Archive for the ‘Hillary Clinton’ Category

Primaries arent all gravy. Heres who led Florida on Thanksgivings past. – Tampa Bay Times

Thanksgiving Day is 110 days away from Floridas presidential primary. The (relatively few) polls of the state have shown former Vice President Joe Biden leading a three-way race for the Democratic nomination, ahead of Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But theres a political lifetime to go.

Heres a list of who else led their primary races on Thanksgiving Day, and who won in the end:

Though former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton faced a tougher-than-expected challenge from Sanders, her lead in Florida was never in question. The eventual nominees support in Florida climbed above 50 percent in most polls starting in early November, and she didnt look back.

It was always a crowded field in 2016s race for Republican presidential nominee. But Donald Trump, now president, led Florida nearly as soon as he entered the race. For much of November 2015, according to RealClearPolitics, polls of the state showed about 30 percent of voters supporting Trump. On Thanksgiving Day, three other candidates still had double-digit support: Ben Carson (18 percent) and Senators Marco Rubio (17 percent) and Ted Cruz (11 percent).

Remember Herman Cain? The tea party candidate was, in fact, dead-even with Mitt Romney after leading a few polls in early November. Cain and Romney were each polling at around 25 percent in Florida, ahead of Newt Gingrich (14 percent). Romney eventually pulled ahead after Cain was accused of sexual harassment and suspended his campaign two months before the Florida primary and threw his support behind Gingrich.

The 2008 race was the last time a presidential candidate won the Florida primary but did not secure the nomination. Hillary Clinton led in the state from start to finish. Clinton carried a 27-point lead over Barack Obama in Florida on Thanksgiving and later won the state decisively.

Rudy Giuliani, now personal attorney to President Trump, was the early frontrunner for the 2008 Republican primary. Giuliani, who was all-in on Florida, regularly polled ahead of John McCain and Mitt Romney through the end of 2007. On Thanksgiving, he led Romney by 16 points, with McCain in a distant third. But McCain surged in the polls in January and won the state primary on his way to the partys nomination.

At this point in 2003, the Democratic primary was wide open. Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) led the field in Florida with just 21 percent of the state, according to a Mason-Dixon poll in November. His support quickly fell, as he polled at just 15 percent early in December and dropped out in February. John Kerry went on win the state easily.

Al Gore, who was the vice president at the time, had an easy time in the Democratic primary. According to a St. Petersburg Times / Miami Herald poll in November 1999, Gore led Bill Bradley by 22 points in the state at the time.

Then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush jumped out to frontrunner status early and polled at 59 percent in Florida in November 1999, a 35-point lead over John McCain. In the Republican primary, Bush won 44 states and Washington, D.C.

Read more:
Primaries arent all gravy. Heres who led Florida on Thanksgivings past. - Tampa Bay Times

The View From Moscow On The Trump Impeachment Inquiry – NPR

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks at an economic forum in Moscow on Nov. 20. "Thank God no one is accusing us anymore of interfering in the U.S. elections. Now they're accusing Ukraine," he said. Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP hide caption

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks at an economic forum in Moscow on Nov. 20. "Thank God no one is accusing us anymore of interfering in the U.S. elections. Now they're accusing Ukraine," he said.

Last summer, just days before former special prosecutor Robert Mueller publicly warned that the Kremlin would continue its interference in U.S. elections, Russian state television aired a 30-minute special report titled "Ukrainian Interference."

"It's time to start a new investigation into meddling by Ukraine, which from the start supported President Trump's opponent, Hillary Clinton," said reporter Anna Afanasyeva. "So-called Russia-gate is turning into Ukraine-gate."

Weaving insinuation and unsubstantiated claims by Ukrainian lawmakers, the report pushed a narrative Trump had already embraced: that the Ukrainian government had intervened against him in 2016, and that Joe Biden, during his time as vice president, had been involved in a crooked scheme in Ukraine with his son Hunter.

Those accusations are the same ones being made by Trump's Republican allies. Democrats counter that Trump abused his presidential powers when he demanded Ukraine's new president investigate election interference and the Bidens in return for military assistance and a White House visit.

In her Nov. 21 testimony during the House Intelligence Committee's public impeachment hearing, Fiona Hill, Trump's former adviser on Eastern Europe on the National Security Council, admonished Republicans not to fall for the "fictional narrative" of Ukrainian interference spread by Russian intelligence agencies.

"Right now, Russia's security services and their proxies have geared up to repeat their interference in the 2020 election. We are running out of time to stop them," Hill said. "In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests."

The Kremlin has largely refrained from commenting on the hearings. But the focus on Ukraine is a relief after the revelations and indictments of the Mueller investigation.

"Thank God nobody is accusing us anymore of interfering in U.S. elections," Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a Nov. 20 investment conference. "Now they're accusing Ukraine. Well, let them sort this out among themselves."

Putin welcomes the impeachment process, like any political turmoil in Western democracies, says Masha Lipman, a political analyst in Moscow.

"Whenever there is a division, the Kremlin tries to drive a wedge. Whenever there is a weakness, the Kremlin tries to take advantage of it," she says. "The impeachment proceedings certainly do not make America stronger."

Sowing domestic strife in competing nations is a hallmark of Russia's intelligence services, according to the annual report published this week by BIS, the Czech Republic's domestic intelligence agency.

"The key Russian goal is to manipulate decision-making processes and the individuals responsible for the decision-making in order to force the counterparty to conduct activities to weaken itself," the BIS report says.

Even if Russian intelligence agencies keep their tradecraft secret, the narratives that Hill warned about are constantly repeated by Russian government media.

Last Sunday, on state television's flagship "News of the Week" program, host Dmitry Kiselyov called the impeachment hearings "a big political show" and asserted that Trump's enemies were too busy taking him down to ask what exactly the Bidens had been up to in Ukraine.

Putin is hardly indifferent to what happens in U.S.-Ukrainian relations.

For centuries Ukraine was the jewel in the crown of the Russian Empire and later of the Soviet Union. The mere prospect of Ukraine joining the European Union and NATO was enough to make Putin seize the strategic Crimean Peninsula and foment an armed insurgency in the east of the country in 2014.

By accident rather than design, Ukraine is playing a supporting role in Washington's impeachment drama. But for Russia, which way Ukraine goes is of central importance. Every misstep by Ukraine's pro-Western leaders is covered obsessively by Russian state TV, as if to demonstrate the perils of an alliance with powerful but fickle friends.

In early November, Putin said Ukraine shouldn't seek its fortune "overseas" and instead should learn to live with its neighbors. He was referring to his first meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, planned for next month in Paris.

Before his fateful July 25 phone call with the U.S. president, Zelenskiy suggested including Trump in talks with Putin as a way of increasing pressure on the Kremlin to end the five-year conflict in eastern Ukraine. Now, with Washington consumed by the impeachment process, Zelenskiy is more isolated than before.

French President Emmanuel Macron, who will host the Putin-Zelenskiy summit, has been advocating for a rapprochement with Russia in recent months. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who will also attend the meeting, is concerned with domestic political issues as she finishes her last term in office.

Washington's distraction by the Ukraine scandal, combined with a growing rift between the U.S. and its European allies, may embolden Putin.

The Kremlin has always denied that it interfered in the last U.S. presidential election or plans to do so in the future. During a panel discussion in Moscow in October, the moderator asked Putin whether Russia is attempting to influence the 2020 U.S. elections.

Putin put his hand next to his mouth and said in a conspiratorial voice: "I'll tell you a secret. We'll definitely do it, just to keep you amused. But you won't tell anyone, OK?"

The hall erupted in applause.

View original post here:
The View From Moscow On The Trump Impeachment Inquiry - NPR

Without Justice There is No Peace, and We Must Remember That – The Sideline Observer

You can tell a lot about a crowd by the things they do and dont chant at a given rally. In 2016, following Hillary Clintons loss, the streets of Denver Colorado chanted not my president or her body her choice. Not bad, right? But when I and a group of friends began a chorus of black lives matter at the same rally, it didnt catch on. We would get looks, maybe two or three supporters, then a swell of pro-choice or pro-Hillary chanting. They would shout their frustrations for Hillary Clinton but racism was apparently a bridge too far. I knew then what crowd I was in.

My personal favorite chant goes like this. No justice, no peace, over and over. Its a chant like this that the world needs to hear. But its just the sort of thing Im sure would get drowned out in a crowd of well-meaning folks.

NO JUSTICE NO PEACE, AND I MEAN THAT.

You can tell a lot about a crowd by the things they do and dont chant at a given rally. In 2016, following Hillary Clintons loss, the streets of Denver Colorado chanted not my president or her body her choice. Not bad, right? But when I and a group of friends began a chorus of black lives matter at the same rally, it didnt catch on. We would get looks, maybe two or three supporters, then a swell of pro-choice or pro-Hillary chanting. They would shout their frustrations for Hillary Clinton but racism was apparently a bridge too far. I knew then what crowd I was in.

My personal favorite chant goes like this. No justice, no peace, over and over. Its a chant like this that the world needs to hear. But its just the sort of thing Im sure would get drowned out in a crowd of well-meaning folks.

For most people, Donald Trump is more of a psychological problem than a physical one. Hes a tangible threat, but thats not what bothers people. Just think, what are his policy positions that bother you? The wall, with all its pomp and vitriol, as a psychological reminder of an inhumane America? How about the quiet but dogged and systematic removal of environmental protections? Do you hate the caging of children on the border as a stain on American idealism more than how legal immigration has been decimated? Are you mad that things feel bad, that the chaos of the world is spilling over into your living room every day, or are you mad about the facts on the ground? I know there are many people that feel upset about both, but I surmise many Americans are not unsettled by the injustice but by a sudden disturbance in what was once a peaceful life.

How can we know when calls for justice arent genuine? Part of it is the chants at protests. But another part is what makes it on television and which candidates are appealing to voters. As of now, Joe Biden is in the lead, followed by Elizabeth Warren, then Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden has promised nothing would fundamentally change proving to be a perfect example of my point. There is a disturbingly large amount of people content with anyone but Trump because they dont care about change but simply about going back to Obama era brunch and bliss. Elizabeth Warren also reflects this ethos. Warren gives people the hope that there could be change, but she is promising to do it within Washington using the best plans and compromises. She isnt the yelling old man the media has often portrayed Sanders as and shes not demanding people become re-engaged in the political process. Shes planning on going to Washington to fight for us not with us.

Sanders, however, is the media-described Trump of the left. And while its flat wrong to compare them in demagoguery, they do share populism. Sanders is calling for a fight, promising to be in our faces asking us for something. Hes asking people to get mad, but for liberal voters who have strung themselves from one high-rage CNN headline to the next, thats the last thing they want. People are exhausted, they want a break.

The left often totes that Obama was the least scandal-ridden president in history, and theyre right, but that does not say anything about the amount of justice achieved. Never mind that he continued mass surveillance, proliferated natural gas exploitation, was the deporter-in-chief to many, or rained hellfire on the Middle East every day of his administration. Everything was okay because nobody had to hear about it. This quiet peace is the goal of the modern democratic party, as Martin Luther King declared it would be long ago in his letter from a Birmingham county jail. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negros great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice;

The world yearns to go back to its negative peace.

The problem with this path to peace is that it will never come. Peace does not come through denial but by facing your demons and winning. America will not have peace because it does not deserve peace. Even if voters elect a peace-promising candidate, the news will still be a frenzy, the streets will be a frenzy, and the world will be a frenzy. The time is not coming where your kids can go back to school worry-free of shootings or the coming ecological collapse. That time is many years from now, and the only way itll come any faster is if you get to work now. Trump was elected in 2016 because all is not well on the Western front, and we cant pretend it is. We wont get justice, and when Trump wins in 2020, we wont get peace either. So next time you hear me chanting, dont ignore it, decide to join me. No justice, no peace. No justice, no peace. No justice, no peace.

For most people, Donald Trump is more of a psychological problem than a physical one. Hes a tangible threat, but thats not what bothers people. Just think, what are his policy positions that bother you? The wall, with all its pomp and vitriol, as a psychological reminder of an inhumane America? How about the quiet but dogged and systematic removal of environmental protections? Do you hate the caging of children on the border as a stain on American idealism more than how legal immigration has been decimated? Are you mad that things feel bad, that the chaos of the world is spilling over into your living room every day, or are you mad about the facts on the ground? I know there are many people that feel upset about both, but I surmise many Americans are not unsettled by the injustice but by a sudden disturbance in what was once a peaceful life.

How can we know when calls for justice arent genuine? Part of it is the chants at protests. But another part is what makes it on television and which candidates are appealing to voters. As of now, Joe Biden is in the lead, followed by Elizabeth Warren, then Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden has promised nothing would fundamentally change proving to be a perfect example of my point.

There is a disturbingly large amount of people content with anyone but Trump because they dont care about change but simply about going back to Obama-era brunch and bliss. Elizabeth Warren also reflects this ethos. Warren gives people the hope that there could be change, but she is promising to do it within Washington using the best plans and compromises. She isnt the yelling old man the media has often portrayed Sanders as and shes not demanding people become re-engaged in the political process. Shes planning on going to Washington to fight for us not with us.

Sanders, however, is the media-described Trump of the left. And while its flat wrong to compare them in demagoguery, they do share populism. Sanders is calling for a fight, promising to be in our faces asking us for something. Hes asking people to get mad, but for liberal voters who have strung themselves from one high-rage CNN headline to the next, thats the last thing they want. People are exhausted, they want a break.

The left often totes that Obama was the least scandal-ridden president in history, and theyre right, but that does not say anything about the amount of justice achieved. Never mind that he continued mass surveillance, proliferated natural gas exploitation, was the deporter-in-chief to many, or rained hellfire on the Middle East every day of his administration. Everything was okay because nobody had to hear about it.

This quiet peace is the goal of the modern democratic party, as Martin Luther King declared it would be long ago in his letter from a Birmingham county jail. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negros great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice;

The world yearns to go back to its negative peace.

The problem with this path to peace is that it will never come. Peace does not come through denial but by facing your demons and winning. America will not have peace because it does not deserve peace. Even if voters elect a peace-promising candidate, the news will still be a frenzy, the streets will be a frenzy, and the world will be a frenzy. The time is not coming where your kids can go back to school worry-free of shootings or the coming ecological collapse.

That time is many years from now, and the only way itll come any faster is if you get to work now. Trump was elected in 2016 because all is not well on the Western front, and we cant pretend it is. We wont get justice, and when Trump wins in 2020, we wont get peace either. So next time you hear me chanting, dont ignore it, decide to join me. No justice, no peace. No justice, no peace. No justice, no peace.

See the rest here:
Without Justice There is No Peace, and We Must Remember That - The Sideline Observer

Redskins So Bad Their Tickets Are Cheaper Than A Hillary Clinton Speaking Tour Event – The Daily Wire

The Washington Redskins are performing so poorly this season that tickets to their game this Sunday against the Detroit Lions are selling for as little as $5.

GameTime Tickets is selling standing-room only tickets to the game for $5 each, a slight increase from the $4 they were selling for on Thursday. WUSA9 reported that StubHub and Vivid Seats are also selling tickets at such a low price, while even Ticketmaster has tickets available for just $6.

The Redskins have won just one game this season against the Miami Dolphins. At the time the two teams played each other, neither had won a game. The Dolphins have now won two games, while the Redskins remain 1-9. The only NFL team with a worse record this season is the Cincinnati Bengals, who havent won a single game.

The Lions may not be one of the top teams this year (again), but they have at least won three games (and tied one against the Arizona Cardinals).

WUSA9 also reported that this is one of the Redskins worst seasons in franchise history, and is on track to be their worst season of all time. In 1961, the team had their worst season, winning just one game and tying in another.

Observant news consumers may recall that $5 is even cheaper than what Hillary Clinton sold tickets for during her disastrous post-election loss tour with husband and former president Bill. As The Daily Wires Emily Zanotti reported in May 2019, tickets to the couples joint book tour were selling for just $6 at one point. Tickets for the event at some venues originally cost as much as $1,700, but by the end of the tour, venues struggled to fill seats, slashing prices by huge margins. Those expensive seats were dropped to about $800 for the Seattle event. More from Zanotti:

Secondary ticket marketplace, StubHub, has tickets for Saturday evenings show in LAavailable for a mere $6 and thats for a floor seat. Similar-priced tickets are available in the arenas first and second bowls. The best ticket currently available on StubHub a third row, middle, floor section seat is just $47.50.

Parking at LAs Forum Theater may actually cost you more than seeing the main event.

Zanotti also reported that attendance was so poor in Toronto that organizers of the event began reassigning seats and blacking out empty sections with curtains to make the event seem more crowded. People who bought cheap tickets were even moved up closer to fill in gaps in the audience.

Clintons tour came after a blockbuster tour by former First Lady Michelle Obama, which sold out venues and was hailed as a success. Clintons, by contrast, was a massive failure for the two-time presidential candidate and former secretary of state.

Congratulations, Redskins, youre the Hillary Clinton of the NFL.

As WUSA9 reported, blame for the teams failure can be reliably placed on team owner Dan Snyder and fired coach Jay Gruden. Clinton continues to blame everyone but herself for her own failures.

Read the original here:
Redskins So Bad Their Tickets Are Cheaper Than A Hillary Clinton Speaking Tour Event - The Daily Wire

Breaking out of the gender straitjacket: Hillary Clinton gives a masterclass on women and power – Wales Online

It was a real honour to be part of a tremendous panel at Swansea University last week.

The event was called Gutsy Welsh Women.

Now, Ive been called a lot of things in my life and this is one of the kindest, so Im certainly not going to complain about the gutsy label.

The gusty women on the platform included the Welsh Government education minister Kirsty Williams, who recalled the young girl from Carmarthenshire who joined the Liberal Democrats at 15, was one of the first intake of AMs in 1999 and rose to become party leader and a government minister.

Also, the indomitable lawyer and academic Professor Elwen Evans, who led the prosecution in the April Jones murder case and the defence in the Gleision mine disaster case. Elwen talked about her early years at the bar when she was told by a senior male colleague that women were good for just two things in life. Yes, honestly...

But this panel was no feminist moan fest. I hope its not immodest to say that all four panel members have managed to carve out successful careers, despite the deep-seated sexism and entrenched misogyny that poisons most sectors, from sport to law to politics.

It struck me that we all said rather similar things about our career paths and the role models who had influenced us. We talked about the self-belief that our families had given us as small girls that, in turn, instilled in us the ambition and confidence to follow our dreams.

The football-mad young girl growing up in Bridgend never dreamt she would captain her country for the simple reason that there was no recognised womens international team at the time.

Meanwhile, the wait goes on for a woman President and a female First Minister. The truth is, in seeking to achieve our goals, women have had to campaign to create or change the structures constructed by and for men. Thats simply not true for most boys and men.

Of course, it was Hillary Rodham Clinton, lawyer, senator, defeated US presidential candidate, gender and human rights campaigner, who was the magnet for the huge crowd in Swansea Bay last week.

Now, Hillary (it seems right to use her first name here, given the warmth and genuine interest and regard she displayed for the people she met there) isnt everyones cup of tea and thats an under-statement! In the current climate, it hardly needs saying that most prominent politicians divide opinion pretty starkly.

But Hillary is in a different league. Shes admired, adored and revered by plenty, positively reviled, abused and detested by others. Im less interested in the claims and counter-claims of what she did or didnt do.

The political power game is a filthy, brutal business, as we have witnessed everywhere these past three years. And we are in no position to slate US politics. We might be on the brink of electing a prime minister whose comments and behaviour would have seen him summarily dismissed from many workplaces. People, stones, glass houses?

Whats more interesting for me is trying to assess how Hillary Clinton has been treated compared to men who have trod similar paths in public life. In a recent In Conversation with former Australian Prime Minister and Barry girl Julia Gillard, she described the very narrow path that women leaders are expected to tread.

This means a very delicate balancing act - stray too widely off the path and a woman will be accused of overambition, arrogance and abrasiveness. Stick too narrowly to the centre of the path and she is stale, uninspiring and unsuited to leadership. Wow, that 2016 presidential path must have felt like a tightrope over the Grand Canyon for Senator Clinton and all with hungry sharks prowling underneath.

Up against a gigantic, puffed-up, ultra-alpha male with limited political experience, a big mouth and multiple allegations of wandering hands to his name, its hardly surprising that Hillarys navigation of the route to the top was dissected so brutally.

I watched again the video of Trump physically stalking Clinton on stage in that notorious presidential TV debate. That has to be one of the weirdest and most disturbing things Ive ever observed in modern politics. Even scarier was that the behaviour seemed not to have been denounced by everyone. Apparently, the US public was evenly split as to who won that debate.

So, clearly, these are the new operating rules of the political game. But there is a very thin line between that kind of posturing intimidation and much more sinister types.

There was lots that resonated in the Gusty Women panel.

Hillary talked about the tightly-restricted expectations of women in power. This is a wholly one-dimensional DNA, an uncomfortable straitjacket for how women should behave, how we should speak, how we should relate to the men already there.

It doesnt take a genius to work out this is deliberate - a way of conditioning and controlling women. Regrettably, in my experience, its also a strategy that some women have bought into. Behaving in public office like an emotional IQ-deprived man or pulling up the ladder behind us feels even more unforgivable when it comes from a female leader.

Hillary talked about the influence of her family, many of whom on both sides came from Wales, and especially how there had been a huge focus on education that she felt came from her mothers lack of schooling.

In these increasingly troubled times, education is our only hope as far as I can see. Id be happy to see an Assembly election in 2021 that focuses entirely on schools and how to better invest in and improve them. Surely this is our best strategy for a better future, where theres a chance of creating the rounded, critical, engaged, healthy, active, interested citizens of the future who vote, who can dissect fake news and political lies, and who can challenge authority and power.

Hillary also talked about the importance of basic values like respect, empathy, kindness and compassion. All of this is blindingly obvious and sounds a little trite, but these are fundamentals for good leadership, especially in divided times.

Its very easy to spout good words from a platform, much harder to walk the walk. Its a rudimentary and impressionistic measurement, of course, but what I liked best about Hillary Clinton was that she displayed these human values in spades as she engaged with the students, staff and guests at Swansea.

So whatever you think of her (to be honest, in a week when we qualified for our second successive European championships, her comment that her election campaign slogan stronger together was a secret tribute to the Welsh football team would have been enough for me!), Hillary Clinton is the ultimate gutsy woman.

Since that panel discussion, Ive reflected on why Hillary generates such strong feelings (affection and admiration, but anger and abuse in equal measure). Ive tried to be as dispassionate and objective as anyone can be in my assessment but, you know, to paraphrase Ali G, I think its because she is a woman.

Develop resilience and do what you have to do when you have to do it, Hillary told the audience.

Thats revealing as, while its what most of us have had to do to be successful in our fields, its still a million times more acceptable a behaviour code for men than it is for women.

Three years ago, Hillary Rodham Clinton was on the brink of breaking the highest, thickest, toughest political glass ceiling there is. And there lies the problem. Gutsy women are tolerated when they toe the line, know their limits, stay firmly on that narrow path and dont get above their station.

Hillary didnt heed this advice and tried to break out of the gender straitjacket and look what happened. But that absolutely mustnt stop us from encouraging other girls and women to follow in her footsteps if we are to ultimately widen that path to power.

ALSO BY LAURA:

Read more from the original source:
Breaking out of the gender straitjacket: Hillary Clinton gives a masterclass on women and power - Wales Online