hotair--2020-01-26--Reports: Kobe Bryant killed in helicopter crash (Updates)

Los Angeles Lakers legend Kobe Bryant is dead in a helicopter crash .
Via Los Angeles Times : Kobe Bryant , the legendary basketball star who spent 20 years with the Los Angeles Lakers , was killed Sunday when the helicopter he was traveling in crashed and burst into flames Sunday morning amid foggy conditions in the hills above Calabasas , sources told the L.A. Times .
The crash occurred shortly before 10 a.m. near Las Virgenes Road , south of Agoura Road , according to a watch commander for the Los Angeles County Sheriff ’ s Department .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it difficult for firefighters and emergency personnel to get to the aircraft , he said .
Sources at the scene said they believed there were multiple fatalities , but the exact number was unclear .
Compounding the issue , TMZ reports that Bryant ’ s reps said his 13-year-old daughter was killed in the crash also .
I was never a Lakers fan or a Bryant fan ( # MFFL ) but the man was so talented as a basketball player .
He was respected by all his peers , even if he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Bryant also matured as a player , according to former Head Coach Phil Jackson , and became more team first instead of “ me first.
” The fact it also happened the day after LeBron James passed Bryant for third all-time in NBA scoring is just shocking too .
Bryant ’ s last tweet was praising James for his basketball play .
More will obviously be released as the investigation to the crash begins , but wow…RIP Kobe .
More information and reaction is starting to be released .
Los Angels County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nine people were on board the craft but declined to identify them until the Coroner ’ s Office finishes their work and next of kin is notified .
Orange Coast College baseball coach John Altobelli also died in the crash .
He was with the Pirates for 24 seasons .
The NBA , player ’ s association , and Magic Johnson also posted statements regarding Bryant ’ s death : This is how the San Antonio Spurs and Toronto Raptors started their game today .

Los Angeles Lakers legend Kobe Bryant is dead in a helicopter crash. Via Los Angeles Times:
Kobe Bryant, the legendary basketball star who spent 20 years with the Los Angeles Lakers, was killed Sunday when the helicopter he was traveling in crashed and burst into flames Sunday morning amid foggy conditions in the hills above Calabasas, sources told the L.A. Times. The crash occurred shortly before 10 a.m. near Las Virgenes Road, south of Agoura Road, according to a watch commander for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The crash ignited a brush fire and made it difficult for firefighters and emergency personnel to get to the aircraft, he said. Sources at the scene said they believed there were multiple fatalities, but the exact number was unclear.
ESPN also confirmed the 41-year-old’s death.
Kobe Bryant is among those dead in a helicopter crash outside Los Angeles, a source confirms to ESPN. — Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) January 26, 2020
Compounding the issue, TMZ reports that Bryant’s reps said his 13-year-old daughter was killed in the crash also.
This…this is pretty shocking.
I was never a Lakers fan or a Bryant fan (#MFFL) but the man was so talented as a basketball player. He was respected by all his peers, even if he and Shaq enjoyed biting at each other. Bryant also matured as a player, according to former Head Coach Phil Jackson, and became more team first instead of “me first.”
The fact it also happened the day after LeBron James passed Bryant for third all-time in NBA scoring is just shocking too.
Bryant’s last tweet was praising James for his basketball play.
Continuing to move the game forward @KingJames. Much respect my brother 💪🏾 #33644 — Kobe Bryant (@kobebryant) January 26, 2020
More will obviously be released as the investigation to the crash begins, but wow…RIP Kobe.
UPDATE: (Taylor)
More information and reaction is starting to be released.
Los Angels County Sheriff Alex Villanueva told reporters this afternoon nine people were on board the craft but declined to identify them until the Coroner’s Office finishes their work and next of kin is notified.
Orange Coast College baseball coach John Altobelli also died in the crash. He was with the Pirates for 24 seasons.
The NBA, player’s association, and Magic Johnson also posted statements regarding Bryant’s death:
NBA commissioner Adam Silver released this statement. “For 20 seasons, Kobe showed us what is possible when remarkable talent blends with an absolute devotion to winning. He was one of the most extraordinary players in the history of our game.” pic.twitter.com/7uVPwEIN3j — Tania Ganguli (@taniaganguli) January 26, 2020
NBPA Statement on the passing of Kobe Bryant pic.twitter.com/iWDBcV7c2N — NBPA (@TheNBPA) January 26, 2020
I love him, his family and what he stood for on the court and off the court. — Earvin Magic Johnson (@MagicJohnson) January 26, 2020
This is how the San Antonio Spurs and Toronto Raptors started their game today.


hotair--2020-01-26--Andrew Yang on FNC: Democrats have to talk to everyone

Good news for Andrew Yang – he has qualified to participate in the New Hampshire Democrat primary debate .
The bad news for Andrew Yang – he is still at the bottom of the heap of Democrat candidates .
Yang recently criticized the DNC for rejecting a Democrat debate on Fox News Channel ( FNC ) .
At the time , DNC Chairman Tom Perez justified the decision based on the coziness between President Trump and some of the anchors on FNC .
It is a fact that no one disputes , especially Trump ’ s relationships with the nighttime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sean Hannity , and Laura Ingraham .
Ingraham was even reported to have been considered for a job in the Trump administration .
Perez seems to have based his decision on the opinion anchors , which is unfortunate .
The other opinion show hosts on cable news channels all lean left , some rabidly so .
Is Perez not confident enough in the party ’ s candidates to face objective or conservative-leaning debate hosts ?
Apparently that is the case .
In the minds of the left , one cable news channel that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must lean left and promote groupthink .
This , by the way , is why FNC is the most-watched cable network .
There is a market for half of the country that doesn ’ t want to swallow Democrat talking points 24/7 .
And , Independents are a part of FNC ’ s audience .
Andrew Yang gets it .
He thinks candidates should talk to everyone .
“ How can you win an election and bring the country together if you literally won ’ t talk to 40 or 50 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the debates specifically and said if he was in the DNC , he would ’ ve “ jumped ” at the opportunity to do a debate on Fox : “ Let me show my candidates to people who generally watch Fox News.
” “ But the DNC turned it down !
” Yang said .
“ I was like , ‘ What are you doing ?
’ ” He ’ s right , of course .
It ’ s also just lazy for Democrat candidates to avoid FNC interviews .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ venues solidly in the Democrat camp than to go and try to bring in conservative or independent voters .
It ’ s short-sighted , too because the winning candidate will need independent or swing voters to win the general election in 2020 .
I watch the Sunday talking heads shows and conservatives are underrepresented on all of them , except Fox News Sunday .
Conservative politicians do , though , sit for interviews on all of the shows .
For example , Senator Mike Braun of Indiana was on NBC ’ s Meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was CBS ’ s Face the Nation .
They were answering questions about impeachment , the topic du jour .
Andrew Yang was the guest on Fox News Sunday this week .
Some of the Democrat candidates appear on FNC .
I can say I ’ ve seen interviews – mostly on Special Report with Bret Baier or Martha MacCallum ’ s show – with Amy Klobuchar , John Delaney , Tom Steyer , and Pete Buttigieg .
Buttigieg is doing a town hall with FNC tonight in Iowa .
All of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town hall but few have taken the opportunity .
Yang did , as did Klobuchar , and even Bernie Sanders did .
It just makes sense .
Yang didn ’ t qualify for the Democrat debate in Iowa this month but he will be on the debate stage in New Hampshire on February 7 .
To qualify , candidates need to hit 5 percent in four polls approved by the Democratic National Committee ( or 7 percent in two polls in New Hampshire , Nevada or South Carolina ) and receive donations from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates can automatically qualify by winning at least one pledged delegate to the Democratic convention out of the Iowa caucuses .
He hit that polling mark in two separate polls released Sunday , and has long cleared the donor mark .
He isn ’ t at the top of the polling but he is hanging in there .
He ’ s gaining name recognition , if nothing else .
In a Washington Post/ABC News national poll conducted by Langer Research , Yang was at 7 percent among Democratic adults and Democratic-leaning independents surveyed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at 28 percent to Sanders ’ 24 percent .
Warren was at 11 percent , Mike Bloomberg was at 8 percent and Buttigieg was at 5 percent , the last candidate at or above that mark .
A second poll released on Sunday got Yang past the polling threshold .
In a CNN/University of New Hampshire poll in the Granite State , Sanders was at 25 percent .
Biden was at 16 percent , Buttigieg was at 15 percent and Warren was at 12 percent .
Klobuchar was at 6 percent and Tulsi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent .
Yang knows he has the opportunity to appeal to swing voters .
He ’ s not a crazy leftist like most of the other candidates , even his $ 1,000 monthly entitlement proposal ( Universal Basic Income ) pales in comparison to other proposals we ’ ve heard this election cycle .
He ’ s a Democrat and I wouldn ’ t vote for any Democrat but he ’ s less scary than most .
It still looks like a contest between Biden and Bernie for the 2020 nomination and Trump @ @ @ @ @ @

Good news for Andrew Yang – he has qualified to participate in the New Hampshire Democrat primary debate. The bad news for Andrew Yang – he is still at the bottom of the heap of Democrat candidates.
Yang recently criticized the DNC for rejecting a Democrat debate on Fox News Channel (FNC). At the time, DNC Chairman Tom Perez justified the decision based on the coziness between President Trump and some of the anchors on FNC. It is a fact that no one disputes, especially Trump’s relationships with the nighttime opinion show hosts – Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham. Ingraham was even reported to have been considered for a job in the Trump administration. Perez seems to have based his decision on the opinion anchors, which is unfortunate. The other opinion show hosts on cable news channels all lean left, some rabidly so. Is Perez not confident enough in the party’s candidates to face objective or conservative-leaning debate hosts? Apparently that is the case.
“Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates.”
In the minds of the left, one cable news channel that leans right is unacceptable. All channels must lean left and promote groupthink. This, by the way, is why FNC is the most-watched cable network. There is a market for half of the country that doesn’t want to swallow Democrat talking points 24/7. And, Independents are a part of FNC’s audience. Andrew Yang gets it. He thinks candidates should talk to everyone. “How can you win an election and bring the country together if you literally won’t talk to 40 or 50 percent of the population?”
.@AndrewYang says Democrats should be going on Fox News and criticizes the DNC for not letting the channel host a Democratic debate: "How can you win an election and bring the country together if you literally won't talk to 40 or 50% of the population?" https://t.co/F9xWFIU08W pic.twitter.com/U1ZglSxM19 — CBS News (@CBSNews) January 24, 2020
He then brought up the debates specifically and said if he was in the DNC, he would’ve “jumped” at the opportunity to do a debate on Fox: “Let me show my candidates to people who generally watch Fox News.” “But the DNC turned it down!” Yang said. “I was like, ‘What are you doing?’”
He’s right, of course. It’s also just lazy for Democrat candidates to avoid FNC interviews. It’s a lot easier to go to venues solidly in the Democrat camp than to go and try to bring in conservative or independent voters. It’s short-sighted, too because the winning candidate will need independent or swing voters to win the general election in 2020.
I watch the Sunday talking heads shows and conservatives are underrepresented on all of them, except Fox News Sunday. Conservative politicians do, though, sit for interviews on all of the shows. For example, Senator Mike Braun of Indiana was on NBC’s Meet the Press and Senator Tom Cotton on was CBS’s Face the Nation. They were answering questions about impeachment, the topic du jour. Andrew Yang was the guest on Fox News Sunday this week.
Some of the Democrat candidates appear on FNC. I can say I’ve seen interviews – mostly on Special Report with Bret Baier or Martha MacCallum’s show – with Amy Klobuchar, John Delaney, Tom Steyer, and Pete Buttigieg. Buttigieg is doing a town hall with FNC tonight in Iowa. All of the candidates have been offered time for a town hall but few have taken the opportunity. Yang did, as did Klobuchar, and even Bernie Sanders did. It just makes sense.
Yang didn’t qualify for the Democrat debate in Iowa this month but he will be on the debate stage in New Hampshire on February 7.
To qualify, candidates need to hit 5 percent in four polls approved by the Democratic National Committee (or 7 percent in two polls in New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina) and receive donations from at least 225,000 individuals. Alternatively, candidates can automatically qualify by winning at least one pledged delegate to the Democratic convention out of the Iowa caucuses. He hit that polling mark in two separate polls released Sunday, and has long cleared the donor mark.
He isn’t at the top of the polling but he is hanging in there. He’s gaining name recognition, if nothing else.
In a Washington Post/ABC News national poll conducted by Langer Research, Yang was at 7 percent among Democratic adults and Democratic-leaning independents surveyed. In the poll, Biden was at 28 percent to Sanders’ 24 percent. Warren was at 11 percent, Mike Bloomberg was at 8 percent and Buttigieg was at 5 percent, the last candidate at or above that mark. A second poll released on Sunday got Yang past the polling threshold. In a CNN/University of New Hampshire poll in the Granite State, Sanders was at 25 percent. Biden was at 16 percent, Buttigieg was at 15 percent and Warren was at 12 percent. Klobuchar was at 6 percent and Tulsi Gabbard and Yang were each at 5 percent.
Yang knows he has the opportunity to appeal to swing voters. He’s not a crazy leftist like most of the other candidates, even his $1,000 monthly entitlement proposal (Universal Basic Income) pales in comparison to other proposals we’ve heard this election cycle. He’s a Democrat and I wouldn’t vote for any Democrat but he’s less scary than most. It still looks like a contest between Biden and Bernie for the 2020 nomination and Trump is likely to be re-elected.


hotair--2020-01-26--Four new polls of Iowa and New Hampshire: Bernie, Bernie, Bernie, Bernie

Democrats are really gon na do this , huh ?
I ’ m imagining Barack Obama looking at these new polling numbers and contemplating his legacy : A wipeout of Democrats in federal and state races by 2016 , the election of a Republican president whom O himself allegedly describes as a “ fascist , ” and the increasing likelihood that his own party will choose an out-and-out socialist as its next nominee .
In time , the Obama/Romney contest of 2012 may come to be seen as the last non- “ European ” election America had for many years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything ’ s coming up Bernie in Iowa : Elizabeth Warren ’ s loss is Sanders ’ s gain , unsurprisingly , as the Times notes that she ’ s lost seven points since October while Bernie has gained six .
Partly that ’ s due to young Democrats defecting from her camp to his .
But another part may be perceived electability , ironically the core dispute between her and Bernie in their now famous 2018 conversation about whether a woman can beat Trump .
Ask Biden and Sanders supporters if their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ POTUS this fall and 80 percent or so of each group says yes .
Ask Warren supporters the same question about their candidate and the number drops to … 51 percent .
It ’ s hard to see a Warren comeback in Iowa and New Hampshire if late deciders think she ’ s DOA against Trump .
( Although , interestingly , she fares slightly less badly in Iowa matched up with the president , trailing 47/42 , than Bernie does .
He trails 48/42 . )
Bernie ’ s seven-point lead in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any candidate in Iowa since mid-November , when the Buttigieg boomlet was in full swing .
Sanders is now the frontrunner there according to the two most highly regarded polls of the state ; the Des Moines Register also found him leading at the beginning of the month , albeit narrowly .
Even so , Iowa remains a jump ball , with Biden having led in two of the three most recent surveys .
He still leads Bernie in the RCP average , in fact , but now by less than a point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CBS , in fact , Sanders ahead by exactly one point : It could go either way next Monday , although CBS makes a smart point in its story about how the 15-percent threshold for delegates could end up benefiting Bernie .
There are actually two ballots on caucus night , with the initial vote designed to see how many candidates have at least 15 percent support .
Supporters of any candidate who falls short of that number on the first vote can then switch to a different candidate on the second ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that rule potentially , as one would assume most of Amy Klobuchar ’ s more moderate backers will switch to him on the second vote .
But Sanders could benefit enormously if Warren come up just shy of the threshold at 14 percent or so , freeing her progressive fans to stampede over to Bernie .
He might win going away .
For the moment , though , it ’ s close in Iowa .
Is the same true in New Hampshire ?
New from CNN : Again we find Bernie ahead and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bleeding liberal support to him .
( To add insult to injury , he ’ s increased his share of women voters there by eight points since October , yet another sign that Team Warren ’ s “ sexism ” attack on him has failed , if not backfired . )
A nine-point lead is a sizable margin by the standards of this primary and this isn ’ t the only poll lately showing Bernie pulling away : Remember that a different poll of New Hampshire a few days ago found him ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s led in the last five surveys of the state and his lead in the RCP poll of polls of New Hampshire now exceeds five points , the biggest advantage any candidate has enjoyed since mid-August .
Given how easily he beat Hillary there in 2016 , there ’ s every reason to think NH Democrats are coming home to him as they make up their minds .
If he wins Iowa comfortably and then takes New Hampshire going away , what does the Democratic establishment do ?
Barack Obama doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary , it seems , but can Biden talk Michelle Obama into an endorsement ?
There ’ s a second poll of New Hampshire out this morning , this time from NBC .
Guess who ’ s leading : Not a rout , but if Pete Buttigieg is the last obstacle in the path of a Bernie Sanders nomination then the establishment ’ s in bigger trouble than I thought .
In fact , Buttigieg is something of an asset to Bernie right now .
Both the NBC poll of New Hampshire and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cutting into Biden ’ s advantage with older Democrats while Sanders runs away with the youth vote .
Biden needs Mayor Pete out of the race ASAP so that he can reclaim some of those voters before Super Tuesday .
The only good news for Biden in today ’ s poll-a-palooza is a national survey from ABC/WaPo that finds him still ahead nationally , with 28 percent .
But even that comes with a bad omen : Sanders has risen to 24 percent , confirming that this is now a two-man race nationally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent or so .
( Biden ’ s lead widens to 12 points among likely voters , but obviously the trends in national polling will shift depending on the results in the early states . )
Warren has lost double-digit support among women since October and again is perceived as an especially weak match-up for Trump .
When asked who has the best chance to defeat POTUS , 38 percent of Democrats in the ABC poll say Biden .
Just 10 percent say Warren .
If Bernie has a weakness , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa , the NYT poll found 56 percent of Dems agreeing that a democratic socialist would have a harder rather than easier time winning and the CBS poll found just one-third of Dems there willing to say that they think Bernie would defeat POTUS versus 45 percent who said so of Biden .
In the CNN poll of New Hampshire , a mere 20 percent gave Sanders the best shot at beating Trump compared to 41 percent who said so of Biden .
The results were basically the same in ABC ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Sanders would have the easiest time against Trump versus 38 percent who said so of Biden .
This is Grandpa Joe ’ s great hope on election night next week — that a critical mass of Iowans will head down to caucus , have a hard conversation with themselves about whether the party is doomed with an avowed socialist as nominee , then switch to Biden at the last minute , however reluctantly .
One more data point for you , from the CBS Iowa poll .
I wonder if … this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffered in polling ever since Warren accused of him believing a woman couldn ’ t win : In lieu of an exit question , here ’ s a clip you ’ ll see played 8,000 times in Republican attack ads over the next nine months if Democrats really do pull the trigger on Berniemania .

Democrats are really gonna do this, huh?
I’m imagining Barack Obama looking at these new polling numbers and contemplating his legacy: A wipeout of Democrats in federal and state races by 2016, the election of a Republican president whom O himself allegedly describes as a “fascist,” and the increasing likelihood that his own party will choose an out-and-out socialist as its next nominee. In time, the Obama/Romney contest of 2012 may come to be seen as the last non-“European” election America had for many years.
The well-respected NYT/Siena poll finds that everything’s coming up Bernie in Iowa:
Elizabeth Warren’s loss is Sanders’s gain, unsurprisingly, as the Times notes that she’s lost seven points since October while Bernie has gained six. Partly that’s due to young Democrats defecting from her camp to his. But another part may be perceived electability, ironically the core dispute between her and Bernie in their now famous 2018 conversation about whether a woman can beat Trump. Ask Biden and Sanders supporters if their guy has the best chance to beat POTUS this fall and 80 percent or so of each group says yes. Ask Warren supporters the same question about their candidate and the number drops to … 51 percent. It’s hard to see a Warren comeback in Iowa and New Hampshire if late deciders think she’s DOA against Trump. (Although, interestingly, she fares slightly less badly in Iowa matched up with the president, trailing 47/42, than Bernie does. He trails 48/42.)
Bernie’s seven-point lead in the NYT poll is the biggest of any candidate in Iowa since mid-November, when the Buttigieg boomlet was in full swing. Sanders is now the frontrunner there according to the two most highly regarded polls of the state; the Des Moines Register also found him leading at the beginning of the month, albeit narrowly. Even so, Iowa remains a jump ball, with Biden having led in two of the three most recent surveys. He still leads Bernie in the RCP average, in fact, but now by less than a point. Another new poll this morning from CBS, in fact, Sanders ahead by exactly one point:
It could go either way next Monday, although CBS makes a smart point in its story about how the 15-percent threshold for delegates could end up benefiting Bernie. There are actually two ballots on caucus night, with the initial vote designed to see how many candidates have at least 15 percent support. Supporters of any candidate who falls short of that number on the first vote can then switch to a different candidate on the second ballot. Joe Biden stands to benefit from that rule potentially, as one would assume most of Amy Klobuchar’s more moderate backers will switch to him on the second vote. But Sanders could benefit enormously if Warren come up just shy of the threshold at 14 percent or so, freeing her progressive fans to stampede over to Bernie. He might win going away.
For the moment, though, it’s close in Iowa. Is the same true in New Hampshire? New from CNN:
Overall, 25% of likely Democratic primary voters back the Vermont senator, with former Vice President Joe Biden (16%), former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg (15%) and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (12%) battling for second place. Behind these four, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar (6%), Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (5%) and businessman Andrew Yang (5%) make up a third tier of candidates… As in polling elsewhere, shifting preferences among liberals have changed the dynamic of the race: Sanders has gained 13 points among liberal likely primary voters in New Hampshire while Warren has dropped 7 points. Sanders now holds a clear lead within that group: 39% back him, 21% Warren.
Again we find Bernie ahead and again it’s because Warren is bleeding liberal support to him. (To add insult to injury, he’s increased his share of women voters there by eight points since October, yet another sign that Team Warren’s “sexism” attack on him has failed, if not backfired.) A nine-point lead is a sizable margin by the standards of this primary and this isn’t the only poll lately showing Bernie pulling away: Remember that a different poll of New Hampshire a few days ago found him ahead by 12(!). He’s led in the last five surveys of the state and his lead in the RCP poll of polls of New Hampshire now exceeds five points, the biggest advantage any candidate has enjoyed since mid-August. Given how easily he beat Hillary there in 2016, there’s every reason to think NH Democrats are coming home to him as they make up their minds.
If he wins Iowa comfortably and then takes New Hampshire going away, what does the Democratic establishment do? Barack Obama doesn’t want to weigh in on the primary, it seems, but can Biden talk Michelle Obama into an endorsement?
There’s a second poll of New Hampshire out this morning, this time from NBC. Guess who’s leading:
Not a rout, but if Pete Buttigieg is the last obstacle in the path of a Bernie Sanders nomination then the establishment’s in bigger trouble than I thought. In fact, Buttigieg is something of an asset to Bernie right now. Both the NBC poll of New Hampshire and the CBS poll of Iowa find him cutting into Biden’s advantage with older Democrats while Sanders runs away with the youth vote. Biden needs Mayor Pete out of the race ASAP so that he can reclaim some of those voters before Super Tuesday.
The only good news for Biden in today’s poll-a-palooza is a national survey from ABC/WaPo that finds him still ahead nationally, with 28 percent. But even that comes with a bad omen: Sanders has risen to 24 percent, confirming that this is now a two-man race nationally as Warren remains stuck at around 14 percent or so. (Biden’s lead widens to 12 points among likely voters, but obviously the trends in national polling will shift depending on the results in the early states.) Warren has lost double-digit support among women since October and again is perceived as an especially weak match-up for Trump. When asked who has the best chance to defeat POTUS, 38 percent of Democrats in the ABC poll say Biden. Just 10 percent say Warren.
If Bernie has a weakness, it’s his own electability issues. In Iowa, the NYT poll found 56 percent of Dems agreeing that a democratic socialist would have a harder rather than easier time winning and the CBS poll found just one-third of Dems there willing to say that they think Bernie would defeat POTUS versus 45 percent who said so of Biden. In the CNN poll of New Hampshire, a mere 20 percent gave Sanders the best shot at beating Trump compared to 41 percent who said so of Biden. The results were basically the same in ABC’s national poll, with 18 percent claiming that Sanders would have the easiest time against Trump versus 38 percent who said so of Biden. This is Grandpa Joe’s great hope on election night next week — that a critical mass of Iowans will head down to caucus, have a hard conversation with themselves about whether the party is doomed with an avowed socialist as nominee, then switch to Biden at the last minute, however reluctantly.
One more data point for you, from the CBS Iowa poll. I wonder if … this might explain why Sanders hasn’t suffered in polling ever since Warren accused of him believing a woman couldn’t win:
In lieu of an exit question, here’s a clip you’ll see played 8,000 times in Republican attack ads over the next nine months if Democrats really do pull the trigger on Berniemania.


Speaker Cheney?

Most of the prognostication regarding the legislative branch in this year ’ s elections has been focused on the Senate .
If the Democrats can somehow flip three seats and win the White House , they would have pulled off the trifecta in terms of controlling the government .
But that ’ s not at all a sure thing at this point .
If President Trump can pull off another run of the swing states ( which is currently looking increasingly likely ) the down-ballot races could just as easily go the other way , potentially increasing the GOP ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But what about in the House ?
The Democrats picked up a healthy margin for their majority in 2018 , but every one of those freshmen are up for election again in November and that pendulum can just as easily swing back the other way .
And if it does , Speaker Pelosi will have to relinquish the gavel yet again .
But who would she be handing it to ?
At least in some circles , there ’ s a growing belief that it might wind up being Liz Cheney .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ( R-Wyo . )
unexpected decision to forgo a Senate bid has GOP colleagues speculating she has ambitions beyond her No .
3 post among House Republicans .
While many GOP lawmakers were surprised that Cheney opted against running to replace outgoing Sen. Mike Enzi ( R-Wyo . )
, particularly with her strong polling numbers , several argued that staying in the House offers her a quicker path to the top .
“ She has more power and voice here .
[ She ’ s ] angling to be Speaker if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it off , ” one GOP lawmaker said , adding that the House is “ a shorter route to meaningful power than Senate backbench.
” Last May , when Mike Enzi announced that he was retiring at the end of this term , I wrote about Liz Cheney ’ s role in the drama to come .
There was immediate speculation that Cheney might run to replace him because she ’ d previously tried to primary him out of his seat .
But if she ’ d done that she would basically be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power ladder in the Senate .
That ’ s probably what caused her to take a pass early and write a very nice love letter to Enzi , commending him for his many years of service to the people of Wyoming .
Why give up all of the power she ’ s built in the House for a position on the backbench in the Senate ?
The rapid rate of Liz Cheney ’ s rise to power in the House came as a surprise to many in the punditry community , myself included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s gone from being a freshman who didn ’ t know where the ladies ’ room was located to holding the third most powerful position in the House GOP structure .
But does she have her eyes on something even bigger ?
The Hill reminds us that when Cheney announced her decision not to run for Enzi ’ s seat , she publicly stated that her goal was to help retake the House majority and “ help make House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy the next Speaker.
” That was clearly the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that was then and this is now .
The linked report also quotes several Republican lawmakers as saying that a rhetorical “ knife fight ” could break out between McCarthy , Steve Scalise and God only knows who else if they retake the majority .
And if that ’ s the case , Cheney could be seen as a politically savvy alternate choice .
It also wouldn ’ t hurt the GOP ’ s national image to put a woman in the top role .
And after that , then what ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the words actually passing her lips , but few seem to doubt that Cheney pictures herself as a possible presidential contender… possibly the first woman president .
In 2024 she ’ ll be 57 years old , a veritable spring chicken compared to everyone with any feasible hope of being president next year .
Nikki Haley should probably keep an eye on Cheney .
That pairing could potentially be the centerpiece of the 2024 GOP primary battle .

Most of the prognostication regarding the legislative branch in this year’s elections has been focused on the Senate. If the Democrats can somehow flip three seats and win the White House, they would have pulled off the trifecta in terms of controlling the government. But that’s not at all a sure thing at this point. If President Trump can pull off another run of the swing states (which is currently looking increasingly likely) the down-ballot races could just as easily go the other way, potentially increasing the GOP’s majority in the upper chamber.
But what about in the House? The Democrats picked up a healthy margin for their majority in 2018, but every one of those freshmen are up for election again in November and that pendulum can just as easily swing back the other way. And if it does, Speaker Pelosi will have to relinquish the gavel yet again. But who would she be handing it to? At least in some circles, there’s a growing belief that it might wind up being Liz Cheney. (The Hill)
Rep. Liz Cheney’s (R-Wyo.) unexpected decision to forgo a Senate bid has GOP colleagues speculating she has ambitions beyond her No. 3 post among House Republicans. While many GOP lawmakers were surprised that Cheney opted against running to replace outgoing Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), particularly with her strong polling numbers, several argued that staying in the House offers her a quicker path to the top. “She has more power and voice here. [She’s] angling to be Speaker if the top two can’t pull it off,” one GOP lawmaker said, adding that the House is “a shorter route to meaningful power than Senate backbench.”
Last May, when Mike Enzi announced that he was retiring at the end of this term, I wrote about Liz Cheney’s role in the drama to come. There was immediate speculation that Cheney might run to replace him because she’d previously tried to primary him out of his seat. But if she’d done that she would basically be starting over at the bottom of the power ladder in the Senate.
That’s probably what caused her to take a pass early and write a very nice love letter to Enzi, commending him for his many years of service to the people of Wyoming. Why give up all of the power she’s built in the House for a position on the backbench in the Senate?
The rapid rate of Liz Cheney’s rise to power in the House came as a surprise to many in the punditry community, myself included. In just three short years she’s gone from being a freshman who didn’t know where the ladies’ room was located to holding the third most powerful position in the House GOP structure. But does she have her eyes on something even bigger?
The Hill reminds us that when Cheney announced her decision not to run for Enzi’s seat, she publicly stated that her goal was to help retake the House majority and “help make House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy the next Speaker.” That was clearly the right thing to say at the time, but that was then and this is now. The linked report also quotes several Republican lawmakers as saying that a rhetorical “knife fight” could break out between McCarthy, Steve Scalise and God only knows who else if they retake the majority. And if that’s the case, Cheney could be seen as a politically savvy alternate choice. It also wouldn’t hurt the GOP’s national image to put a woman in the top role.
And after that, then what? I can’t find any record of the words actually passing her lips, but few seem to doubt that Cheney pictures herself as a possible presidential contender… possibly the first woman president. In 2024 she’ll be 57 years old, a veritable spring chicken compared to everyone with any feasible hope of being president next year. Nikki Haley should probably keep an eye on Cheney. That pairing could potentially be the centerpiece of the 2024 GOP primary battle.


hotair--2020-01-26--Fishers of men? Here's the catch ... Sunday reflection

When Jesus heard that John had been arrested , he withdrew to Galilee .
He left Nazareth and went to live in Capernaum by the sea , in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali , that what had been said through Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled : Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali , the way to the sea , beyond the Jordan , Galilee of the Gentiles , the people who sit in darkness have seen a great light , on those dwelling in a land overshadowed by death light has arisen .
From that time on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Repent , for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
” As he was walking by the Sea of Galilee , he saw two brothers , Simon who is called Peter , and his brother Andrew , casting a net into the sea ; they were fishermen .
He said to them , “ Come after me , and I will make you fishers of men.
” At once they left their nets and followed him .
He walked along from there and saw two other brothers , James , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John .
They were in a boat , with their father Zebedee , mending their nets .
He called them , and immediately they left their boat and their father and followed him .
He went around all of Galilee , teaching in their synagogues , proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom , and curing every disease and illness among the people .
Give a man a fish , a proverb instructs , and you feed him for a day .
Teach him to fish , and you feed him for a lifetime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me , and let ’ s just say that it ’ s a good thing Mom still bought fish . )
But what if you take away his fishing nets and set him far away from his trade ?
What does it take to walk away from the only sustenance-providing work you know , just to join a ministry that focuses only on feeding the souls of others ?
Today ’ s readings gloss over a critical point about Jesus ’ call to the fishermen to become these “ fishers of men.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their trade to feed themselves and their families , and these were not times in which people socked away enough for a sabbatical from their careers .
We know Peter was at least married , so he had family obligations .
Andrew , James , and John had to work to feed themselves , likely every day except the Sabbath , and had to compete with each other and other fishermen in Galilee to sell their catches .
Not only were these men unlikely theologians — those got chosen much earlier in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were among the working poor in a region under Roman occupation and heavy taxation .
If all you do is teach a man to fish and then take him out of the water , what does he have left ?
Clearly the Lord had placed His finger on the hearts of these disciples , but the context of their choice is still worth pondering , because it was still their choice .
Jesus did not order them out of their boats and their comfort zones ; He invited them to join Him .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ riches , or even a morsel to eat .
These four apostles first joined with Jesus and deliberately left their sustenance trade on the promise that they would help save others , not so much themselves .
This is the self-giving love that Jesus would preach and exemplify in presenting salvation , but it is also a reflection of the model of salvation from the beginning .
The Lord chose the Hebrews to be His instrument of salvation to the world , eventually rescuing them from Egypt and bringing them to the Promised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would build the City on the Hill , Jerusalem , as a place for the world to come hear the Word of God and be converted by this nation of priests and prophets .
It was for this purpose that Moses led them and delivered them the Laws , so that they might be outward-directed in caritas rather than concerned over their own portion and power in the world .
In today ’ s Gospel , we see Jesus begin this process all over again with Peter , Andrew , James , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s prophesying is fulfilled in Jesus ’ baptism , Jesus rebuilds that path of salvation by which the world will be converted through the Israelites .
This time , however , Jesus chooses men who are willing to give up any sense of their own power and connection to this world , men who are willing to throw in completely for others for their own sakes .
Here ’ s the catch , however : none of these men are perfect either .
They only slowly begin to realize that there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will require them to change their own hopes , dreams , and ambitions .
Judas Iscariot never submitted to that and was lost .
James and John would jockey for power .
Peter would deny Jesus three times during the Passion to protect himself .
Thomas would scoff at Jesus ’ resurrection until he put his hands into the wounds to see for himself .
Not until the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost would the disciples fully grasp that their mission would mean giving their lives — literally for almost all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gentiles alike through the preaching of God ’ s love and mercy and repentance of sin .
They became fishers of men rather than fishermen , and in doing so built a church to provide that path of salvation by which the world could be converted .
The apostles also understood that the temptations of worldly power and ambition would always threaten that connection , just as it had for the ancient Davidic kingdom .
In our second reading from Corinthians , Paul issued a warning to those who would elevate apostles and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well : For it has been reported to me about you , my brothers and sisters , by Chloe ’ s people , that there are rivalries among you .
I mean that each of you is saying , “ I belong to Paul , ” or “ I belong to Apollos , ” or “ I belong to Cephas , ” or “ I belong to Christ.
” Is Christ divided ?
Was Paul crucified for you ?
Or were you baptized in the name of Paul ?
For Christ did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preach the gospel , and not with the wisdom of human eloquence , so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning .
Paul ’ s warning emphasizes the lesson of today ’ s Gospel .
In order to become His disciple , we all have to leave the boats behind .
We can not put ourselves above Christ ; we can not effectively build salvation by working for ourselves first and foremost .
We are all called to be fishers of men for other men , not for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way , we can all share in the glory of Christ .
The front page image is “ Calling of Saints Peter and Andrew , ” English engraving c. 1160-1180 , on display at The Metropolitan Museum of Art , New York City .
“ Sunday Reflection ” is a regular feature , looking at the specific readings used in today ’ s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world .
The reflection represents only my own point of view , intended to help prepare myself for the Lord ’ s day and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here .
For previous Green Room entries , click here .

This morning’s Gospel reading is Matthew 4:12–23:
When Jesus heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew to Galilee. He left Nazareth and went to live in Capernaum by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali, that what had been said through Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled: Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali, the way to the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles, the people who sit in darkness have seen a great light, on those dwelling in a land overshadowed by death light has arisen. From that time on, Jesus began to preach and say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” As he was walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon who is called Peter, and his brother Andrew, casting a net into the sea; they were fishermen. He said to them, “Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.” At once they left their nets and followed him. He walked along from there and saw two other brothers, James, the son of Zebedee, and his brother John. They were in a boat, with their father Zebedee, mending their nets. He called them, and immediately they left their boat and their father and followed him. He went around all of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and curing every disease and illness among the people.
Give a man a fish, a proverb instructs, and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime. (My dad tried that with me, and let’s just say that it’s a good thing Mom still bought fish.) But what if you take away his fishing nets and set him far away from his trade? What does it take to walk away from the only sustenance-providing work you know, just to join a ministry that focuses only on feeding the souls of others?
Today’s readings gloss over a critical point about Jesus’ call to the fishermen to become these “fishers of men.” They would have known nothing other than their trade to feed themselves and their families, and these were not times in which people socked away enough for a sabbatical from their careers. We know Peter was at least married, so he had family obligations. Andrew, James, and John had to work to feed themselves, likely every day except the Sabbath, and had to compete with each other and other fishermen in Galilee to sell their catches. Not only were these men unlikely theologians — those got chosen much earlier in the life of Hebraic communities — but they were among the working poor in a region under Roman occupation and heavy taxation.
If all you do is teach a man to fish and then take him out of the water, what does he have left?
Clearly the Lord had placed His finger on the hearts of these disciples, but the context of their choice is still worth pondering, because it was still their choice. Jesus did not order them out of their boats and their comfort zones; He invited them to join Him. Nor did He promise them wealth, riches, or even a morsel to eat. These four apostles first joined with Jesus and deliberately left their sustenance trade on the promise that they would help save others, not so much themselves.
This is the self-giving love that Jesus would preach and exemplify in presenting salvation, but it is also a reflection of the model of salvation from the beginning. The Lord chose the Hebrews to be His instrument of salvation to the world, eventually rescuing them from Egypt and bringing them to the Promised Land for that purpose. The Israelites would build the City on the Hill, Jerusalem, as a place for the world to come hear the Word of God and be converted by this nation of priests and prophets. It was for this purpose that Moses led them and delivered them the Laws, so that they might be outward-directed in caritas rather than concerned over their own portion and power in the world.
In today’s Gospel, we see Jesus begin this process all over again with Peter, Andrew, James, and John. Once John the Baptist’s prophesying is fulfilled in Jesus’ baptism, Jesus rebuilds that path of salvation by which the world will be converted through the Israelites. This time, however, Jesus chooses men who are willing to give up any sense of their own power and connection to this world, men who are willing to throw in completely for others for their own sakes.
Here’s the catch, however: none of these men are perfect either. They only slowly begin to realize that there’s a catch to this mission — that it will require them to change their own hopes, dreams, and ambitions. Judas Iscariot never submitted to that and was lost. James and John would jockey for power. Peter would deny Jesus three times during the Passion to protect himself. Thomas would scoff at Jesus’ resurrection until he put his hands into the wounds to see for himself. Not until the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost would the disciples fully grasp that their mission would mean giving their lives — literally for almost all of them — to save both Israelites and Gentiles alike through the preaching of God’s love and mercy and repentance of sin.
They became fishers of men rather than fishermen, and in doing so built a church to provide that path of salvation by which the world could be converted. The apostles also understood that the temptations of worldly power and ambition would always threaten that connection, just as it had for the ancient Davidic kingdom. In our second reading from Corinthians, Paul issued a warning to those who would elevate apostles and preachers above the Word and above Christ as well:
For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers and sisters, by Chloe’s people, that there are rivalries among you. I mean that each of you is saying, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with the wisdom of human eloquence, so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning.
Paul’s warning emphasizes the lesson of today’s Gospel. In order to become His disciple, we all have to leave the boats behind. We cannot put ourselves above Christ; we cannot effectively build salvation by working for ourselves first and foremost. We are all called to be fishers of men for other men, not for our own sake. And in that way, we can all share in the glory of Christ.
The front page image is “Calling of Saints Peter and Andrew,” English engraving c. 1160-1180, on display at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City.
“Sunday Reflection” is a regular feature, looking at the specific readings used in today’s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world. The reflection represents only my own point of view, intended to help prepare myself for the Lord’s day and perhaps spark a meaningful discussion. Previous Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here. For previous Green Room entries, click here.


hotair--2020-01-26--Revelation at Sundance? Hillary throws Obama under the bus

We know that President Obama was no fan of Donald Trump when he received the GOP nomination to run for president in 2016 .
Something we didn ’ t know is that Barack Obama described Donald Trump as a fascist in a phone call to Tim Kaine in the lead-up to the 2016 election .
I don ’ t think we ’ ve heard this little tidbit of information , have we ?
Hillary Clinton is receiving the kind of hero-worship at the Sundance Film Festival that she usually does from the entertainment industry .
The documentary , a four-part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the documentary is a mention of a call from President Obama to the vice-presidential candidate , Tim Kaine , just weeks before the 2016 election .
He tells Senator Kaine , “ Tim , remember , this is no time to be a purist .
You ’ ve got to keep a fascist out of the White House.
” That sounds like a plea to go low , doesn ’ t it ?
I ’ ll also note that the fascist label is pretty rich coming from the “ I have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Apparently there are not many other revelations revealed in the four hours .
The documentary shows behind the scenes footage from the 2016 campaign and Hillary narrates .
How many new things are there left after Hillary ’ s defeat , given that she never left the stage ?
She ’ s written books and done countless interviews and television appearances .
How many times have we read that Hillary Clinton credits Trump ’ s election to Russian interference or voter suppression ?
She also usually credits her defeat to sexism .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to win the election , never any real self-reflection .
For Hillary , it is always everyone else ’ s fault when she loses .
We know Hillary has a grudge against Bernie Sanders .
She trashes him at every opportunity she finds .
She did an interview with the Hollywood Reporter where she said no one likes Bernie and no one wants to work with him .
Yada , yada , yada .
Hillary is not a graceful loser , that ’ s for sure .
Hillary had to walk back her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even Democrats criticized her .
At Sundance when a BernieBro asked her whom they should support , suddenly she was all about party unity .
Suddenly magnanimous , Clinton pivoted on that passionate stance Saturday , when an apparent Sanders voter in the Sundance audience took her to task .
“ It ’ s no surprise that you ’ re not a big fan of Bernie Sanders , ” he said .
“ So what would you say to the Bernie Sanders fans ?
… Who should they vote for ?
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranks , ” Clinton responded to loud applause .
There was a lot of clapping throughout , with Sundance being Utah ’ s largest annual liberal convention .
And , of course , Hillary took the opportunity to trash Republicans to the audience .
She hopes the impeachment trial “ will haunt them ” .
She said “ Trump is exactly the “ leader whose behavior would be so egregious and dangerous to the republic ” that the Founding Fathers feared.
” “ I hope this will haunt them , ” Hillary Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Festival of the Republicans ’ likely acquittal of President Donald Trump in his ongoing Senate Impeachment trial .
“ I find it absolutely beyond my understanding why they are so cowed to do what they know they should do , ” the 2016 Democratic candidate told an almost overfilled Ray Theatre about the GOP senators , who seem hellbent on allowing the former Celebrity Apprentice host to escape being removed from office .
“ They ’ ll probably default to deriding the case , they started that today , and move it as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or witnesses called , ” the former Secretary of State added at the conclusion of the world premiere of her Hulu docuseries Hillary .
Self-awareness is hard for Hillary .
She and Bill Clinton are easily the most corrupt politicians in my lifetime .
They entered the White House with little to their names and left as multi-millionaires .
During the impeachment of Bill Clinton , it was well-known that Hillary was lobbying senators to spare her husband ’ s presidency .
You may remember that Bill turned health care reform over to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeared before Congress to promote Hillarycare , the predecessor to Obamacare .
The crowd loved her .
She received frequent applause and the random “ We love you ” from the audience .
No doubt the documentary will be a hit with the elites on both coasts .
The series runs for 253 minutes and premieres on Hulu on March 6 .
I ’ ll end with a little mantra I recite to myself : Any day Hillary Clinton isn ’ t president is a good day .

We know that President Obama was no fan of Donald Trump when he received the GOP nomination to run for president in 2016. Something we didn’t know is that Barack Obama described Donald Trump as a fascist in a phone call to Tim Kaine in the lead-up to the 2016 election. I don’t think we’ve heard this little tidbit of information, have we?
Hillary Clinton is receiving the kind of hero-worship at the Sundance Film Festival that she usually does from the entertainment industry. The documentary, a four-part series titled Hillary premiered Saturday. Included in the documentary is a mention of a call from President Obama to the vice-presidential candidate, Tim Kaine, just weeks before the 2016 election. He tells Senator Kaine, “Tim, remember, this is no time to be a purist. You’ve got to keep a fascist out of the White House.” That sounds like a plea to go low, doesn’t it? I’ll also note that the fascist label is pretty rich coming from the “I have a pen and a phone” guy.
Apparently there are not many other revelations revealed in the four hours. The documentary shows behind the scenes footage from the 2016 campaign and Hillary narrates. How many new things are there left after Hillary’s defeat, given that she never left the stage? She’s written books and done countless interviews and television appearances. How many times have we read that Hillary Clinton credits Trump’s election to Russian interference or voter suppression? She also usually credits her defeat to sexism. She has nothing but excuses for her failure to win the election, never any real self-reflection. For Hillary, it is always everyone else’s fault when she loses.
We know Hillary has a grudge against Bernie Sanders. She trashes him at every opportunity she finds. She did an interview with the Hollywood Reporter where she said no one likes Bernie and no one wants to work with him. Yada, yada, yada. Hillary is not a graceful loser, that’s for sure.
Hillary had to walk back her attack on Bernie, though, when even Democrats criticized her. At Sundance when a BernieBro asked her whom they should support, suddenly she was all about party unity.
Suddenly magnanimous, Clinton pivoted on that passionate stance Saturday, when an apparent Sanders voter in the Sundance audience took her to task. “It’s no surprise that you’re not a big fan of Bernie Sanders,” he said. “So what would you say to the Bernie Sanders fans?… Who should they vote for?” “Once we have a nominee, close ranks,” Clinton responded to loud applause. There was a lot of clapping throughout, with Sundance being Utah’s largest annual liberal convention.
And, of course, Hillary took the opportunity to trash Republicans to the audience. She hopes the impeachment trial “will haunt them”. She said “Trump is exactly the “leader whose behavior would be so egregious and dangerous to the republic” that the Founding Fathers feared.”
“I hope this will haunt them,” Hillary Clinton said Saturday night at the Sundance Film Festival of the Republicans’ likely acquittal of President Donald Trump in his ongoing Senate Impeachment trial. “I find it absolutely beyond my understanding why they are so cowed to do what they know they should do,” the 2016 Democratic candidate told an almost overfilled Ray Theatre about the GOP senators, who seem hellbent on allowing the former Celebrity Apprentice host to escape being removed from office. “They’ll probably default to deriding the case, they started that today, and move it as quickly as possible without any more evidence or witnesses called,” the former Secretary of State added at the conclusion of the world premiere of her Hulu docuseries Hillary.
Self-awareness is hard for Hillary. She and Bill Clinton are easily the most corrupt politicians in my lifetime. They entered the White House with little to their names and left as multi-millionaires. During the impeachment of Bill Clinton, it was well-known that Hillary was lobbying senators to spare her husband’s presidency. You may remember that Bill turned health care reform over to Hillary, the First Lady, who appeared before Congress to promote Hillarycare, the predecessor to Obamacare.
The crowd loved her. She received frequent applause and the random “We love you” from the audience. No doubt the documentary will be a hit with the elites on both coasts. The series runs for 253 minutes and premieres on Hulu on March 6.
I’ll end with a little mantra I recite to myself: Any day Hillary Clinton isn’t president is a good day.


hotair--2020-01-26--The tale of the faithless elector

The tale of the faithless elector

With barely a week to go before the primary voting begins , some of our media analysts are already fretting over whether or not the loser of the election in November will “ accept the results of the election ” or refuse to concede .
That linked article is clearly making a reference to President Trump , but the author also suggests the possibility that if Trump once again loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college , liberals will claim that “ voter suppression ” in Florida will have rendered the election invalid .
( Just for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to remember the last time a presidential candidate refused to accept the election results .
His name was Al Gore . )
But others have a different scenario in mind .
What if Trump wins the electoral college but some the electors decide to “ save us ” from our own decision by casting their votes as faithless electors ?
It ’ s not an entirely imaginary scenario .
In fact , the Supreme Court is currently considering a case involving just such an elector .
In 2016 , an elector from Colorado @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Hillary Clinton .
( Clinton carried the state handily . )
Instead , he tried to cast his vote for John Kasich in violation of state law .
( NBC News ) One of the “ faithless electors ” at the heart of a coming Supreme Court case says he ’ s “ thrilled ” that the high court will take on the issue and has no regrets about how he cast his Electoral College vote for president — even though it went against the wishes of his state ’ s voters… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law in Colorado ( and in 29 other states ) requiring electors to cast their votes in accordance with the results of the popular vote — triggered the legal avalanche that has now gone all the way to the Supreme Court after the justices agreed last week to hear the case .
Four years later , Baca , 27 , a government teacher at a Las Vegas high school , isn ’ t looking back — and he ’ s rooting for the high court to grant all Electoral College members “ total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t exactly paint a picture of the fastest tractor on the farm .
He claims that he was aiming to try to prevent Trump from taking office .
But his method was to remove one electoral vote from Hillary Clinton and transfer it to a guy who wasn ’ t even on the ballot ?
We ’ ll find out later this year whether or not the state laws forbidding faithless electors are constitutional or not .
As much as we may hate to admit it , Baca ’ s claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutional terms .
While not specifically explained in the Constitution , the purpose of the electoral college was much discussed and debated among the founders , and their writings are often taken into account by the courts when considering such questions .
In Federalist 68 , Hamilton famously described the electoral college as “ an intermediate body of electors… much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements.
” That word “ intermediate ” has often been pointed to as the smoking gun , showing that the signatories of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an option in place to thwart the will of the voters .
And such a momentous choice was to be made by “ men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station ” ( of President ) .
One can probably assume that Baca views himself as one of those most capable analysts .
Your mileage may vary .
It ’ s easy to say that if laws barring faithless electors are overturned and a sufficient number of these people changed the outcome of the election that the nation would revolt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more properly , would all of us ?
The country is so firmly and vehemently divided along partisan lines right now that I ’ m not at all confident of that sort of prediction .
If Trump wins the electoral college vote but the electors flip over to give the win to the Democrat , I ’ m not so sure that the liberal , Democratic rank and file across the country would object .
Similarly , if the Democrat wins but a handful of electors gave it to Trump anyway , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the streets in revolt .
In either scenario , the Supreme Court would need to be dragged into the fray immediately because we would then truly be in the grip of a constitutional crisis .
And if a significant majority of the country turns out to be unwilling to accept the court ’ s decision , that could pretty much be it for the great American experiment .
Is that going to happen ?
Highly doubtful .
One of the main reasons is that both parties have been reevaluating their process for appointing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often handed out like candy to various , popular party officials who may or may not see eye to eye with the rest of the party .
But given how things are going these days , the electors are , without question , being vetted six ways from Sunday to ensure that they are the most vehement party loyalists and stalwarts available .
Those chosen by the GOP will be Trump absolutists up and down the line .
The people sent by the Democrats will be similarly ready to go to the wall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case is interesting from a legal and constitutional perspective , don ’ t lose too much sleep over the results either way .
I ’ m confident that our nation isn ’ t close to crashing down around our ears .
Or at least… not yet .

With barely a week to go before the primary voting begins, some of our media analysts are already fretting over whether or not the loser of the election in November will “accept the results of the election” or refuse to concede. That linked article is clearly making a reference to President Trump, but the author also suggests the possibility that if Trump once again loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college, liberals will claim that “voter suppression” in Florida will have rendered the election invalid. (Just for the record, I’m old enough to remember the last time a presidential candidate refused to accept the election results. His name was Al Gore.)
But others have a different scenario in mind. What if Trump wins the electoral college but some the electors decide to “save us” from our own decision by casting their votes as faithless electors? It’s not an entirely imaginary scenario. In fact, the Supreme Court is currently considering a case involving just such an elector. In 2016, an elector from Colorado named Micheal Baca was supposed to vote for Hillary Clinton. (Clinton carried the state handily.) Instead, he tried to cast his vote for John Kasich in violation of state law. (NBC News)
One of the “faithless electors” at the heart of a coming Supreme Court case says he’s “thrilled” that the high court will take on the issue and has no regrets about how he cast his Electoral College vote for president — even though it went against the wishes of his state’s voters… That decision — a violation of a law in Colorado (and in 29 other states) requiring electors to cast their votes in accordance with the results of the popular vote — triggered the legal avalanche that has now gone all the way to the Supreme Court after the justices agreed last week to hear the case. Four years later, Baca, 27, a government teacher at a Las Vegas high school, isn’t looking back — and he’s rooting for the high court to grant all Electoral College members “total elector freedom.”
Baca’s plan doesn’t exactly paint a picture of the fastest tractor on the farm. He claims that he was aiming to try to prevent Trump from taking office. But his method was to remove one electoral vote from Hillary Clinton and transfer it to a guy who wasn’t even on the ballot? We’ll find out later this year whether or not the state laws forbidding faithless electors are constitutional or not.
As much as we may hate to admit it, Baca’s claim isn’t entirely without merit in constitutional terms. While not specifically explained in the Constitution, the purpose of the electoral college was much discussed and debated among the founders, and their writings are often taken into account by the courts when considering such questions. In Federalist 68, Hamilton famously described the electoral college as “an intermediate body of electors… much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements.”
That word “intermediate” has often been pointed to as the smoking gun, showing that the signatories of the Constitution intended for there to be an option in place to thwart the will of the voters. And such a momentous choice was to be made by “men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station” (of President). One can probably assume that Baca views himself as one of those most capable analysts. Your mileage may vary.
It’s easy to say that if laws barring faithless electors are overturned and a sufficient number of these people changed the outcome of the election that the nation would revolt. But would we? Or, more properly, would all of us? The country is so firmly and vehemently divided along partisan lines right now that I’m not at all confident of that sort of prediction. If Trump wins the electoral college vote but the electors flip over to give the win to the Democrat, I’m not so sure that the liberal, Democratic rank and file across the country would object. Similarly, if the Democrat wins but a handful of electors gave it to Trump anyway, I doubt many Republicans would be taking to the streets in revolt.
In either scenario, the Supreme Court would need to be dragged into the fray immediately because we would then truly be in the grip of a constitutional crisis. And if a significant majority of the country turns out to be unwilling to accept the court’s decision, that could pretty much be it for the great American experiment.
Is that going to happen? Highly doubtful. One of the main reasons is that both parties have been reevaluating their process for appointing electors. Previously, that honor was often handed out like candy to various, popular party officials who may or may not see eye to eye with the rest of the party. But given how things are going these days, the electors are, without question, being vetted six ways from Sunday to ensure that they are the most vehement party loyalists and stalwarts available. Those chosen by the GOP will be Trump absolutists up and down the line. The people sent by the Democrats will be similarly ready to go to the wall for their nominee.
While the Baca case is interesting from a legal and constitutional perspective, don’t lose too much sleep over the results either way. I’m confident that our nation isn’t close to crashing down around our ears. Or at least… not yet.


hotair--2020-01-26--Sunday morning talking heads

Sunday morning talking heads

I ’ m embarrassed to say that I skimmed the list of Sunday show guests this morning , didn ’ t spot Adam Schiff ’ s name , and felt a moment of hope that we might get through a weekend without seeing him on television .
Should have known better .
Turns out he ’ s scheduled for “ Meet the Press ” and I just missed it at first glance .
Nearly all of today ’ s guests are also related to impeachment .
Democrats will offer two impeachment managers besides Schiff : Jason Crow will chat with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lofgren will guest on “ State of the Union.
” Republicans will counter with two members of Trump ’ s defense team , former Whitewater prosecutor Robert Ray and don ’ t-call-me-Trump ’ s-lawyer lawyer Alan Dershowitz .
Ray is set for “ This Week ” and “ State of the Union ” while Dershowitz is booked on “ Fox News Sunday.
” They ’ ll discuss how day one of opening arguments went for their side and preview how the final day or two of their case will look .
Senators from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presentation this past week , with even some stalwart Trump-loving Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Jim Inhofe having admitted in the last few days that he was effective .
Mike Braun and Tom Cotton will talk with “ Meet the Press ” and “ Face the Nation , ” respectively , while Minnesota ’ s two Democratic senators , Tina Smith and Amy Klobuchar , will speak to “ State of the Union ” and “ Meet the Press , ” also respectively .
Klobuchar will presumably be live on the ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day off from the trial to make her case to voters there with the caucus just eight days away .
Sanders , Warren , Biden , and maybe even Buttigieg will all forge on to New Hampshire no matter what happens next Monday , but probably not Klobuchar .
If she finishes a dismal fifth , in mid-single digits , as she ’ s projected to do then she ’ s effectively finished .
One and done .
The one guest today who ’ s not linked to impeachment is upstart Democratic candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with “ Fox News Sunday ” about how he managed to outlast Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and build a small but highly loyal political following online .
The full line-up is at the AP .

I’m embarrassed to say that I skimmed the list of Sunday show guests this morning, didn’t spot Adam Schiff’s name, and felt a moment of hope that we might get through a weekend without seeing him on television.
Should have known better. Turns out he’s scheduled for “Meet the Press” and I just missed it at first glance.
Nearly all of today’s guests are also related to impeachment. Democrats will offer two impeachment managers besides Schiff: Jason Crow will chat with “Face the Nation” and Zoe Lofgren will guest on “State of the Union.” Republicans will counter with two members of Trump’s defense team, former Whitewater prosecutor Robert Ray and don’t-call-me-Trump’s-lawyer lawyer Alan Dershowitz. Ray is set for “This Week” and “State of the Union” while Dershowitz is booked on “Fox News Sunday.” They’ll discuss how day one of opening arguments went for their side and preview how the final day or two of their case will look.
Senators from both sides will also analyze Schiff’s presentation this past week, with even some stalwart Trump-loving Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Jim Inhofe having admitted in the last few days that he was effective. Mike Braun and Tom Cotton will talk with “Meet the Press” and “Face the Nation,” respectively, while Minnesota’s two Democratic senators, Tina Smith and Amy Klobuchar, will speak to “State of the Union” and “Meet the Press,” also respectively. Klobuchar will presumably be live on the ground in Iowa, capitalizing on a rare day off from the trial to make her case to voters there with the caucus just eight days away. Sanders, Warren, Biden, and maybe even Buttigieg will all forge on to New Hampshire no matter what happens next Monday, but probably not Klobuchar. If she finishes a dismal fifth, in mid-single digits, as she’s projected to do then she’s effectively finished. One and done.
The one guest today who’s not linked to impeachment is upstart Democratic candidate Andrew Yang, who’ll chat with “Fox News Sunday” about how he managed to outlast Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and build a small but highly loyal political following online. The full line-up is at the AP.


hotair--2020-01-26--Don't forget about Hong Kong

Don't forget about Hong Kong

It ’ s been almost a year since demonstrators took to the streets of Hong Kong to protest the now-pulled Extradition Bill .
Police beatings , riots , political arrests , student walk-outs , and property damage have all followed with the government in Hong Kong and China attempting to portray everything as a one-off with very little public support .
Reality is much different from Beijing ’ s fantasy with pro-democracy candidates making major inroads in District Council races forcing HK Chief Executive Carrie Lam to promise to reflect on the results .
She also vowed to not step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ World Economic Forum in Switzerland last week .
There ’ s still much to discuss and process about Hong Kong and the coronavirus-caused pause , along with the Lunar New Year , might be the best opportunity for both sides to reflect on the past year .
It ’ s doubtful the tension and conflict will end , and police launched more tear gas at protesters last night , but this shouldn ’ t cause any of the “ Five Demands .
Not One Less ” crowd from backing down .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local and central governments is posed not by noisy , violent , attention-grabbing protesters , but by the portion of the population who think of themselves as pro-democracy , ” Benjamin Wilson wrote at Hong Kong Free Press yesterday in a retrospective of the current climate .
“ This includes those who identify as part of the movement even if they disagree with some of the more radical actions committed by demonstrators , or have never physically attended a protest or taken part in social media debate , or breathed a word about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s theory is the protests have planted the seed of democracy inside the minds of Hongkongers .
That seed , he hopes , will eventually become a full-fledged tree overtaking the rest of the forest of ideas in Hong Kong .
The big test for Wilson ’ s hope is the September elections in the Legislative Council .
Democracy advocates won ’ t get a majority The Economist reported last November due to the rules put together by China , however , they might be able to get more of a say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This would be a victory if the right candidate is selected .
There is still plenty of fear in Hong Kong about what is coming next .
The Wall Street Journal wrote last month the so-called “ Greens , ” people who see themselves as neutral in the clash between police and protesters , are becoming more fraught for the future .
One woman opined the region is “ not right ” because of the events of the past year .
She understands the pro-democracy protesters but is still fearful there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divide due to violence on both sides .
Those fears might be alleviated if Wilson ’ s theory comes true .
“ As this anti-authoritarian identity is consolidated – paradoxically , by the very forces intended to stamp it out – the movement has carved its values into the fabric of contemporary Hong Kong culture , ” Wilson suggests while also pointing out the changing social and political climate .
“ The adoption of a protest anthem ; the sustained local coverage and endless reports of confrontations , on the street , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pro-Beijing and pro-democracy supporters ; and the wide international response – all strengthen the position occupied by protesters as the most significant issue affecting Hong Kong in our times.
” Are there things Americans can do as individuals to strengthen pro-democracy forces outside of the hashtagivism of social media ( which isn ’ t bad but more can always be done ) ?
Absolutely !
Groups like Demosisto , Freedom HONG KONG , Democracy for Hong Kong , Hong Kong Free Press , and Hong Kong Democracy Fire all exist and need support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Hong Kong .
This could be more powerful than any kind of legislation passed by Washington , DC because the money goes directly to Hongkongers and allies looking to stay organized in 2020 .
The fight for freedom in Hong Kong is not going away , despite the hopes of Beijing .
Protesters need to stand firm in their beliefs .
Hopefully , the demonstrations will keep going and eventually force the government to respond diplomatically instead of with further violence .

It’s been almost a year since demonstrators took to the streets of Hong Kong to protest the now-pulled Extradition Bill. Police beatings, riots, political arrests, student walk-outs, and property damage have all followed with the government in Hong Kong and China attempting to portray everything as a one-off with very little public support. Reality is much different from Beijing’s fantasy with pro-democracy candidates making major inroads in District Council races forcing HK Chief Executive Carrie Lam to promise to reflect on the results. She also vowed to not step down from her position while visiting the World Economic Forum in Switzerland last week.
There’s still much to discuss and process about Hong Kong and the coronavirus-caused pause, along with the Lunar New Year, might be the best opportunity for both sides to reflect on the past year. It’s doubtful the tension and conflict will end, and police launched more tear gas at protesters last night, but this shouldn’t cause any of the “Five Demands. Not One Less” crowd from backing down.
“The greater threat to the legitimacy of the local and central governments is posed not by noisy, violent, attention-grabbing protesters, but by the portion of the population who think of themselves as pro-democracy,” Benjamin Wilson wrote at Hong Kong Free Press yesterday in a retrospective of the current climate. “This includes those who identify as part of the movement even if they disagree with some of the more radical actions committed by demonstrators, or have never physically attended a protest or taken part in social media debate, or breathed a word about their political opinion to others.”
Wilson’s theory is the protests have planted the seed of democracy inside the minds of Hongkongers. That seed, he hopes, will eventually become a full-fledged tree overtaking the rest of the forest of ideas in Hong Kong.
The big test for Wilson’s hope is the September elections in the Legislative Council. Democracy advocates won’t get a majority The Economist reported last November due to the rules put together by China, however, they might be able to get more of a say in issues including whoever becomes chief executive. This would be a victory if the right candidate is selected.
There is still plenty of fear in Hong Kong about what is coming next. The Wall Street Journal wrote last month the so-called “Greens,” people who see themselves as neutral in the clash between police and protesters, are becoming more fraught for the future. One woman opined the region is “not right” because of the events of the past year. She understands the pro-democracy protesters but is still fearful there’s no way to cross the current divide due to violence on both sides.
Those fears might be alleviated if Wilson’s theory comes true.
“As this anti-authoritarian identity is consolidated – paradoxically, by the very forces intended to stamp it out – the movement has carved its values into the fabric of contemporary Hong Kong culture,” Wilson suggests while also pointing out the changing social and political climate. “The adoption of a protest anthem; the sustained local coverage and endless reports of confrontations, on the street, in bars, at university campuses, between pro-Beijing and pro-democracy supporters; and the wide international response – all strengthen the position occupied by protesters as the most significant issue affecting Hong Kong in our times.”
Are there things Americans can do as individuals to strengthen pro-democracy forces outside of the hashtagivism of social media (which isn’t bad but more can always be done)? Absolutely! Groups like Demosisto, Freedom HONG KONG, Democracy for Hong Kong, Hong Kong Free Press, and Hong Kong Democracy Fire all exist and need support to keep the fight for freedom going in Hong Kong. This could be more powerful than any kind of legislation passed by Washington, DC because the money goes directly to Hongkongers and allies looking to stay organized in 2020.
The fight for freedom in Hong Kong is not going away, despite the hopes of Beijing. Protesters need to stand firm in their beliefs. Hopefully, the demonstrations will keep going and eventually force the government to respond diplomatically instead of with further violence.


hotair--2020-01-27--Pennsylvania Democrats: A Sanders-style fracking ban would kill any chance of defeating Trump in the

Pennsylvania Democrats: A Sanders-style fracking ban would kill any chance of defeating Trump in the state

The NY Times published a piece today about Pennsylvania Democrats who are warning their party that nominating either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren for president would help ensure Trump would win the state in 2020 .
But this isn ’ t a vague concern about electability .
This is something very specific .
Pennsylvania lieutenant governor John Fetterman and Pittsburgh mayor Bill Peduto both believe the national fracking ban Warren and Sanders are promising would wipe out hundreds of thousands of local jobs if it were enacted .
They say the “ leave it in the ground ” message is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In Pennsylvania , you ’ re talking hundreds of thousands of related jobs that would be — they would be unemployed overnight , ” said Mr. Fetterman , who endorsed Mr. Sanders in 2016 before Donald J. Trump won his state , pop .
12.8 million , by just over 44,000 votes .
“ Pennsylvania is a margin play , ” he added .
“ And an outright ban on fracking isn ’ t a margin play.
” Mr. Peduto said “ the Warren-Sanders , ban-all-fracking-right-now ” position would “ absolutely devastate communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environmentalists against workers at a time when Democrats need both .
“ If a candidate comes into this state and tries to sell that policy , they ’ re going to have a hard time winning , ” he said… A November poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Cook Political Report found that only 39 percent of Pennsylvania swing voters saw a fracking ban as a good idea , even as nearly 7 in 10 of those same voters said they supported the idea of a “ Green New Deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert F. Matzie , also a Democrat , told the Times that no candidate running on a fracking ban could win the state .
“ He ’ s quite frankly probably the only guy you could stand onstage with in Beaver County , ” Matzie said , referring to Joe Biden .
The Times points out that the number of jobs connected to renewable energy in the state ( about 90,000 ) is still greater than the number directly working on fracking ( about 30,000 ) , but the industry claims a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dependent on those 30,000 jobs .
In any case , the point is that Trump isn ’ t campaigning on a plan that would wipe out the 90,000 renewable jobs overnight .
But Warren and Sanders are threatening the 30,000 fracking jobs with elimination .
That ’ s a tough sell to people in the rust belt who have seen what happens when major industries disappear .
The Times spoke to a group of union members , all Democrats , who said they supported Hillary Clinton in the last election .
“ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that supports a fracking ban , I ’ m going to tell my members that they either don ’ t vote or vote for the other guy , ” one of the union members told the Times .
Are Democrats listening ?

The NY Times published a piece today about Pennsylvania Democrats who are warning their party that nominating either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren for president would help ensure Trump would win the state in 2020. But this isn’t a vague concern about electability. This is something very specific. Pennsylvania lieutenant governor John Fetterman and Pittsburgh mayor Bill Peduto both believe the national fracking ban Warren and Sanders are promising would wipe out hundreds of thousands of local jobs if it were enacted. They say the “leave it in the ground” message is a loser in the state:
“In Pennsylvania, you’re talking hundreds of thousands of related jobs that would be — they would be unemployed overnight,” said Mr. Fetterman, who endorsed Mr. Sanders in 2016 before Donald J. Trump won his state, pop. 12.8 million, by just over 44,000 votes. “Pennsylvania is a margin play,” he added. “And an outright ban on fracking isn’t a margin play.” Mr. Peduto said “the Warren-Sanders, ban-all-fracking-right-now” position would “absolutely devastate communities throughout the Rust Belt” and pit environmentalists against workers at a time when Democrats need both. “If a candidate comes into this state and tries to sell that policy, they’re going to have a hard time winning,” he said… A November poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Cook Political Report found that only 39 percent of Pennsylvania swing voters saw a fracking ban as a good idea, even as nearly 7 in 10 of those same voters said they supported the idea of a “Green New Deal” for the environment.
State Representative Robert F. Matzie, also a Democrat, told the Times that no candidate running on a fracking ban could win the state. “He’s quite frankly probably the only guy you could stand onstage with in Beaver County,” Matzie said, referring to Joe Biden.
The Times points out that the number of jobs connected to renewable energy in the state (about 90,000) is still greater than the number directly working on fracking (about 30,000), but the industry claims a lot more jobs (over 350,000) are dependent on those 30,000 jobs. In any case, the point is that Trump isn’t campaigning on a plan that would wipe out the 90,000 renewable jobs overnight. But Warren and Sanders are threatening the 30,000 fracking jobs with elimination. That’s a tough sell to people in the rust belt who have seen what happens when major industries disappear.
The Times spoke to a group of union members, all Democrats, who said they supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. “If we end up with a Democratic candidate that supports a fracking ban, I’m going to tell my members that they either don’t vote or vote for the other guy,” one of the union members told the Times. Are Democrats listening?


hotair--2020-01-27--Illinois admits non-citizens voted in 2018... again

It ’ s being reported that the voter turnout in Illinois in 2018 was even higher than already suspected .
This was not all accounted for by enthusiastic citizens trudging out in the cold to cast their ballots , however .
In a story that ’ s been repeated often enough to become tiresome , the state has admitted that their “ motor voter ” system registered a significant number of non-citizens to vote .
And some unknown number of them took advantage of the opportunity .
( Free Beacon ) A watchdog group has requested records from the Illinois @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were added to its voter rolls , allowing some of them to vote illegally in the 2018 midterm elections .
The Public Interest Legal Foundation [ PILF ] , an election integrity law firm , made the request on Thursday after the board admitted the error .
The individuals in question were improperly invited onto the rolls through a glitch in the state ’ s automatic voter registration system while applying for a driver ’ s license or state identification .
The watchdog says Democratic politicians are pushing automatic voter registration at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been doing some admirable work in exposing these systemic failures over the years .
And this wasn ’ t the first time that the state of Illinois has been forced to publicly eat crow over this problem .
PILF previously found more than 200 non-citizens in Chicago who were registered to vote .
Out of this batch of 574 , 19 have been confirmed to have cast ballots in 2018 .
Critics will immediately jump up and say that 19 people out of a population the size of Illinois ’ is only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal voting is so rare , there ’ s no need to do away with the motor voter system or require voter ID .
But those 19 were only the ones who self-reported that they had committed the crime .
The true number is unknown and couldn ’ t be determined without a thorough review of the voter records .
Seemingly everywhere that the motor voter system is implemented , these types of problems quickly follow .
We ’ ve seen it in Pennsylvania , Texas and Ohio , among others .
Heck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California who voted in as many as twenty straight elections .
( You almost have to admire the dedication .
I know many citizens who can ’ t match that record . )
This problem was probably best summed up by one officer at PILF who said , “ States have no business experimenting with automatic voter registration until they can zero out the risk of ineligible noncitizens passing through traditional Motor Voter.
” That much should have been self-evident all along , but for nearly twenty states it apparently wasn ’ t @

It’s being reported that the voter turnout in Illinois in 2018 was even higher than already suspected. This was not all accounted for by enthusiastic citizens trudging out in the cold to cast their ballots, however. In a story that’s been repeated often enough to become tiresome, the state has admitted that their “motor voter” system registered a significant number of non-citizens to vote. And some unknown number of them took advantage of the opportunity. (Free Beacon)
A watchdog group has requested records from the Illinois State Board of Elections after 574 noncitizens were added to its voter rolls, allowing some of them to vote illegally in the 2018 midterm elections. The Public Interest Legal Foundation [PILF], an election integrity law firm, made the request on Thursday after the board admitted the error. The individuals in question were improperly invited onto the rolls through a glitch in the state’s automatic voter registration system while applying for a driver’s license or state identification. The watchdog says Democratic politicians are pushing automatic voter registration at the expense of election integrity.
PILF has been doing some admirable work in exposing these systemic failures over the years. And this wasn’t the first time that the state of Illinois has been forced to publicly eat crow over this problem. PILF previously found more than 200 non-citizens in Chicago who were registered to vote. Out of this batch of 574, 19 have been confirmed to have cast ballots in 2018.
Critics will immediately jump up and say that 19 people out of a population the size of Illinois’ is only a drop in the bucket. So if illegal voting is so rare, there’s no need to do away with the motor voter system or require voter ID. But those 19 were only the ones who self-reported that they had committed the crime. The true number is unknown and couldn’t be determined without a thorough review of the voter records.
Seemingly everywhere that the motor voter system is implemented, these types of problems quickly follow. We’ve seen it in Pennsylvania, Texas and Ohio, among others. Heck, there was one illegal alien in California who voted in as many as twenty straight elections. (You almost have to admire the dedication. I know many citizens who can’t match that record.)
This problem was probably best summed up by one officer at PILF who said, “States have no business experimenting with automatic voter registration until they can zero out the risk of ineligible noncitizens passing through traditional Motor Voter.” That much should have been self-evident all along, but for nearly twenty states it apparently wasn’t.