[EDITORIAL] Trump, Sanders and a murky horizon

There’s something happening here. What it isain’t exactly clear.

The words of Buffalo Springfield in the ‘60s anthem “For What It’s Worth” evoked social unrest in a turbulent time, even if they were penned more in response to Los Angeles street riots than Vietnam.

But the lyrics have resonated for decades in part because they can apply to so many social trends difficult to comprehend as they evolve. The 2016 presidential campaign to date may be revealing one of those trends, spiced with a genuine touch of revolutionary spirit.

We all keep laughing at Donald Trump’s chutzpah, the apparent silliness of his entire pseudo-campaign. Yet he keeps growing stronger in the polls. His supporters say Trump gives loud voice to the concerns of many Americans tired of half-hearted, diplomatic solutions.

On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders’ unabashedly ultra-liberal style has his poll numbers surging against the long-presumed nominee, Hillary Clinton. People laugh at Sanders’ absent-minded professor mien in dismissing his candidacy as little more than a chance to raise the public profile of a few pet issues. But his supporters see in him someone who truly understands the dangers of the nation’s escalating wealth gap.

There’s a long way to go. The “anyone-but-Clinton” movement has picked up serious steam and may draw other Democrats like Vice President Joe Biden into the race, dampening the Sanders’ spark. The Republican field will inevitably be winnowed down even before we reach 2016, and the coalescing of voters around some of the survivors figures to reel in Trump.

So this may not last. But why is it happening even now?

We like what Sanders brings to the campaign table, beating the drums on issues that need to be voiced. We can’t be as enthusiastic about Trump, but a lot of people like what he’s selling. Still, a nation ruled by their extremes and eccentricities on either side of the aisle would serve the interests of precious few. The two-party system is designed to encompass large cross-sections of values and philosophies and to avoid control by extreme ideologies. Sanders and Trump in their own ways represent those dangerous extremes. If we’re headed toward that kind of choice, we’re in trouble, regardless of the winner.

But Sanders and Trump also reflect a nation sick to death of the bitter partisanship, the relentless deceptions and obsequious deference to money and power that poisons modern politics. It all feels like one enveloping lie, a game we’re forced to play over and over again. From that mud pile Sanders and Trump come across as candidates who are simply saying what they think and believe, and letting the chips fall where they may. There’s something refreshing about that, and voters who don’t have to make areal choice for president this early in the process are embracing that.

If somehow this could herald a more forthright era in politics, America would be a better place. But where this is headed just ain’t clear.

Via: myNewJersey.com

Continue Reading.....

Sharpton *Shocked* At Suggestion That People Who Work Harder Earn More

And I am shocked that he has a TV show. CLICK for VIDEO

I will be even more shocked if I hear that anyone actually watches.

Via NewsBusters:

In the liberal universe, there's no correlation between hard work or ingenuity and financial success.  As President Obama recently put it, the rich are simply "society's lottery winners."

Sounding a similar theme, Al Sharpton today declared it "astounding" that Rand Paul believes that income inequality is due to "some people working harder."  Astounding, indeed!  What's wrong with Rand?  How could he possibly believe that someone someone who works, say, 60 hours per week might earn more than someone else who works 20?

Note that Sharpton also recycled the canard that Jeb Bush said people needed to work longer hours whereas the context made clear he was calling for the availability of  more full-time jobs. 

AL SHARPTON: It's the new 2016 Republican answer to income inequality and it's a doozy. Here is GOP senator Rand Paul saying Americans must, they just need to work harder. 

CHRIS WALLACE: Question, doesn't your plan massively increase income inequality? 

RAND PAUL: Well the thing is, income inequality is due to some people working harder and selling more things. So if voluntarily buy more of your stuff, you'll have more money.

SHARPTON: He said that, that's right, he's claiming income inequality is due to some people working harder? Astounding! Implying that the poor just don't work hard enough. It's also strikingly similar to Jeb Bush last month when he said Americans need to work longer hours.

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading....

[EDITORIAL] Electing a president is not a game

Think about the acronym POTUS, President of the United States. Now imagine Donald Trump when you hear the phrase POTUS. Is that thought merely surprising or terrifying?

    Polls seem to indicate that at least some are willing to put the destiny of the United States, indeed of the entire world, into “the Donald’s” hands just because they are angry at the political system. Really consider Donald Trump and the kind of president he would be were he to actually be elected.

    Who among us would feel comfortable giving this person complete control over the nuclear codes. POTUS is, after all, charged with the power to use them. At some point, Donald Trump becomes no joke.

    Now that the primary debate season is underway, Trump is the first choice of 19 percent of GOP primary voters. In reality, that is actually a fairly tiny number of actual persons, but they seem to believe in Trump as the one best able to explain the issues important to a president, and in his dismissal of the debates as just a waste of his time.

    Trump admitted that he has little experience in the exchange of ideas that debates entail. He sees as his strength his unwillingness to control his emotions and to engage only with bombast. In fact, it is those very qualities that have made Trump the centerpiece of these very early days in the presidential election process. 

    Electing a president is more than a game. Russian President Vladimir Putin will not be dismissed with the “you’re fired” catch phrase. Allies, like Germany’s Angela Merkel, are just as unlikely to be reassured by Trump’s assurances that he will “know just what to do.” Trump, however, seems to have convinced himself he is ready to run the country.

    Trump set the rules on his TV show, but he certainly will not be able to do so in the debates or the campaign months ahead. We will now see whether he can operate without his own rules. On Thursday night, Republicans opened the first part of their process for showcasing their candidates for the office of president. A Trump true to his outrageous form is preferable for entertainment purposes, but for the good of the country, a more controlled Trump is a better outcome.

    The debates are intended to give the public an opportunity to learn what choices we, as voters, will be offered. Up to the debates, Trump has certainly been clear about what kind of leader he will be. In the end, however, it is not the Donald but we, America’s voters, who must take responsibility for the momentous decision of who will be POTUS, the most powerful person on the planet.

Via: Idaho Mountain Express

Continue Reading....

California and the GOP Debate

Looking for California in the GOP debate presented some challenges even with one candidate who has tentative ties to the Golden State and the state’s Democratic governor who tried to put himself into the debate via a letter to the candidates on climate change.

There was only one Californian (sort of) in the field of 17 — Carly Fiorina who made her name as CEO of Hewlett-Packard and was handily defeated by Barbara Boxer for the California U.S. Senate seat in 2010. She now lives in Virginia.

She did fairly well in the first debate, many pundits declaring her the winner. And it appeared that former Texas governor Rick Perry has Fiorina lined up for the Secretary of State job if he becomes president. In criticizing the Iran nuclear deal Perry said, “I’d rather have Carly Fiorina over there doing our negotiation rather than (Secretary of State) John Kerry.”

Major California companies Google and Apple also made it into the first debate with Fiorina saying they should cooperate with the government on investigations that might prevent terrorism.

Apparently, Jerry Brown sent his letter to the wrong recipients for the main debate. California’s Democratic governor tried to work his way into the debate when he sent a letter asking GOP candidates how they would address climate change. He should have sent his letter to the Fox News Channel debate moderators. They didn’t bother to engage the candidates on climate change in the debate featuring the 10 leading candidates.

There was a reference to climate change in the first debate held for candidates in positions 11 to 17 in the polls. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham responded that if he debated presumptive Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton on climate change she would argue cap-and-trade that would ruin the economy while he would focus on energy independence and a clean environment. Cap-and-trade is a key strategy in Brown’s camapign on climate change.

Immigration was a big issue at the debate although nothing specific to California. However, the situation on sanctuary cities was raised in both the earlier and later debates. The sanctuary cities issue gained headlines after the shooting death in San Francisco of Kate Steinle by an illegal immigrant who had been deported many times but still came back. Candidates from Jeb Bush to Ted Cruz, to Bobby Jindal said they would eliminate federal funds to sanctuary cities.

There are a number of presidential candidates working with individuals with strong California ties. To name a few: Jeff Miller is campaign manager for Rick Perry, Mike Murphy is a strategist for Jeb Bush and Todd Harris is communication director for Marco Rubio.

While California didn’t have a big role in the debates one of her favorite sons was mentioned frequently –Ronald Reagan. And that will carry over with the next Republican debate scheduled for the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley September 16.

Originally published of Fox and Hounds Daily

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....

[VIDEOS] Mainstream media surprised by Republican debate as Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina score

What can best be described as "Hunger Games: Parts I and II" kicked off with more than three full hours of GOP debate in Cleveland Thursday and with more action and drama than the movies by the same name.

In the main debate, casino mogul Donald Trump ran into a buzzsaw of tough questions and quickly found himself flailing wounded on center stage.

Fox News’ anchor Bret Baier started that debate off with a blockbuster question asking if any candidate would refuse support for another GOP nominee. Trump was the only one to raise his hand and say he would consider running as a third-party candidate. The crowd rained boos on him as a result.

While Trump had some effective answers throughout, he also looked mean when questioned about comments he had made disparaging women. Moderator Megyn Kelly, asked Trump about adjectives he's used to disparage women. “You've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals.” Trump’s sarcastic response saying they were only for liberal actress Rosie O’Donnell didn’t help dig him out.

Ultimately, liberals were unhappy, which means the GOP did something right.

But Trump did recover, complaining that “the big problem this country has is being politically correct,” he responded.

Where Trump faltered, conservative Sens. Marco Rubio, Fla., and Ted Cruz, Tex., were more than happy to take advantage. Rubio was consistent throughout the debate conjuring up great images for a future America and being tough when needed. At one point bashing Planned Parenthood, Rubio emphasized his pro-life record and said: “Generations will look back at us and call us barbarians” for abortion.

When asked about God, Rubio gave a comment that fit his evening’s theme: “God has blessed the Republican Party with some very good candidates. The Democrats can't even find one.”

Cruz wasn’t to be outdone, drawing more Google search attention than anyone. He told viewers the “We need a commander in chief that speaks the truth. We will not defeat radical Islamic terrorism so long as we have a president unwilling to utter the words, radical Islamic terrorism.” Cruz scored big with Frank Luntz’s debate watchers, too, who loved that comment.

While the top candidates from Zones 1 and 2 ripped each other apart, the earlier debate held out for and found a hero (ine).

The debate, nicknamed #kidstable on Twitter, was led by former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina who put on her best Katniss Everdine performance. All she needed was a bow and to turn her criticism of Hillary to “President Snow” and the image would have been complete. Like the Jennifer Lawrence character, Fiorina wiped up the floor with her competitors.

Fiorina earned her plaudits with tough, prepared statements and her own use of filibuster. Viewers of the New Hampshire non-debate would have seen much of what she said, but only locals and wonks watched both. (Hint: I’m not a local.)

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

Who Can Beat Hillary?

Already feeling overwhelmed by the 2016 presidential race? It's understandable with 16 major Republican candidates running for White House. This doesn't count a slew of lesser-known aspirants, including some former governors who would merit attention in a smaller field.

People ridiculed the 1988 Democratic presidential candidates as the "Seven Dwarves." So far, no one has called this group the Sweet 16. Only 10 at a time are expected to appear together onstage for debates sanctioned by the Republican National Committee. Among them are senators, governors, a successful businesswoman, a retired neurosurgeon and author and a billionaire reality TV star.

Can any of them beat Hillary Clinton? They have reason to hope, for the last time Clinton looked inevitable, she lost. Her odds of making it out of the Democratic primaries are much better this time. So far, she has attracted four challengers and only Bernie Sanders, the socialist senator from Vermont, has attracted a meaningful following. Neither Joe Biden nor any other Democratic savior has emerged.

The general election is a shakier proposition for Clinton. She fares well in national polls, frequently beating her Republican rivals by double digits in hypothetical match-ups. But swing state polls tell a different story. In late July, Quinnipiac found her losing Colorado, Iowa and Virginia — they are all states Barack Obama carried twice and George W. Bush won at least once — to the leading Republican candidates.

But if the polls more than a year before the election were determinative, Rudy Giuliani and Richard Gephardt would have been major-party presidential nominees, and John McCain might have been president of the United States. At this point, Clinton looks like a competitive but beatable candidate in the general election. But before any of the Republicans can beat Hillary, they must first defeat the rest of the GOP field.

The Republican race is wide open, with barely 10 points separating first and fourth places in the national RealClearPolitics polling average. Fewer than 20 points separate first place from fifteenth place, a spot occupied in July by a candidate with 0 percent of the vote.

Superficially, the 2016 GOP contest looks a lot like past races. You have an establishment candidate in Jeb Bush. The combined finances of his campaign and super PAC mean Bush is awash in money. He has a good team, solid organization and plenty of endorsements. Then there's a group of candidates competing to be the conservative alternative to Jeb.

Yet the race is, in other ways, like no other in recent memory. Bush is the establishment candidate, yes, but he is not the clear front-runner. He's led in only one major poll in Iowa since May 2014, and after trailing Mike Huckabee in an outlier poll in February, he has at different times lost his national lead to Scott Walker, Marco Rubio and, most recently, Donald Trump.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading...

Michael Reagan: Trump Has My Dad's 'Passion'

(Frederic J. Brown//AFP/Getty ImagesDonald Trump shares an important characteristic with President Ronald Reagan — and it could serve him well in next Thursday's first GOP debate of presidential candidates, commentator Michael Reagan tells Newsmax TV.

In an interview Friday with "Newsmax Prime" host J.D. Hayworth, the son of the late president says the surging Trump speaks with the kind of "passion" his father so brilliantly conveyed.

"The best thing that these candidates can do is be themselves," Reagan said. "America wants to see who they are and what they represent and where they want to take America."

Reagan added "consultants get rich from these campaigns and meanwhile they give us losers."

"I want to see, and America wants to see, that campaign that says 'you know something, this is where I want to take America. I am passionate about it. These are my issues. This is what I want to do,'" Reagan said.

"That's why America right now has surrounded Trump, in this case, because he's off the cuff and he speaks from his own passion."

Reagan recalled a 1980 debate in which his father showed a rare flash of anger over the order of speakers, exclaiming, "I am paying for this microphone" — and helped turn the tide of his campaign in New Hampshire.

"[T]hat night my [late] sister Maureen and I… looked at each other … and said 'it's about damn time you lost your temper' because we had never seen our dad ever lose his temper — ever raise his voice at all to the children, to anybody — and then all of a sudden he comes up with that one and we said 'bravo Dad. It's about time. You deserve to be able to, in fact, do that,'" he recalled.

Reagan also teed off on Hillary Clinton's email scandal, asserting it won't topple her from the top of the Democratic heap in the presidential primary because of "the power that is wheeled by the Clintons" in the party — but that it might "eat her alive" in the general election.

"We've seen over the years that nothing really sticks to Bill [Clinton] but everything sticks to Hillary Clinton," he said. "The one thing that Bill has that Hillary Clinton has never had is likability. She is not likable and she certainly isn't relatable."

"Bill Clinton would get elected today again if he were the nominee of the Democrat Party and we had nobody run against him… she's hoping that just simply being a woman and selling that will bring the women to her table, but I don't think that's ever going to happen."

"I hope these emails eat her alive but [that] she stays at the top of the heap for the Democrats," he said. "[A]nyone of our possible candidates out there can beat Hillary Clinton in November of 2016."

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading.....

Don’t Fear The Shutdown… well, it *kind* of scans.

 

SunnyRight‏@sunnyright

From the people who brought you "The Koch Bros will hurt Republicans in 2014" comes "Attacking @PPAct will hurt Republicans in 2016"

• RETWEETS7
• FAVORITES5
• 

2:10 PM - 31 Jul 2015

More

With some clarifications, sure. First off: yes, very little that happens with a shutdown in Congress this year will have any effect on the national elections next year.  This is, of course, broadly similar to what happened in 2013: everybody who wasn’t part of the Republican grassroots (and a few of them, too) was convinced that the shutdown would do permanent damage to the GOP brand, right up to the point where Obamacare blew up in the missile silo. Technically, something equivalent has not yet happened this year.  But something will. Something always will. You can’t subject the populace to a year-plus-long rant about the inequities of the Republican party without said populace eventually tuning it out.

Second: unfortunately, you can’t really count on the Democrats being as dumb in 2015 as they were in 2013 – and they were dumb. Starting with the Democrats not taking the free gift that the GOP had offered them – there’s a bunch of former Senators and governors who wish that they had – and following with not capitalizing on even the transitory advantage the shutdown gave them. At this point somebody’s going to smugly mutter ‘Virginia,’ and I’ll mutter ‘sitting governor obvious en route to being indicted,’ and then we can all pick sides over who to blame in the Virginia gubernatorial election. I will note that, the way things were going, one more week and we would have won that race… which does not suggest that the Democrats really followed through on things. Presumably they’ve learned better. Obviously, it’s great if the Democrats haven’t, but it’s safer to assume that they have.

Third: this year’s races. A shutdown could very well affect the Kentucky gubernatorial race between Matt Bevin and Jack Conway. It probably won’t hurt Mississippi’s, given that Phil Bryant is running for re-election and he’s pretty popular. As for Louisiana’s… are we certain that a Democrat will even survive the jungle primary in the first place? – So if you do favor a shutdown of the government over Planned Parenthood funding, you should also be in favor of making sure that it doesn’t hurt Matt Bevin‘s gubernatorial bid.

Via: Red State

Continue Reading....

Obama Thinks His Hypothetical 2016 Chances Are Pretty Good

While discussing democracy during his last speech in Ethiopia on Tuesday, President Obama jokingly graded his presidency — Certified Fresh — and his imaginary 2016 chances. 

“I actually think I’m a pretty good president," he said. "I think if I ran, I would win."

"But," he added, "I can’t."

He went on to promote the American style of government, noting that some African leaders "change the rules" to stay in office and only see their power end because of death or coups. "The point is," Obama said, "I don’t understand why people want to stay so long. Especially when they’ve got a lot of money."

He noted that he's “still a pretty young man, but I know that someone with new insights and new energy will be good for my country ... Old people think old ways. You can see my gray hair, I’m getting old.”

After the speech Obama was scheduled to return to the U.S., where the leading presidential candidates from his party are both older than him.

Via: NY Magazine

Continue Reading....

FLORIDA REPUBLICANS RAISE BIG MONEY TO REPLACE DEMOCRAT CONGRESSMAN

The soon-to-be hotly-contested Republican primary race in Florida’s 18th congressional district will not mirror the God-awful and boring 2014 GOP primary race in this same district.

This will be a race to watch.

No one in the 2014 race was able to raise any money, except for former Rep. Carl Domino, who benefitted from the contributions he made to his campaign.

Domino went on to get clobbered by 

Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-FL)

10%

 (D) by 20 percentage points in a Republican swing year election.

The 2016 primary election cycle will be different, as Republicans have raised close to $1 million.

There are six announced Republican candidates in the race, including Domino, who are ready to make a strong push to replace the outgoing Murphy. Murphy is running for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

Democrats are already getting behind Palm Beach County Commissioner Melissa McKinlay, a mother of three and staunch liberal Democrat, who has raised $183,000, a lot of that money coming from the liberal ActBlue non-profit,

What about these Republicans? How much did they each raise?

Here is a breakdown and analysis of all the candidates:

Carl Domino—Career Politician and Candidate

$208,000 (Loaned himself this amount, no contributions)

Announced April 2014

Domino is coming off a big election night loss to Rep. Patrick Murhpy (D). He had to drop in a lot of his own money to be competitive and was only able to raise about $300k in the entire election cycle.

Domino ran in three straight election cycles and lost. Will the fourth time be the charm?

Paul Spain—Businessman

$635 (Loan)

Announced late June 2015

Spain ran in Florida’s 22th congressional district against 

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL)

22%

 (D) and lost big because he wasn’t able to raise more than $10 (he raised a little bit more than that) for his congressional campaign. Spain loaned his campaign $125,000 in his 2014 losing effort.

Tod Mowery—St. Lucie County Commissioner

$85,000

Announced May 2015

Mowery’s FEC report is not out yet. But according to his campaign, Mowery raised about $85k. Considering that he is a sitting county commissioner, we expect Mowery to have used his bully pulpit to raise campaign dollars from local and state special interests and small businesses with interests in St. Lucie County.

This is how politics work.

Brian Mast—Combat Wounded Vet and Fox News Favorite

$70,270

Announced June 9, 2015

Mast, the political newbie with no fundraising base and who lost both of his legs in an IED blast in Afghanistan, announced his congressional campaign with an inspiring video that landed him two Fox News TV hits. In addition to Fox, it seem as if Mast’s story is resonating around the country, as the overwhelming bulk of his donations have come from individuals outside of the district.

Mast could pose a real threat in this congressional district that is heavy with military veterans. Even Democrats are saying that Mast could be the one that will face McKinlay in the general election.

Mast loaned his campaign $9,499.

Can Mast keep this up?

Rick Kozell—Attorney and Establishment Republican

$100,000

Announced June 9, 2015

Kozell, one of those young Palm Beach Republicans, who was groomed in party ways, jumped in the race the same day Mast did. In the same amount of time, Kozell was able to tap into his donor base of establishment Republicans. Attorneys and lobbyists from South Florida and Washington, D.C., chipped in cash, as did his family.

Kozell was able to raise money from Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart (his former employer), the firm former U.S. Senator and then-Charlie Crist Republican George LeMieux currently runs.

According to the FEC, Kozell received $10,800 from his family. Kozell has only loaned his campaign $100.

Rebecca Negron—State Sen. Joe Negron’s Wife and Martin County School Board Member.

$175,282

Announced May 2015

As expected, Negron has been able to use her husband’s bully pulpit in Tallahassee to raise money from major lobbyists and special interests beholden to her husband Sen. Joe Negron.

Senator Negron could be the next Senate president in the GOP-led state legislature, leaving many attorneys and lobbyist feeling compelled to donate to his wife.

Negron himself considered running for the U.S. Congress a few years ago, leaving many in south Florida to question if Rebecca is running as a mere place-holder for her husband.

Negron has not loaned her congressional campaign any money.

Who is really running for Congress, Joe Negron or his wife Rebecca?

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....