Sex. Lies. Groping. Video Tape. and a Debate / October 10, 2016 by marilyn salenger

We have gone through many stages of Donald Trump during this 2016 presidential campaign, but we’ve now reached the numbing effect. He went to the bottom of the barrel in the St. Louis Presidential Debate and did not come up cleansed. The debate was held several days after the release of the sleazy and lewd Access Hollywood video and audio tapes in which we hear Trump describe kissing, groping and trying to have sex with women despite being married.

Trump apparently felt humiliating Hillary Clinton in a cheap and tawdry way in front of the world audience watching the debate was the best way to redeem himself. In a move few could believe, Trump brought four women to the debate, three of whom accused Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct in the 90s. His obvious goal was to intimidate Hillary Clinton and embarrass her husband who was seated in the audience next to their daughter Chelsea.

In a plan orchestrated by Trump’s campaign chairman Steve Bannon and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, a pre-debate photo op with Trump and the women was held. Trump friend Rudy Giuliani then escorted the women to seats in the main debate room directly in front of Clinton’s podium.

This is the same Donald Trump who told us after the first debate, "I'm really happy I was able to hold back on the indiscretions in respect to Bill Clinton. Because I have a lot of respect for Chelsea Clinton."

The same Chelsea Clinton who was now forced to sit rows apart from women who had played a very painful role in the Clinton family life when she was a young girl. The same Chelsea who was seated in the St. Louis audience next to her father, the former president of the United States. The same daughter whose good friend Ivanka Trump was also sitting close by next to her siblings and Melania Trump.

That's what Hillary Clinton saw as she looked out at the audience in the relatively small debate area.

The debate was held on a fine midwestern college campus. In normal times, it would have been a great opportunity for students to have the presidential candidates’ debate on their campus. But what took place last night was something that should never have been seen by any of us as part of the presidential political process.

Donald Trump came on to the debate stage an angry man backed into a self-made corner. You can no longer be dispassionate about Trump. His behavior at the St. Louis debate was repulsive and wrong. He created what was too often an abusive encounter with his opponent.

He tried to make Hillary feel guilty for her husband's alleged indiscretions. Trump showed continual disrespect for the former first lady, senator and secretary of state, telling her if he were in charge "you'd be in jail." He refused to stop interrupting her, shouting at her and walking behind her when she was talking. And this was a presidential debate.

The one thing Trump didn't do last night was offer the American people a major apology for his behaviors showcased on the Access Hollywood tapes. Not the thirty second late night one quickly put together two days before. He wasn't man enough to do the right thing that many were waiting to hear.

So much damage had been done to this debate by a defiant and arrogant Trump that it was hard to focus on whatever substance there was. What we saw was a Republican candidate seriously out of control.

An Anniversary Retrospective / October 7, 2016 by marilyn salenger

One year ago, Political & Otherwise published its first post. I am and always have been a political junkie coming off many years of covering so much of it as a news correspondent, or being in the midst of it working on two presidential campaigns. This was all done, of course, when few women were allowed to cover the hallowed halls of male dominated politics. I just always loved it, and respectfully pushed my way in to City Halls, State Houses, Capitol Hill and the White House, honing my craft as a trained observer. Yes, I do have sympatico with other women who are 'firsts.' It ain't easy. Fast forward to 2015, I knew that lightening was beginning to strike our political process and it was once again time to share added perspective with all of you by publishing this blog. Your support has been overwhelming.

As Political & Otherwise readers, one of my goals is to enable you to gain insight into stories before they appear in major news publications, as was the case with the first post, The 2016 Presidential Campaign and Our Kids. The campaign rhetoric in October, 2015 was already beginning to get out of control, and I could only imagine it's impact on young ears and eyes. The theme had yet to be studied or made into a Clinton campaign commercial - both of which have happened. And from there we went to the two women then running for president, Carly Fiorina and Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump's misogyny reared its ugly head early in the campaign which, among other things, was providing us with a headache. As our first month of publication was ending, it was noted that Jeb Bush was significantly pushing himself out of the race.

The 2016 campaign will not soon be forgotten. Too much negativity will leave a mark on our political process, and too many may think more than twice about running for political office. There was a time when it was considered a higher calling. True public service. The idealist in me would like to believe that those young children I wrote about a year ago will grow up and realize that this turning point in our historic process of electing a president is a goal and an ideal to still be pursued.

No matter which candidate ends up in the White House, a historic Hillary first or a Trump that realized he can indeed be Trumped, there will continue to be much to share and talk about as we inaugurate a new president. Stay tuned ... and thank you for being a part of this year!

Clinton and Trump Share the Stage / September 27, 2016 by marilyn salenger

Presidential debates hold an esteemed role in our country's history. They provide a unique showcase that enables the final candidates to go head to head in full public view, letting us see who they are and who they are not. It's a brilliant political creation.

Hillary Clinton won the first 2016 presidential debate against Donald Trump. It must be said up front because if she had lost the debate, tides might well have turned. She won the debate on substance and style with a deft use of preparation that was a winning factor. She did her job well, and as the first woman on the stage in that position, gender is something that shouldn't be dismissed.

The big question going into the debate concerned her opponent. Which Donald Trump would show up at the Hofstra University setting? We now know. The real one. The one for whom rules don't apply - at least in his mind - and preparation is something other people do. The so-called presidential appearing Trump was nowhere to be found.

From the moment television cameras went to a split screen picture of each candidate, Trump lost. It was fairly remarkable to watch the body and facial language of a man who made his way into our public lives via his own TV show.

The man we saw standing on the debate stage next to Hillary Clinton squirmed, squinted, pouted and slouched his way through the presidential debate, trying hard not to look as nervous as he apparently felt. It was hard not to think of Richard Nixon sweating under hot studio lights during his first debate with John Kennedy.

Trump is a man used to controlling the show. In order to do that, you advisedly have to prepare thoroughly so there are no surprises. He brought in former and now fired Fox news chief Roger Ailes to help with debate prep. Ailes pedigree includes preparing Nixon for his second debate and Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for their debates. If you bring in a professional coach, it generally pays to listen. But Trump didn't. The real Donald Trump who came to the Hofstra stage showed us what not preparing for a presidential debate looks like. It was clear he’s a man who still believes he can become leader of the free world without in-depth knowledge of the issues involved.

And he kept interrupting the woman on stage. Not once, but throughout the 90 minutes they were together. He kept trying to argue not debate, which can happen if you're short on substance. It can also happen if you're a man who thinks he can get away with that kind of behavior standing opposite a woman in a professional setting. The tall big man on stage came off looking much smaller.

When the debate ended, Trump went into the Spin Room to talk to the media. He talked about how great he had done. And then he said something that tells us much about the man himself:

"I'm really happy I was able to hold back on the indiscretions in respect to Bill Clinton. Because I have a lot of respect for Chelsea Clinton."

Trump added, “Maybe I’ll tell you at the next debate. We’ll see.”

No matter how far he's come, Donald Trump appeared officially out of his league back home again seven miles from Queens, New York.

Style vs. Substance: The Choice / September 20, 2016 by marilyn salenger

This past weekend's bombings in New York City and New Jersey provide an important and unexpected glimpse into the leadership ability and style of both presidential candidates during a time of crisis. Out of its complexity comes a simplicity that creates its own short form preview.

Donald Trump's techniques for verbalizing anything, even in a crisis, are important to look at. Facts be damned. If you focus on the methods he uses for making points, we begin to level a playing field for choice. He's conversational. It's the way he talks that makes things he says digestible no matter how outrageous. He uses simple words. He verbally drops major thoughts or words or statements casually in a matter of fact manner so that they don't seem like the big deal they are. He has the gift of verbal dynamite. Beware. Be alert. Report.

Shortly after news of the explosions in NYC broke, Trump couldn't contain his need to quickly comment, even before the city's Mayor Bill de Blasio and new Police Commissioner James O'Neil held their news conference. They had the facts. He didn't. Trump told a group of Colorado supporters:

"I must tell you that just before I got off the plane, a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what's going on, but boy we are really in a time - we better get very tough folks. We better get very tough. We'll find out."

The Twitterverse lit up. Trump publicly said, "nobody knows exactly what's going on" planting seeds of fear. He didn't have a clue but that didn't matter. The negative phrase was already put in people's minds. "We better get very tough folks" was equally well-suited to be negatively repeated. And then, as he does with great frequency, he dropped his zinger in a trail off voice that eerily planted his point - "We'll find out" ...

By the time the mayor said it was "too early to determine specifically what the incident was caused by," Trump's mission had been accomplished.

Hillary Clinton sounded a position that anyone in the sane political or business world would call calm and professional in crisis:

"We need to do everything we can to support our first responders - also to pray for the victims. We have to let this investigation unfold."

In perspective, her remarks reflect one of Clinton's major challenges against Donald Trump. Hillary's words didn't leave us hanging on to phrases to repeat or that incite passion. As pathetic as it is to say, this election is as much about communication skills as it is about real knowledge and ability. He plays to emotions, she plays to intellect.

On Tuesday as the NYC bombing details continued to unfold, Hillary said:

"This threat is real, but so is our resolve. Americans will not cower, we will prevail. We will defend our country and we will defeat the evil, twisted ideology of the terrorists.”

She went on to say, "Terrorists are using Donald Trump's rhetoric as a recruiting tool." Clinton looked and sounded presidential as she spoke to reporters. But how much of her statement will people remember?

Trump used the same Tuesday morning to do a phone interview with "Fox & Friends" and boast about being the first one to call Saturday night's explosion a bomb:

“I was criticized for calling it correctly, What I said was exactly correct. I should be a newscaster because I called it before the news.”

Taking a cue from Trump, I'll close by saying we can either get on the sane talk express or be prepared...

Trump's Women Problem Revisited / September 8, 2016 by marilyn salenger

The next president of the United States will be elected in two months, and the first female Democratic nominee continues to be hammered by two things. Emails and her gender. At this point, I believe Senator Bernie Sanders had it right in the first debate with Hillary Clinton way back in 2015 when he said, "Enough about your damn emails." Clinton has since admitted - and admitted again that she made a mistake using a private email server when she was Secretary of State, and said it won't happen again.

NBC News Matt Lauer missed that memo when he used about one third of her time at the Commander-in-Chief Forum asking her about those emails. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) didn't get the memo either. The Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is calling for another Clinton email investigation. Moving right along, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus took to Twitter during the Forum criticizing Hillary for seeming angry and not smiling enough as she answered questions.

Wait a minute. The female candidate didn't smile enough while talking about national security and our veterans as well as her emails? Thank you Reince for getting to the point. This is the presidential campaign that has made misogyny a household term.

When does a heated election contest between a man and a woman cross the line and become harassment? Perhaps when the male candidate surrounds himself with new advisers who possess an outright disdain for women that has gotten each of them into serious trouble. If Trump wins the election, these men are sure to play key roles.

Trump's new guiding lights, as he fights to win this election, are both men who have histories of reported “issues” with women. First up we have the man just thrown out of his last job for sexual harassment, former Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes. Fifteen days after being successfully sued by Fox anchor Gretchen Carlson, Ailes resigned in disgrace. The stories recounted by a number of women who also worked at Fox are beyond repulsive.

Roger Ailes has been a very powerful man, both in the media and politics, for a long time. Before Fox News, Ailes strategized victories for Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. But he let the power go to his head. Carlson was awarded a settlement of $20 million and an unprecedented apology from Fox. Ailes got a $40 million exit from Fox, and a place of esteem within the Trump campaign helping the candidate prepare for the debates and more. Donald Trump supported his buddy throughout his legal matter, and went so far as to question the veracity of the women accusing Ailes.

Next up, the man who recently got the job of Trump campaign CEO, Steve Bannon. While far from a household name, Bannon was the Executive Chairman of Breitbart News, a publication well known to the extreme right political world. This is a man who has been charged with misdemeanor domestic violence against his now ex-wife, and sexual harassment at a previous place of employment. Bloomberg News labeled Steve Bannon the "Most Dangerous Political Operative in America".

With Bannon’s reported strong desire to destroy those on the left and a no holds barred approach to taking opponents down, Trump has brought in another misogynist to work the final stretch of his campaign against Clinton. Weeks before being named Trump's new campaign CEO, Steve Bannon wrote the following on the Breitbart website:

"Women are -- screwing up the internet for men by invading every space we have online and ruining it with attention-seeking and a needy, demanding, touchy-feely form modern feminism that quickly comes into conflict with men's natural tendency to be boisterous, confrontational and delightfully autistic."

What a lineup of handpicked top advisers.

Trump Polls Drive Immigration Policy / August 30, 2016 by marilyn salenger

Donald Trump has made no secret of how much he loves polls. During the primary season he was often seen carrying them in his jacket pocket making for an easy read of his popularity to anyone who was listening. He was very adept at turning those numbers into the message of the day no matter what else was taking place. Polls to Trump are like TV show ratings, which we also know he loves. It made perfect Trump sense when he recently hired Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway as his third campaign manager. She drives the kind of train that he likes best. Numbers.

Does anyone really think that Trump just pulled immigration out of the hat to make it his major campaign issue? Don't bet on it. Trump's focus on immigration goes to the primary issue polls have shown is of most concern to his supporters, but not necessarily the rest of the country. He’s playing to his base.

A new Pew Research poll shows Americans rejecting many of Trump's views on immigration. Yet 66% of Trump registered voters consider immigration a "very big problem." The dichotomy between the two groups reflects some of the waffling the candidate has done in recent days on his signature and often inflammatory issue.

The same poll shows Trump supporters have mixed feelings about undocumented immigrants, but no crack in that big wall they want to have built. Seventy-nine percent of Trump supporters overwhelmingly favor construction of a wall along the U.S.- Mexico border. The split showed up once again when the majority of Americans surveyed rejected it.

As a country of immigrants, our immigration policies have always been complicated. Donald Trump is a man who likes quick fixes. But he’s learning that when it comes to opening and closing our borders it’s not so simple.

No Analyzing Trump From Afar, but ... / August 9, 2016 by marilyn salenger

The American Psychiatric Association made a surprise appearance in our presidential campaign slogfest. It makes perfect sense at this point. The Association has issued a reminder warning to psychiatrists across the country: "No psychoanalyzing Donald Trump." That's a pretty tough call.

The state of Donald Trump’s mental health has become part of the national conversation. It’s even become a Twitter hashtag: #trumpdiagnosis. A former Harvard Medical School dean tweeted that Trump had narcissistic personality disorder. A Northwestern University professor published a 9000 word psychological evaluation of Trump. The fact that the American Psychiatric Association felt the need to make their official "unethical" stamp public again last week brings up a rule that few of us knew existed.

It’s called The Goldwater Rule, and it prohibits psychiatrists from giving professional opinions about public figures they haven't personally evaluated. The rule grew out of Senator Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign. Goldwater was an out of the box right wing Republican politician, so much so the candidate bashing of that era got out of hand. It included a large group of generally surveyed psychiatrists who agreed that Goldwater was psychologically unfit to be president. Even though he hadn't visited any of their couches. After this election, they may feel the need to create an updated rule and re-brand it the “Trump Rule.”

For the rest of us not formally trained in the mental health field, it's gotten close to impossible not to analyze Donald Trump's behavior. It's the impact his words and behavior are having on others, here and around the world, that remains of most concern. Whether it's your friends or neighbors, almost everyone has some kind of analytic opinion of him. Including the president of the United States.

I've grown weary of hearing excuses for Trump's bad behavior. How he's just not politically correct. Or how his campaign is disruptive politics. He's not an establishment politician. Or he can't control himself. It's time for Donald Trump to take responsibility for his actions and be held accountable.

Speaking from the White House, President Obama finally got to the point where he made a remarkable statement about the Republican nominee after Trump attacked a Muslim Gold Star family whose son had been killed in the Iraq war. Describing his feelings as “unprecedented,” Obama said, “The Republican nominee is unfit to serve as president.”

The Power of the Democratic National Convention: Nominating A First / July 29, 2016 by marilyn salenger

Photo by Mike Coppola/WireImage / Getty Images

Hillary Clinton officially became the first woman to accept a major U.S. party's presidential nomination.

"When there are no ceilings the sky's the limit." Hillary Clinton, July 28, 2016

It's an almost unfathomable thought. Women have labored under ceilings based upon gender and set by men for generations. Hillary’s statement reflects an unofficial emancipation of possibility that will take time to truly set it. But what an amazing beginning for young women today. It makes no difference if you're a Democrat or a Republican. What makes a difference is to see the lifting of inequity between men and women take place on the biggest stage in our country.

By the time we reached the last night of the Democratic National Convention, it actually felt good to feel hopeful again. To hear positive messages about us as a people and as a country. It’s been such a bruising campaign that feeling good about the state of politics has seemed almost out of place. It's only when you realize how unusual it is to feel good about ourselves that you realize how bad we must have been feeling.

Democrats did their best to pull us out of the trenches of terror promoted by Donald Trump at his convention, and push the refresh button for a moment. But it was the power of so many moments that led up to this time that will now forever be etched in history.

The Democratic National Convention was a convention of strength that grew from diversity. Across political and economic rank. Across race and religion. Across military and civilian. It was a sea of faces representative of what our country actually looks like. A country that shares its stories of triumph and tragedy while working to build bridges to each other. It was a convention that stood in extraordinary contrast to the previous week's Republican National Convention - a coronation of their would-be king who already thinks he is king.

We saw a stronger and more relaxed Clinton deliver her acceptance speech. Not because the fight is over. The battle to win the Presidency against Donald Trump will only get harder and dirtier as the campaigns slug through the coming months.

Cracking that glass requires a toughness that Trump can never feel or truly understand. It's the kind of preparedness that has been passed down through generations of women, and was vividly shown when Hillary hugged her daughter Chelsea sharing private words before she took center stage. The true torch between mothers and daughters and granddaughters has been passed.

Trump Kids Shine & Dad Gets Credit: USA TODAY Column / July 23, 2016 by marilyn salenger

```` Previously Published in USA Today

Ex-wives were missing from the picture though they largely raised the children.

In a week when Donald Trump’s four adult children were the breakout stars of the Republican National Convention, Trump is getting lavish credit for raising great kids. Their poise, presence and acumen suggests that they are as comfortable as their father in the political spotlight.

Trump has worked hard to put them there, as much for his own image as theirs. The team of dad plus Donald Jr., Ivanka, Eric and Tiffany projects a public image of a near perfect seamless blended family. It just happens to be missing a major part of what made that blending — and near-perfection — possible: The children’s mothers.

Donald Trump was not a single dad. But there’s been a conspicuous lack of acknowledgement that the older Trump children were actually raised by their mothers as well. Trump's ex-wives were outside the convention spotlight, presumably to try to sanitize a part of his personal past that’s not so perfect.

Melania, Trump’s third wife and the mother of 10-year-old Barron, was front and center (for better and worse). Marla Maples, Trump’s second wife, watched daughter Tiffany deliver her convention speech hidden backstage. Ivana, Trump’s first wife, is the mother of Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric. She is rarely seen or publicly credited for her role in the children’s lives and kept a low profile during the convention.

A family friend posted a loving picture of Ivana and her newborn grandson on Instagram when Ivanka and husband Jared Kushner had their third baby in March. But the Daily Mail reported that it was quickly taken down.

When Donald and Ivana were married, the former Czechoslovakian model worked alongside her husband helping to build the Trump brand. The couple came of age at a glitzy time in New York City history and loved living the high profile life. At one point Trump called a press conference announcing Ivana’s new position as president of the Plaza hotel. “My wife is a brilliant manager. I will pay her one dollar a year and all the dresses she can buy!” Equality in Trump marriages only goes so far, but the children were raised by a smart working mother as well as a smart working father.

Ivana recently said of her child-rearing role, “I decided on their schooling and everything they did.” Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric grew up with nannies and a close relationship with Ivana’s parents, who initially lived with them. The boys describe their dad as a workaholic. Don Jr. credits Czech grandfather Milos for his interest in hunting and being a strong male figure in his early years.

The kids then went off to boarding schools and college. Ivana has said that when they were 21 and done with college, she “gave them” to her ex, telling him, “This is the final product — now it’s your job.”

The first Trump marriage ended in scandal and front-page divorce. Donald Trump began an affair with Maples while still married to Ivana, and the publicity rang loudly and clearly in the ears of their young children. Donald Jr. was 12 at the time and didn’t talk to his father for a year after the divorce. Ivanka was eight and Eric was six. Ivana received custody of the children but Donald Trump reportedly remained a part of their lives.

Marla Maples, an aspiring actress, became Donald Trump wife number two. Their daughter Tiffany became child number four. The marriage lasted six publicly tumultuous years before they divorced. Marla got custody of their daughter and moved them across the country to California. People Magazine described Maples as “virtually a single mother living on a comparably modest budget.” Tiffany had little time with her father or half-siblings. The New York Post reported that she spent about at Trump’s Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago.

Tiffany appeared to become more part of the family once she started college at the University of Pennsylvania, the same school attended by her older half-sister Ivanka and their father. This past year was Tiffany’s senior year at Penn and also her semi-official public coming out as part of the Trump political family. There was a certain poignancy to her convention speech as she spoke lovingly about a father who, in reality, was largely absent from her childhood.

Donald Trump has said, “I want five children, like in my own family, because with five, then I will know that one will be guaranteed to turn out like me.”

The four adult Trump children have now shown their ability to excel to all those around them, including their father. Maybe it’s time for a familial group hug that includes the moms who also helped make them what they are today.

Marilyn Salenger is an Emmy-Award-winning news correspondent and anchorwoman. Follow her on Twitter @MarilynSalenger.

Uniting Democrats Across Generations / July 13, 2016 by marilyn salenger

Each Democratic presidential candidate this year has become known as much for the demographics of their supporters as for all else. Bernie's Millennials and Hillary's Boomers+. The age divide among these 2015-2016 voters has created a party split as unique as the election itself. Sanders’s so-called revolution wowed millennials repeatedly in each primary race. Hillary impressively provided strength for those over 45 years old, and even more to those over 65. Now that Bernie Sanders has formally endorsed Hillary Clinton, his supporters and her supporters need to go about the co-mingling process passionately and quickly if they want to win.

We're not talking about an automatic flick of the loyalty switch, but a grounded desire for an election victory. It requires a thought adjustment by both groups. In the 2008 presidential election, 61% of Democrats over the age of 45 voted. But young voters have not shown the same strength of turnout on election day, when it can be critical. Given the size of the millennial demographic, a key question is whether this year's group will break rank with their previous voter pattern, and come out in the large numbers they’ve shown during the primary races.

While each campaign has to work through the unification process, national events can change the dialogue in a minute, and that’s happening now. Born out of the horrifying tragedies of the last few weeks, the shooting deaths of black men by white police officers and white police officers by a black man, the issue of race has yet again reared its ugly head.

The millennial generation didn’t live through the racial turmoil of the 60's, but they are seeing its next generation now. The Democratic party has a strong history of fighting for civil rights. They once again have a major opportunity to take a leadership role in working to change the racial dialogue in our country.

Both Sanders and Clinton supporters have the power to come together and work on the unfinished business of eliminating social injustice. It will not only take a truly motivated president, but a passionate and committed group of supporters to build a solid base upon which racism can become history and stay there.