Super Saturday Reads

Smoking Bar for Ladies, Harry Grant Dart

Smoking Bar for Ladies, Harry Grant Dart

Good Morning!!

A note on the illustration above: It is an anti-women’s suffrage cartoon originally publish in the satire magazine Puck, showing the horror that could befall the country if women actually got the vote.

We have a busy few days coming up for presidential politics. Today is the Louisiana primary, and Hillary is expected to win overwhelmingly on the Democratic side. There will also be Democratic and Republican caucuses in Kansas and Nebraska. For Republicans, there will be additional caucuses in Maine and Kentucky. Maine Democrats will caucus tomorrow and there will be a GOP primary in Puerto Rico. Then on Tuesday there will be primaries in Michigan and Mississippi.

Tomorrow night there will be a CNN Democratic debate in Flint, Michigan and on Monday night Fox News will hold a Democratic town hall event. Hillary originally declined the invitation, but yesterday she agreed to go. I think it’s a mistake for her to go, but we’ll see. The next Republican debate will be on March 10 in Miami.

Washington Post: Five more states ready to chip in delegates to campaign 2016.

Hunting for delegates, Trump added a last-minute rally in Wichita, Kansas, to his Saturday morning schedule and Cruz planned to stop in Kansas on caucus day, too, one day after Rubio visited the state.

Trump’s decision to skip an appearance Saturday at a conference sponsored by the American Conservative Union in the Washington area to get in one last Kansas rally rankled members of the group, who tweeted that it “sends a clear message to conservatives.”

The billionaire businessman’s rivals have been increasingly questioning his commitment to conservative policies, painting his promise to be flexible on issues as a giant red flag….

With the GOP race in chaos, establishment figures are frantically looking for any way to stop Trump, perhaps at a contested convention if none of the candidates can roll up the 1,237 delegates needed to snag the nomination. Going into Saturday’s voting, Trump led the field with 329 delegates. Cruz had 231, Rubio 110 and Kasich 25. In all, 155 GOP delegates are at stake in Saturday’s races.

Illustration of "founding mothers" "Woman is a slave from the cradle to the grave -- Ernestine Rose

Illustration of “founding mothers”
“Woman is a slave from the cradle to the grave — Ernestine Rose

On the Democrats:

Clinton is farther along than Trump on the march to her party’s nomination, outpacing Sanders with 1,066 delegates to his 432, including pledged superdelegates. It takes 2,383 delegates to win the Democratic nomination. There are 109 at stake on Saturday.

In Louisiana, Clinton was hoping that strong support from the state’s sizable black population will give her a boost. Both Democrats have campaigned heavily in Nebraska and saturated the state with ads. In Kansas, Clinton has the backing of its former governor and onetime Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius. Sanders held a pre-caucus rally in Kansas’ liberal bastion of Lawrence hoping to attract voters.

A couple of big stories out of Louisiana:

Think Progress: BREAKING: Supreme Court Reopens Clinics Closed By Anti-Abortion Law.

The Supreme Court handed down a brief order Friday allowing four Louisiana abortion clinics to reopen after they were closed due to a recent decision by a conservative federal appeals court.

Last week, an especially conservative panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down an “emergency” decision permitting an anti-abortion Louisiana law to go into effect. Under this law, physicians cannot perform abortions unless they have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital — an increasingly common requirement masterminded by an anti-abortion group that drafts model bills for state legislatures. A challenge to a similar Texas law is currently pending before the justices.

The Supreme Court’s order temporarily suspends the Louisiana law, effectively preventing the Fifth Circuit’s Wednesday decision from taking effect. Only Justice Clarence Thomas explicitly dissented from the Court’s order.

Could this be a good sign for the Texas case that is currently being considered by SCOTUS?

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Texas case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, this Wednesday. During those arguments, conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy appeared open to striking down the Texas law — although he also seemed concerned with a procedural issue unique to that case. The Court’s decision to halt the Louisiana law is another sign that the conservative-but-not-absolutist justice believes that laws like the ones in Texas and Louisiana may go too far.

DeclarationSentiments

I sure hope so. Meanwhile Louisiana’s economy is in desperate shape, thanks mostly to former Governor Bobby Jindal’s horrendous policies.

Wonkblog: Battered by drop in oil prices and Jindal’s fiscal policies, Louisiana falls into budget crisis.

Already, the state of Louisiana had gutted university spending and depleted its rainy-day funds. It had cut 30,000 employees and furloughed others. It had slashed the number of child services staffers, including those devoted to foster family recruitment, and young abuse victims for the first time were spending nights at government offices.

And then, the state’s new governor, John Bel Edwards (D), came on TV and said the worst was yet to come.

Edwards, in a prime-time address on Feb. 11, said he’d learned of “devastating facts” about the extent of the state’s budget shortfall and said that Louisiana was plunging into a “historic fiscal crisis.” Despite all the cuts of the previous years, the nation’s second-poorest state still needed nearly $3 billion — almost $650 per person — just to maintain its regular services over the next 16 months. Edwards  gave the state’s lawmakers three weeks to figure out a solution, a period that expires March 9 with no clear answer in reach.

Louisiana stands at the brink of economic disaster. Without sharp and painful tax increases in the coming weeks, the government will cease to offer many of its vital services, including education opportunities and certain programs for the needy. A few universities will shut down and declare bankruptcy. Graduations will be canceled. Students will lose scholarships. Select hospitals will close. Patients will lose funding for treatment of disabilities. Some reports of child abuse will go uninvestigated.

“Doomsday,” said Marketa Garner Walters, the head of Louisiana’s Department of Children and Family Services. If the state can’t raise any new revenue, her agency’s budget, like several others, will be slashed 60 percent.

“At that level,” she said in an interview, “the agency is unsustainable.”

Read more about the disastrous consequences of Jindal’s embrace of Koch brothers politics at the link.

Seneca Falls, 1848

Seneca Falls, 1848

The Tax Policy Center just released its analysis of Bernie Sanders’ tax plan, and it’s stunning. Here’s the abstract:

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders proposes significant increases in federal income, payroll, business, and estate taxes, and new excise taxes on financial transactions and carbon. New revenues would pay for universal health care, education, family leave, rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, and more. TPC estimates the tax proposals would raise $15.3 trillion over the next decade. All income groups would pay some additional tax, but most would come from high-income households, particularly those with the very highest income. His proposals would raise taxes on work, saving, and investment, in some cases to rates well beyond recent historical experience in the US.

You can read the entire report in a pdf at the link. From Bloomberg:

Senator Bernie Sanders’s proposals for sweeping tax hikes on businesses and individuals to bankroll universal health care, infrastructure and free college tuition would raise $15.3 trillion over the next decade but “substantially reduce incentives to save and invest in the United States,” according to a new policy study.

Sanders’s plan would “modestly raise” tax rates for average taxpayers and “raise them significantly for high-income taxpayers,” according to the report by the Tax Policy Center, a research group in Washington, D.C. that’s a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. The report is the last of the center’s analyses of leading presidential candidates’ tax plans.

While the plan — which would be sure to face opposition in a Republican-controlled Congress — could generate benefits by increasing “the nation’s investment in productive physical and human capital,” economists are unsettled on the question of just how much increases in tax rates spur or stymie economic growth. Sanders’s proposals “would be a great experiment,” said Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center.

Warren Gunnels, Sanders’s policy director, criticized the tax center’s findings. The analysis was conducted “in a vacuum without taking into account the savings the American people would gain” under the candidate’s proposal to replace private health-insurance with a publicly funded “Medicare-for-all” plan, he said. Gunnels cited an earlier study by Citizens for Tax Justice, which found that 95 percent of U.S. households would see their take-home pay increase under Sanders’s health plan.

Girls in a milk-bar in England, 1954

Girls in a milk-bar in England, 1954

Kevin Drum on the analyses of the five candidates’ tax plans so far:

As before, the Republican plans are all the same: a tiny tax cut for the middle class as a sop to distract them from the enormous payday they give to the rich, and a massive hole in the deficit.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton’s plan is fairly modest. It leaves the middle class alone and taxes the rich a little more. Once her domestic proposals are paid for, it’s probably deficit neutral. Bernie Sanders is far more extreme. He’s basically the mirror image of the Republicans: he’d tax the middle class moderately more and soak the hell out of the rich. This would raise a tremendous amount of money, which he’d use to pay for his health care plan and his other domestic proposals. It’s impossible to say for sure how this would affect the deficit, but the evidence suggests that it would blow a pretty big hole.

It looks like Sanders is going to continue and even increase his attacks on Hillary Clinton even though she will likely have the nomination in hand by March 15. It doesn’t seem to bother him in the least that he’s hurting the Democratic Party and making it more difficult for their candidate to win the White House in November.

From The Hill: Sanders blames Clinton for Michigan’s declining middle class.

“If the people of Michigan want to make a decision about which candidate stood with workers against corporate America and against these disastrous trade agreements, that candidate is Bernie Sanders,” he said during a rally in Traverse City, according to a campaign statement obtained by NBC News.

Sanders argued that Clinton’s support of legislation like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) had helped create the Great Lakes State’s crippling poverty.

“[NAFTA] is one of the reasons that the middle class in this country is disappearing,” the self-described Democratic socialist said.

“[NAFTA and other trade deals are] crafted by the big-money interests and corporations. Hillary Clinton was on the wrong side of many of these trade agreements.”

I love this photo of the 2013 class of women in the House.

I love this photo of the 2013 class of women in the House.

Hillary did not hold political office when NAFTA passed Congress. I believe she opposed NAFTA as first lady, but to blame her for bill passed by a right wing Republican Congress and signed by her husband is both unfair and sexist. But that’s how Bernie rolls.

Markos laid down the law at Daily Kos yesterday, and the reaction was hilarious. As background, the front pagers have been supporting Hillary in 2016, but the majority of diarists have been pushing for Bernie, attacking Hillary using every right wing meme they can find and the most misogynistic language they can dream up. Read about it here: March 15, and Daily Kos transition to General Election footing.

The gist is that Kossacks have to stop attacking Hillary with right wing memes and ugly sexist language and if they are planning to vote for Donald Trump or Jill Stein if the Democrats nominate Hillary, they have to keep it to themselves. They can criticize Hillary, but only in positive ways that could help the party.

The response was predictable, with people posting “goodbye cruel world” diaries and threats to continue advocating for Bernie in any way they choose if if Kos bans them. It was like watching kids arguing on a playground or like the last GOP debate.

So . . . what are you hearing and reading about today? I’ll post a live blog later for discussion of the primary and caucus results.


Friday Reads: Shock and Awe on the American Campaign Trail

Good Morning!

Well, I  am supposed to be waiting to hear the Big Dawg speak at an event today. Instead, I’m sitting here with a flat tire waiting.  I’ve heard Bill Clinton speak quite a few times down here including with George H.W. Bush in a small tent on campus right after Katrina when I was one of two profs actually teaching on the UNO campus.  Exactly one building was open.  He’s really a great speaker and he has the ability to make you feel like the most important person he’s ever met when he’s one on one.  I wanted to see if he still had it frankly.

I’m still stunned by the so-called “debate” last night between the remaining Republican Presidential Candidates. Did you ever think you’d see ten minutes of one of these things dedicated to the penis size of the front runner?  Did you even think that a member of the U.S. Senate would be the one to bring it up on national TV?  I’d like to go on record saying that the Republican party needs to goes the way of the Dodo.  I’m not sure if there are any sane people left in the infrastructure, but whatever grown ups are left need to just turn off the lights and start over.  They need to send the racists and the religious kooks and the enablers that make them deny economic and scientific reality back to whatever self-created hell realm they’ve emanated from. Paul Krugman isn’t very generous about their shit show either.

So Republicans are going to nominate a candidate who talks complete nonsense on domestic policy; who believes that foreign policy can be conducted via bullying and belligerence; who cynically exploits racial and ethnic hatred for political gain.

But that was always going to happen, however the primary season turned out. The only news is that the candidate in question is probably going to be Donald Trump. Establishment Republicans denounce Mr. Trump as a fraud, which he is. But is he more fraudulent than the establishment trying to stop him? Not really.

Actually, when you look at the people making those denunciations, you have to wonder: Can they really be that lacking in self-awareness?

Donald Trump is a “con artist,” says Marco Rubio — who has promised to enact giant tax cuts, undertake a huge military buildup and balance the budget without any cuts in benefits to Americans over 55.

“There can be no evasion and no games,” thunders Paul Ryan, the speaker of the House — whose much-hyped budgets are completely reliant on “mystery meat,” that is, it claims trillions of dollars in revenue can be collected by closing unspecified tax loopholes and trillions more saved through unspecified spending cuts.

Mr. Ryan also declares that the “party of Lincoln” must “reject any group or cause that is built on bigotry.” Has he ever heard of Nixon’s “Southern strategy”; of Ronald Reagan’s invocations of welfare queens and “strapping young bucks” using food stamps; of Willie Horton?

Put it this way: There’s a reason whites in the Deep South vote something like 90 percent Republican, and it’s not their philosophical attachment to libertarian principles.

The Republican Party is capable of nothing these days but ruining the states they govern,  stopping any kind of governance on the Federal level,

and making laws to make lives miserable for any one that isn’t either white male or white male property and branded the right kind of  “christian”.  The one thing I will say about the ongoing shit show is that people that have been voting Republican under the mistaken idea that Republicans are anything but a party of rich dudes getting political favors and racists, misogynist, homobigoted religious freaks are finally finding out what’s been the underlying theme of insurrection since the Reagan Shit show. The Republican Party is not the Party of Lincoln or even Ronald Reagan.  It’s the party of George Wallace, at best.

image

The Republicans have become so obsessed with one policy–subsidizing the extremely rich--they’ve also tanked any possible hope that we can get reasonable trade policies or any kind of reasonable form of government spending to include fixing the damn roads and bridges.  If you look around the world, you can see how trade has been creating healthy middle classes.  There’s a lot of money that flows into countries from trade and a hell of a lot of it goes to workers and smaller businesses because responsible government ensures this through good policy.  NOT in this country, however.  They’ve destroyed the decades of what economics has taught us they way they’ve turned racism, misogyny and bigotry into religious freedom.

The Econ-101 case for free trade is straightforward: Trade benefits those who produce exports and those who consume imports (including producers who use imported goods as inputs). It hurts the producers of goods which can be made better or more cheaply abroad. But the gains to the winners exceed the gains to the losers: that is, the winners could make the losers whole and still come out ahead themselves. Therefore, trade passes the Pareto test.

[Yes, this elides a number of issues, including path-dependency in increasing-returns and learning-by-doing markets on the pure-economics side and the salting of actual agreements with provisions that create or protect economic rents on the political-economy side. It also ignores the biggest gainers from trade: workers in low-wage countries, most notably the Chinese factory workers whose parents were barefoot peasants.]

So when the modern Republican Party (R.I.P), in the name of “small government” and opposition to “class warfare,” set its face against policies to redistribute the gains from economic growth, it destroyed the theoretical basis for thinking that a rising tide would lift all the boats, rather than lifting the yachts and swamping the trawlers. Free trade without redistribution (especially the corrupt version of “free trade” with corporate rent-seeking written into it) is basically class warfare waged downwards.

Trade by itself can’t account for all of the fractal growth in incomes, with the top half of earners (mostly college graduates) pulling away from the less-educated bottom half, the top decile pulling away from the rest of the top half, the top 1% pulling away from the rest of the top decile, and the top tenth of 1% pulling away from the rest of the top percentile. (I suspect that the billionaires have also been pulling away from the merely rich, but I’m not sure there’s data to support that.) The increasing importance of “winner-take-all” phenomena (linked to the information revolution and the increasing importance of very-low-marginal-cost goods as well as trade), the combination of dual incomes and assortative mating, and the destruction of labor unions have all done their share.

But the bottom line is that all of the gains, not merely from trade but from economic growth, have been concentrated in the hands of a relative few.  And worsening inequality harms the relative losers even if their absolute incomes do not fall.

Have we finally reached a critical mass where folks on both sides of the aisles will realize that all they do is lie and that if Bernie Bros or Hillary Haters repeat their lies, we’re as good as cooked.   Donald Trump has pretty much killed the narrative that the Republicans are a Big Tent party that are just interested in a different approach to governing. 

Reeling from a second straight loss to Barack Obama, a flailing Republican Party in 2013 found its culprit: Mitt Romney’s callous tone toward minorities. Instead of being doomed to irrelevance in a changing America, the party would rebrand as a kinder, more inclusive GOP. They called their findings an “autopsy,” and party leaders from Paul Ryan to Newt Gingrich welcomed it with fanfare.

But even then, Donald Trump was lurking.

Now, with Trump’s GOP takeover fully underway, interviews with four co-authors of the 2012 autopsy and 10 other Republican leaders reveal a party establishment terrified that Trump is not only repeating the party’s failures — he’s destroying the party in the process. And while the leaders continue to insist that their report laid out the Republican Party’s best chance of victory, they fear Trump’s dominance will tear the party apart before they ever get a chance to put it in play. “New @RNC report calls for embracing ‘comprehensive immigration reform,’” he wrote in a little-noticed tweet, nestled alongside digs at Mark Cuban and Anthony Weiner on the day of the report’s release. “Does the @RNC have a death wish?”

Pundits laughed it off as the buffoonish ramble of a fringe New York billionaire on that March 2013 day, but what Trump didn’t say — and what the party establishment couldn’t have imagined — is that, three years later, he would be the one on the verge of making that death wish come true. The billionaire has not only ignored the report’s conclusions, he has run a campaign that moved the party in the exact opposite direction.

This is the same candidate that has open support of David Duke and white supremacists and answers questions about that support with “meh”. You need look no farther than Trump Rallies to find them out in the open and acting like goons. White nationalists shoved and assaulted a young black woman with absolute impunity.

White supremacists and other Donald Trump supporters could face charges for altercations that broke out during a Kentucky campaign rally — but so could protesters.

Video showed a white nationalist leader shoving and screaming at a black woman who protested the Republican presidential candidate’s rally Tuesday at the Kentucky International Convention Center in Louisville.

Matthew Heimbach, head of the Traditionalist Youth Network, admits he was involved in an altercation with a black woman who he said was screaming obscenities and creating a disturbance, but he denied the woman’s claims that he used racial slurs.

One of the protesters, Henry Brousseau, filed a police report alleging that he was punched in the stomach by a woman in Heimbach’s group for shouting “Black Lives Matter,” reported the Courier-Journal.

The 17-year-old Brousseau said he did not know the woman’s name but took a photo of her before he was ejected from the event by what he believes was a combination of Trump security guards, Louisville Metro Police officers and Secret Service agents.

Trump interrupted his roughly 40-minute speech at least a half-dozen times to call for the removal of protesters, reported WDRB-TV, and some of the demonstrators said the candidate’s supporters roughed them up before they were ejected.

“I didn’t expect hands to be placed on me,” said protester Shalonte Branham. “I expected security to say, ‘It’s time to go,’ but I did not expect people to try and harm me.”

Karma has been swift for these horrible people in the world of social media.  Those of us living in the world outside Trump’s wet dreams are ensuring that chickens come home to roost.

Imagine if you will that you are one of the dullards who frequents Donald Trump rallies. Imagine that Donald Trump’s rhetoric is actually exciting enough for you to become energized when he hits the stage. Now imagine that because you are of the low-information variety American voter, your favorite part of the show is the racism.

You would be just like young Joseph Pryor, who was just kicked off of the US Marines’ delayed enlistment program, meaning he will not EVER be a United States Marine, because of the antics he pulled in connection with the assault of a black woman at a recent Trump rally in Kentucky.

Louisville police added to the mess the Trump supporters got themselves into by announcing they’re looking at filing criminal charges against several people. There has been some speculation that Trump himself may be facing charges as a ringleader, but that is unconfirmed at this time. What we do know is that a woman was treated with the utmost of disrespect, was physically and verbally assaulted and quite possibly had her civil rights violated for no reason other than the color of her skin.
It’s a common scene at these things. Protesters stand as quietly as they can and are eventually discovered and removed with extreme prejudice. Trump security personnel, local police and tens of thousands of unruly thugs in red hats solves those issues while Trump stands on stage scanning for the next people to have booted out. It’s nothing but a reality TV hook.

Now this poor young man, whose racism may have just been a side-effect of being raised by idiots and who may have had hope with just a few more IQ points, will tell the story of how he sacrificed his military service for Donald Trump. His friends will toast him with Natural Ice until the day he dies of liver failure. He’ll be buried with full honors by his World Of Warcraft buddies in a casket draped with the Gadsden Flag In an unsanmctioned cemetery slated to be paved for the new Walmart Supercenter parking lot.

This guy isn’t the first person to go full stupid for Donald Trump and lose big and he certainly won’t be the last.  But, so many folks are also

falling for horrid Republican lies about Hillary Clinton.  Last night, Rubio out right lied about the focus of the FBI interest in Clinton’s emails which were first outlined here.   Politico fact checked it last night along with other blatant lies last night.  The entire lot of them lie like a warehouse filled with rugs.

Marco takes two shots at Hillary on Benghazi; misses

Rubio launched a late attack on Hillary Clinton that contained what were at best two distortions. First, he said she’s under FBI investigation. In fact, the FBI is investigating handling of classified information on her email server, which is not quite the same as investigating her—at least not yet. Second, Rubio said Clinton lied to the families of the victims of the attack in Benghazi. But there’s no way to know: PolitiFact has delved into this before and determined “there simply is not enough concrete information in the public domain for Rubio or anyone to claim as fact that Clinton did or did not lie to the Benghazi families.” Clinton and the families disagree about what was said, but even if she blamed the video mocking Islam for triggering the attacks, that might not have been an intentional lie given the intelligence at the time.

— Isaac Arnsdorf

This morning our local published an Op Ed a local freaking Republican pol repeating the same damned lie!  (H/T to Adrastonos.)  “There is no FBI or DOJ email investigation of Hillary Clinton.”  Immunity granted to Bryan Pagliano does not look bad for her or mean she’s done something criminal at all.   There are now lies!  damned lies!  and Republican lies!!!

What about Clinton – does Pagliano’s immunity somehow count against her? Hardly. Again, it is only what it is.  The whole country saw her on live television being questioned by a Republican-majority House Committee. They can decide about her from what they saw themselves.

WAPO puts it this way: “Clinton emails continue to be non-scandal, disappointing Republicans”.  So, they lie.

US citizens of goodwill can no longer take the Republican Party seriously.  This morning, Fox News is trying to push Kasich as the reasonable one left

in the room.  This is the governor that is trying to take credit for both Obama’s and Clinton’s legacy while simultaneously damning them.  He is no moderate. Never has been or will be.

For all of Kasich’s supposed moderation, he is one of the most extreme antiabortion politician in America. Such views, however, seem to have little impact on Kasich’s moderate image.

Consider that, since Kasich took office in 2011, he has signed into law 16 antiabortion measures. These include a ban on abortions after 20 weeks; a mandatory ultrasound for women having abortions in clinics that receive state funding; and a provision in the state’s budget bill that prevents rape crisis counselors from providing women with information about abortion services. Onerous regulations on abortion providers have led half the abortion clinics in the state to shut down. All of this would seem to reflect Kasich’s “Christian moral imperative” too.

“John Kasich also peddles economic quackery and social conservatism.”

While there’s substantial evidence that Kasich is not consumed with a sociopathic loathing of immigrants and the poor, that’s a remarkably low bar to clear to merit the “moderate” appellation. To be sure, Kasichhas not quite followed the ultraconservative path charted by, say, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — but it’s not for lack of trying. Just as Walker did, Kasich signed a law stripping public employees of collective bargaining rights shortly after taking office in 2011 — and like Walker, Kasich witnessed a plunge in his standing in the polls; one April 2011 survey pegged Kasich’s approval rating at a mere 30 percent. Unlike Wisconsin, Ohio lacked a law providing for a gubernatorial recall, so opponents of Kasich’s anti-union law staged a November 2011 referendum on it instead. The outcome was a humiliating rebuke to the new governor; by a margin of 61 percent to 39 percent, voters overturned the law — a chastening result that informed Kasich’s subsequent decision not to pursue legislation making Ohio a so-called right-to-work state.

It is imperative that more and more people see exactly what the Republican Party has become.  For that, I’m thankful for the Trump candidacy.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?


Friday Reads: Unintelligible Yelling

unintelligible yelling

Good Afternoon!

I was in sore need of a pick me up last night after wading into the Republican debate for a period of time when this picture showed up on Scott Eric Kaufman’s facebook newsfeed.   It came with the following brief message “I’m deaf enough that even when I watch things online, I have the subtitles on, and people, CNN just the won the Internet.”Last night, he posted the same to Salon. He obviously “inspired” this in Esquire by Charles Pierce.  It’s obviously a lede worth nabbing since I’m about to do it too albeit I’m giving him full credit and luscious linky goodness.

If you expected to find out about any positions on issues last night watching that debate you would’ve been sorely disappointed.  If you like National Geographic specials of monkeys flinging poo, well, this made the monkeys behavior look absolutely rational by comparison.  I will borrow Pierce’s bottom line from his piece I attributed above.  Unintelligible yelling was a good as description as any one could’ve found for the entire evening’s discourse.

To be honest, there were some moments of clarity. Trump was the only one on stage with anything close to a reasonable position on the question of Israel and Palestine. Kasich gave a reasonable answer to the stupid “religious liberty” question. (“If you’re in the business of selling things, if you’re not going to sell to somebody you don’t agree with, OK, today I’m not going to sell to somebody who’s gay, and tomorrow maybe I won’t sell to somebody who’s divorced. I mean, if you’re in the business of commerce, conduct commerce. That’s my view.”)  And, to be completely honest, Trump probably gave the best closing statement of the bunch. But, at that point, those people watching who hadn’t turned away from this intellectual demolition derby  that, like me, they were numb and willing to believe almost anything. I felt like I’d stumbled into the ladies garden club from the beginning of The Manchurian Candidate.

There were, of course, no questions about the climate crisis. There, of course, were no questions about gun violence, even though the third mass shooting in a week was occurring at virtually the same time these guys were fighting over who was the biggest crook, con man, liar, and choke artist on the stage. Priorities, gentlemen, please.

(Unintelligible yelling).

You said it, pal. Whoever you are.

I’m not sure that you could find any moments of clarity.  Strump defended Planned Parenthood right before he said that the few abortions they do would make him completely defund the outfit.  Kasich basically 168186_600said the Supreme Court spoke on Gay Marriage and that you can’t discriminate in the public market even if he still considers religious freedom to be akin to bigotry. Cruz and Rubio were absolutely unhinged proving they could outDonald The Donald.  As we know, Cruz is a very smart and dangerous man.  Rubio basically just does what he’s told.

Earlier this month, the English version of Der Spiegel had an excellent piece on how “Donald Trump is the Most Dangerous Man on Earth.”  That’s probably because he is headed towards the Republican nomination and his closest rivals look completely off the planet by comparison.  Hell, Chris Christie just endorsed him this morning.  You can read the Rubio attack puppy mode along with Christie labelling him “desperate” at the link.  But, back to Spiegel.  Germans, as you know, have experienced fascism enough to know it when they see it. They see it.

Donald Trump is the leader of a new, hate-filled authoritarian movement. Nothing would be more harmful to the idea of the West and world peace than if he were to be elected president. George W. Bush’s America would seem like a place of logic and reason in comparison.

Well, there’s your mic drop.

And, there’s even a Nixon connection. You know there had to be.  This is their take on the upcoming Clinton/Trump general. I’ve lifted an entire section and the entire article is a very long, well thought out read.

This is evident on a bitter cold January evening in Burlington, Vermont. A line has formed in front of a local theater. Mary Loyer, 44, and her son Tim, 28, are hoping to catch a glimpse of Trump. Tim works as a waiter, Mary is unemployed. They’re supporters of the left-wing democrat Bernie Sanders, a long-time mayor of Burlington. But Mary says something that one hears over and over again on the campaign trail: “If it came down to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, I don’t know who I’d vote for. But it wouldn’t be Clinton.”

“Hillary is corrupt,” Tim says. “She does what Big Money wants her to do, and she’s a flip-flopper.” Sanders and Trump have more in common than it seems, he adds: “Both of them are the only politicians who say what they think and do what they say.” His mom nods.

For a long time, the Clinton camp fantasized about taking on Trump. The way they saw it, it would be Clinton, an experienced, middle-of-the-road candidate, versus Trump, the radical leader of the old, white guard. Many democratic strategists viewed such a matchup as a unique opportunity. Vice President Joe Biden said if Trump won the Republican nomination, Hillary Clinton would “win in a walk.”

In the meantime, it has become apparent that Clinton can’t even rely on the unconditional support of her own people. For many, she represents a political system that is symbiotically entwined with Big Business. Trump, the big capitalist, however, bills himself as someone who is not for sale. He doesn’t accept big donations and doesn’t owe anyone anything. The fact that he, unlike Clinton, has never held a political office is an advantage in this election campaign.

Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg is one of the few in his party who openly addresses how difficult it could be for Clinton to handle a Trump candidacy. The founder of the progressive think tank “New Democratic Network” believes that the widespread frustration about the status quo within the American electorate and his ability to handle the modern media better than anyone else in the race would make Trump a strong opponent in the general election. “Trump would be a lot harder to defeat than most of us think”, he says. “There were more than a dozend Republican candidates and he basically destroyed all of them. It is unbelievable what he did.”

But many democrats aren’t panicking yet. They’re betting on Clinton’s campaign coming around and gaining momentum once she secures the nomination. At the same time, they are anxious that this could become the dirtiest duel in the history of American presidential campaigns.

If it does, Roger Stone will be the man to blame. The unscrupulousness that has come to define Trump’s campaign is largely Stone’s doing. He learned the tricks of the trade from Richard Nixon in the 1970s, and later helped Ronald Reagan get into the White House. By the end of the 1980s, Stone was already trying to convince his friend Trump to run for president. Almost everything Trump knows about politics and power, he learned from Stone — including the art of manipulation. Stone is considered a master of defamatory rumors.

Stone also helped Trump lay the foundations for his campaign last spring. Then in summer, he was abruptly fired. Trump’s people cited a disagreement between the two, but observers now believe the split could have been staged, a trick.

“I remain an unabashed Trump supporter and Trump enthusiast,” Stone said when reached on the phone last autumn. “I just finally made a decision that I could have a greater impact on the outside. Trump is still a very close friend.” As before, the two talk regularly and Stone obviously gives Trump important advice. And just like old times, Stone spends nearly every evening on TV touting Trump and his “movement.”

Since he is no longer an official member of Trump’s campaign team, Stone has the freedom to be even more ruthless in his derision of Trump’s opponents, without the risk of the mud-slinging coming back to haunt the candidate. Trump biographer D’Antonio describes Stone as “pure evil.” He is a “deeply disgusting person,” someone who doesn’t understand anything but “brute force.”

Stone’s favorite victim is Hillary Clinton. His recently published book, “The Clintons’ War on Women,” is a nasty piece of work. But it could also be seen as a blueprint for Trump’s campaign against Hillary. Without credible proof, Stone claims that Chelsea Clinton is not Bill’s biological daughter and that Bill has fathered at least one son with a black prostitute. Stone calls the former president a serial rapist and Hillary his henchwoman. He also suggests that Hillary has the death of a man who knew about Bill’s escapades on her conscience.

In television interviews, Stone claims Hillary is the “point person in the terror campaign to intimidate and bully women into silence.” That she once waged a “nuts and sluts campaign to discredit Monica Lewinsky to make it her fault that she was seduced by a man three times her age.” He has also stated that “Bill rapes women physically and Hillary rapes them psychologically.” He claims Hillary Clinton “has no right to call herself an advocate for women and girls.” Trump recently released a campaign video with a similar message.

“The Clintons are money-making opportunists and criminals,” Stone says. Their foundation is nothing more than a “luxury travel service to augment the lifestyles of Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton.” People with those kinds of friends and advisers don’t leave much to the imagination as to their character, he says.

This is what worries me as I deal with BernieBots and undecideds.  The long, horrible list of lies slung at Hillary has taken root even in folks that should appreciate her contributions and her tribulations. I hate it 12790901_10154045928969434_2488475492731761044_nevery time a Bernie Bot tells me she’s not trustworthy because she’s taken money for speeches or because she took Bill back or because email server or because, heaven forbid, BENGHAZI!  The years and years of Fox News like slander and the relentless battle of some republicans to take her down just gives me the Rubio flop sweat.

No Republican is positioned to beat Trump in the primary.  They all should realize that by now some where in the darkest deepest part of their dark hearts. And so, the Trump Mean Machine will take aim direclty at Hillary and a lot of the ammunition will be put there already by Bernie Sanders and friends as well as the 20 something year Republican Crusade.  It will be ugly, folks.  

Just think, Trump may sweep Super Tuesday.

Another statistical affirmation comes from Bloomberg Analysts (full pdf below) who conducted polling of the “Super Tuesday” states and found Donald Trump leading in every contest, every demographic, and every metric in the multiple races.

Donald Trump isn’t just winning, he’s way ahead of Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz – AND even more substantially Trump beats each of them as individuals in head-to-head matchups. It’s not even close – heck, he’s even more supported than Pope Francis:

 

361c52b00b100bc1bd1bfd0e9e5714b23929d108Clinton is aware what lies ahead and sees Trump as the clear rival.

With three state wins under Donald Trump‘s belt, Hillary Clinton is now ready to acknowledge something many on both sides of the aisle never could have imagined saying: that the real estate mogul turned reality-TV star will likely be the Republican presidential nominee.

“Yes,” Clinton said on “Morning Joe” today when asked by Joe Scarborough whether she thinks Trump will beat the remaining GOP contenders.

“I mean, right now it looks like that,” she continued. “But I’m not going to handicap their race. I want to let them decide that.”

I woke up to the trolling and howling of the BernieBros.  Bernie’s the only one that can beat the STrump.  It’s all over the usual suspect places including Current Affairs where I wonder if the author of this article even shaves yet. (BB’s put it up before.) Here’s one at Slate.  But, I’m actually beginning to look at this like the endless and endlessly boring Rocky movie franchise.  If any one was set up for a long term battle fully knowing what’s going to be thrown at you, it’s Hillary Clinton.  Here’s the voice to the contrary at TNR with some hesitation.

According to RCP’s average of polls, Clinton enjoys only a slim lead over Trump in a head-to-head match-up. You have to think that her lead will climb once the Democratic Party revs up the Trump attack machine, which the GOP has so far mysteriously declined to use.

But at the same time, in a polarized, nearly evenly divided electorate, there’s only so much the Democratic Party can do to expand its coalition. It’s unlikely that the editors of National Reviewand other anti-Trumpists will flock to Clinton. The real question is whether Trump can consolidate the GOP and perhaps even make inroads with blue-collar workers who have traditionally voted Democratic. As Noam Scheiber reported, even labor unions are interested in Trump, given his idiosyncratic position on trade.

So, maybe?

ColeJ20150821_lowSo, getting out, supporting and voting for Hillary may be the most important thing we do this year.  This argues that it’s more important than voting for Obama in 2008.  Okay, I should probably tell you who wrote this first at the Daily Beast.  Sit down. Swallow any drinks you may be sipping.  Ready?  Jon Favreau.

Recently, though, there are signs that Hillary is finding this courage. About a month ago, Buzzfeed’s Ruby Cramer asked Clinton a simple question that, for some strange reason, no reporter or staffer ever thought to press her on: Why are you doing this? What truly motivates you?

Her response was not to talk about fighting for this constituency or that issue. There is no pablum about real solutions for real people with real problems, or the poll-tested garbage about coming from the middle of America with the middle class at the middle of her priorities (I can no longer remember if that’s a joke we used to make as speechwriters or an actual line).

There is only this, from Hillary: “love and kindness.” She mentioned it for the first time after the shooting in Charleston, and then expanded on the theme a few weeks later: “I want this campaign, and eventually my administration, to be more about inspiring young people, and older ones as well, to find that niche where kindness matters, whether it’s to a friend, a neighbor, a colleague, a fellow student—whether it’s in a classroom, or in a doctor’s office, or in a business—we need to do more to help each other.”

You think it might be another cynical ploy. But this turns out to be a theme that she’s repeated throughout her life. In her announcement speech, Hillary talked about being raised to believe Methodist founder John Wesley’s admonition to “do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, for as long as you can.” In her 1969 Wellesley Commencement, she called for a “mutuality of respect.” After working at the Children’s Defense Fund, she would often cite Marian Wright Edelman’s quote that “Service the rent we pay for living. It is the very purpose of life and not something you do in your spare time.”

As First Lady, Hillary spoke about the need for “a new ethos of individual responsibility, “a great renaissance of caring in this country,” and “going back and actually living by the Golden Rule.” In the State Department, she’d talk about Alexis de Tocqueville’s “habits of the heart,” and says in Hard Chocies that “I’ve also returned again and again to this question of universality—how much we all have in common even if the circumstances of our lives may be different.”

If nothing else, you’ll notice that Hillary Clinton’s words are the very antithesis of the mean-spirited, xenophobic bile that spits from the mouth of Donald Trump.

He continues.giphy

In her campaign against Sanders, Hillary has begun to tell that broader, more inclusive story about the future. There she is, comforting a crying child in Nevada who worries that her parents might be deported. There she is in South Carolina, with five mothers of African American children who died of gun violence, who told Mother Jones, “She listened and followed through for us. You can’t fake that…She cares. Not only does she care about victims of gun violence but she cares about women, she cares about African Americans. She cares!”

She cares.

Hillary Clinton isn’t perfect. She isn’t flashy or entertaining. She isn’t cool or hip, so please stop forcing the poor woman to learn the Dab on Ellen. As someone who’s been in politics for a few decades, she’s made plenty of mistakes, and will probably make many more.

But Hillary is also more than just a policy wonk who can’t wait to start shuffling through white papers in the Oval. She cares. She tries. She perseveres. And now she has a chance to tell the story she’s always wanted about America: the story about a country that found the courage to turn away from our darkest impulses; that chose to embrace our growing diversity as a strength, not a weakness; that pushed the boundaries of opportunity outward and upward, until there are no more barriers, and no more ceilings.

At stake in this election is control of a Tea Party-run Congress, at least one Supreme Court vacancy that could tip the balance for a generation, and the very real chance that a highly unstable demagogue could become the 45th President of the United States. So while I may not have imagined myself saying this a few years ago, I certainly believe it now: It’s far more important to elect Hillary Clinton in 2016 than it was to elect Barack Obama in 2008.

See.  That ObamaBot grew up.  There’s hope for the BernieBros.  Let’s just hope it’s soon so we can stop Trump.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?


Thursday Reads: Political Parasites

 gazette-du-bon-ton-by-gose-1914-art-deco-pochoir.-il-a-ete-prime-[2]-58970-p

Good Morning!!

I’m illustrating this post with drawings from a vintage French fashion magazine. You can read about it at Abe Books: Gazette du Bon Ton: A Journal of Good Taste.

There’s another Republican debate tonight, this time in Houston. I honestly don’t think I can stand to watch it, but I’ll keep an eye on today’s thread and put up another one tonight if necessary. The debate is on CNN, so you shouldn’t have any trouble streaming it on-line if you want to watch from your computer or other device. The freak show starts at 8:30PM ET.

b8d5db19c09f0f780adf710259b0ee23

Reuters: Trump versus Rubio and Cruz at Houston Republican debate.

At a CNN-hosted debate at the University of Houston, [Donald] Trump’s rivals will have one of their last best chances to try to derail the blunt-spoken political outsider before the Super Tuesday contests.

Whether they can pull it off is an open question. On stage with Trump will be U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Ohio Governor John Kasich and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson. None have been able to slow Trump’s momentum in previous debates.

“Trump is on cruise control,” said Eric Fehrnstrom, a former senior adviser to 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney. He said Trump should ignore his opponents and focus on the key planks in his platform – a border wall to keep out illegal immigrants, a stronger military, defeating Islamic State and fair trade.

“It’s getting late in the game for everyone else. People who are expecting a sudden shift in the direction of the race are deluding themselves. Trump is Goliath, and we’ve seen enough of the other candidates to know there are no Davids in this field,” Fehrnstrom said.

Rubio, 44, has an added incentive to change the makeup of the race. He is scrambling to attract the financial donors who supported one-time establishment favorite Jeb Bush, who dropped out of the race after his disappointing finish in South Carolina on Saturday….

Cruz, 45, enters the debate under pressure. He must do well in his home state of Texas on Super Tuesday. Recently, he has been accused by his rivals of using negative tactics, including one that led to the resignation of his spokesman, Rick Tyler.

1913horseraces-1

Mitt Romney has inserted himself into the GOP race with a highly ironic attack on Donald Trump. The Boston Globe reports:

Mitt Romney, whose 2012 presidential campaign was bedeviled over his own reluctance to publicly release his personal income tax returns, aggressively criticized Donald Trump on Wednesday for not releasing his returns….

“I think we have good reason to believe that there’s a bombshell in Donald Trump’s taxes,” Romney said on Fox News. “I think there is something there. Either he is not anywhere near as wealthy as he says he is, or he hasn’t been paying the kind of taxes we would expect him to pay, or perhaps he hasn’t been giving money to the vets or the disabled like he has been telling us he’s been doing.”

Trump quickly responded, ridiculing Romney — whom he endorsed in 2012 in a gold-studded event at Trump Tower in Las Vegas — and calling him a loser.

“Mitt Romney, who totally blew an election that should have been won and whose tax returns made him look like a fool, is now playing tough guy,” Trump wrote on Twitter. Then, he added: “When Mitt Romney asked me for my endorsement last time around, he was so awkward and goofy that we all should have known he could not win!”

In 2012, Republican candidates like Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain were running vanity campaigns–basically running for president in order to sell books.

1913horseraces-2

That also seemed to be the case this year with Ben Carson. He even suspended his campaign for time to go to book signings. But it turns out that Carson’s campaign may be even a worse “scam”–one that Carson himself may not have been aware of until recently. From The Atlantic:

Carson has taken in incredible amounts of money during the race. His campaign has raised more than any other Republican presidential  rival, though they’ve raised more when super PACs are included. But he’s also spent more than any of them, so that despite his prolific fundraising, he has barely $4 million in cash on hand.

That’s because Team Carson has been plowing a huge portion of the money it raises back into fundraising, using costly direct-mail and telemarketing tactics. Pretty much every campaign uses those tools, but the extent to which Carson was using it raised eyebrows around politics. First, many of the companies being paid millions and millions of dollars are run by top campaign officials or their friends and relations, meaning those people are making a mint. Second, many of the contributions are coming from small-dollar donors. If that money is being given by well-meaning grassroots conservatives for a campaign that’s designed not to win but to produce revenue for venders, isn’t it just a grift?

These questions have been circling since last summer. If they’re right, the most sympathetic interpretation is that Carson, like his donors, was being taken for a ride by his aides, and wasn’t in on the scam. Carson seemed to suggest as much on Tuesday, implying he was taken advantage of by aides who treated the campaign as an ATM.

Read more at the link.

00235022da424bb171b44988bf77868c

I’m wondering if Bernie Sanders will use his higher visibility from his campaign–which is basically a vanity campaign at this point–to get a big book contract and increase his speaking fees. It turns out Sanders has done something similar in the past. From The Center for Public Integrity:

Sanders turned a fiery, hourslong filibuster against extending the Bush tax cuts into a book. During the 2012 election cycle, his campaign gave a copy to donors of at least $50.

What he did was use campaign funds to purchase a lot of the books and then “gave” them to donors who contributed at least $50.00 That’s a pretty good profit on a paperback book that sold for around $10.00. I don’t think this is illegal, but it seems a little bit questionable for a man who calls himself a socialist (he isn’t one). Here’s a graphic posted on Twitter.

 

https://twitter.com/SDzzz/status/702771840859549696

 

From US News: Sanders’s 8.5 Hour Tax Cut Filibuster Gets a Book.

It wasn’t exactly Washington’s version of The King’s Speech, but independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’s 8½-hour blast in December at President Obama’s deal with Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts is getting star treatment. Nation Books is printing it in its entirety in The Speech: A Historic Filibuster on Corporate Greed and the Decline of Our Middle Class. The senator’s passionate address, which runs over 255 pages in the book, was a rare oratorical tour de force: It attracted so many online viewers it crashed the Senate television website. Some say Obama was so miffed by the speech that he held an impromptu press conference with former President Clinton to divert attention.

So he used the speech to undermine President Obama twice–by giving the speech against the Obama’s wishes and using it to run Senate during the president’s reelection campaign. By the way, Sanders’ book “The Speech” was published by Nation Books, the publishing arm of The Nation magazine which has endorsed Sanders in the 2016 race.

gazette-du-bon-ton-by-barbier-1912-art-deco-pochoir.-la-belle-aux-moineaux-[2]-59024-p

At Politico, Jack Shafer has an interesting piece on Trump and Sanders as “political parasites.”

Think of the Republican Party as a host organism that has only now discovered the parasite it acquired eight months ago. The parasite, of course, is Donald J. Trump—no more a Republican than I—who has inserted himself into the party and appears to be on his way to winning its presidential nomination. Feeding on the Republican Party’s primary and caucus process, the Trump parasite has progressed from egg to larva and has now commandeered many of the Republican Party’s metabolic functions. But it’s been managed growth, as the smart-thinking parasite likes to keep its zombie host alive long enough to develop into the next stage and lay its own eggs and begin the process anew.

Trump isn’t the only political parasite on the hustings this season. Bernie Sanders, who never ran as a Democrat before this election, has likewise attempted to colonize the gastrointestinal tract of a major party in hopes that it will eventually deposit him at the White House. True to his parasitical nature, Sanders loves the idea of the party but has little interest in actually supporting it. He has raised only $1,000 for the Democratic Party’s fundraising alliance, while Hillary Clinton, who is many things but assuredly not a parasite, has raised $26.9 million.

Trump has similarly stiffed his party’s fundraising operations, canceling a scheduled appearance at a December Republican National Committee fundraising event, and Twitter-shouting his fury at the RNC for allegedly using his name in a fundraising solicitation without his consent. “Totally unauthorized, do not pay,” Trump tweeted. The true parasite never supports the host!

The life cycles of the Trump and Sanders parasites are nowhere near as gruesome as the life cycles of the Guinea worm and the parasitoid wasp, but they are as striking as anything we witness in nature. Viewing Trump and Sanders with an ideological microscope, it’s apparent that neither has much affinity for the parties they’ve joined. Their object and their genius has been to seize as much control as they can of the major parties from the various “establishments” and wage their outsider third-party candidacies from inside. Suitably camouflaged, neither Trump nor Sanders is seen by the average voter for political freeloaders they are.

I’m not a big fan of Schafer’s but that makes a lot of sense to me. Are both parties being hollowed out from within?

gazette-du-bon-ton-by-fabius-1914-art-deco-pochoir.-sophonisbe-[2]-59150-p

If the polls in upcoming primary and caucus states are anything close to correct, Sanders has no chance to get the Democratic nomination. But he is still out there trying to tear down the party and attacking Hillary Clinton–the likely nominee–in the most vicious ways he can think of. It is really starting to bother me a great deal, and I’m glad that the party seems to be coalescing around the potential first woman president.

I’ll end this post with another powerful essay from Sady Doyle: America loves women like Hillary Clinton–as long as they’re not asking for a promotion.

It’s hard to remember these days, but just a few years ago, everybody loved Hillary Rodham Clinton. When she stepped down as US secretary of state in January 2013 after four years in office, her approval rating stood at what the Wall Street Journal described as an “eye-popping”69%. That made her not only the most popular politician in the country,but the second-most popular secretary of state since 1948.

The 2012 “Texts from Hillary” meme, which featured a sunglasses-clad Clinton scrolling through her Blackberry aboard a military flight to Libya, had given rise to a flood of think pieces hailing her “badass cool.” The Washington Post wanted president Barack Obama to give vice president Joe Biden the boot and replace him with Clinton. Taking stock of Clinton’s approval ratings, Nate Silver noted in a 2012 piece for the New York Times that she currently held “remarkably high numbers for a politician in an era when many public officials are distrusted or disliked.”gazette-du-bon-ton-by-barbier-1914-deco-pochoir.-la-fontaine-de-coquillages-[2]-59020-p
How times have changed. “The FBI And 67 Percent of Americans Distrust Hillary Clinton,” booms a recent headline in the Huffington Post. Clinton’s favorability ratings currently hover around 40.8%. Bob Woodward complains that “there is something unrelaxed about the way she is communicating.” “Hillary’s personality repels me,” Walker Bragman writes in Salon.
How can we reconcile the “unlikable” Democratic presidential candidate of today with the adored politician of recent history? It’s simple: Public opinion of Clinton has followed a fixed pattern throughout her career. Her public approval plummets whenever she applies for a new position. Then it soars when she gets the job. The wild difference between the way we talk about Clinton when she campaigns and the way we talk about her when she’s in office can’t be explained as ordinary political mud-slinging. Rather, the predictable swings of public opinion reveal Americans’ continued prejudice against women caught in the act of asking for power.

I hope you’ll go over to the Quartz link and read the whole thing.

So . . . what stories are you following today?


Tuesday Night: Democratic Townhall and Republican Caucus Live Blog

121173_600Hello from Storm and Tornado riddled New Orleans! Tonight are two big events which probably won’t rival our weather today but could be interesting.  Will Rubio try to convince us losing is winning?  Will Bernie continue the attacks laid out in yesterday’s Presser?  Will the Donald and Hillary edge closer to November?

First up at 8 pm eastern is a CNN Townhall between Sanders and Clinton.

Bernie Sanders will try to dent Hillary Clinton’s momentum Tuesday at a CNN Democratic town hall meeting, as he faces pressure to change the dynamics of a presidential race that is starting to trend against him.

After losing to Clinton in Saturday’s Nevada Democratic caucuses and another loss likely looming this weekend in South Carolina, Sanders needs a confident performance to project strength going into the multiple contests on Super Tuesday.

He will get the chance to draw sharper contrasts with his rival at the town hall meeting in South Carolina, from 8 p.m-10 p.m. ET, which will be moderated by Chris Cuomo and air on CNN, CNN International and CNN en Español and be streamed live online on CNNgo.

In the coming weeks, Clinton is counting on a strong showing in Southern states likely to showcase her dominance among African-American voters, putting the onus on Sanders to try to broaden his support or face falling behind.

876e8b51a5a0ef9c20453b3fc7bc688aIt’s not quite Super Tuesday but you’ll get a taste of things to come!

The menu for politics lovers starts with a Democratic town hall featuring Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders on CNN at 8 p.m. ET.

Then come the results from the Nevada Republican caucuses, where Donald Trump, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz will battle it out for first place in the last GOP election before 12 states vote next Tuesday.

The Nevada Caucus will likely be won by Trump but watch closely at what goes on with Rubio he’s put up a firewall there and Cruz who seems to be struggling.

The townhall will probably show Hillary being positive and Bernie going on offense.

Trump is definitely on his way to the nomination.

With Jeb Bush out, Donald Trump has widened his lead in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Voters finds Trump with 36% support, giving him a 15-point lead over Senator Marco Rubio who earns 21% of the vote. Senator Ted Cruz is in third place with 17%.

For Trump, that’s a five-point gain in support from the beginning of this month just after the Iowa caucus and right before the New Hampshire primary when it was Trump 31%, Rubio 21% and Cruz 20% among likely GOP voters.  Rubio’s support has held steady, while support for Cruz has fallen slightly.

In mid-December, Trump led with 29% Republican support, with Cruz in second with 18% and Rubio at 15%.

So, join us!!!hillaryclintoncaricature