Month: July 2015

The New York Times again on how the economy will impact the 2016 election:

“They said they believed that unemployment would be the lowest it has been during an election since George W. Bush and Al Gore faced off in 2000, when it stood at 3.9 percent. The median forecast for the unemployment rate when voters go to the polls in November 2016 was 4.8 percent (which would be down from 5.3 percent last month). They saw only a 15 percent chance of a recession starting by next Election Day. Interest rates, inflation and gasoline prices should all be a bit higher than they are now, they said, while staying quite low by historical standards.” “On its face, all of that points to an election with dynamics similar to 1988 or 2000, when the nominee of the incumbent party (George H. W. Bush in 1988 and Mr. Gore in 2000) could promise continued prosperity. That bodes well for the Democratic nominee, though as Mr. Gore’s loss despite winning the popular vote shows, even a favorable economy doesn’t assure victory, given the workings of the Electoral College.”

Al Gore also ran AWAY from the Clinton Presidency when he should have embraced it with both arms and legs, while at the same time, George W. Bush pretended that there was no difference between him and Gore (and given an assist by the evil Nader voters) with his "Compassionate Conservative" pitch. So that makes 2000 an outlier in my mind. In 2016, you are going to have Hillary Clinton embracing the Obama record, and the GOP candidate will do everything he can to run away from Obama and push an extremist and radical agenda. And that all benefits Hillary.

USA Today:

We had hoped to pay no attention to the Trump sideshow. But that became harder to do when he jumped to the top of the recent USA TODAY/Suffolk and Fox News polls of Republican voters. Then, over the weekend, Trump's big mouth became, not surprisingly, impossible to ignore. [...] Like meteors that flash across the sky and burn out, flawed candidates have a way of self-destructing. That’s one of the few benefits of our endless, grueling presidential campaigns. The classless attack on McCain might or might not turn out to mark the end of Trump's presidential ambitions. This much is assured: The mouth will keep moving, and one day it will open wide and swallow his candidacy whole.

I will be curious to see if Trump's attack on John McCain this Saturday (which by the way was just like the entire Republican Party's attack on John Kerry in 2004, so it is ok to attack a veteran and question his service so long as that veteran is a Democrat) affects his poll standing at all. Right now, Trump still leads.

It had to happen sooner or later. With his sneering and cynical remarks about John McCain's service and captivity in Vietnam, Trump has brought his candidacy to a close. It…

Four Marines and a gunman were killed in shootings at multiple military sites in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Mayor Andy Berke announced at a Thursday afternoon press conference. The gunman was believed to have acted alone.

No matter what you think about gun control, it is impossible to dispute the fact that our gun laws make it easy for people, who are so inclined, to inflict a lot of damage.

Keith Koffler writes that “despite what you’ve read in the media, even some outposts of the conservative media, these Trump acolytes in general are not racist against Latinos and they have not been seized by madness.”

“They are, however, angry. Very angry. And many are agonizingly fearful about the future of the nation. They believe that vast changes to the country are being wrought in ways that are undemocratic, dishonest and perhaps even illegal. Trump, who seems perpetually angry, is an expression of the angst of conservatives who believe the United States has gotten so deep into a mess that a little extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. What they adore about Trump is that he is a pugilist who has emerged at a time when someone needs to start throwing punches.”

Chris Matthews echoed this on MSNBC recently. That Voters are Angry!!! Well first, which voters? I am not angry. People need to clarify that racist Tea Bagger voters are angry. And yes, they are losing "their" country. That is a good thing. No longer will there be discrimination. We are a multicultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious country now, where there is equality for all and tolerance of all. And if they don't like that, they can go fuck themselves. I really really do not care if their feelings are hurt or if they are angry. In fact, I enjoy it. Their tears are delicious. And if they want to throw punches, I will throw them right back.

According to this Daily Beat piece by Michael Tomasky the ostensible reason Coons is down on diplomacy because it doesn't solve all problems in the middle east tomorrow. That's some transparent bullshit, because nobody ever said that this deal was supposed to solve all middle eastern problems (or even the ones caused by George Bush) with the stroke of a pen. But I think we all know the real reasons. 1) AIPAC says so. and 2) He thinks there is some political/career gain from building up this image as some kind of Dem hawk. I don't get #2, but his track record is pretty clear. h/t a commenter for the link