “a digital task force” to oppose Clinton opponents online.

The concept of silencing critics of Democrats in general can be seen in other actions, as well. The Obama Administration has engaged in a number of measures that would have a chilling effect on free speech. The latest, outlined in a Fox News report, is a Federal Election Commission move to censure a film maker who produced a movie sharply critical of the Obama Administration. Joel Gilbert, producer of a number of politically-themed independent films, is being targeted under the excuse that his movie, which has no connection to any campaign, should have filed reports to the FEC as though it were part of a campaign. Interestingly, the FEC has not undertaken similar actions against pro-Democrat works on tv and in movies.

A potentially violent tactic has also been observed, as protestors have taken to blocking roads and streets leading to rally sites used by at least one GOP candidate.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.