Obama to free dozens of inmates, tour federal prison this week

President Obama arrives to join first lady Michelle Obama (not pictured) to welcome children to a Kids’ State Dinner at the White House. (Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

President Obama will use his clemency power to release dozens of inmates from federal custody this week, doubling the commutations he’s granted so far and reassuring advocates that he is serious about using his executive authority to free people serving long decades for nonviolent crimes.

If the president grants another 40 or so commutations as expected, he will have shortened the sentences of more prisoners than any president since Gerald Ford, who extended clemency to thousands of Vietnam draft dodgers. (Obama’s record on pardoning ex-convicts outside of prison, however, has remained stingy by historical standards.)

The commutations will be granted during a criminal-justice-heavy week for the president. On Tuesday, he addresses the NAACP’s annual conference in Philadelphia, where he will speak about the need to reform mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent crimes, which disproportionately affect men and women of color. On Thursday, Obama will travel to El Reno prison in Oklahoma, becoming the first sitting president to tour a federal prison, according to White House spokesman Josh Earnest. The president will also give an interview to VICE magazine at the prison, on his criminal justice reform efforts.

Last year, the Obama administration made a historic call for applications from prisoners serving more than a decade in prison for nonviolent crimes that would have been prosecuted less harshly today. Obama is expected to shorten the sentences of hundreds of these prisoners before he leaves office, though the White House maintains there is no set number of commutations. The president has shown a special interest in people sent away for decades for crack cocaine violations, which were punished 100 times more harshly than powder cocaine until Congress scaled down that gap in 2010.

Obama may cross paths with one such prisoner seeking his clemency when he visits the federal prison in Oklahoma on Thursday. Douglas Dunkins, 49, has served more than 20 years of a life sentence at El Reno for dealing crack cocaine. (If Dunkins had been convicted of dealing the same amount of powder cocaine, his sentence would have been 20 years.) The judge in Dunkins’ case expressed discomfort with the mandatory minimum laws that forced him to put a 26-year-old with no prior felonies on his record in prison for life.

Via: Yahoo

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Donald Trump steering GOP field into tough topics

Donald Trump may be known more for his brazen antics than his presidential potential, but the business magnate could make more waves on the trail than expected by forcing fellow candidates to tackle touchy subjects early on in the race, analysts say.

“He’s an agenda-setter right now in the Republican party,” said Erin O’Brien, associate professor of political science at University of Massachusetts Boston. “Other candidates are going to have to talk in more detail about issues they were hoping would remain off the table, namely immigration.

“It may force them to take more radical positions,” she added.

Trump again brought out his brash immigration rhetoric yesterday at a gathering in Las Vegas, which he hit before heading to a standing room-only event in Phoenix, where flag-waving supporters carried signs reading “Make America Great Again” and “Truth Trumps All.”

“These people wreak havoc on our population,” he said of immigrants who come to America illegally, suggesting that a wall should be built along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump took heat last month after his announcement speech when he said that many of the people crossing the border from Mexico are criminals and rapists.

But despite drawing outrage from voters that likely won’t help his chances in the long term, O’Brien said Trump is giving voice to a portion of the constituency, and fellow candidates may try to follow suit.

“Trump is doing damage to the Republican party,” O’Brien said. But, she added, “It would be a mistake to write him off as a total buffoon. He is speaking to a small, but real segment of the population.”

And because Trump’s demeanor is so bombastic, voters may see him as a voice of truth next to his more cautious and curated opponents, said Rob Brown, professor of communications at Salem State University, who has worked as a political adviser.

“He looks authentic, because if you weren’t authentic, why would you be saying these hateful, horrible, bigoted things?” he said. “He speaks what sounds like the unpleasant truth in a world of corporate apologies, political lies and scandals.”

“He’s a ringmaster,” he added, “and everyone likes a circus.”

Both O’Brien and Brown said that, while Trump may push the GOP candidates to extremes, it could also leave room for a hopeful who strays from party lines — like Ohio Gov. John Kasich — to fill the more moderate void.

“It gives them a chance also to move away from home to the center,” Brown said.

Via: Boston Herald

Continue Reading....

[OPINION] Opinion: Fix state? Here are 16 ideas

Silicon Valley tycoon Tim Draper’s quixotic campaign to reassemble California into six new states didn’t go anywhere, so he shifted into soliciting ideas to “Fix California.”

Draper received 427 suggestions and narrowed them to a “stately 16” finalists, one of which will be the winner with “perhaps a chance to get on the 2016 California ballot.”

Some of the 16 are relatively simple procedural changes, such as making the Legislature’s activities more transparent or placing more information on candidate and ballot measures in an online voter guide.

Others are more significant changes with the potential for broader impact, such as allowing ballot measures to qualify via electronic signatures, or giving voters access to public funds to electronically donate to candidates or parties of their choice.

But a few would, if enacted, truly transform California – perhaps not as much as reconfiguring it into six states, but fundamentally nevertheless.

One echoes Draper’s six-state notion by congealing California’s 58 counties into six “super counties.”

Another would replace the current two-house Legislature of 80 Assembly members and 40 senators with a 120-member unicameral Legislature, à la Nebraska.

A third would create thousands of “neighborhood legislative districts,” thus expanding the Legislature from 120 members to 14,000 members, who would then elect 120 members of a “working committee.”

The most far-reaching proposal, however, would replace California’s governmental structure with the parliamentary system used by most of the world’s democracies, with the governor the leader of the Legislature’s majority party or a coalition, like the British prime minister.

All of the 16 are interesting, certainly, and demonstrate, if nothing else, that many Californians sense – accurately – that such a large and complex state is not being governed as well as it should be.

Some of the lesser proposals, such as forcing the Legislature to comply with the same transparency laws it imposes on local governments, are just common sense. And if we can file our income tax returns electronically, we should be able to vote and sign petitions that way.

Fundamental structural changes are more difficult, but it’s high time that we consider them. We have a system that hasn’t changed in more than 150 years, other than becoming more infuriatingly complex and unresponsive. Nor have we changed a county boundary in more than a century.

Six counties may be too few, but replacing counties with perhaps a dozen regional governments that would absorb thousands of single-purpose special districts makes a lot of sense.

Our Legislature is, believe it or not, too small. Some state Senate districts are hundreds of miles long and all have nearly a million constituents, which reduces them to blips on a computer screen. A unicameral Legislature with perhaps 300 members would be better, and we ought to at least consider a parliamentary system, which could be both more empowering and more accountable, with politicians less able to pass the buck.

There are no magic solutions, but California has always been willing to embrace progressive change, and it’s time we made some fundamental reforms in the way we are governed.

Via: Sacramento Bee

Continue Reading....

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/dan-walters/article27050479.html#storylink=cpy

[COMMENTARY] Overtime regulations will hurt workplace flexibility, not raise wages

President Barack Obama has pitched his new overtime regulations as a way to raise wages. However, even economists who support the change admit that's unlikely to happen. Instead, they expect employers to cut workers' pay by an offsetting amount.

So how will this new overtime rule affect the economy? Primarily by forcing salaried workers to log their hours. That's right - more work, same pay.

Under federal law, all employees paid hourly rates get overtime - 1.5 times their regular wages - for working more than 40 hours a week. The law exempts some salaried employees.

Employees with sufficiently advanced job duties (generally in executive, professional, or administrative jobs) and who make more than a set amount can get paid a flat salary for the work they do.

The administration just proposed raising that salary level to $50,440 a year and increasing it each year going forward. Employees making less than that amount, no matter what they do, would qualify for overtime pay.

At first glance this looks like a great idea. Who could oppose more workers getting overtime? However, economics didn't earn the moniker "the dismal science" for nothing. The fact is, these regulations will have little effect on pay.

Economists have found that employees and employers care mostly about their overall employment package: total hours worked and total pay offered for those hours. They don't care much about the pay rate for individual hours, provided the overall package doesn't change. So when the government requires employers to pay extra for overtime hours, they do - and reduce base wages by about the same amount. Workers' weekly take-home pay changes little.

Overtime only affects total pay for workers making near the minimum wage. Their employers cannot legally cut their base pay. However, these workers already automatically qualify for it. Overtime has little effect on total compensation for everyone else.

Many economic studies come to this conclusion. One recent study examined what happened when Japanese courts extended overtime to previously exempt salaried employees - precisely what the administration proposes. Japanese employers reduced base pay by an amount equal to the new overtime eligibility. Average hourly pay - including overtime - remained unchanged.

Even the architects of the overtime rule understand this. Jared Bernstein, former chief economic adviser to Vice President Biden, wrote an influential paper last year calling for the administration to expand overtime eligibility. The report drove the administration's decision to promulgate these regulations.

However, Bernstein candidly admits these regulations won't raise pay. As he puts it:

"The costs of increased (overtime) coverage would ultimately be borne by workers as employers set base wages taking expected overtime pay into account."

Yet President Obama and Labor Secretary Thomas Perez are arguing the new regulations will provide a $1 billion raise for American workers. They won't. Worse, the new overtime regulations will make juggling work and family life harder for millions of salaried employees.

Many employees prefer being overtime-exempt. It means they don't have to track their hours - and have more flexibility over when and where they work. Exempt salaried employees can take off work early in the afternoon to be with family, and then make up the work later when their kids are sleep. All they have to worry about is getting their work done - not when or where they do it.

Increasingly technology enables Americans to telecommute. About 3 million employees primarily telecommute to work, and over 15 million more telecommute at least once a month. (These numbers exclude the self-employed). The flexibility of working from home makes it a lot easier for working parents to fulfill their obligations as employees and as parents.

Overtime-eligible employees have much less freedom over when and where they work. They must log their hours. Even if they don't work overtime, they need to prove it. Their employers risk lawsuits if they don't. Trial lawyers filed 8,000 federal Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuits last year.

So employers often forbid overtime-eligible employees from working remotely - much less telecommuting. Instead they must clock in and clock out on schedule so their firm can precisely calculate their overtime liability. As a Pitney Bowes spokesman explained to reporters, the firm denied overtime eligible workers' requests to work from home because "you just don't take the (legal) risk."

That defuses lawsuits, but it also deprives overtime eligible employees of flexibility to balance work and family lives. The administrations' proposal will effectively convert 5 million professional employees into hourly workers. They will lose flexibility at work without getting paid any more. So much for helping middle-class families.

Via: Heritage 

Continue Reading....

Chicago Racial Mob Attack Woman and Her Children – “didn’t belong in their neighborhood because she was white”…

CHICAGO (WLS) —  Her car damaged, her nerves shaken, the victim of an alleged group attack near the University of Chicago campus with her children in the back seat of her car talked exclusively with ABC7 Eyewitness News about the incident Friday night.

Police say two people were arrested and charged after the incident, but that woman says several dozen people were involved. Her two kids left covered in broken glass. The encounter left several dents in the vehicle, the back window shattered and Susan Pedersen shaken.

“I’m very scared, very anxious, nervous. Just fearful,” she said. Friday night, broken glass still litters the pavement at 60th and King Drive across from Washington Park, where the attack took place around 9 p.m. Thursday night.

Pedersen says she had just dropped off a friend at the University of Chicago, with her daughter and son in the back seat. She said she stopped at a red light and found herself surrounded by several dozen young people.

“They were walking around both sides of the vehicle – in the front, in the back – and as they were walking across, they were hitting my car, using racial slurs and telling me that I didn’t belong in their neighborhood because I was white,” Pedersen said.

The group, all African-American, she says, kicked the vehicle and shook it violently, the kids in the back screaming. (read more with video)

Via: Conservative Tree House

Continue Reading....

Nevada's Road to Nowhere - and Why You Need to Drive It

 While Traveling From Michigan to Lake Tahoe, One Road Tripping Fanatic Recounts Why US 50 is One of the Greatest Roads He's Ever Traveled 

I first became aware of the Loneliest Road (US 50) when I was planning a trip to Lake Tahoe to attend my niece's wedding.  I found out that in 1968 Life magazine had dubbed US 50 in Nevada the "Loneliest Road in America" and that the State of Nevada would provide travelers of US 50 with a certificate and pin once they had had traversed it.  Well that did it for me, I was going to travel US 50 to Lake Tahoe.  When I traced the route on the map I also found that US 50 would be the shortest route to my destination as it passes right through South Lake Tahoe on it's way into California.  Coming down out of the Rocky Mountains on I-70 you pick up US 50 in Utah at Salinas.  It then passes  I-15 through Delta, Utah before you enter Nevada. 

It was a marvelous experience to get off the interstate on to US 50 and have this marvelous 2 lane blacktop road all to yourself.  I made it to Ely the first day and spent the night and the next day I made it all the way to Carson City. 

What was amazing to me was the 17 mountain ranges I crossed and the spacious valleys between them.  It's like the mountains ripple across Nevada like the waves out on the sea. In December they are mostly show capped and you can see them looming in front of you for many miles before you ascend the pass that crosses them.   The road slithers like a reptile, snaking between mountains like an ancient river bed before disappearing behind the next mountain range you must cross.

The vistas along US 50 are breathtaking. Coming down the Austin Summit pass in the Toiyabe Range was amazing, in my humble opinion. Here, you can see for miles and miles. As I told many a friend and family member, I felt the horizon was 360 degrees and looked like I could see the natural curvature of the Earth. The land seemed to envelope me and I felt naked and exposed as if gravity would fail me and I would float up into the great American west. 

Via: National Review

Continue Reading....

New York City: DeBlasio presiding over rapid decline in NY city quality of life

New York City has never been a paradise, but for 20 years previous to the election of Mayor Bill de Blasio, quality of life had risen dramatically as a result of what's known as "broken windows" policing - enforcing minor crimes to take people off the streets and prevent them from committing major offenses.

But now, with the far left wing mayor leading the charge, more and more minor crimes are not being enforced. Predictably, this has led to a surge in violent crime and an invasion by vagrants and homeless people that hasn't been seen since the pre-Guiliana days.

New York Daily News:

This urinating vagrant turned a busy stretch of Broadway into his own private bathroom yesterday – an offense that would result in a mere summons if Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and her pals get their way. 

Wrapped in rags and a Mets blanket the hobo wandered into traffic at around 10:30 a.m. and relieved himself as cabs, cars and buses whizzed by between West 83rd and 84th streets on the Upper West Side. 

He finished his business at a nearby garbage bin, then strolled back to the front of a Victoria’s Secret store at Broadway and 85th Street, where he camped out for the rest of the day. 

Mark-Viverito in April announced plans to decriminalize public urination along with five other low-level offenses: biking on the sidewalk, public consumption of alcohol, being in a park after dark, failure to obey a park sign and jumping subway turnstiles. 

Police Commissioner Bill Bratton — who in the early ’90s implemented a “broken windows” approach to policing to dramatically cut crime — is against the new plan, saying such offenses lead to more serious crimes. 

Bill Caprese, 38, who lives on 82nd Street with his 6-year-old daughter, was appalled by the street urinator. 

“It’s absolutely a failure of government. It’s a total abject failure,” he said. “The mayor could fix it. The governor could fix it. We need asylums.”

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading....

[OPINION] COLUMN: Here’s a biased opinion about bias in the news media

Vanilla ice cream is good. Chocolate ice cream is better.

Strawberry? Yuck!

 That’s my taste. Yours is different, and I’m OK with that. Are you OK?

News comes the same way. Some of it is slanted to the right. Some is slanted to the left.

But there is more vanilla out there than most Americans recognize.

Conservative columnist Cal Thomas brought attention to bias in the news media in a column that we published Friday (“Survey says: They hate us, but who cares?”).

The column cited the 2015 State of the First Amendment Survey, a project of the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center. The survey said that only 24 percent now think that the news media try to report on news without bias. That’s a 17-point drop from 2014 and a 22-percent drop from 2013.

My conclusion: Many Americans now actually prefer “flavored” news. They seek television networks and websites that spin the news the way they want it. But the left scoffs at what’s out there for the right and thinks it is wrong, and vice versa.

Conservatives listen to Rush Limbaugh. Liberals watch “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.”

Liberals read The New York Times and conservatives read The Wall Street Journal because they get what they want on those editorial pages.

News flash: The “news” on those pages isn’t news. It’s clearly presented as opinion.

Another news flash: I’ve never watched Jon Stewart, but I sometimes listen to Rush Limbaugh. Though he’s bombastic, he’s smart, passionate and entertaining. I would characterize his show more as anti-liberal than anything. If you want to know what liberals are saying, his show is a great source. Just dismiss the spin.

It amuses me when Limbaugh rails against the mainstream media, as if he isn’t media. If he isn’t mainstream, then why are liberal counterparts mainstream?

Local news organizations seem to get caught in the crossfire. Conservatives consider The New York Times a liberal newspaper. The Morning News is a newspaper. Therefore, the Morning News is a liberal newspaper.

I find the news on NBC balanced, but conservatives think the network is liberal. WMBF is our local NBC affiliate. Is WMBF guilty of bias by association?

Some news consumers confuse balance with bias. A news story should tell both sides of a story, but radicals don’t want to see or hear what the other side has to say.

The day after the Charleston church massacre, we assigned a local reaction story on gun control. It was easy for our reporter to find people on one side of that heated issue, but gun proponents either didn’t want to talk that day or didn’t want to go on the record with their thoughts. Because we couldn’t balance the story, we didn’t run it.

Some news consumers confuse news with opinion. The editorials, columns, letters and cartoons on the Opinion pages are biased by nature.

We try hard to balance our Opinion page, and toward that end we seem to confound some of our readers. For instance, some readers still don’t seem to understand the difference between an editorial and a column. This column is my opinion. An editorial is the opinion of an editorial board representing this newspaper.

On June 21, you might have read my column that tried to strike middle-of-the-road thoughts about guns (“Gun control? What we need is people control”). On the opposite page, we ran an anti-gun editorial cartoon. Henry Ham of Leesville wrote to ask: “So, which position does your paper take – blame the NRA, which fights for our 2nd Amendment rights, or true common sense as discussed in your editorial?” The answer: Our paper did not take a position. Two individuals did, and they were differing positions.

In our news coverage, we strive to be objective, but that is an elusive goal. We make subjective calls in deciding which stories to do and not do. Our reporters make subjective decisions in deciding which questions to ask and not ask. They make judgment calls in deciding which facts should be at the beginning of a story, which ones should be at the end and which ones don’t need to be included at all.

Does that mean our news stories are biased? No. We don’t go out of our way to slant the news. News stories are framed, but we want to be fair.

That’s different from flair. In features (and columns), we try to put some sprinkles on your vanilla ice cream.

Via: SCNow

Continue Reading.....

Winners and losers in Massachusetts casino plans

The opening of the $250 million Plainridge Park Casino last month wasn’t exactly the grand unveiling Massachusetts gaming backers envisioned more than four years ago.

We’re not being critical of Penn National Gaming’s newest casino. The all-slot machine facility is attached to the Plainridge Park Racecourse, a harness racing track, in Plainville, a town about 35 miles southwest of heavily populated Boston.

The trouble is Plainridge Park — Massachusetts’ first legal gambling hall — will be the commonwealth’s last casino for a few years. Two of the three Las Vegas-style casinos planned for the state won’t open until 2018. The third will take longer.

That leaves Plainridge Park as Massachusetts’ only game.

Janney Montgomery Scott gaming analyst Brian McGill told investors the delays “keep Plainridge as the closest casino to Boston for three more years. In general, the Boston area is an underserved gaming market.”

Massachusetts casino proponents said the state’s 2011 Expanded Gaming Act was a job creator for construction, hospitality and tourism. It was also a tax vehicle, providing $300 million to $500 million annually in new revenue.

Those projections may still come true — well into the next decade.

MGM Resorts International, which last year earned the right to build the $800 million MGM Springfield in western Massachusetts, wants to delay the opening by a year, into 2018, when an Interstate 91 rebuild is completed.

Wynn Resorts Ltd.’s proposed $1.7 billion casino complex on the banks of the Mystic River in Everett — just outside of Boston — has been slowed by political, legal and regulatory challenges. It may not open until 2018.

The casino license for the state’s southeast region, which was originally set aside for an Indian tribe, is the subject of a tug-of-war between Brockton and New Bedford. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission won’t pick a winner until fall.

The three resort licenses required an upfront fee of $85 million and a promise to drop more than $500 million on the facility. The gaming tax rate was 25 percent.

Penn National paid a $25 million license fee for the slot machine parlor and is facing a 40 percent gaming revenue tax, and 9 percent to the state’s race horse development fund.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission said Plainridge Park collected $6.154 million in gaming revenue in its first week.

McGill visited Plainridge Park shortly after it opened and came away convinced the casino will provide Penn National $84 million in annual cash flow by next year. Besides drawing from Boston, the casino can draw from Providence, R.I., which is 18 miles south.

“From our perspective, we are confident the initial results will be strong out of Plainridge,” McGill said. “We also think the company’s estimated annual revenue of $250 million could prove to be conservative.”

Penn National pulled out all the stops in launching the 44,000-square-foot casino with its 1,250 slot machines, including video poker and electronic table games. Penn National executives were joined by local dignitaries and two Las Vegas-style showgirls for the June 25 ribbon cutting.

Former Boston College and New England quarterback Doug Flutie participated in opening ceremonies. Doug Flutie’s Sports Pub is one of Plainridge Park’s signature restaurants, and his 1984 Heisman Trophy is displayed there.

More than 10,000 visitors packed the casino in its first 19 hours of operation, a success by most standards.

Plainridge Park’s closest gaming competition is the Twin River Casino in Lincoln, R.I., about a 30-minute commute from Plainville. Twin River has 4,500 slot machinelike video lottery terminals and 80 live-dealer table games. It also allows smoking. Plainridge is smoke-free.

The Indian tribes that own the Connecticut resorts dread Massachusetts’ entry into the Northeast casino fold.

That’s not the case for the Massachusetts, which could use the gaming tax revenue. MGM’s delay could cost the state $125 million per year.

MGM Springfield President Michael Mathis told gaming regulators the company could be on the hook for “tens of millions” in additional interest money by pushing back the opening date.

But MGM was willing to bite the bullet because I-91 is a “critical piece of infrastructure.” The highway brings 100,000 cars a day past the property’s site and MGM would rather wait than see its opening disrupted by construction and congestion.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has to sign off on the casino’s construction schedule. MGM has already said it would give Springfield an additional $1 million payment in 2017, and its revenue commitments, if the city backs the delay.

So the big winner is Plainridge Park.

Via: Las Vegas Review Journal

Continue Reading...

Woman Outraged After Showdown With Census Worker

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – An East Dallas woman is outraged after she claims one U.S. Census workershowed up at her door for a housing survey and would not take “no” for an answer.

Sonia Platz said the worker went as far as to camp out in her yard as she waited for Platz to change her mind.

“She’s ringing the bell, knocking on the door. And I’m like, ‘I don’t want to participate.’” Said Platz

The East Dallas resident said it started with a series of three letters from the U.S. Census Bureau. A few days later after receiving the third later, a census worker showed up. Her husband verbally declined.

But a few days later, a different worker showed up at their home and would not leave according to Platz.

“That is a whole, other level. That’s not following up. I felt like she a part of the mob,” said Platz.

The census worker sat on the bumper of her van for the next 30 minutes. Sonia said the worker would only get up from the back of her van every few minutes to see if she had changed her mind about taking the housing survey.

“Some people were stunned. Some people couldn’t believe it. They were kind of shocked like, ‘that can’t be a true government census bureau worker,’” said Platz.

It was a real federal census worker according to the regional office that covers Dallas. A supervisor confirmed more than 100 other workers are out in the area conducting the same work. The regional office said employees are encouraged to be “pleasantly persistent” and never take “no” for an answer at first.

Platz said it is not a good look for a government agency that survives on voluntary participation.

The U.S. Census Bureau said anyone who feels they are being visited too frequently can request to have their address removed from the list.

Dallas is one of 25 cities targeted in the housing survey which runs through August.

Via: CBSDFW

Continue Reading....

With Walker's Entry, GOP 2016 Field Now Numbers 17

Sunday, 12 Jul 2015 08:32 AM

Who yelled "everybody into the pool?"

After all the candidate announcements, after all the speculation about who'd go first and who's yet to jump in, one question remains in this summer BEFORE the election year: Why are so many Republicans running for president?

Surely, the soon-to-be-17 announced GOP candidates don't all think they will become president.

But it's easy for a politician to get caught up in the hype and yell "cowabunga!" in a year when there's no incumbent seeking re-election and no Republican who seems to have an inside track to the nomination.

Plus, it's easier than ever to make a credible run for president, thanks to the equalizing effects of social media and digital fundraising, and with looser federal rules in place on raising money.

The apt question for an ambitious Republican this year seems to be: Well, why not?

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker adds his name to the list on Monday, with Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore to follow in coming weeks, bringing the total by summer's end to at least 17.

"Every now and then you have an election cycle that is defined by what can be best described as me-too-ism," says Mo Elleithee, executive director of Georgetown's Institute of Politics and Public Service and a onetime spokesman for Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.

With any number of theoretical pathways to the GOP nomination, second-tier candidates may well have surveyed the field and said to themselves, "Why can't I burst into that top tier?" says Elleithee. "Everybody is sitting there with their advisers, slicing and dicing the electorate, and either finding a potential path or deluding themselves into finding a potential path."

Tony Fratto, a Washington consultant who worked for President George W. Bush, says there's far more than delusions motivating candidates. Beyond the generally easier mechanics of running for office, he says, there are all sorts of incentives to run that have nothing to do with actually being president.

"You have the opportunity to become a personality in a relatively short period of time," says Fratto. "You get on the national stage, your name ID is elevated and that can translate into writing books, giving speeches and getting an opportunity to go on TV." Not to mention a potential job as vice president or in the Cabinet.

It worked for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who's running again after parlaying his losing candidacy in the 2008 primaries into political celebrity, including TV and radio shows and book deals.

The should-I-run equation is different on the Democratic side, where Clinton is dominant, but even there, four other notable candidates have joined the against-the-odds race.

A look at some of the reasons so many candidates are running this year:

WAITING FOR A STUMBLE

Some candidates run just in case. If top-tier candidates suddenly falter, these challengers want to make sure they're positioned to step right up.

These types "genuinely think things can fall apart" for the top candidates, says Princeton historian Julian Zelizer.

He puts New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kasich in that category.

In Christie's case, says Zelizer, "I think part of him hopes that people will see how great he is — according to him" if an opening emerges.

THE OBAMA EFFECT

The election of a junior Illinois senator with a funny name as president in 2008 has heartened candidates who might not otherwise have thought of themselves as ready to run.

"What Barack Obama proved in 2008 is that you don't need all that much experience," says Fratto. "You can take on a presumed front-runner, and you can raise money and improve your name ID very quickly. That possibility wasn't imaginable in the past."

Obama's precedent has to hearten Marco Rubio from Florida and Ted Cruz from Texas, both 44-year-old freshman senators, and 52-year-old rookie Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

TAKING TURNS

Senior politicians may look at relative newcomers who've gotten into the race, and think, "Wait, it's my turn."

Elleithee envisions veterans such as Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kasich asking themselves, "Why should these young up-and-comers be seen as more credible than me?"

IDEA GUYS

Some candidates run to get their ideas in the mix even if their candidacies face long odds.

Graham is pushing the Republicans to focus on national security. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is pressing Democrats to do more to address income inequality.

BIG MONEY

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling that loosened fundraising rules, says Zelizer, "all you need is a few wealthy people and you can be a presidential candidate." Candidates may not have enough money to go the distance, but a supportive billionaire or super PAC can bankroll a candidacy that otherwise might not go far.

Casino titan Sheldon Adelson's millions kept Newt Gingrich's 2008 candidacy afloat long after it otherwise would have gone under. Super PACs will file paperwork later this month that will help show who's benefiting from big donors this time around.

SMALL DOLLARS

No sugar daddy? No problem.

Online fundraising and social media have made it cheaper and easier for candidates to haul in lots of small contributions.

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson is relying on small contributions to propel his GOP campaign. And on the Democratic side, Sanders' upstart challenge to Clinton is pulling in millions mostly through small donors on the Internet

.

BUILDING THE "ME" BRAND

Businessman-showman Donald Trump has to know he's not going to be president.

His self-promotional candidacy helps keep him in the news, something he's clearly relishing even if it's triggered a backlash that's going to cost him.

Companies and organizations are lining up to cut ties to Trump after his much-criticized comments about Mexican immigrants.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....