Image 01 Image 03

2016 Democratic Primary Tag

Speaking in South Carolina Thursday, Hillary dropped an atomic gaffe. Of all the idiocy that's seeped out of Hillary Clinton's mouth, this just might take the cake as the dumbest thing she's said so far. Ruby Cramer, the Buzzfeed political reporter on the Hillary beat captured the moment on social media:

Mark Halperin of Bloomberg Politics recently interviewed 2016 Democratic Party presidential candidate Martin O'Malley. Their discussion covered a wide range of topics, but when talk turned to foreign policy, O'Malley suggested that climate change was behind the rise of ISIS. Transcript and video via Real Clear Politics:
Martin O'Malley: Climate Change Created ISIS MARTIN O'MALLEY: One of the things that preceded the failure of the nation state of Syria and the rise of ISIS, was the effect of climate change and the mega-drought that affected that nation, wiped out farmers, drove people to cities, created a humanitarian crisis that created the symptoms — or rather, the conditions — of extreme poverty that has now led to the rise of ISIS and this extreme violence.
The interview is approximately six minutes long. To hear the segment on ISIS and climate change, skip to the 3:40 mark:

There are few things more cringeworthy than watching stiff-shirted, scripted folks attempting charisma. But that's exactly what happened in Hillary Clinton's latest social media soirée. Long gone are the days when parents struggled to figure out how to rewind a video tape... now we have smart phones. Snapchat is a social media sharing site that allows users to send pictures and videos to one another. Because the political world insists on invading every thing good and pure in this world, it too has spread its poisonous reach into the realm of Snapchat. Monday, Mrs. Clinton shared the following video:

Just when you thought the Democrat presidential primary couldn't get any more entertaining, the folks over at Salon are trying to kick off a "draft Al Gore" campaign. Seriously. From Salon's article It's time to draft Al Gore, with the subheading, "Hillary's flailing. Biden's grieving. Bernie's a longshot. Gore bridges the party's establishment, progressives":
Sure, the GOP field is studded with unserious candidates, but they still have a relatively deep bench of big-state governors and prominent senators. To win, therefore, the Democrats need a nationally viable candidate. Enter Al Gore: the one person on the left, apart from Clinton and Biden, with the cachet to bridge the establishment and progressive wings of the party. Here are 10 reasons why a Gore candidacy makes sense, both for the Democratic Party and the country.
Let's look at these ten reasons:

Yesterday in Iowa, the Hillary Clinton campaign told their young supporters they couldn't speak to the press. This clumsy and seemingly paranoid move earned Hillary Clinton mockery even on MSNBC. Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard has the details:
"Here's what struck me," said Susan Page of USA Today, "when I read the coverage in the Des Moines Register this morning. Jennifer Jacobs, who's been on your show, was covering this last night. Big demonstrations outside of young people for O'Malley and Hillary Clinton. She went up to the Clinton supporters -- these are protesters for Clinton -- and they were told they were not allowed to [speak to] a reporter." Page continued, "Now, why in the world would the campaign tell their own supporters who came out to campaign in favor Hillary Clinton ... these are the young people, college kids, for Hillary, and they've been told they can't talk to reporters. Why in the world would you do that?
Enjoy the video:

Long ago and far away I predicted that the effect on Hillary's presidential campaign of the multiple scandals would be cumulative. Since a large portion of the electorate, the younger generation, didn't know the real Hillary of the 1990s, Hillary's vulnerability was that the manufactured "nice grandma" and glass-ceiling breaker image of her would be supplanted by the controlling, paranoid figure of the 1990s. There is increasing evidence that the scandals, particularly the email scandal, is having an effect. You can see from the HuffPo Pollster chart that Hillary has been on a horrible favorability trajectory for the past two years: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating There is more evidence today, in an AP-Gfk Poll that shows Hillary's favorability dropping to 39% among all voters, and even dropped among Democrats (though still high):

Tuesday brought with it a devastating news cycle. Video footage showed a Planned Parenthood doctor munching on salad, sipping red wine, casually chatting about harvesting baby hearts and livers for cash. Towards the end of the video footage, the undercover videographers approach Planned Parenthood President, Cecile Richards (Daughter of Former Texas Governor Ann Richards), identifying themselves as employees of an organ harvesting organization. Richards says of the baby part harvesting abortion doctor, "she's amazing." Since the horrifying footage was released, Planned Parenthood claimed the video was "heavily edited," and "falsely portrays Planned Parenthood’s participation in tissue donation programs." Meanwhile, the company buying aborted baby body parts from planned parenthood appears to have taken their website down, according to Life News. Richards personally sounded off on Twitter defending Planned Parenthood and also quoting... Jane Austen? We decided to take a cursory look at those Richards supports and those that support Richards' work. This list is by no means exhaustive.

She said she's not running. Ready for Warren and MoveOn.org have gone to spend the Weekend at Bernie Sanders, the stand-in for who progressives really want, Elizabeth Warren. Bernie!? Really? Is an open Socialist really going to stand a chance in a general election? And weakness in the Hillary campaign may be just what is needed for the Democratic Party to grovel for a Warren entry, writes Doug Shoen, The potentially mortal threat to Hillary’s candidacy:
Pundits have focused recently on Hillary Clinton’s narrowing lead in polls among a group of less well known Republicans, along with voters' growing skepticism about her integrity. But a much more immediate threat to her electability is beginning to appear: in the last few weeks, Clinton has lost significant ground in both New Hampshire and Iowa to socialist Bernie Sanders....
But Sanders isn't a viable national candidate, so who will Democrats turn to if Hillary continues to falter? Schoen sees the need for a new Bobby Kennedy. Who’s the Bobby Kennedy in this race? Elizabeth Warren, say Schoen.

Comedy Central's Key & Peele began Season 5 by having a little fun with the Obama Administration. Key and Peele describe their show as:
Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele are the stars of Key & Peele, a show that examines life in a distinctively provocative and irreverent way. Whether it's anger-translating the president, spoofing Nazis or ordering up some soul food, Key & Peele showcases the guys' camaraderie and unique point of view, born from their experiences growing up biracial in a not-quite-post-racial world.
In a fictitious meeting between President Obama and Mrs. Clinton, each brings an Anger Translator. Their function? To translate the diplomatic b.s. into what they're really saying. President Obama's Anger Translator is Luther and Mrs. Clinton's is Savannah: The profanity-laced (but bleeped out) meeting began nice enough:
Obama: “It’s always good to see you.” Luther (Translation): “I pretended to like you for seven years!” Clinton: “Good to see you too, Mr. President.” Savannah (Translation): “My hatred for you is a pure force of nature that is going to move me onward to my destiny.”

In a train wreck of an interview with CNN Tuesday, Hillary Clinton made some colorful claims. CNN's Brianna Keilar asked Hillary what lead her to delete 33,000 emails. Avoiding the question, Mrs. Clinton rambled on about how technology is hard and was finally redirected by the softball coach Keilar. “But you said that they [former Secretaries of State] did the same thing. That they used a personal server, and while facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them,” interjected Keiler, engaging Hillary Death Stare Sequence Phase II. “You know you’re starting with so many assumptions that are, I’ve never had a subpoena, there is no, again, let’s take a deep breath here,” said Mrs. Clinton, obviously rattled and speaking to herself. No subpoena?

I remember my first unfriending-by-way-of-politics. I was 25; I'd made it all the way to my second year of law school without alienating a single person in the digital space---give me a medal. I had posted something negative about nuclear proliferation in Iran, drawing the ire of one of my best friends who also happened to be 100% Persian. Over the course of three or four heated comments, it was friendship over, both online and in the real world. 7 years of friendship, down the drain in an off-cycle. It deserved better. I like to think I've grown out of the kinds of superficial political arguments that end relationships, but there's something about an election cycle that brings out the worst in all of us. Semi-anonymity is a truth serum, and sites like Facebook and Twitter are handing it out for free. Does our addiction to social media mean that our relationships will forever wallow in an extra layer of tension? Probably; and now there's a new app called Who Deleted Me that will show you just how big of an impact your online posts are having on your friends, family and colleagues. Buzzfeed spotted it:

Mrs. Clinton joined CNN Tuesday night for an interview that was stranger than fiction. In fact, I'm honestly not sure if the awkward conversation was meant to be self-parody or an earnest attempt at a prime time interview. The pants suit, the seemingly botoxed brow and resultant crazy eyes, and the passionate dedication to fibbery made for fascinating television. Following the Clinton Campaign Press Play Pen-Gate, Camp Clinton presumable decided to prove the scoffers, mockers, and justifiably incensed members of the press corps wrong. "We don't think so little of press that we actually, like, rope them off! See?! We're like, totes about press access. We chat it up with the press alllllllll the time, like we're doing right now with CNN!" - the Clinton Campaign (not an exact quote). We'll start with one of the interview's best moments:

"People should and do trust me"

On Saturday, the internet exploded after Hillary Clinton's campaign lasso'd reporters covering an Independence Day parade into an actual, mobile pen. It was a terrible visual for the Clinton machine, and as Aleister pointed out yesterday, revealed yet another crack in the facade hiding an operation that is barely holding itself together. Yesterday's State of the Union panel roundly lampooned the entire disaster, but it was S.E. Cupp who stood up and pointed out what many of our commenters have been saying for some time now---this is the media's fault. Watch:

If there's one thing the Democratic Party could use right now, it's another aging white politician to run for the 2016 presidential nomination. Vice President Joe Biden seems ready to answer the call. Linda Feldmann of the Christian Science Monitor:
Will Joe Biden run for president? Drumbeat picks up. WASHINGTON — Vice President Joe Biden has long harbored dreams of being president. He’s run twice before, clearly relishes political life, and has yet to rule out a third try – even as Hillary Clinton dominates in fundraising and in polls of Democrats. After the death on May 30 of Mr. Biden’s beloved elder son, Beau, such talk was put on hold. But in recent days, speculation has begun to soar. New York businessman Jon Cooper, a former Obama fundraising bundler now working on a draft effort to get Biden into the race, told the Monitor Thursday that he puts the probability of Biden running at 80 percent.

A professional campaign operative I know believes optics are extremely important when it comes to political candidates. Therefore, the optics of Hillary Clinton having her staff herd reporters behind a rope during a parade in New Hampshire certainly didn't look all that great. For the reporters who were there, the story became about being held behind ropes as Hillary walked the parade route:
At the Fourth of July parade Hillary Clinton marched in today in Gorham, New Hampshire, reporters following the candidate were kept -- and at moments, dragged -- behind an actual moving rope line. The rope, which two Clinton staffers held on to on either side, was meant to give Clinton space as she walked down the parade route, but photos of reporters being dragged behind the rope as she marched have gone viral on Twitter.
They certainly did. Here are a couple of them:

He may only be polling at 2% in preliminary polls, but Jim Webb has come out swinging against Hillary Clinton. The former Virginia Senator and Reagan-era secretary of the navy announced today that he's throwing his hat in for the Democratic nomination for president with a statement that punches up both at Clinton's controversial run as Secretary of State, but the underdeveloped foreign policy chops of the other Democratic candidates. Via Time:
“I understand the odds, particularly in today’s political climate where fair debate is so often drowned out by huge sums of money,” Webb said. “I know that more than one candidate in this process intends to raise at least a billion dollars—some estimates run as high as two billion dollars—in direct and indirect financial support.” ... Webb said in his statement that he is running to offer both “a fresh approach” and “experienced leadership.” As president, he said, he would reinforce alliances with NATO and in the Middle East, as well as challenge China in the South China Sea. Webb is the only Democratic candidate to strongly emphasize foreign policy in his platform. “There is no greater responsibility for our President than the vital role of Commander in Chief,” said Webb. “I have spent my entire life in and around the American military.”
The odds are stacked against him, but I wouldn't count him out. Webb is tough, and has a resume that does more than establish progressive talking point credibility.

Our friends at National Review published a new video this week. The question is simple enough -- Who is Hillary Clinton? Election cycles are full of "The REAL so and so," and "You think you know _____" oppo pieces. Sometimes positive candidate profiles manage to land underneath intentionally enticing headlines. So why is National Review's any different? Is it any different?