Hillary Clinton #39;s Reaction to Latte Art Is Priceless
Subscribe to NowThisNews: http://full.sc/1ewEzh6 NowThisNews is the rst and only video news network built for mobile and social users. It #39;s news in your poc...
By: NowThis
Excerpt from:
Hillary Clinton's Reaction to Latte Art Is Priceless - Video
Jeb Bush #39;s Campaign Ends Before it Begins?
The New Year is almost here, and we still don #39;t know who will officially run for President in 2016. The closest we #39;ve seen to official statements come from Democrat, Hillary Clinton, and...
By: NextNewsNetwork
WASHINGTON -- Hillary Clinton has all but been declared the 2016 Democratic nominee. But even a front-runner has to get to the finish line against a field of competitors determined to trip her up.Campaigns have a way of making leading candidatesadapt their positions and talk about issues they'd rather avoid, even as they try to stick to their predetermined message. Clinton will be no exception.
As formidable as she looks right now, there are several politicians playing with the idea of running against her. Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb announced earlier this month that hes forming an exploratory committee. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is registered as an independent and describes himself as a socialist, caucuses with Democrats in the Senate and is considering a campaign. Outgoing Maryland Gov. Martin OMalley has said hes weighing a campaign and will likely announce a decision in the spring. Plus, there is Vice President Joe Biden, who has signaled hell likely stand aside if Clinton runs, but has made little secret of the fact that he would love to drop vice from his title.
Webb and Biden are moderates who could weaken Clinton's sales pitch that she's the only Democrat in the field who is centrist enough to win a general election.
But the politician who might be the most disruptive is one who insists she isn't running. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warrenhas been consistent in saying she won't be a candidate, but that hasn't stopped her fans from encouraging her to challenge Clinton from the left.
Warren is already creatinguncomfortable questionsfor Clinton, pushing her -- and the party -- to address progressives' concerns about income inequality and the power of Wall Street. Warren ruffled feathers in her own party earlier this month when she denounced language in the budget bill that rolled back financial regulations in the Dodd-Frank law. Warren assailed big banks for trying to make risky gambles backed by taxpayer dollars. She singled out Citigroup for criticism -- a firm whose executives were major donors to Clinton's Senate and presidential campaigns.
In Elizabeth Warrens case, if she were to enter the race, she will enter with a pretty big megaphone," said Peter Ubertaccio, a political science professor at Stonehill College in Massachusetts. I think shes more influential by not running and by staying just coy enough, he said. Shes more influential by staying in the Senate, being a superstar in her party and by not having to worry about the mechanics of a presidential campaign. He added, Warren has a really unique and unusual platform right now.
Even as a non-candidate, Warren can keep Clinton on the defensive. If Warren weighs in on a piece of financial legislation or consumer-protection issue, Clinton will be asked if she agrees with the senator.
For Clinton -- who appears to be putting together a presidential campaign that is more disciplinedthan her last -- losing control of her campaign message is dangerous. She doesn't want to create sound bites or campaign positions that can be used against her in the general election. If there are candidates trying to tug her farther to the left, it will be difficult to avoid engaging them.
Party infighting from primaries can create some of the most destructive weapons that get used in a general election. Democrats were happy to repeat Republican criticism of Mitt Romney in 2012 for his time spent working in venture capital. Republicans would gladly return the favor in 2016, using both Warren's arguments and Clinton's responses as ammunition.
Warren isnt the only possible force that will be pulling Clinton to the left. Sanders also enjoys the megaphone that comes with being in the Senate. Plus, hes taking over as the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, so his thoughts on a range of government programs will be fodder for news stories.
See the original post here:
Hillary Clinton 2016: The Democrats Who Could Hurt Her With The Party Base
It has become apparent that if Hillary Clinton faces a crediblechallenge from the left in her effort to win the 2016 Democratic primary, that challenge will come from Elizabeth Warren. ButMs. Warren would almost certainly lose a primary battle against Ms. Clinton, whowouldenjoy a huge advantage in fundraising, organization and name recognition.
Supporters of Ms. Warren are undoubtedly buoyed by the recollection of the 2008 Democratic primary. However, Barack Obamas success against Ms.Clinton in 2008 was almost unprecedented and unlikely to be repeated by Ms. Warren, or anybody else in 2016. Recent primary history is informative. In 1988, 1992 and 2000 a moderate front runnerand Clinton mythology notwithstanding, by early 1992 Bill Clinton was the front-runnerheld off a challenge from a progressive opponent. In 1984, the early favorite, Walter Mondale, won the nomination by handily beating an opponent, Gary Hart, who was not necessarily the progressive alternative, but who ran as the non-establishment type candidate, something Ms. Warren would try to do if she runs in 2016.
Progressive activists who would like to see Ms. Warren run may argue that even if she does not win, shecan benefit from challenging Ms. Clinton, helping to move the party more towards the left and positioning herself for a 2020 candidacy should a Republican win the White Housein 2016. That is an appealing idea, but one that is probably wrong.
Ms. Warren would undoubtedly like to see herparty, particularly on economic issues, move in a different direction. Ms. Warren, noted the New York Times,has been musing with associates in recent weeks about how to keep the party focused on questions of economic fairness, as she did with her unsuccessful attempt to stop a spending bill this month that included language that would benefit banks. However, running for the Democratic nomination, but losing to Ms. Clinton, is no way to do this. Ms. Clinton already knows she is to the right of Democratic activist base on several economic and foreign policy questions. She will either move to the left or not based on what she wants to do, but it is hard to imagine President Hillary Clinton, sitting in the Oval Office in early 2017 after waloppingMs. Warren in a series of Democratic primaries, deciding she therefore needs to govern differently.
Losing to Hillary Clinton in 2016 is not going to help Ms. Warren in 2020 either. If Ms. Clinton wins a contested nomination, but loses the general election, at least some in the party will blame Ms. Warren, creating problems for a Warren 2020 candidacy. Similarly, 2020 is a long way from now and by then there will be new issues and new rising stars in the Party. Elizabeth Warrens moment is probably now, but she is blocked by Ms. Clinton.
The only reason Ms. Warren should run for President is if she thinks she can win; against Hillary Clinton, that will be very difficult. A new Washington Post/ABC poll has both bad news and good news in this regard. The poll shows 63 percent of Democrats support Ms. Clinton for the nomination, a 49 point lead over the second place candidate, Vice President Joseph Biden. Ms. Warren sitsin third place with 11 percent supporting her. This poll indicates that Ms. Clinton is not likely to lose a primary, but that Ms. Warren is in the top tier of the non-Clinton candidates.
For Elizabeth Warren, the best strategy remains being the candidate to whom the party turns should Hillary Clinton decide not to runor more accurately withdraw from the campaign she is already running. That is a frustrating position for Ms. Warren and particularly for her avid supporters, but it is much better than losing badly to Ms. Clinton and hoping that experience magically moves Clinton to the left.
Lincoln Mitchell is national political correspondent at the Observer. Follow him on Twitter @LincolnMitchell.
The rest is here:
Why Elizabeth Warren Would Accomplish Nothing By Challenging Hillary Clinton
Last Wednesday, in a coffeehouse in downtown Des Moines, a group of progressive activists launched an effort they hope will change the 2016 presidential campaign and in the process upend the Democratic Party.
The gathering in Iowa, organized by MoveOn.org and backed by Democracy for America, was the opening of a grass-roots push to draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to run for president. Its broader effect was to escalate the ongoing debate among Democrats about the partys values, its message, its real constituencies and, most of all, how to win elections in the post-Obama era.
That there is such a debate over the direction of the Democratic Party is without question, and the differences have become louder in the wake of the drubbing the Democrats suffered in the midterm elections.
What is in question is the degree to which the rising populist movement on the left can materially shape the partys future. More specifically, absent some sign from Warren that she is going to run, can these Democrats successfully pressure Hillary Rodham Clinton, the partys dominant, prospective presidential candidate, to adopt much of their agenda?
To those who argue that the ideological splits within the party are overstated or mostly stylistic, the effort to draft Warren is a misguided enterprise. There really isnt a huge division in the party, said former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell (D). ... I dont think its anything like the tea party and the Republicans.
Rendell, who two years ago criticized President Obamas campaign for attacking Mitt Romney over his business record at Bain Capital, said he believed most Democrats shared Warrens opposition to a provision favorable to Wall Street in the recently passed spending bill that she attacked on the Senate floor.
Those trying to encourage Warren to run in 2016 argue a different case. Anna Galland, executive director of MoveOn.Org Civic Action, said there are important policy differences that need to be aired before Democrats pick their 2016 nominee.
She cited issues such as how the party should address income inequality, who populates positions of power in the executive branch a cause taken up by Warren when she opposed Obamas nomination of investment banker Antonio Weiss as treasury undersecretary and whether it is even possible for Democrats to have a discussion about expanding, rather than constraining, Social Security benefits. We are not debating style here, she said. We are debating substance.
The power of populism
Populist energy pulsates within the party to the point that Democrats cannot agree on whether it has become its dominant ideological strain. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who has championed a populist message as much as Warren, said: Its a good strong message, and its a message that shes carried very well, and its a message that a number of us have put out there for a number of years, and its catching on. ... I dont think its there yet.
See the rest here:
Democrats see rising populist sentiment. But can it shake Hillary Clinton?