Wednesday Open Thread [1.13.2016]

NATIONAL—CBS/NY Times: Clinton 48, Sanders 41, O’Malley 2
IOWA—Quinnipiac: Sanders 49, Clinton 44, O’Malley 4
IOWA—PPP: Clinton 46, Sanders 40, O’Malley 8
NEW HAMPSHIRE—Monmouth: Sanders 53, Clinton 39, O’Malley 5

NATIONAL—CBS/NY Times: Trump 36, Cruz 19, Rubio 12, Carson 6, Bush 6, Huckabee 4, Christie 3, Fiorina 3, Kasich 2, Paul 1
IOWA—DM Register/Bloomberg: Cruz 25, Trump 22, Rubio 12, Carson 11, Paul 5, Bush 4, Christie 3, Huckabee 3, Kasich 2, Fiorina 2, Santorum 1
IOWA—PPP: Trump 28, Cruz 26, Rubio 13, Carson 8, Bush 6, Paul 3, Christie 3, Huckabee 3, Kasich 3, Fiorina 3, Santorum 2

Dylan Matthews says one of the winners of last night’s State of the Union speech was Hillary Clinton:

Obama has avoided directly intervening in the Democratic primary, even as he and his team obviously prefer Hillary Clinton to Bernie Sanders. But he’s surely noticed that the candidates offer two starkly opposed narratives. Clinton’s is, “Things are generally good. We need improvements here and there, on family leave and the like, but in general the best course of action is to continue the Obama administration’s approach domestically.” Sanders’s narrative, by contrast, is deeply pessimistic: inequality’s rising, the rich hold all the political power, only a wholesale political revolution can save us.

Intentionally or not, the State of the Union served as a stirring endorsement of the Clinton narrative and rejection of the Sanders narrative. He emphasized positive trends in the economy and American accomplishments abroad; he readily conceded more work needed to be done, but mostly stuck to the mild policy proposals he’s included in his recent budgets. As the leader of the party, he effectively told Democratic voters watching that the authentically Democratic position is that things are looking good and need to be maintained. That’s a message that the Clinton camp wants primary voters flirting with Sanders to hear.

Brian Resnick edited the SOTU speech down to 375 words from 5400 words:

I’m going make this short. Instead of a wish list, I’m going to ask four questions of the next president. (Spoiler: I have the answers!)

1) How can we make the economy better?

First, education. Provide two years of free community college for every responsible student. Then strengthen Social Security and Medicare. A wage insurance system would be nice. Let’s think about expanding tax cuts for low-income workers without kids.

2) Can we be technological innovators and stop climate change?

Yes. I put Joe Biden in charge of curing cancer. And we have to keep funding research. We also have to accelerate the transition away from dirty energy. (Though $2 gas ain’t bad!) We should change the way we manage fossil fuels, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers.

3) Can American still lead the world and fight terrorists?

Remember: The fight against ISIL isn’t World War II. But they still have to be destroyed. Which reminds me, Congress: Authorize the use of military force against ISIL. I’m committed. Remember Osama bin Laden? My foreign policy doctrine is this: America will always act, alone if necessary, to protect our people and our allies — but on issues of global concern, let’s get others involved. Now I’ll quickly list some unfinished foreign policy business: Let’s try to end HIV and malaria, and I still need to shut down Guantanamo.

4) Can politics work better?

The rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better during my presidency. I regret that. We need to reject any politics that targets people because of race or religion. (You know who I’m talking about.) Some fixes: End gerrymandering, reduce money in politics, modernize voting, and fight the urge to scapegoat fellow citizens who don’t share the same background.

In conclusion: Americans, vote in the next election. Your voices matter. You’re the reason I have such incredible confidence in our future. I see the best of America in wage earners, DREAMers, teachers, former convicts ( and the business owners who give them a second chance), protesters, cops, soldiers, nurses, LGBTQ kids (and the parents who love them), the elderly, new citizens, and poll volunteers. I’m hopeful because of you. The state of our union is strong.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) accused President Obama of falling “far short of his soaring words” while also cautioning her own party not to fall for its own populist rhetoric, the Wall Street Journal reports.

“Those twin themes dominated Mrs. Haley’s rebuttal to Mr. Obama’s final State of the Union address, with the Republican governor faulting the president for ‘the squeeze of an economy too weak to raise income levels’ and warning her own party against following the anti-immigration rhetoric that has propelled Donald Trump to the lead in GOP presidential election polls.”

I guess Nikki Haley will not be on the VP shortlist for Trump, Rubio or Cruz.

To wit:

Trump should deport Nikki Haley.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) January 13, 2016

Josh Marshall:

The President’s speech was a rebuke to the Trumps and the Cruzes and in a sense probably half the GOP field. But to the country as a whole it was more of a wake up call, a friendly reality check. I don’t know if America’s best economic days are ahead of it. We are clearly declining in relative terms, which isn’t necessarily bad. It just means other countries are rising. It is going to be pretty hard to be as dominant as we were in the 1950s when most of the world was in ruins and we were basically manufacturing everything for everyone. But in the realm of security and the possibilities of the future Obama was right on the mark. The line about Sputnick was an instant classic for a certain kind of American courage and can-do spirit, a certain version of exceptionalism. We do ourselves no favors but wildly exaggerating the threats we face as a country. And we demean ourselves by retreating into the sort of rancid and tribal group hate that Donald Trump now represents.

The oddness of the speech was Obama’s broad indifference to the partisan and even legislative politics of the moment. He wanted to say where he thinks we are as a country, a moment of opportunity and crossroads. Here’s the big picture, he seemed to be saying. We’re fine, we’re strong and we’re safe. We’re still Americans and we can do great things. And I (Obama) think we will do them.

Rick Klein says all three Democratic successors to Obama are running to his left: “Tuesday night marks an opportunity for President Obama to focus on what he’s leaving behind. And the Democratic race to follow him in office isn’t disappointing in terms of honoring his legacy – and reminding his party of what he’s been about. An insurgent candidate is again challenging Hillary Clinton and the establishment, drawing crowds and donors and polling numbers to a big-change message. All three Democratic presidential candidates are running to the president’s left to a great extent, challenging in what’s now unison, for example, his immigration enforcement policies as inhumane. Clinton and Bernie Sanders, the frontrunners, are hitting each other at different angles, but virtually all from the left.”

“At a Fusion forum in Iowa last night and beyond, Clinton is questioning Sanders’ record on gun control, while Sanders is undermining Clinton’s commitment to paid family leave. There won’t be another Obama, not in this election cycle. But his lessons and his legacy have been incorporated into an early but already wild campaign to replace him in office.”

Charlie Cook: “It is worth re­mem­ber­ing that 94 per­cent of the 2,472 Re­pub­lic­an con­ven­tion del­eg­ates are not from the Feb­ru­ary states of Iowa, New Hamp­shire, South Car­o­lina, and Nevada; these del­eg­ates are picked on or after March 1, and the win­ner-take-all states don’t come on­line un­til Flor­ida and Ohio on March 15. Fifty-eight per­cent of del­eg­ates are picked in March, 16 per­cent in April, and 8 per­cent in May, with the fi­nal 12 per­cent in early June.”

Matt Yglesias says last night’s speech was a declaration of victory in the culture war:

Obama said not only that he favored equal marriage rights for gay and straight couples, but that such rights had already been achieved and not just achieved but achieved as the crowning example of the spirit that underlay all the accomplishments of his administration.

And Democrats stood and clapped for it. Not just the ones from New York and California but the ones from Missouri and Virginia and Ohio, too. The underlying structure of public opinion on this issue has completely transformed over the course of Obama’s relatively brief time in the national limelight, and paired with the historic election of a black president it’s given liberals an extraordinary spring in their step.

Obama mentioned policies in his speech and of course policy is and always will be central to what politics is all about. But his key moments were about reclaiming the mantle of American identity for liberalism. He didn’t so much defend his economic policy record as defend the united States, saying simply “America, right now, has the strongest, most durable economy in the world” and daring Republicans not to clap.

Ed Kilgore on the Sanders Surge:

Well, maybe; some hype about his polling revival in Iowa and New Hampshire was definitely going to emerge from Team Bernie, which needed a fresh fix to fuel its Enthusiasm Machine, and from Republicans, for whom any bad news about Hillary Clinton was likely to inspire snake-dancing through the studios of Fox News. But even Clinton’s campaign could find something positive in the new numbers: a big change in the expectations game lowering her bar for success in the first two states.

What we really need to know is whether the Sanders Surge, such as it is, extends beyond New Hampshire to those states where Clinton’s big advantages among minority voters gave her what appeared to be a firewall, even if she lost both of the first two states. Specifically, we could really use more data from Latino-heavy Nevada and African-American-heavy South Carolina, where sparse polling has given Clinton a big lead, and perhaps from some of the March primary states that also have sizable minority populations.

Nikki Haley’s jaw never seems to move.

Steve Benen says the public liked what they heard last night.

For all the mindless chatter about “making America great again,” last night was an opportunity to hear a leader make a powerful case that such talk is unnecessary – because America is already great.

There is a risk that a president delivering a hopeful, optimistic message will seem out of touch, but there’s early evidence that Americans were impressed with what they heard last night. CNN released an overnight poll that found 53% had a “very positive” reaction to the State of the Union address, while another 20% had a somewhat positive reaction. A 68% majority said the policies Obama proposed “would move the country in the right direction.”

Results like these come with important caveats – many of the president’s critics simply don’t tune in – but it nevertheless suggests the hopeful rhetoric landed on fertile soil.

Brian Beutler asks why aren’t Hillary and Bernie pushing the public option?

Paul Waldman breaks down the convoluted fight Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are waging over single payer insurance. The short version is that from what we know of Sanders’ earlier preferences, he’d like to consolidate federally subsidized insurance and create a Canadian-style single payer system, administered at the state level.

Clinton says Sanders’s plan would not only be too expensive (contestable), but would empower conservative states to erode their citizens’ health coverage (also contestable). This is to say nothing of the political feasibility question, which she has not yet broached.

But to the extent that most Democrats (presumably including Clinton) think single-payer is a good idea in theory, the spat is a reminder of how odd it is neither of them has made issue of the public option. The fight over the public option dominated the intra-Democratic ideological fight over Obamacare, and many progressives were embittered when it fell out of the final legislation. But the idea had multi-pronged appeal, and addresses all of the issues at the heart of the Clinton/Sanders dispute.