Tag: 2016 Presidential race

The Clinton Chasm

Hillary Clinton, trust, lie, truthful, Ezra Klein, illustration, VOX

Hillary Clinton is roundly disliked by millions of outsiders, but admired by hundreds of politicians and activists. What sets her apart?

She listens.

Well, that’s Ezra Klein’s take in “Understanding Hillary,” an almost-believable piece of apologetics courtesy of Vox.

He calls Hillary’s problem “The Gap,” though “Vast Chasm” is more like it.

There’s a huge difference between how the public sees her — “Polls show most Americans doubt her basic honesty” — and how her fellow insiders feel about her. “She inspires a rare loyalty in ex-staff,” Klein informs us, “and an unusual protectiveness even among former foes.”

Klein emphasizes Mrs. Clinton’s capacity to talk naturally and listen carefully, when dealing one-on-one with insiders and constituents, and in small groups. “She gets things done,” he asserts, though I think what he really means is she moves her agenda forward. Actual accomplishments? Open to dispute.

On the crucial issue of trust, Klein buys into what Hillary is selling. She says people doubt her because she’s been so often attacked.

I don’t know about you, but I doubt her because . . . well, cattle futures, for starters. Her ridiculous “vast right-wing conspiracy” dodge to all those rich 1990s scandals: the blue dress, President Bill losing his law license, even the crony takeover of the White House travel office. Hillary has led the way more recently with the Benghazi “video” lie and her private server and email scandal. Plus, witness the ongoing conflict presented by the Clinton Foundation raking in millions from unsavory foreign sources..

Klein, on the other hand, argues that the media is against her.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Ezra Klein, Hillary Clinton, Presidential campaign 2016, VOX

Accountability free trade & free markets moral hazard national politics & policies responsibility

It’s the Stupid Economy

HIllary Clinton, Obama, Bill Clinton, economy, election, illustration

When Bill Clinton ran for president, the slogan inside his campaign’s war room was a blunt reminder to focus on “the Economy, Stupid.” This was Clinton’s first enduring contribution to the American stock of catch-phrases.

Now, Bill’s wife, Hillary, seeks the top banana position. But she has a harder job than Bill: he could fight against a lackluster incumbent caught in a big lie (“No New Taxes,” another slogan). Hillary is almost required to defend the outgoing president, in no small part because she served in his Cabinet.

If she were candid, she’d address the weak recovery and long-term stagnation.

Her slogan could be, “It’s the Stupid Economy.”

No matter what politicians say, however, secular (long-term) stagnation is a thing. Lots of people have given up, are off the roles of job-searchers and so don’t appear in official unemployment statistics, and too many people have taken early retirements on trumped-up disability claims.

At least, economist Lawrence Summers is decrying it, jet-setting around the world to meet with financial leaders and political functionaries.

I doubt his diagnosis, however. Summers talks Keynesian, pointing to inadequate aggregate demand. While there may be something to the general shift in the desire to hold monetary assets, leading to deflation and even negative interest rates, I bet the underlying problem is regime uncertainty — when widespread fears of the future and doubts about governmental consistency and follow-through lead the owners of capital to withhold investing in production.

There are also the effects of general regulatory and redistributionist kludge.

When the problems stem from your favored policies, you can’t revive FDR’s slogan “nothing to fear but fear itself” and let it go at that.

Hillary will surely explain — Thursday night.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Bill Clinton, economy, Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama, Presidential campaign 2016

ideological culture media and media people national politics & policies political challengers

MoveOn2Video

Donald Trump is MoveOn.org’s worst nightmare.

The decades-old “left-leaning” organization is still very much a live concern.

The group’s original mission was to urge then-President Bill Clinton’s censure, rather than his impeachment . . . and then “move on” to normal governmental business.

Over the years, the organization has backed “progressive” candidates, and promoted causes like campaign finance reform.

Trump annoys MoveOn folks doubly, I gather. Though he’s super-rich, he parlayed social media to leverage major media to gain billions in free coverage — which is precisely what MoveOn attempts to do.

Trump also sports a tongue that flouts all past decorum, thus making Clinton’s Lewinsky scandal itself seem . . . almost . . . quaint.

Oh, and this: Trump seems to stand for everything MoveOn supporters are against. That is, if you can figure what, precisely, Trump stands for on most issues.

Robert Reich wrote an email, the other day, reveling in his role as a video propagandist for the organization for over a year, but fearing that isn’t enough to defeat Trump. So, he explains, “instead of just producing an online video every few weeks, MoveOn’s gearing up to produce one practically every day.” He writes to pitch for money.

MoveOn’s videos may be very effective — at getting progressive types to hate Trump all the more, and to vote against him.

Less certain is their reach. Can the new professional videographers preach beyond the eager choir?

Oh, and it’s worth noting that this is precisely the kind of thing campaign finance reform is designed to squelch.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Donald Trump, MoveOn.org, Presidential campaign 2016, Robert Reich

crime and punishment First Amendment rights general freedom initiative, referendum, and recall nannyism national politics & policies political challengers responsibility too much government

A Private Party

Donald Trump, delegates, unbound, convention, crime, vote

Virginia delegate Beau Correll won’t cast his first ballot vote at the Republican National Convention for Donald Trump, and won’t go to jail, either.

As discussed last Thursday, at issue is a state statute requiring* delegates to vote for the plurality winner of the party’s primary. On the Republican side, that’s Mr. Trump. Yesterday, Federal Judge Robert Payne ruled the law unconstitutional, no law at all, because it violates Correll’s First Amendment rights to speak and associate politically.

“In sum, where the State attempts to interfere with a political party’s internal governance and operation,” the federal judge wrote, “the party is entirely free to ‘cancel out [the State’s] effort’ (Def. Resp. 28) even though the state has expended financial and administrative resources in a primary.”

Love ’em or hate ’em, political parties are private associations, properly protected by the First Amendment.

But is it fair to hold primary elections, at taxpayers’ expense, and then ignore the votes of so many people?

Easy answer: NO.

Sure, Judge Payne correctly struck this statute, but it doesn’t follow that states must foot the bill for party primaries and national conventions or provide legal preference. Up to now, incumbent politicians have quietly legislated a relationship of too-friendly collusion between government and the major parties.

It’s time for citizens to look at initiatives to mandate separation of political party and state.

More immediately, the implications for the coming GOP convention in Cleveland are obvious and far-reaching. “The Court’s decision,” as Correll’s attorney David Rivkin summarized, “follows more than 40 years of precedent in firmly rejecting Donald Trump’s legal opinion that delegates are obligated by law to vote for him.”

The delegates are free.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* Penalty for non-compliance? One year in prison.

Printable PDF

Original photo credit: Gage Skidmore on Flickr

Tags 2016 Presidential race, delegates, Donald Trump, first amendment, Presidential campaign 2016, Republican, Republican Party, Unbound

Accountability crime and punishment government transparency national politics & policies

The Servers of the Self-Serving

Post author By CS Admin
Post date July 6, 2016
7 Comments on The Servers of the Self-Serving

Hillary Clinton, investigation, FBI, crime, server, email

Feel like Charlie Brown? That football . . . yanked away again.

Yesterday, FBI Director James Comey announced he’s not recommending prosecution of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate.

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” Comey stated, “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” He saw the evidence as not strong enough, “especially regarding intent.”

It doesn’t appear that Mrs. Clinton purposely divulged classified material, though her “intent” in setting up a private server for State Department work was self-centered, and purposely not transparent. She was clearly more concerned with shielding her communications from the U.S. Government and the public, than shielding classified information from the Russians, Chinese, Iranians or ISIS.

While the FBI noted that Clinton and her aides lacked any apparent intent “to violate laws governing the handling of classified information,” the investigation discovered ample “evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Not a sterling report card for someone seeking to be the commander-in-chief.

Donald Trump’s negative standing with voters, 70 percent disapproval in a recent survey, may save Mrs. Clinton. Still, standing in her way remains the fact that a majority of voters just don’t trust her.

That won’t change with yesterday’s news.

“Key assertions by Hillary Clinton in defense of her email practices have collapsed under FBI scrutiny,” read the lead of an Associated Press story, detailing six public statements made by her that the investigation found to be false.

Let’s split the difference: neither prosecute Hillary nor elect her president.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Photo credit: Toms Norde / Valsts kanceleja on Flickr

Tags 2016 Presidential race, crime, emails, FBI, Grand Jury, Hillary Clinton, innocent, Presidential campaign 2016, server

general freedom media and media people national politics & policies

Why, Journalists, Why?

HIllary Clinton, Donald Trump, Gary Johnson, polls, Washington Post, illustration

Complaints about “the mainstream media” are old hat. But that doesn’t mean the complaints have lost validity.

I was struck by this while reading Matt Welch’s warning, at Reason: “Don’t Believe Any Headline Showing Hillary Clinton with a 12-Point Lead over Donald Trump.”

“There is indeed a 51 percent to 39 percent advantage for Clinton over Trump in newly released Washington Post/ABC News poll, conducted from June 20-23,” Welch concedes. “But that same survey also asked the same pool of voters to react to a far more representative ballot, i.e., one that includes Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson . . . and the Green Party’s Jill Stein. . . .”

The point is, leaving out Hillary’s and the Donald’s actual competition from poll results — or from poll questions, for that matter — is tantamount to misreporting. It is, in other words, “bad science” and “journalistic malpractice.”

“Clinton has yet to reach 50 percent when her proper competition is included,” Welch explains, “and Trump hasn’t even cracked 40.”

In the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, Mrs. Clinton was reported to enjoy a seven-point lead, but when voters were offered all likely ballot options, including Johnson, the Libertarian, and Stein, the Green, Hillary bettered Donald by only one point: 39-38 percent.

But why would journalists and editors systematically rig the reporting of politics?

Laziness? Covering four candidates is twice as much work as covering two.

Partisan reasons? The Washington press corps has been embedded with R&D operatives for decades.

Whatever the reason, they’ve missed a huge story: the impact of these minor party candidates is major news.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF