The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

[grokit]

Drumpf will continue to harp on this; it could end up being hillary's biggest weakness.

"The deal itself was signed under constitutionally questionable circumstances;
it essentially amounted to a treaty, which would have required congressional approval"

Congress was right: The Iran deal is a travesty — and Obama is to blame

The terrible Iran deal, complete with a $400M payment, is proving to be the disaster Republicans predicted.

Onlookers concerned about a nuclear Iran shouldn’t be surprised by a report from The Wall Street Journal that the Obama administration secretly apparently airdropped $400 million in foreign currency in exchange for the release of four Americans, a move that breaches U.S. protocol and amounts to ransom. Even more troubling, yet not surprising: new reports that Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is publicly backpedalling from President Obama’s prized nuclear deal.

On state-affiliated media, Khamenei reportedly blasted “the futility of negotiations with the Americans” and said the United States wasn’t keeping its promises under the nuclear agreement. The deal itself was signed under constitutionally questionable circumstances — it essentially amounted to a treaty, which would have required congressional approval–over the protests of Congress, including many Democrats like Sen. Chuck Schumer.

These latest developments undoubtedly confirm what conservatives and other pro-Israel activists have been arguing throughout this entire episode. They’re yet another reason why people who don’t like flawed GOP nominee Donald Trump will still have a hard time voting for Hillary Clinton, given her prominent role in helping usher in this flawed deal. They also tarnish President Obama’s legacy, despite his brag last week at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia that he’d “shut down Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”

The State Department officially denied any explicit link between the $400 million payment and the release of prisoners, that this happened entirely coincidentally, not as a tit-for-tat. But it’s baffling why this administration continues to place its blind faith in a theocratic, authoritarian regime that bankrolls terror the world over, from Hamas to Hezbollah to the murderous Assad regime.

“It’s time the State Department stop trusting Iran more than the U.S. Congress,” Michael Rubin, a foreign policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute, told Salon. “The problem isn’t simply the timing of the ransom payment. Rather, it is the fact that Obama and Kerry are acting like gamblers who believe they can win big with just one more throw of the dice, and are willing to sacrifice increasingly more to do so. There simply is no introspection. The whole premise of the Iran deal was that they could work with Iranian reformers and moderates to defeat Iran’s hardliners at home and abroad. They never understood that Supreme Leader Khamenei and President Rouhani were playing an elaborate game of good cop-bad cop.”

more:
https://www.salon.com/2016/08/04/re...ran_deal_is_a_travesty_and_obama_is_to_blame/

 

[grokit]

To me it seems the United States has been working very hard at creating this enemy.

They're working even harder to re-start the cold war with russia; imo the reason is we can't justify building a new nuclear arsenal just by fighting middle-eastern jihadists, because they don't have any nukes. Yet.

 

[ReggieB]

It seems that there has been an infowar going on at the very least for some time between russia and it's cold war enemies, RT will often push it's own narrative around world events.

 

[ReggieB]

yeah but you're not the only nation they don't like much UK and the EU get stick on rt too, any time there's bad news on either continent RT are stirring it.

 

[CarolKing]

I realize the economy is different depending on where you live. In my state the economy is doing pretty good compared to where it was at during the beginning of the Obama presidency. So many lost their homes.

Also anything can effect the economy. Look at the stock market when the UK decided to break from the EU. It recovered after a week but it can be like a rolling coaster. It's effected by just a rumor that something may happen. I don't know a lot about the economy just the effects of supply and demand.

It really is a global economy. If China doesn't import logs it hurts our economy in my state. That still exists.
I know some people that were affected by the down turn, started their own cottage industry attached to the Internet. Sometimes it's finding a service that somebody needs. Like a power washing business for example. It's finding a niche and filling it. Sometimes you have to start your own business. I'm waaaaay off topic. I'm very medicated too. I had some banana bread made with cannabis infused coconut oil.

 

[lwien]

It really is a global economy.

Yup, and it's globalization that Trump supporters are afraid of and want it to stop. That's akin of being afraid of the industrial revolution and wanting that to stop. Cat's out of the bag, can't unring a bell, etc, etc, etc.

We're in the technology revolution. Fucking deal with it........

 

[His_Highness]

I'm in a technological growth industry so I seem to be insulated, so far, from any ill affects on the job front. I've also noticed that millennials with 4 year degrees and up are doing well now. There was a time, not too long ago, when millennials weren't doing all that well.

I posted a similar article a page or so back:
*-----------------*
http://www.uexpress.com/scott-burns/2016/8/7/the-almost-half-full-glass

A new study, however, suggests something different. It shows that the big growth is in people who are "upper middle class" and "rich." Those who are "middle class," "lower middle class" and "poor or near poor" are actually shrinking as a percentage of the population. More people are moving up than moving down, not more people moving down than up.

Surprised? I was too. It's definitely not the conventional wisdom.

Yet the study comes from the Urban Institute, a think tank more inclined to worry about the poor than celebrate the rich. Stephen J. Rose, the author of the study, is an accomplished labor economist with a Ph.D. from City University of New York.
*-----------------*

I've seen the affect of technology on those without advanced skills and/or a advanced degree. It's not pretty BUT you could see it coming. You either moved careers or got run over. Self-serve registers in retail, slot machines in casinos that print out a chit instead of a floor runner coming to pay you out, etc.

So, as the article I posted implied.... is the upper middle class expanding and the middle, lower middle and poor shrinking as a percentage of the population? If the article is correct then all the angst the politicians are stating about the middle class isn't quite correct but the pain of those not moving up is very real. Retraining is the answer but it's not all that easy. The cost, the time and drive all have to be dealt with.

 

[lwien]

but the pain of those not moving up is very real. Retraining is the answer but it's not all that easy. The cost, the time and drive all have to be dealt with.

Some people are going to be left by the wayside. For many, it's gonna be and IS a tough go. I may have sounded a bit harsh in my previous post but it was mainly aimed at those that want to turn back the clock............to the way it was. THAT ain't gonna happen and Trump giving false hope by saying that he's the one that CAN turn back that clock and people believing that he will makes me...............

When he loses, those people that had so much faith in him will feel that they've had the rug pulled out from under them and whatever hope they had for their future will be dashed. I'm more than a bit concerned of what happens next. Will they try to adjust to the changing times? Will they just give up? Or will it give way to anger and if it does give way to anger, that can get ugly especially with Trump suggesting that the election will be rigged.

Ya know, Trump has a lot of negative things going on from being called a bigot, racist, etc etc but what he is setting up for his followers could very well be the biggest negative of all.

 

[cybrguy]

An Electoral Win For Trump Goes Through Florida
by Nancy LeTourneau
August 8, 2016 9:28 AM

It’s Monday morning – time to get back to work. I have an assignment for you: go to the website 270 to Win and try to come up with a path to electoral college victory for Donald Trump that doesn’t include winning Florida. What you’ll find is that he would have to pretty much sweep all of the toss-up states to do so. That includes winning states like Virginia (he’s down by 7 at RCP) and Pennsylvania (where he’s down by 8). Right now, Hillary Clinton leads Florida by 2.7 – which is a lot more than the margin by which Obama won the state in 2012 (one percent), but we’ll have to keep an eye on that over the next few months.

In the meantime, Michael Grunwald provides us with a look at why Florida will be increasingly difficult for Trump to win. Of course, central to that uphill climb is the growing Hispanic population of voters in the state – which is projected to increase by 2% from 2012 to 2016. That is happening at the same time that Republican support from Hispanics is dropping.

George W. Bush actually won Hispanics in Florida when he carried the state by 5 points in 2004. Even Mitt Romney pulled a semi-respectable 39 percent of Florida Hispanic voters (versus only 27 percent nationally) when he lost the state by a single point in 2012. But that is not an encouraging trend line for Republicans. And Trump could be a uniquely toxic Republican.​

But beyond that, Grunwald paints a picture of Florida that not many of us are aware of.

It’s booming, home to four of America’s 10 fastest-growing metro areas, generating a million new jobs since 2009. It’s welcoming, too, a destination for a record 100 million visitors last year and home to more than 4 million immigrants, renowned for its come-hither economic ethos that couldn’t be less about building walls. Florida’s lunch isn’t being eaten by foreign powers exploiting bad trade deals that Trump claims are killing jobs; in fact, 1 in 5 of its jobs relies on international trade. It has problems—bad schools, overwhelmed infrastructure, severe inequality, rising seas that threaten its 1,300 miles of coastline—but it simply doesn’t resemble Trump’s portrait of America as an Obama-fueled garbage fire…

If the real Trump’s biggest demographic problem is hostile Hispanic voters, his biggest thematic problem may be his insistence that the U.S. economy is in shambles. It’s hard to see the evidence in Orlando, which led the entire country in job growth last year. And it wasn’t just tourism and construction jobs, although Disney World and the rest of the hospitality industry did have a record-breaking year, while real estate continued its dizzying rise from the depths of the 2008 crisis. The entire area is becoming a kind of “Center for Technology, Innovation and Creativity,” a hub for life sciences as well as Indienomicon-style digital jobs…

The kind of knowledge workers who work in these kinds of industries make metropolitan areas younger, denser and politically bluer.​

As Grunwald points out, Trump’s message is likely to resonate in the northern and panhandle areas of Florida – which have more in common with the deep south than the rest of the state. But it is hard to see how it succeeds in the crucial I-4 corridor of central Florida that is increasingly dependent on foreign trade and witnessing tremendous job growth in the digital economy. Add to that the kind of hostility Trump is conjuring from Hispanic voters as well as the fact that Clinton has more staff on the ground in Florida than her opponent has in the entire country, and prospects look pretty bleak for the possibility of that state going red in November. It’s also true that if Trump loses Florida, it is almost impossible to see how he wins the election.

 

[CarolKing]

We went on a brief trip (motor home broke down) in OR and a little in CA. What I noticed was that nobody is at the malls. You yourself are probably doing it too, you are ordering stuff online. People aren't going to go back to the malls to shop unless there is no more shopping online. Teenagers like to go to the mall maybe but most people don't have time to shop. Or would rather do other things. Our country has changed over the last 20 years.

Way more people are working for FedEx and UPS. The post office is screwed up but they are finally getting better.

Trump I noticed has lined up a bunch of guys that are suppose to be able to work with the economy. None are woman though.

It's just a different economy.

 

[grokit]

...the growing Hispanic population of voters in the state – which is projected to increase by 2% from 2012 to 2016. That is happening at the same time that Republican support from Hispanics is dropping.

The main reason for the potential shift in hispanic voting is the recent influx of democrat-leaning puerto ricans, which is starting to offset all the republican-leaning cubans that live there. Of course many of these cubans are now re-evaluating, since it was a democrat just re-established relations with cuba.

The dynamics behind this recent shift are the puerto rican bankruptcy, and cuban diplomatic relations.

This just in:
The right wing is all a-flutter about their new desired talking point, which is hillary's health condition

edit:

 

[yogoshio]

There is also a major pro-life issue within the Hispanic communities which will always draw a decent segment towards pro-life candidates. Granted, this election cycle neither candidate does well with that group. VP pick may help, but unlikely.

 

[His_Highness]

Trump presented his economic plan. I'm not going into the details but a couple of the talking points are not surprising.....

I expect these will be repeated till everyone can quote them in their sleep:
- Hillary is bought and sold not just by corporate America but by other countries. Hence the reason for TPP, the lack of interest in NAFTA, etc.
- The Obama Iran negotiations were a joke and Hillary was heavily involved. The 400 million drop off was supposed to remain a secret and was a ransom.

 

[CarolKing]

Hispanics aren't going to vote for Trump because of the abortion issue IMO. Trump isn't religious at all and I think folks can see that. He will say whatever they put in front of him now.

He acts like its the first time he's seen the material he's suppose to read. The republicans will try to mold Trump into what they want. We'll see if he stays on script. Let's hope not. His voters want something different.

His economy package is trickle down economics. I like the daycare idea about allowing the whole amount to be deducted from a families income. The rich need to pay more and Trump needs to show his taxes. They need to needle him on that. Like this man is trying to hide something. Really hound him on that.

 

[cybrguy]

Donald’s Unlikely Gift To Hillary
08/07/2016 08:04 pm ET | Updated 4 hours ago

Robert Kuttner Co-founder and co-editor, ‘The American Prospect’

This was going to be a tough election for Hillary Clinton. She represented continuity and establishment politics, at a political moment when unhappy voters wanted change.

She was pushing 70. Most of her prospective GOP opponents were more youthful, some of them a whole generation younger, reinforcing the image of Clinton as a candidate of the past.

She had a lot of baggage — Bill’s affairs, potential embarrassments from Clinton Foundation deals, a very long public record of public service, with inevitable gaffes and contradictions as targets. Even her strength in national security and foreign policy was blemished by misadventures such as the email mess.

And then along came Trump.

At first, it seemed as if Trump, in the role of faux populist, tribune of working class discontent, and media genius, might mean big trouble. But lately, Trump has been making Clinton look not just presidential; compared to Trump, she’s Jefferson, Lincoln and Roosevelt.

Consider:

He’s older than she is! So age is off the table.

Bill Clinton may be an odd first spouse, even a risky one. But ever since her plagiarism episode, Melania Trump has been missing in action. It now appears that she may have worked illegally for years in the U.S. on a tourist visa before she got her green card, which takes a certain zing out of Trump’s anti-immigrant rants.

The Clinton Foundation may have done some dubious deals. Clinton’s Wall Street speaking fees may have been outlandish. But compared to what? Trump’s stiffing of small business contractors? Trump University? His refusal to release his taxes? His serial bankruptcies?

The biggest worry for Clinton has been the risk of some major terrorist attack, which might drive voters to Trump as the strong hand in a crisis. But after last week, voters will have second thoughts about who has the steadier hand on national security.

Trump, himself a draft-dodger, insulted gold star families, and wouldn’t let up. He didn’t know that Putin had invaded Ukraine. He made casual comments about using nuclear weapons and abandoning NATO allies. On foreign policy, he reveals himself as an impulsive fool.

Republicans usually begin as the party superior at the mechanics of politics and the use of media. But Trump’s impulsiveness disdains professionalism, undermines the consistency of his campaign, and demolishes those structural advantages.

For one speech, on Friday, Trump actually managed to stay on message, After intense pressure from RNC chairman Reince Priebus, his own campaign staff, and anyone else who could get through to him, Trump reversed himself and announced that he was endorsing House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Senators John McCain and Kelly Ayotte after all. He even managed to avoid continuing the disastrous insults to the Khans and other gold star families.

But that discipline is very unlikely to continue. There has been a charming debate in the media about whether Trump’s bizarre character more closely corresponds to the American Psychiatric Association’s textbook definition of narcissistic personality disorder (grandiosity, self-absorbtion, lacking in empathy) or mania (inability to control outbursts, obessive “flights of ideas”).

I’d vote for both.

In the past week, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats had some potentially awkward moments such as her mischaracterization of FBI Director Comey’s view of her truthfulness, and the revelation that the Administration had paid $400 million in cash to Iran as part of a prisoner exchange . But Trump, in his obsessive sensitivity to slights, managed to keep the (negative) spotlight on himself, and keep potentially damaging Clinton stories off the front pages.

Until a couple of weeks ago, Trump’s penchant for stealing attention was a positive—billions of dollars in free media. Now it’s a clear negative.

In the Democratic convention speech by Khizr Kahn and its aftermath, the Democrats stumbled on a strategy that will serve them well throughout the fall campaign: Goad Trump into responding with insults to a criticism on which Democrats clearly have the high ground, knowing that he is incapable of not taking the bait.

As the ancient Greeks put it, character is fate. It took a while for Trump’s true character to be revealed. But there it is, rampant, florid, and repulsive. Those who live by tweets perish by tweets.

In all likelihood, Trump will continue to amplify the splits in the GOP. The spotlight will stay on him — pulling younger voters, independent voters, sane Republican voters, and Bernie voters tempted by Jill Stein back into the Hillary camp.

All of this should be cause for relief, but not complacency. After all, a competent demagogue with greater mental stability — channeling racism, misogyny, white working class economic rage, anti-immigration anxiety and fear of terrorism — could well have beaten Clinton. Those demons will not be quelled any time soon.

 

[lwien]

"Fifty of the nation’s most senior Republican national security officials, many of them former top aides or cabinet members for President George W. Bush, have signed a letter declaring that Donald J. Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president and “would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.

"Mr. Trump, the officials warn, 'would be the most reckless president in American history.' "

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/national-security-gop-donald-trump.html?_r=0

 

[cybrguy]

Why This Isn’t a Normal Election
by Nancy LeTourneau
August 8, 2016 10:46 AM

The top line of the latest ABC/WaPo poll that was released yesterday doesn’t contain a big surprise. Hillary Clinton is leading Donald Trump nationally by about 8 points – which is pretty much in line with what we’ve been seeing lately. But buried deep in the reporting about it comes this:

In a campaign in which Trump is running as a political outsider who would shake up Washington and not be beholden to the establishment, the electorate currently favors someone with experience working in the political system by a margin of 55 percent to 42 percent. That represents a marginal shift in the direction of experience since before the conventions.​

But wait a minute…I thought this election was all about angry voters who are hell-bent on throwing out the establishment bums who are responsible for the big mess we’re in. How does that jive with the fact that a clear majority favors experience working IN the political system? And how does that square with President Obama’s increasing job approval?

Pundits have been pointing out that this election isn’t following “normal” patterns. Usually that is in reference to how Republican voters are responding to Donald Trump’s candidacy. But there might be another way this election is different. For the first time in the modern era, the country has a scandal-free President who is fairly popular and is going all-in to support his successor.

We are used to hearing that elections must either be about “change” or maintaining the “status quo.” I would propose that neither of those is an apt description for what a majority of Americans are looking for this time around. Is it possible that behind all the noise being created by angry voters, a majority think that – while things are getting better – we need more progress? Could it be that voters know that taking America “back” means going in the wrong direction and that we need to go forward with the kind of change that is currently underway? Are a majority of voters capable of that kind of nuance in a world of either/or? That was essentially Clinton’s message at the Democratic Convention.

Now, I don’t think President Obama and Vice President Biden get the credit they deserve for saving us from the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes.

Our economy is so much stronger than when they took office. Nearly 15 million new private-sector jobs. Twenty million more Americans with health insurance. And an auto industry that just had its best year ever. Now that’s real progress but none of us can be satisfied with the status quo. Not by a long shot.

We’re still facing deep-seated problems that developed long before the recession and stayed with us through the recovery.

I’ve gone around the country talking to working families. And I’ve heard from many who feel like the economy sure isn’t working for them.

Some of you are frustrated – even furious. And you know what? You’re right. It’s not yet working the way it should.

Americans are willing to work and work hard. But right now, an awful lot of people feel there is less and less respect for the work they do. And less respect for them, period.

Democrats, we are the party of working people. But we haven’t done a good enough job showing we get what you’re going through, and we’re going to do something to help.​

In that quote, Clinton is rejecting the idea that this is a “change” election as well as rejecting the idea of maintaining the “status quo.” She is instead promising to build on the progress that has been underway for the last 8 years. That is precisely why President Obama was confident in passing the baton on to her for the next portion of this relay. And it’s also why this isn’t the kind of “normal” election we’ve seen in the recent past.

 

[CarolKing]

It sure makes the Republican Party look like a bunch of sheep following each other to the slaughter with this letter from 50 of the GOPs Nat'l Security Experts. This fucking lunatic GOP doesn't even care about the safety of this country, they just want to win come hell or high water.

The end of the letter says this man would be the most reckless in American history. Pretty jarring when you think how serious this is and who these men are.

 

[grokit]

I liked candidate obama. Not so crazy about the guy currently reversing his original positions on the tpp and monsanto/gmos. I saw it coming, when I couldn't bring myself to vote for his re-election. It seems to me that the democrats' strategy (largely pioneered by bill clinton) to counter the republicans is working. By gradually moving even further to the right over the years since bubba, they have claimed the political center of america. Meaning that they have fractured the republicans, by forcing them over the crazy cliff. Not all of them want to go (at least 50 of them lol), but at least some of the sane ones must have see the writing on the wall. What to do, 100 days is a lifetime in politics so we'll see if drumpf can somehow make it a race again. Because if the gop loses to the libertarians this year, we could have a whole new crazy coming!

 

[ReggieB]

I liked candidate obama. Not so crazy about the guy currently reversing his original positions on the tpp and monsanto/gmos. I saw it coming, when I couldn't bring myself to vote for his re-election. It seems to me that the democrats' strategy (largely pioneered by bill clinton) to counter the republicans is working. By gradually moving even further to the right over the years since bubba, they have claimed the political center of america. Meaning that they have fractured the republicans, by forcing them over the crazy cliff. Not all of them want to go (at least 50 of them lol), but at least some of the sane ones must have see the writing on the wall. What to do, 100 days is a lifetime in politics so we'll see if drumpf can somehow make it a race again. Because if the gop loses to the libertarians this year, we could have a whole new crazy coming!

That move towards the centre is what new labour (tory lite) did in the uk, it was kind of effective for a while, til 2008 with the crash and the infighting over leadership etc. we're still seeing the fallout unfold where the left readjusts to the left again or tears itself in 2.

 

[lwien]

It sure makes the Republican Party look like a bunch of sheep following each other to the slaughter with this letter from 50 of the GOPs Nat'l Security Experts. This fucking lunatic GOP doesn't even care about the safety of this country, they just want to win come hell or high water.

The end of the letter says this man would be the most reckless in American history. Pretty jarring when you think how serious this is and who these men are.

Waiting to see Trumps response to this. He will no doubt again get off track from going after Clinton and go after these guys.......and that 10 point gap will begin to widen.

The Clinton campaign should save any production costs on their next campaign ad and just copy and past the text of this letter to the TV screens of the American public. This letter isn't coming from the Dems. It's coming from Republicans.......lol.

 

[grokit]

That move towards the centre is what new labour (tory lite) did in the uk, it was kind of effective for a while, til 2008 with the crash and the infighting over leadership etc. we're still seeing the fallout unfold where the left readjusts to the left again or tears itself in 2.

I think the democrats are going to have move more to the left, or risk losing the youth vote to 3rd parties.

It's the demographics; something like 90% of the under-30 crowd is very progressive.

 

[ReggieB]

Or the young need to be more realistic, imho they should meet somewhere in the middle because even if you win it's never all about just your group.

 

[BD9]

There's another presidential candidate in the race, Evan McMullin. A conservative Mormon running as an independent.

Evan McMullin

Born in Provo, Utah, McMullin obtained his undergraduate degree at Brigham Young University and received an MBA from Wharton. In addition to his years with the CIA, he participated in a Mormon mission in Brazil and worked for Goldman Sachs.

"Americans who believe in limited, Constitutional government that is smaller, smarter, and more accountable view both Clinton and Trump as symbols of corruption and excess that provide no hope of basic competence in the federal government," McMullin said in a letter posted on his campaign website.

 

[cybrguy]

Here is a little more...

Ex-CIA officer launches presidential campaign aimed at thwarting Donald Trump
Michael Isikoff and Michael Walsh
•August 8, 2016

A former CIA case officer who has served as top policy aide to House Republicans is launching an independent campaign for the presidency on Monday with the backing of veteran GOP strategists and donors determined to block Donald Trump from getting anywhere near the White House.

Feeding off mounting discontent within GOP ranks over Trump, Evan McMullin — who is resigning today as chief policy director for the House Republican Conference — announced his campaign with an open “Letter to America” that took pointed shots at both the GOP nominee and Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Clinton, McMullin declared, is a “corrupt career politician who has recklessly handled classified information” and “put American lives at risk, including those of my former colleagues.”

But Trump “is a real threat to the Republic,” McMullin added, citing the mogul’s “obvious personal instability.” He continued: “Putting him in command of our military and nuclear arsenal would be deeply irresponsible. His infatuation with strongmen and demagogues like Vladimir Putin is anathema to American values. We cannot and must not elect him.”

“It’s never too late to do the right thing, and America deserves much better than either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton can offer us,” McMullin, 40, said in his announcement statement. “I humbly offer myself as a leader who can give millions of disaffected Americans a conservative choice for president.” (A campaign website went live Monday morning.)

Although the candidacy of a political unknown with no experience in electoral politics seems improbable at best, strategists working with Better for America, a group dedicated to stopping Trump, told Yahoo News that they believed the McMullin campaign has a genuine chance to catch on. The group said he even has a plausible path to victory through a deadlocked race that would ultimately go to the House of Representatives to resolve if neither Trump nor Clinton gets the required 270 electoral votes.

“The goal is unequivocally to win,” said Joel Searby, chief strategist for the McMullin campaign. “It’s clear that Donald Trump had a disastrous week and his support is waning, and we think it’s a great time” for an alternative.

Backers of the effort, he said, include a group of GOP strategists and activists who have been searching for months to find an alternative to Trump, including John Kingston, a GOP donor who was close to Mitt Romney and has been spearheading the Better for America campaign.

The initial goal, Searby said, is to “plant a flag” in Utah, Colorado and other Rocky Mountain western states, where polls show discontent with Trump is high, and then start to target key swing states such as Virginia, Florida and Minnesota. Ballot access will be a problem, but not insurmountable, Searby said: The deadline for getting on the ballot has not passed in 15 states and in some cases only requires a minimal number of signatures. (Among them are Utah, which requires a mere 1,000 signatures on a petition, and Colorado, which requires as few as 275.) In other states, the pro-McMullin forces will seek to partner with parties already on the ballot such as the Reform Party. Finally, he said, the McMullin forces are planning to launch a constitutional challenge in the courts to gain ballot access in remaining states where the deadlines have passed.

All this requires convincing voters that McMullin represents a plausible alternative for conservatives who can’t bring themselves to back Trump. He is widely known among House Republicans as thoughtful and knowledgeable, especially on national security issues, and has close relations with several GOP leaders, such as House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Rep. Ed Royce. He played a key role in formulating GOP efforts against President Obama’s policy on Syria, including arranging to bring a key opponent to President Bashar Assad’s regime — who went under the code name of Caesar — to Washington to display photos of the Syrian government’s brutal treatment of political dissidents. At least one House Republican, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, is expected to endorse McMullin shortly, and others, his backers say, are likely to follow with supportive words.

For 11 years, from 1999 until 2010, McMullin was an undercover operations officer for the National Clandestine Service at the CIA. He served across the globe, including in war-torn regions of Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

On LinkedIn, he summarized his responsibilities in his position as having managed “clandestine operations related to counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, energy, political stability and counterintelligence, while serving mostly in hostile environments.”

McMullin also worked as an investment associate for Goldman Sachs in the San Francisco Bay Area and briefly held positions as a volunteer refugee resettlement officer in Jordan with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and a deckhand for a commercial fishing vessel off the coasts of Alaska and Washington state.

The CIA veteran has a relatively small public profile and few followers on social media. Earlier this year, he delivered a Ted Talk called “Why Saying ‘Never Again’ to Genocide Is Not Enough” at the London Business School.

He has been highly critical of Trump on Twitter, calling the real estate tycoon an authoritarian interested in trampling on civil rights in the pursuit of power.



McMullin also argued that Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns could be a harbinger of things to come, namely a lack of transparency, under a potential Trump presidency.