Image 01 Image 03

2016 Republican Primary Tag

The State Department published another batch of Hillary's emails Monday as part of their rolling release thanks to a court order. The emails are a portion of the chunk Hillary turned over to the State Department from her personal server. She or her legal counsel (Clinton has been opaque here) determined what emails were worthy of State Department record. Pilfering through the emails, readers have found all kinds of fun stuff. Evidently, everyone loved Hillary's glasses. And Blumenthal thought he had a huge scoop:

Will the battle between Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz come down to the support of their colleagues in Congress? Those colleagues hope so. An article out today in Politico details how the rise of Ted Cruz in the polls (especially in Iowa) has prompted some prominent members of Congress to start leaning toward Marco Rubio as the preferred candidate of cross-spectrum Republicans. This lean in itself could be construed as a momentary win for Cruz, whose supporters couldn't care less what Mitch McConnell has to say about much of anything these days, but it could spell trouble in the long run for the firebrand candidate. The hesitance (and in some cases, outright refusal) to support Ted Cruz springs from a long history of various floor fights and back hall disputes over policies. Now, congressional Republicans are coming out in force against the possibility of a Cruz nomination, not because they agree with him on principle, but because they see Marco Rubio as the candidate who can win over new supporters in numbers that will place the GOP back in the White House. From Politico:
Mainstream elected Republicans now see Cruz as a bigger threat than Donald Trump or Ben Carson to clinch the nomination — but equally damaging to their party’s chances of winning the White House and keeping the Senate next fall. Rubio would be a much stronger general election standard bearer, they believe.

New Jersey governor Chris Christie is still pretty low in the polls. In fact, the Real Clear Politics average has him at 2.7 percent. Christie has picked up an important endorsement, however, from the conservative leaning New Hampshire newspaper, the Union Leader. The paper's publisher, Joseph W. McQuaid writes:
For our safety, our future: Chris Christie for President Thanksgiving is just past. Christmas is ahead. We doubt that too many people across New Hampshire have politics front and center right now. But in just 10 weeks, New Hampshire will make a choice that will profoundly affect our country and the world. We better get it right. Our choice is Gov. Chris Christie. As a U.S. attorney and then a big-state governor, he is the one candidate who has the range and type of experience the nation desperately needs.

Republican presidential hopeful Marco Rubio was asked if he goes to God for counsel when encountering difficult decisions. Rubio took the opportunity to elaborate on his relationship with faith and peace. "You know, I'd love to tell you absolutely all the time. I should and I often do. I think none of us do that enough," said Rubio. "About two months ago, somebody asked me, "do you ever doubt your faith?" I think people think doubting faith means you wake up in the morning and you say I wonder if there's really a God. I think we all doubt our faith. Let me tell you when you doubt your faith," he continued. "You doubt your faith when you're confronted with a challenge or a problem and you start to have deep anxiety."

Between reports that representatives from major networks (CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, and CBS) gathered together to discuss how to take down Trump and John Kasich's bizarre ad, Trump seems to have more people poised to work against him than with him. The Hill reports that the GOP is in a "panic" over Trump and are finally taking his campaign seriously enough to call him "the clear front-runner" and to wonder how to derail it. So far, GOP strategists and pundits on both sides have been predicting that Trump's success will be short-lived, that it's just like the last presidential election in which each candidate had his or her 15 minutes of fame . . . only to crash, burn, and drop out in a matter of weeks. That, however, is not the case with Trump thus far; the Hill continues:
“The media has twisted and turned through a number of different positions where they tried to explain that it was just a fad — the summer of Trump,” said Craig Robinson, a former political director of the Republican Party of Iowa. “Well, it’s lasted all fall. There is a realization that you are not going to wake up tomorrow and he’s going to vanish.”

Art Laffer, famed member of President Reagan's Economic Policy Advisory Board, has co-authored, with Stephen Moore, an article for Investor's Business Daily in which they assert that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have the "best" tax proposals. They begin with a bit of a warning to those serious about tax reform:
All the GOP tax plans look good to us — though some are admittedly better than others. The danger now is that too many conservatives have formed a circular firing squad and are shooting down nearly all proposals on purity grounds or attacking trivial differences. This is the surest way to derail tax reform altogether. If Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp and Bill Bradley had held to such a "my way or the highway" approach, the epic 1986 tax reform that collapsed tax rates to 15% and 28% never would have happened.
That said, Laffer and Moore continue by narrowing their focus to Rand and Cruz:
Which brings us to Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. The two of us helped craft their low-rate flat tax plans. The plans are similar: Paul's rates are 14.5% on business net sales and wages and salaries. Cruz has a 16% business net sales tax and a 10% wage and salary tax.

There's a big spat over Donald Trump's comments that he remembers seeing video of Muslims in Jersey City or other towns near NYC cheering the attack on the World Trade Center. The argument is over whether it happened, whether there is video and so on. Trump is sticking to his memory, and the media is swarming to prove him wrong. CNN in particular is going all out on the effort. There's no purity of purpose there. What's most interesting to me is that there is an emerging consensus among those who are hammering Trump on this that Trump is not "lying," but likely is thinking of celebrations elsewhere. Since the aspersions that Trump is a "racist" or "Islamophobic" are predicated on a bad intent, whether he is lying as opposed to honestly mistaken seems relevant. The concept of false or suggested memory is something I've often explored both in private practice and in the course I teach. There just are some people who absolutely believe and will swear on a stack of Bibles to something that objectively did not happen -- and they always seem to be on the other side of the case from me! They are not liars, but they are wrong. Proving it is the challenge. Robert Mackey of The New York Times argues that Trump probably is confusing videos of Palestinians cheering with some memory of it taking place in northern New Jersey, The Video of Celebrations That Was Broadcast on 9/11:

Earlier today, Turkey shot down a Russian fighter plane after repeated warnings.
According to the Turkish military, officials warned “an unidentified aircraft” ten times over the course of five minutes that its path would violate Turkish airspace over the border town of Yayladagi, in Hatay province. A spokesman for U.S. officials leading the coalition from Baghdad confirmed that his team heard Turkish officials give those warnings over “open channels.” NATO called an emergency meeting today to address rapidly escalating tensions between Turkey and Russia, where Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stood in solidarity with Turkey.
According to The Telegraph, Obama spoke with the Turkish president who's said they're working to avoid any repeats of todays events:
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president, has spoken to Barack Obama by telephone. The Turkish presidency said: "They were in accord on the importance of de-escalating tensions and making arrangements to prevent a repeat of such incidents." They also expressed their commitment to a bringing about a transitional political process for peace in Syria and joint determination to continue the fight against Isil, the statement added.
Shortly after news of the skirmish broke, Senator Rubio joined Fox News and was asked how the U.S. should respond. Rubio explained that if Turkey finds itself threatened by Russia, the U.S. must respond and defend the Turks.

A post by Ed Lasky over at the American Thinker is making its way around the internet. Lasky suggests a little known bill introduced by Senator Rubio may have killed Obamacare. Naturally, we had to dig in. Rubio first introduced similar legislation in 2013. Lumped into the 2014 Omnibus bill, the act passed. Because it was globbed into an appropriations bill, it has an expiration date. The Obamacare Taxpayer Bailout Prevention Act was re-introduced by Rubio in January, the first piece of legislation he introduced in 2015, with companion legislation introduced by Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland. The current version would eliminate tax-payer funded bailouts completely. The Obamacare Taxpayer Bailout Prevention Act's premise is simple -- amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by striking out section 1342. Sen. Rubio's office explained in January:
The bill would repeal section 1342 of ObamaCare, which establishes a risk corridor program to distribute money from exchange plans that earned profits to exchange plans that suffered losses. However, the risk corridor program was not designed to be budget neutral, and section 1342 of ObamaCare puts the American taxpayer at risk of a taxpayer bailout if insurers systematically lose money on exchange plans. By repealing Section 1342, the legislation would force the administration to come back to Congress to request appropriations to cover any losses in the program. ...“Under December’s omnibus spending bill, taxpayers are protected from bailing out insurance companies until September 30, but now Congress has the opportunity to take the possibility of a bailout off the table for good,” added Rubio. “By passing this bill, Congress will ensure that no bailout will occur, in 2016 or ever.”

This development is cause for concern for many on the right. If Donald Trump runs as an independent, he'll obviously take more votes away from the Republican candidate than the Democrat. The Wall Street Journal reports:
Donald Trump: Open to Independent Bid if GOP Doesn’t Treat Him ‘Fairly’ Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump said Sunday he is open to running for president as an independent if he concludes Republicans are not treating him “fairly.” He made his comments on ABC’s “This Week” when asked about a Wall Street Journal story first published online Friday that reported an effort by Republican establishment figures to unite to knock Mr. Trump out of the race. The group plans a “guerrilla campaign” backed by secret donors to “defeat and destroy” the celebrity businessman’s candidacy, the Journal reported.

In light of the terror attack in Paris and (presumably) Obama's weak performance against ISIS and bizarrely petulant performance in Turkey, terrorism now rivals the economy as the single most important issue to American voters. ABCNews reports:
Terrorism suddenly rivals the economy as the single most important issue to Americans in the 2016 presidential election -- and a year out, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds more people paying close attention to the contest than at this point in any race back to 1988. After years of dominating the political landscape, the economy now has company. Given the Nov. 13 attacks in Paris, 28 percent of Americans now call terrorism the top issue in their choice for president, compared with 33 percent who cite the economy. Nothing else comes close. Attention, moreover, is focused as never before. Three-quarters of Americans say they are closely following the 2016 race, including three in 10 who are following it very closely. That’s the highest level of attention at this point in a presidential race in polls back nearly 30 years.
According to this report:  "Partisan divisions are 33-23-36 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents."

On Tuesday, December 15, Las Vegas will play host to the 4,752nd 5th Republican presidential debate. Wolf Blitzer will moderate, joined by Dana Bash and Hugh Hewitt. Once again, we're looking at two sessions---a kids' table discussion, and a prime time debate featuring those candidates who meet one of three criteria in a set series of polls. If a candidate wants to grab a podium on the main stage, he or she will have to poll at an average of 3.5% nationally, or hit at least 4% in either Iowa or New Hampshire. To sit at the kiddie table, a candidate must scratch together at least 1% in four separate national, Iowa or New Hampshire polls. As usual, we have safe candidates, bubble candidates, and candidates who should probably just go home:
Right now, nine candidates would make cut for the Republican National Committee sanctioned debate at The Venetian in Las Vegas: Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, Carly Fiorina and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Carly Fiorina appeared on the Kelly File last night and offered a harsh rebuke to President Obama's recent remarks regarding the terror attacks in Paris. Fiorina pointed out that Obama is more comfortable attacking Republicans than he is talking about America's enemies and laid blame at the feet of the president and Hillary Clinton who she charges with leaving a vacuum in the Middle East by prematurely pulling out American forces against military counsel. When Megyn Kelly asks Fiorina what can be done domestically to stop the rise of ISIS and other terrorists, she says one of the most logical first steps would be to stop the flow of Syrian refugees who can't possibly be vetted adequately.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced Tuesday afternoon he was ending his presidential campaign. Jindal is the third Republican candidate to suspend his campaign, and also the third Governor. Governor Jindal made his announcement during Bret Baier's Special Report on Fox News.

Way back in September, when we were still young and naive in our belief that conservatives would overcome the odds and rally around The One sooner rather than later, I attended an anti-Iran nuclear deal rally on Capitol Hill. The event was headlined by Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, and featured the kind of anti-establishment, anti-Obama, anti-ridiculously stupid foreign policy speeches that have bolstered the more non-traditional candidates on the current Republican slate. Walking around, I was amazed at how many people displayed swag from multiple campaigns---weren't we in the middle of a hotly-contested nomination cycle? Still, rally attendees seemed less worried about who was taking a stand than they were about the possibility that nobody would take a stand at all. Trump and Cruz worked well together in this regard; they connected with the crowd and produced a cohesive message that resonated both on the Hill, and outside Washington. Looks like the honeymoon is over, though. It was nice while it lasted, but let's face it---we all saw this one coming.

As the Republican presidential primary heats up, illegal immigration is again taking center stage.  While this is nothing new (as we know President Reagan attempted to address it in the '80s, John McCain made it a priority in '08, and on), the discussion has taken an interesting turn this election cycle. At issue, of course, are Obama's executive amnesty, the recent influx of illegal immigrants (including huge numbers of children), the vast number of illegals currently living and working in the U.S., border security (such as it is), and a host of related issues including the burden of illegal immigration on tax payers in terms of jobs, health care, schooling, police and judicial involvement, and various entitlement costs. Marco Rubio's involvement with the Gang of Eight, particularly his decision to work closely with Chuck Schumer, has not gone unnoticed by either the conservative base nor by the other presidential hopefuls.

How the Republican candidates react to the vicious terrorist attacks in Paris tells us something about their attitude towards Islamic terrorism in general (for example, do they use the phrase?) and what to do about it. The first response I read early today was from Ben Carson. An excerpt:
I think America's involvement should be trying to eliminate them completely,' he said. 'Destroy them!' "There are those out there who have a thirst for innocent blood, in an attempt to spread their philosophy and their will across this globe... "I would be working with our allies using every source known to man – in terms of economic resources, in terms of covert resources, overt resources, military resources, things-that-they-don’t-know-about resources, in an attempt not to contain them, but to eliminate them before they eliminate us.