Monday, November 30, 2015

Hillary Speaks at the New Hampshire Jefferson-Jackson Dinner



On Sunday, Hillary Clinton spoke at the New Hampshire Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner along with Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley. Her speech got the biggest and loudest response of the night and most of it will sound familiar to those who have been listening to her recent stump speeches. However, some of the longest applause came after this "unusual" but resonant line towards the end.

"I know it is unusual for a candidate for president, especially in these divisive times, to say we need more love and kindness...but that's exactly what we need in America right now."

It is indeed unusual to hear about "love and kindness" after the barrage of hateful, suspicious and warlike rhetoric from the Republican side, but it's just the sort of talk that we need a lot more of.

Watch the full speech above.

Hillary News & Views 11.30: Planned Parenthood, Guns, Infrastructure, Marty Walsh, Maya Harris


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with Clinton’s remarks at last night’s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner.

Throughout her campaign, Clinton has been forcefully advocating her support for Planned Parenthood, reproductive rights, and gun control, all issues which are relevant to the terrorist attack in Colorado Springs.

The Hill reports:
“The shooting on Friday was at, as you know, a Planned Parenthood clinic, a place where lots of women get healthcare they need – breast exams, STD testing, contraception, and, yes, safe and legal abortions,” Clinton said at the New Hampshire Jefferson-Jackson Dinner. “We should be supporting Planned Parenthood, not attacking it.”
“And it is way past time to protect women’s health and respect women’s rights, not use them as political footballs,” she said.
In an appeal for more stringent gun control, Clinton drew a connection between the Colorado shooting, which left three dead, and the terrorist attack on Paris earlier this month.
“This is truly unbelievable, that after what we’ve seen in Paris and other places, Republicans will not bring up a bill that will prohibit anyone on the no-fly list from buying a gun in America," she said. "If you are too dangerous to fly in America, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.
“How many more Americans need to die before we take action?” she asked.

Clinton released expanded details about infrastructure spending at a Boston event yesterday.

CNN reports:
Standing inside historic Faneuil Hall's Great Hall, Clinton said as president she would increase federal investment in infrastructure by $275 billion over the next five years, including establishing a $25 billion national infrastructure bank, which would put up federal dollars to attract private investment, and more federal spending to "bankroll upgrades to roads, bridges, airports and public transit."
The event kicks off Clinton's month-long focus on her jobs agenda, which, aides said Sunday, will be paid for through business tax reform. Clinton's cumulative jobs and infrastructure plan -- which aides called "the most significant investment, dollars-wise, of her policy platform" -- will cost at least $350 billion.
"To build a strong economy for our future, we must start by building strong infrastructure today," Clinton said flanked by paintings of Daniel Webster, Samuel Adams and George Washington. "I want our cities to be in the forefront of cities anywhere in the world. I want our workers to be the most competitive and productive in the world. I want us, once again, to think big and look up, beyond the horizon of what is possible in America."
The former secretary of state teased that the plan would also call for universal broadband by 2020, more focus on creating a clean energy grid and bringing back Build America bonds, municipal bonds that were used during to fund infrastructure projects during the Great Recession in 2009.
"I know we can do this. I know it is not going to be easy," Clinton said to the audience, made up largely of union members. "This is not my first rodeo."
While in Boston, Clinton picked up the endorsement of Mayor Marty Walsh.

MSNBC reports:
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh endorsed Hillary Clinton at a charged rally in historic Faneuil Hall Sunday afternoon with hundreds of union members as Clinton rolled out a $275 billion infrastructure plan.
“Get your sledgehammers ready, we’ve got a glass ceiling to demolish!” Walsh declared to cheers as they launched an initiative dubbed “Hard hats for Hillary.”
“Nobody comes closer to her experience, nobody comes closer to her achievements,” Walsh continued, adding that he chose Clinton because she was “battle-tested” and “gets the job done.”
Mayoral endorsements are a key part of Clinton’s national strategy, as big cities will be a central focus in a Clinton administration.

Politico reports:
At an event billed as “Hard Hats for Hillary,” Clinton unveiled a $275 billion infrastructure proposal to fix highways, trains, airports, aging sewer systems and the country’s frayed electrical grid.
“Here in Boston, I remember the historic snowfall you had last winter,” she told the packed hall, where an overflow crowd of about 1,200 supporters watched on a screen set up in the square outside. “The pictures I saw of two-story snowdrifts -- it crippled the T, I remember hearing that.”
Leaning into her urban message, she added that “not everyone can afford, or wants, to have a car these days, and I don’t think people want to see more traffic downtown. That’s why public transit is absolutely vital to connecting people.”
“Our roads and bridges are potholed and crumbling," she said. "Families endure blackouts because our electric grid fails in extreme weather. Beneath our cities, our pipeline infrastructure, our water, our sewers are up to a century or more old. Our airports are a mess, our ports need improvement, and our rail systems do as well.”
Clinton promised her entire infrastructure program would be paid for through business tax reform.
“For years the best airports in the world have been in places like China, Korea and Japan,” she said. “Not one U.S. in the top 10 or even in the top 20…. We invented airplanes in America, we are the reason the world can fly, we can do better than we’re doing now.”
Elle profiled senior Clinton policy advisor Maya Harris:

What shapes the way Hillary speaks to certain policies?

Hillary has a really broad approach to engaging people around policy precisely because she understands that there are so many different dimensions to each issue. She really wants to understand how different people are experiencing the issue and what different people think are the solutions to an issue, so that when she actually starts to develop policy it's from a very informed perspective. ... She's very much cognizant of the relationship that policy has on real people's lives.

As a policy advisor, what exactly do you...do?

You know, Hillary spent a lot of time during the first part of the campaign just traveling around the country and having really intimate conversations. And one of the issues that kept coming up was substance abuse and mental health. She knew and we knew that it was a problem, but it's so pervasive. It's a problem in rural and urban areas. It's a problem in Iowa and California. Everywhere she went, she would hear that this issue is what's keeping people up at night. People would tell her about addiction and loss and what it had done to their families. From that, she came back to the policy team and said, "Look, I want you guys to dig in on this. I want you to meet the people I met on the trail. Talk to them." And we did. We did Google hangouts with people in Iowa and New Hampshire. We spoke not only to people who have had issues with this in their own lives, but people on the ground—first responders, police officers, peer counselors. We engaged with all of these different people in all these different cities. And then we sat down with her to develop her policy.

This time around, Hillary has talked a lot about how her being a woman impacts the way she approaches political issues. She's made it very clear that her gender and experiences as a woman inform her decision-making process. Have you found that to be true for you?

You can never separate yourself from who you are. You bring your whole self to everything that you do, and that includes this work that I do. [...] Being a parent, I'm acutely aware of how hard it is to get good childcare. Even as I've gotten older and been a boss, you know, I've always reflected on this moment that happened at the elevator bank at the first law firm I worked at. I was going to leave at the end of the day, because I had to go pick up my daughter. I was a single parent at the time. And just as I was standing there, a partner stopped me and wanted to pull me into a meeting and have this whole conversation. And I'll never forget feeling like, "What do I do? I have this person who clearly feels I need to be here to have this conversation and yet I've got to go because my kid is going to be sitting on a curb if I don't get to childcare."
Pivoting back to the New Hampshire dinner, Clinton’s supporters outnumbered those of her fellow candidates for the nomination.

The Concord Monitor reports:
But the loudest cheers – plus glow sticks and thunder sticks – inside the event easily came from Clinton supporters. (Neither a party spokesperson nor any campaign officials confirmed how many tickets each campaign purchased for the event. Seats ranged from $100 to $1,000.) 
Janet Mason of Dover even brought along her Clinton campaign button from 2008, signed by the candidate.
“It’s everything I know she stands for,” Mason said of why she supports the candidate.
While the Republican front-runners have no history as elected officials, Mason said political experience is important to her.
“It certainly does matter,” she said. “You’re dealing with ISIS, you’re dealing with domestic terrorism.”
Northwood resident Tom Chase was still bundled up in layers of sweatshirts from holding Hillary signs outside all afternoon. He also said Clinton’s experience from decades in politics makes her most qualified to be president.
“Hillary has all kinds of proposals and policies,” Chase said. “That’s how you govern – you make policies.”
While the election is still a distance away and things could change, the scene above dovetails with what insiders are seeing on the ground today in the early states.

Politico reports:
Hillary Clinton has stymied Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ summer surge, according to Democratic insiders in the same four early states surveyed by POLITICO. Insiders said overwhelmingly in all four states that Clinton would win if the caucuses or primaries were held today.
While members of The POLITICO Caucus have always leaned more toward Clinton than the public opinion polls, Sanders had closed the gap — especially in New Hampshire — over the summer. In late June and early July, roughly a quarter of New Hampshire Caucus members said Sanders would win the first-in-the-nation primary there if it were held that day.
But now only a handful of insiders say Sanders would win today in their states. “Hillary's organization in Nevada is large and very competent in its work preparing for our caucus,” said one Democrat.
“Sanders has lost momentum,” said one Democratic insider. “The race has become about more than income inequality, and his more limited focus/message — in contrast to Clinton's breadth and depth — has become a weakness. Also, as voters get more engaged and serious, the electability factor is also starting to become more important, helping Clinton [and] hurting Sanders.”
Hopefully, the campaign will continue to work like it is thirty points behind in every state!

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Happy Thanksgiving!


Hillary HQ will be on vacation over the long Thanksgiving weekend and will return on Monday. But as always, keep following us on Twitter and Facebook for all the latest.

Happy Turkey Day, y'all!

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Hillary TV: Volume 7

Live with Kelly & Michael - 11/19:



Boulder, CO rally with Mark Udall - 11/24:



Reno, NV rally - 11/23:



Memphis, TN rally - 11/20:



And here are a couple of slightly older ones that got missed...

San Antonio, TX rally with Julian Castro - 10/15:



Manchester, NH forum on gun violence - 10/5:

Hillary News & Views 11.25: The Hillary Coalition, Rejecting Fear, Telemundo, Rural Schools, LIUNA


Today's Hillary News & Views begins with an article about the Hillary Coalition: the demographic groups that supported Clinton in 2008, along with those she's picked up for the current election.

Medium reports:
Even before the term “Obama Coalition” entered the political lexicon, both Hillary and then-Sen. Obama assembled impressive electoral coalitions that held throughout the 2008 primary campaign. Hillary performed strongest among women, union households, Latinos, LGBTQ and AAPI voters — groups that contributed heavily to the 18 million votes she earned in that election. These groups weren’t voting against then-Sen. Obama (they supported him heavily in two general elections). They were voting for Hillary. Similarly, groups comprising President Obama’s winning primary election coalition — namely young voters, African Americans and white progressives — weren’t voting against Hillary; they were voting for then-Sen. Obama.
There is zero evidence to suggest that Hillary primary voters rejected then-Sen. Obama in the 2008 or 2012 general elections. So after Hillary served as the president’s secretary of state, and as she is on the campaign trail touting President Obama’s achievements and their joint work, there’s even less reason to think that President Obama’s strongest supporters would reject Hillary in 2016. Logic, data, and conversations on the ground say just the opposite. Just look at her whopping 70-point leads among African American voters in South Carolina primary polls.
While her initial polling numbers were inflated, her floor was rock-solid, particularly because of her strong support across racial lines. If she wins the Democratic primary, it will be because she has assembled the most diverse coalition of voters in memory. The crosstabs demonstrate that relationships and relatability with communities of color are not built overnight. Coalition-building is not Hillary’s challenge. It’s her forte.
I should also add this: Hillary walks the walk. Her campaign staff is three times more diverse than that of her two Democratic rivals, according to the experts at INCLUSV, a diversity hiring initiative. 32 percent of her campaign is comprised of people of color, according to the report, while her opponents’ campaigns are 90 percent white. The LGBTQ community, not surprisingly, is also represented in force in Brooklyn and in early states. Hillary’s diverse campaign staff is preparing to capture a diverse coalition of voters throughout the country.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Clinton vs. Cruz: Yes, It Really Could Happen

I've been saying this since the day he entered the race eight months ago, and the debates have done nothing to make me doubt it my initial assessment: Keep an eye on Cruz.

With the collapse of Carson, Ted's got the momentum and is now riding shotgun in the GOP clown car.

In fact, he's now (suddenly) essentially tied with Trump in Iowa.
Ted Cruz, buoyed by tea party support and the backing of the conservative wing of the Republican Party, has surged to a virtual tie with Donald Trump in the first caucus state of Iowa, according to the results of a Quinnipiac University poll surveying likely Republican caucus-goers released Tuesday.
Trump took 25 percent of support, followed by 23 percent who opted for the freshman Texas senator, more than doubling his support in the same poll from October, when he earned just 10 percent. Trailing the two leaders is Ben Carson, who dropped from first to third, falling 10 points to 18 percent.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is fourth with 13 percent, while no other candidate registered in the double digits.
I guess that Steve King endorsement really was a big deal, huh?

This comes on the heels of another Iowa poll showing Cruz in second place and a slew of other state and national polls showing him hovering around third place.

I get why a lot of people still don't Ted Cruz very seriously. His views are absurd, his face is kinda goofy, he's got bad hair, his voice is odd, and all reasonable people can't stand him. As a Texan, I didn't take him very seriously either...then he crushed our sitting Lieutenant Governor in a runoff and the Democrat in the general election and was my senator before I even knew what had happened

In short, say what you want about the guy...but he knows how to win. And if Trump finally collapses and Rubio goes down over his immigration flip-flopping (quite likely in this environment, in my opinion), Cruz is well-positioned to be the least-bad consensus choice among conservatives and lock up the nomination around mid-Spring. 

Consider that a highly-plausible hunch. But consider this a prediction:

If it's Clinton vs Cruz, we're looking at Democratic electoral landslide on par or better than 2008...possibly flipping the Senate and the House in the process.

Hillary News & Views 11.24: Ironworkers, Corporate Mergers, Reno, Hard Hats, and Haters


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with another union endorsement for the presidential candidate.

Reuters reports:
Democrat Hillary Clinton on Monday won the endorsement of the ironworkers' union, adding to her front-runner status in the race for her party's U.S. presidential nomination.
"While the council felt that several other candidates align with ironworker values, none compare to Secretary Clinton when it comes to putting those beliefs into practice," the union said in a statement.
"Clinton's record of looking out for the jobs that union members rely on was the largest factor in the council’s decision."
"Secretary Clinton's unmatched experience in government will enable her to deliver on her promises in ways the other candidates cannot," the ironworkers said on Monday.

Monday, November 23, 2015

Game Over, GOP: Hillary Most Trusted Candidate on Terrorism

Once upon a time, national security was the trump card that Republicans could count on to win elections that might otherwise be out of reach. As recently as 2004, it was as easy as tossing out a mysterious "Code Orange" terrorist alert immediately after the Democratic National Convention.

So obviously, the horrific terrorist attacks in Paris provided Republicans with a welcome change of focus from those pesky domestic issues that would lead to certain defeat. Marco Rubio perhaps said it best this week by admitting that the tragedy in Paris could be a "positive development" for the 2016 campaign. (I guess the sheer fascist lunacy of Trump's campaign overshadowed this appalling statement?)

Well, the bad ol' days of the GOP reliably pounding the electorate with the fear hammer seem to be gone, because America trusts Democrat Hillary Clinton more than any other candidate when it comes to keeping the country safe:
A crescendo of tough talk on Syrian refugees and terrorism seems to be elevating the toughest talkers in the GOP primary -- most notably Donald Trump. But among the broader American public, the most trusted person to handle the issue is Hillary Clinton. ...
By 50 percent to 42 percent, more Americans say they trust Clinton to handle the threat of terrorism than Trump, who leads the Republican field and responded to the Paris terrorist attacks by calling for heightened surveillance of mosques and redoubling his opposition to allowing Syrian refugees to settle in the U.S.

Clinton holds a similar nine-point advantage over retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson on the issue (49-40) and an eight-point edge over Sen. Ted Cruz (48-40) in the poll of 1,004 U.S. adults. Jeb Bush fares a bit better, trailing Clinton by a three-point margin on trust to deal with terrorism (46-43), while Marco Rubio trails Clinton by four points (47-43). Those last two differences don’t reach statistical significance. ...
Clinton’s position of strength in the new Post-ABC poll is perhaps more striking given it also found a record high 54 percent of Americans disapprove of the way Obama is handling terrorism, and 57 percent disapproved of his handling of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Clinton owes her edge then, to a significant share of Obama detractors who nonetheless prefer her over Republicans. Tellingly, the poll found between one-quarter and one-third of those who disapprove of Obama's efforts dealing with terrorism also say they trust Clinton over Republican on the issue.
And so we see yet again why Republicans have been so afraid of facing Hillary Clinton: She's obviously tougher and smarter than all of them and America knows it. The Benghazi hearing and the debates from both parties have only solidified that.

There is little doubt that Clinton will wallop the Republican nominee on domestic issues next November. And if she retains her edge or even ties on national security...game over. It won't even be close.

And the best part of all? She'll beat them using resolve instead of fear. 

Hillary News & Views 11.23: Personal Loss in Mali, Caring for Caregivers, '94' on Climate Change


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with the tragedy in Mali. 

Clinton personally knew one of the victims, and publicly expressed her condolences.

The Guardian reports:
Hillary Clinton on Saturday expressed her condolences to the family of Anita Datar, the American aid worker who was killed in a terrorist attack on a luxury hotel in Mali on Friday.
The former secretary of state said Datar, 41, a mother and sometime Peace Corps volunteer, had represented the “best of America’s generous spirit”. Datar was the former partner of one of Clinton’s former advisers, Clinton said.
In a heartfelt statement, Clinton, the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, said she had known Datar as “ the loving mother of a wonderful seven-year-old boy and the former partner of David Garten, one of my senior policy advisers in the Senate”.
“My heart breaks thinking of the burden [her son] will now bear on his small shoulders and the courage he will have to show in the days ahead,” she said.
“As I said this week, America must wage and win an immediate battle against Isis, al-Qaida and other terrorist networks, as well as a generational struggle against radical jihadism.
“We face a choice between fear and resolve. Anita’s murder should deepen our resolve. American must lead the world to meet this threat.”

Clinton is proposing tax credits and expanded Social Security benefits to help offset caregiver costs.

The Los Angeles Times reports:
"We need to recognize the value of the work that caregivers give to all of us, both those who are paid and the great number who are unpaid," Clinton told the crowd of more than 400 people gathered at a middle school.
The caregiver proposal is part of a series of tax proposals geared at the middle class that Clinton is rolling out. In her plan, Clinton states that the number of Americans needing long-term care is expected to grow from about 12 million today to 27 million by 2050. She says family members often have to take time away from work, using vacation time or personal time to provide care.
"The lost wages and the work that is sometimes given up are costing families — especially women, who make up the majority of both paid and unpaid caregivers," Clinton said.
The former secretary of State is also seeking to provide additional Social Security benefits to those who spend time out of the workforce to care for immediate family. She wants to enhance support for care workers and increase funding for a program that offers state-level grants to programs for caregivers. Clinton's campaign says the plan would cost $10 billion over 10 years and would be paid for through other revenue increases.
Clinton focuses on her long history fighting for health care and her current focus on reducing prescription drug prices in her latest campaign ad:


The Associated Press requested that climate experts score the presidential candidates on accuracy regarding their statements on climate change. Clinton came out on top.
The Star Tribune reports:
When it comes to climate science, two of the three Democratic presidential candidates are A students, while most of the Republican contenders are flunking, according to a panel of scientists who reviewed candidates' comments.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had the highest average score at 94.
Below Clinton's 94 were O'Malley with 91; Sanders, 87; Bush, 64; Christie, 54; Ohio Gov. John Kasich, 47; Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, 38; Fiorina, 28; Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, 21; businessman Donald Trump, 15; retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, 13; and Cruz with 6.
Clinton is promising that incomes will go up for middle class families, but not taxes.
The Washington Post reports:
“You know the deck is rigged, but we’ve got to reshuffle that deck,” Clinton said, speaking to the growing concern within her party’s base that the political and economic systems are skewed to benefit the rich and powerful. “And make sure we are raising incomes for the middle class, not raising taxes on the middle class. And I will not do that.”
“Other candidates want to increase taxes for the working people and the middle class as part of their health plans,” Clinton said Saturday. “Well, I don’t want to see your taxes go up, I want to see your health-care costs go down.
“We can manage to do that while preserving the accomplishment of the Affordable Care Act,” she said.
Clinton has expanded her campaign infrastructure beyond the early voting states, but more importantly, she’s providing needed funds for state parties.
Politico reports:
Certainly, the Brooklyn-based campaign is still spending a considerable chunk of its time on Iowa and New Hampshire — and running a rotation of fresh ads across both states. But she’s making moves in South Carolina and Nevada, dispatching high-profile surrogates, unleashing Bill Clinton, and even deploying cash to strategically useful state Democratic parties long before her rivals have anywhere near the organizational capacity to follow suit.
The campaign has been using its joint fundraising agreement with the Democratic National Committee and state parties to start spreading election-season cash and bolster local relationships: According to Federal Election Commission filings that landed on Friday, Team Clinton has sent funds to state parties in Florida, Pennsylvania, Wyoming and Massachusetts. At the same time, Bill Clinton has been stepping up his own fundraising blitz for the campaign, scheduling at least 20 events this month, including eight in March states.
“I don’t think it’s any explicit strategy to finish [Sanders and O’Malley] off,” said one Democratic strategist close to the Clinton campaign, summing up the campaign’s intensification and the current state of play. “If things were going badly — and they’re obviously not — I think they’d be doing the same thing."
“But,” he acknowledged, she’s "playing the long game."

Friday, November 20, 2015

Hillary News & Views 11.20: American Values and the Challenge to Meet Them


Today's Hillary News & Views previews the moral foundation of a potential Hillary Clinton presidency, as she spoke out for American leadership abroad to fight terrorism, but also at home to stand up for refugees and against racial injustice and gun violence.

First, some coverage and highlights from her big speech yesterday on ISIS.

CNN reports:
Hillary Clinton is calling for more allied planes, more airstrikes and a "broader target set" -- though no large-scale mobilization of U.S. ground troops -- to combat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
She urged Congress to approve a new authorization of the use of military force against ISIS, saying that doing so would signal "that the U.S. is committed to this fight. The time for delay is over. We should get this done."
In the wake of the Paris attacks, for which ISIS has claimed responsibility, Clinton said that "every society faces a choice between fear and resolve" -- an indirect shot at her Republican foes in the 2016 presidential race, who have called for the United States to shut out Syrian refugees.
"This is no time to be scoring political points. We must use every pillar of American power, including our values, to fight terror," Clinton said.
USA Today reports:
Republicans, including Ted Cruz of Texas, have criticized both Obama and Clinton for refusing to label ISIL's network as "radical Islamic terrorism." In her speech, Clinton explained why, saying that such language strengthens terrorist recruitment by alienating Muslims as a group.
"Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism," said Clinton. A debate over terminology in the presidential primary arena "isn’t just a distraction," she said.  "It gives these criminals, these murderers more standing than they deserve. It actually plays into their hands by alienating partners we need.”


ABC News reports:
Clinton also said the United States must do more to stop ISIS’ growth online, and called on Silicon Valley and those in the private sector to help. "We must deny them virtual territory, just as we deny them actual territory,” she said.
She called out the GOP for their use of the phrase “radical Islamists,” which she says gives terrorists more standing than they deserve. “Islam is not our adversary,” she said.
And Clinton doubled-down on her call for allowing refugees into the United States.
"It would be a cruel irony, indeed, if ISIS can force families from their homes and also prevent them from ever finding new ones,” she said.
During the Q&A that followed, Clinton added that “we should not have religious tests" to decide which refugees can come into the country.
The New York Times reports:
“Like President Obama, I do not believe that we should again have 100,000 American troops in combat in the Middle East,” she said.
Similarly, she called for more air power, but only in cooperation with Persian Gulf allies. And she acknowledged in a question-and-answer session that Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had halted their air attacks on the Islamic State to focus instead in Yemen.
Expanding on her previous call for a no-fly zone, Mrs. Clinton said it should be limited to northern Syria, where Turkey has proposed a buffer zone to protect civilians, and enforced by many countries. That, she said, “will confront a lot of our partners in the region and beyond about what they are going to do.”
She took a particularly hard line against Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations who she said had been complicit in the rise of the Islamic State. “Once and for all, the Saudis, the Qataris and others need to stop their citizens from directly funding extremist organizations,” Mrs. Clinton said.
The Atlantic reports:
And so, in Thursday’s speech, Clinton held President Obama’s anti-ISIS blueprint close, but not too close; she argued for more American involvement, but also more international involvement.
“What we have done with airstrikes has made a difference but now it needs to make a greater difference and we need more of a coalition flying those missions with us.”
She also argued for more ground troops, but not American ground troops. More American special ops forces, however, were another thing:
“To support them, we should immediately deploy the special operations force President Obama has already authorized, and be prepared to deploy more as more Syrians get into the fight.”
Quartz reports:
“We are in a contest of ideas against an ideology of hate—and we have to win it. Now, let’s be clear though: Islam itself is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. The obsession in some quarters with a ‘clash of civilizations’ or repeating the specific words ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism’ is not just a distraction, it gives these criminals, these murderers, more standing than they deserve and it actually plays into their hands by alienating partners we need by our side.”
Given how quickly anti-Muslim rhetoric became acceptable (again) among leading US political figures after the Paris attacks, it will be extremely challenging for the US to win a propaganda war over tolerance, but this may be among the most critical items on this list.
“Law enforcement also needs the trust of residents and communities, including in our own country Muslim-Americans.”
The New Republic has a strong piece up about how Clinton challenged white America to combat racial injustice at last Saturday’s debate.
But when Clinton was specifically asked by moderator Dickerson about the student activism we’ve seen on the Mizzou campus, Clinton offered an answer that helped point her almost universally white Democratic and Republican competitors in the direction that the presidential discussion on race needs to head.
“I come from the sixties,” Clinton began, referencing her own time in college, as a clear attempt to show kinship with the student protesters. “I do appreciate the way that young people are standing up and speaking out,” she continued.  
Adding that there should be enough respect in these discussions so that everyone can hear each other, Clinton said that the protests reflects the “deep sense of concern, even despair that so many young people, particularly of color, have” about how they are treated. In a bit of a non-sequitur, Clinton again brought up the meeting that she had with the mothers of black boys and men killed by gun and police violence, mentioning Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and others.
But the end of her response didn’t only acknowledge racial injustice, the crutch upon which presidential debaters—particularly white ones—lean on all too often. It put the burden on white doubters to do that and more.
“It’s a question for all of us to answer,” she said, referring to Dickerson’s original question. “Every single one of our children deserves the chance to live up to their God-given potential.” 
I took it to mean that Clinton recognized the very real grievances expressed by the protesters and those mothers—and, more important, that she approved of it. Those black folks she’s supporting don’t need her to do that, but white viewers on the fence about the protests might. By actively legitimizing activism at Mizzou, Clinton put the burden on her fellow white people to help solve the underlying problem: systemic racism.
Finally, on gun violence.

Newsweek reports:
After receiving an award recognizing her continued leadership in gun-violence prevention efforts, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday night called the issue a "national emergency" and urged Americans not to give up hope that the gun lobby can be defeated.
"It is long past time to say enough,"  said Clinton, the Democratic front-runner and former secretary of state. "Enough talk. Enough delay. It is time to act."
"There is no reason whatsoever of why we can't come together to take action," she said at the event, which was hosted at Cipriani on Broadway in Manhattan. "The problem is not finding common ground. The problem is politicians finding the courage."
"Don't give in to frustration, disappointment or just giving up," she said. "My plea to all of us is to deliver, finally, the key to keep all Americans safe."
New York Daily News reports:
“There are people too dangerous to be let on airplanes, but Congress won’t stop them from getting guns,” the Democratic presidential hopeful said. “We can do this from the grass roots, and I believe we can do it from the top down.”
The Observer reports:
In her remarks, Ms. Clinton called gun violence a “national emergency” and touched an issue that has been getting considerable attention since terrorists in Paris shot dozens of people at a theater and in restaurants—the fact that people on terror watch lists can still purchase firearms in the United States.
“Leaders in the House and Senate will not even allow a vote on whether we should prevent people on the no-fly list from getting guns,” Ms. Clinton said. It’s just something that makes no sense.”
Ms. Clinton listed some of the policies advocated for by the Brady Campaign—named for James Brady, the press secretary to President Ronald Reagan who was shot and paralyzed in an attempt on Reagan’s life—including closing loopholes that allow some gun sales to occur without background checks.
“These are all, I believe, utterly sensible policies,” Ms. Clinton said. “Yet despite the fact many millions of Americans agree, we can’t seem to break the hold that the gun lobby have on our Congress.”

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Clinton Details Plan to Defeat ISIS and Assist Refugees



Today's speech and Q&A at the Council on Foreign Relations once again made clear that there is only one candidate on either side who is ready to be Commander in Chief on the first day in office.

With her usual thoughtful attention to detail, Clinton laid out a tough plan to defeat ISIS with the help of a robust international coalition and no American combat forces on the ground. She also reiterated her humanitarian stance of allowing Syrian refugees to settle into the country, hoping to convince a skeptical public in the process.

This is quite the opposite of what we're hearing from most Republican candidates, who simultaneously long for another American ground war in the Middle East while coldly rejecting those who are attempting to flee from the enemy. And even worse...if you can believe it...via Marco Rubio.

Meanwhile, Hillary's campaign sent out these tweets:

Quite the contrast, eh?

Check out the full transcript as well as video of the speech and Q&A with Fareed Zakaria above.

Hillary News & Views 11.19: "Hateful Rhetoric" is "Undermining Who we are as Americans"


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with Clinton’s forceful denouncement of GOP rhetoric surrounding the Syrian refugee crisis, and her support for aiding those refugees.
CNN reports:
"We've seen a lot of hateful rhetoric from the GOP. But the idea that we'd turn away refugees because of religion is a new low," Clinton said.
Later Tuesday at a campaign event in Dallas, Clinton pressed further, saying that denying refugees isn't in line with American values.
"We can't act as though we are shutting the door to people in need without undermining who we are as Americans," she told a crowd of supporters.
CBS News reports:
"We have always welcomed immigrants and refugees," Clinton said. "We have made people feel that if they did their part, they sent their kids to school, they worked hard, there would be a place for them in America."
"America is not just electing a president," she said in Dallas, repeating a line she used during the second Democratic debate on Saturday and the next day in Ames, Iowa. "We're also electing a commander-in-chief. That choice matters."
Clinton, for her part, singled out Donald Trump for "his hateful language and his offensive policies" that she believes would "divide our country."
"We may have differences but that's part of what makes us unique and strong," she said. "We remain the symbol for human progress, for democracy, for an economy that produces real opportunity around the world."



Clinton’s expansive leadership teams for each state include elected officials that have endorsed her campaign. Yesterday, her team in Virginia lost one member.
The Washington Times reports:
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign kicked the mayor of Roanoke, Virginia, off its leadership team after he said his city wouldn’t assist in resettling Syrian refugees and cited Japanese internment in his letter of opposition.
A Clinton spokesman slammed Mr. Bowers’ comments in a statement.
“The internment of people of Japanese descent is a dark cloud on our nation’s history and to suggest that it is anything but a horrible moment in our past is outrageous,” said Josh Schwerin, a Clinton campaign spokesman.
Mrs. Clinton has said she is welcoming of Syrian refugees and would like to increase the number to 65,000 within the next year, expanding from President Obama’s recommended 10,000.
Clinton's growing endorsement list now includes the original plaintiff in the court case that ultimately led to marriage equality.
The Huffington Post reports:
Jim Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court's landmark marriage equality case, announced his support for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Monday.
"We have fought to not only change laws, but to change hearts, and now we need a President who will help us fight to eliminate the injustices that occur regularly in our community, and the best person to do that is Hillary Clinton," Obergefell said in a statement. "Hillary is a proven leader who will not only ensure that states are implementing marriage equality, but will work to end discrimination in our community whether it's by passing the Equality Act or through state measures."
"There are still too many places where LGBT Americans are targeted for harassment and violence, and there are too many young people who are uncertain and scared of what their future might hold," Clinton said Monday. "Right now in America, you can get married on Saturday and be fired from your job on Monday just because of who you love."
In July, Clinton came out in favor of the Equality Act, which is a comprehensive nondiscrimination bill that would provide protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals who are currently not protected by federal law. 
Finally, the always excellent offshoot of Clinton’s campaign — The Briefing — takes on Steve King’s endorsement of Ted Cruz:

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Multiple Polls Show Clinton vs. Trump Fantasy Approaching Reality


Clinton vs. Trump in 2016.

According to a slew of new polls, what seemed like an absurd fantasy early this summer is getting closer and closer to being our upcoming reality. Or perhaps the greatest/worst Reality TV show of all time.

People keep expecting The Donald to go away...but he just hasn't. Not even close. And now that GOP voters trust him more than any other candidate on national security (!) with his tough talk of "bombing the hell out of ISIS", I'm not sure he will go away before he ends up with the nomination.

Crazy? Absolutely.

Delusional? Nope.

Let me put it this way: If Rubio had these numbers instead, the pundits would be declaring the race all but over. But in actuality, Trump creams Rubio by 31 points in the new Morning Consult national poll. And the picture is similar in many important states:

Iowa: Trump +12
New Hampshire: Trump +18, +17+10
Nevada: Trump +20
South Carolina: Trump +2
Florida: Trump +18
New Jersey: Trump +13
Connecticut: Trump +11
Texas: Tied with Cruz

Recent polls show Carson still leading by a little bit in a few states like Virginia and Colorado, but it seems as though his bubble may finally be deflating. We shall see.

But what definitely isn't in doubt is Hillary Clinton's dominance among Democrats. Her leads in each of these polls range from big to huge...the only exception being New Hampshire, which has her at +21, +4 and -1 depending on which poll you want to look at.

However, don't bother with the general election polls right now. Quinnipiac is completely insane (as usual) with Hillary stuck in the 30s in Colorado, while PPP shows her almost competitive in SOUTH Carolina. These polls must have been taken in alternate universes.

I know...it's hard for me to wrap my brain around a Clinton vs. Trump contest too. There's certainly time for a Rubio or Cruz or whoever to sneak up and beat him, but I'm starting to wonder if, after all these months, Trump's steady lead might just last long enough for him to win the nomination.

Only to be crushed in a historic landslide by Hillary, of course.

Hillary News & Views 11.18: SEIU, Taxes, Texas, and African-American Outreach


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with coverage of Clinton’s endorsement from SEIU.

The New York Times reports:
The Service Employees International Union, one of the largest and most politically influential unions, threw its support behind Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday, the latest indication that she is consolidating support among the institutional pillars of the Democratic Party.
Mary Kay Henry, S.E.I.U’s president, said the group’s members “believe she is going to fight like hell for our agenda.”
Ms. Henry, noting that Mrs. Clinton had met twice with S.E.I.U. workers this year, cited the former secretary of state’s support for higher wages, an immigration overhaul, strengthening voting rights and addressing mass incarceration. Mrs. Clinton also assured the group that, if elected, she would use her executive authority to bolster union protections, Ms. Henry said.
“She knows that workers being able to join together and collectively bargain is essential to building an economy that works for everybody,” the service workers president said.
The service employees union, which has about two million members, offers Mrs. Clinton support from a group that is about half female and includes many minorities, demographic groups she is counting on to capture the Democratic nomination. With a growing number of Hispanics joining its ranks, the group has increased its activism in recent years around immigration issues. It has also gotten involved in racial justice issues, lending its support to the Black Lives Matter movement.
The Huffington Post reports:
In the case of SEIU, there's reason to believe rank-and-file membership would broadly support Clinton over other candidates in the Democratic primary. The union has a high proportion of African-American and Latino members -- demographics that have clearly favored Clinton over Sanders in polling. According to SEIU, the union carried out three national town hall meetings and polled membership three times since last year before settling on Clinton as a candidate.
Even before Tuesday's announcement from SEIU, Clinton had already locked down union endorsements representing a majority of the unionized workers in the U.S. That includes the two primary teachers unions -- the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, which together boast 4.6 million members -- as well as the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. She's also picked up the endorsements of the carpenters' union and the machinists' union, among others.


Clinton is pointing out that she is the only Democratic candidate who is not planning to raise taxes on the middle class.

Politico reports:
Clinton’s campaign is mounting an attack against Sen. Bernie Sanders for proposals to raise taxes on the middle class that were part of the national single-payer health care bills he introduced in Congress.
“Bernie Sanders has called for a roughly 9-percent tax hike on middle-class families just to cover his health-care plan,” said Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon, referring to legislation Sanders introduced in 2013, “and simple math dictates he'll need to tax workers even more to pay for the rest of his at least $18-20 trillion agenda. If you are truly concerned about raising incomes for middle-class families, the last thing you should do is cut their take-home pay right off the bat by raising their taxes.”
Sanders introduced a single-payer health care bill in 2013 that included a 2.2 percent income tax across the board, as well as a 6.7 percent payroll tax for employers, The Washington Post reported Friday, and he has introduced similar legislation in multiple sessions of Congress. While payroll taxes are split between employers and employees, economists and the Congressional Budget Office have said that most of those fees are carried by the workers in the form of lower wages.
The Washington Post reports:
Clinton is using that 2013 legislation because Sanders has yet to release updated details of either his health care plan or how he’d pay for it. Sanders is also putting off a speech he had planned to give explaining his vision of democratic socialism, which could be because now that the primary campaign is competitive, he’s wary of alienating moderate Dems by emphasizing his leftist bona fides (but who knows; there could be other reasons).
In any case, there is a genuine division here: Sanders is willing to broadly raise taxes to pay for the programs he supports, while Clinton has adopted the same pledge she and Barack Obama did in 2008: no tax increases for anyone making under $250,000 a year.
Clinton held a large rally in Texas as she organizes for that state’s March 1st primary.

The Star-Telegram reports:
“Now, every election is about the future,” Clinton told more than 1,500 people in the gymnasium at Mountain View College in Dallas. “That’s why I’m laying out the plans I think will make our country strong.
“But this election will have such an impact on the society and economy,” she said during her half-hour speech. “So I’m going to work hard in Texas and I need your help.”
Clinton also took a jab at Republican Gov. Greg Abbott about healthcare, criticizing his decision not to expand Medicaid in Texas, which would give more low-income Texans health coverage.
“I don’t know about you, but I’d be a little worried about turning [healthcare] over to Greg Abbott,” she said, adding that he “should be doing everything he can to bring healthcare to more people in the state.”
Clinton said she saw a sign referring to the need to “turn Texas blue.”
And she admitted doing that could take a while.
But she said that if Texans and voters nationwide “stand together in favor of what we believe is the right path for America” – which she said includes defending LGBT rights and preventing gun violence – “if we stand together, we will make change.”
Clinton’s African-American outreach is revealing itself not only in her appeals to voters and lawmakers, but also in who she chooses for leadership positions within her campaigns.

Black Enterprise reports:
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has tapped advertising agency Burrell Communications to assist with its focus on the issues and concerns of African American voters, reports NBC News.
Based in Chicago and Los Angeles, the firm is currently headed by two African American women, Fay Ferguson and McGhee Williams Osse, who both share years of professional experience in advertising and marketing.
The hiring of Burrell Communications adds to Clinton’s list of African Americans who are currently working with her campaign. Some of these prominent figures include LaDavia Drane, who is Clinton’s Director of African American Outreach; Marlon Marshall, who is Director of Political Engagement; Brynne Craig, Deputy National Political Director; and Karen Finney, Clinton’s communications adviser and spokesperson.
Marshall, who is the highest ranking African American staffer on any presidential campaign, is credited by Clinton aides with helping to create a diverse campaign team at the state and upper staff level.
As Clinton’s campaign push continues, her African American backing continues to grow, with 50 current and former black mayors already announcing their support for her, including Kasim Reed of Atlanta, Michael Nutter of Philadelphia, Steve Benjamin of Columbia, South Carolina, and many more.
Politico reports:
Hillary Clinton's top deputy will be on Capitol Hill on Tuesday to continue the campaign's outreach to African-American Democrats.
John Podesta, the chairman of Clinton's presidential campaign, will be at the Democratic National Committee headquarters to discuss their strategy and talk to members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
The Clinton campaign has been heavily courting members of the black caucus — a group that strongly supported her 2008 primary opponent, then-Sen. Barack Obama — since she first announced her candidacy earlier this year.
Finally, a touching piece from U.S. News and World Report: “I Don’t Need Hillary Clinton to be Perfect”:
Hillary Clinton has had a perfection problem for years. She wasn't our idea of a perfect First Lady because she dared to step out of the mold of what voters knew and were comfortable with. She wasn't the picture of perfection as a Senate candidate because what FLOTUS had ever dared to tout her own qualifications to run for national office? She wasn't the perfect wife because she stayed with her straying husband, and she wasn't the perfect wife because many assumed she stayed for reasons of ambition rather than marital loyalty; that didn't sit well with women regardless of whether they were baby boomers, Gen Xers or Millennials. She wasn't perfect because she turned all our expectations on their heads about women politicians. In 2008, she was still a transitional woman trying to navigate the gap between twentieth century stay-at-home First Ladies and the first generation of accomplished feminist women who were going to "have it all," whether voters were ready for that or not.
But why did we project those expectations and visions of American womanhood onto Hillary, while also holding it against her for tenaciously clinging to her own dreams and making personal compromises many of us contend we would never have made in order to achieve them.
We clearly still live in a time where women are criticized and judged more harshly than men based on this expectation of perfection. That obvious, but unspoken, need for female perfection plays out in so many parts of our lives. It's what fuels the "mommy wars," our debates about "leaning in" vs. institutional changes for increases in women's professional advancement, and the sales of women's magazines, books, and websites that call on us to continually examine the things that are wrong – or imperfect – with our lives. Too many women expect perfection of themselves and end up projecting that onto candidate Hillary. If we, as twenty-first century American women, judge ourselves harshly for failing at the perfection game, how can we not view Hillary through that same lens?

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

SEIU Endorses Clinton!



This is really big for so many reasons:
The powerful union behind the fast food workers' wage movement endorsed Hillary Clinton for president Tuesday. 
The 2-million-member Service Employees International Union approved the endorsement through a vote by its executive board. “Hillary Clinton has proven she will fight, deliver and win for working families,” said SEIU President Mary Kay Henry in a statement. “SEIU members and working families across America are part of a growing movement to build a better future for their families, and Hillary Clinton will support and stand with them."
Clinton now has the support of unions representing about 9.5 million union members, or nearly two-thirds of the U.S.’ 14.6 million union workers.
With SEIU now added to the growing list of powerful unions including AFSCME, NEA and AFT, Clinton's status as the overwhelming favorite to win the nomination only grows that much stronger.

America's union workers know a fighter...and a winner...when they see one. 

And they are choosing Hillary.

Hillary News & Views 11.17: Teacher Evaluations, Islam, Florida Campaign, and 9/11


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with a major break from the Obama administration regarding education policy, opposing using test scores to evaluate teachers, moving away from charter schools, and increasing funding and support for public schools.

Vox reports:
"I have for a very long time also been against the idea that you tie teacher evaluation and even teacher pay to test outcomes," Clinton said. "There's no evidence. There's no evidence. Now, there is some evidence that it can help with school performance. If everybody is on the same team and they're all working together, that's a different issue, but that's not the way it's been presented."
This is a direct shot at Obama's education policy. The Education Department pushed states to adopt policies that would link teachers' professional evaluations in part to their students' test scores.
She didn't criticize charter schools in the AFT roundtable, but she suggested she'd deemphasize them: "There are also great examples of excellent public schools, and they should equally be held up as models," she said, later adding, "They should be supplementary, not a substitute, for what goes on."
Clinton's solution for improving education sounded like ideas teachers unions have supported for years, including more federal money:
“I'm going to do everything I can to raise the federal contribution. There are two big areas of federal funding that I feel strongly about. One is the special ed funding, and the other is the Title I funding, the equalization of funding for poor schools. Those were the earliest levels of commitment from the federal government, and we haven't really, in my view, fulfilled either one, and we've gotten diverted off into a lot of other stuff. And so, I think I would do what I can to try to provide more support.


The American Federation of Teachers have released the entire transcript to their roundtable with Clinton. Here are some more highlights.

On supporting teacher unions:
I think there's been too much contention and lack of cooperation when it comes to education.  There's been a concerted relentless attack on unions, and in particular, teachers unions.  We know the governor from New Jersey has said he wants to punch teachers unions in the nose, and that is just so wrong.  It's so counterproductive.  It's just so unhelpful.
But what I think we have to do is really, starting today and moving through the election into the next administration, figure out what our priorities are, how I can be working with you, and how we can make the changes that we know will benefit kids and families and restore respect to educators and create an atmosphere in which we're all on the same team.  We're on the American team.  We're on the team that is going to actually get things done, not just talk about it or not just engage in insults.
On standardized testing, and its negative impact on instruction:
I was glad to hear the president make that statement because I certainly agree with him that I think we have become much too focused on testing, and there have been too many tests.  So I've said from the beginning of the campaign we need fewer, better tests.
I believe in diagnostic testing that teachers can use to try to figure out how to help individuals and classes deal with their learning challenges.  I do believe that there can be and should be a set of tests that everybody agrees on.  That's the way it was all those many years ago when I was going to school, and that's the way it was for a very long time.  So we do need as a first priority to figure out: What are the tests that should be administered? When? And what do we do with them?
And I have for a very long time also been against the idea that you tie teacher evaluation and even teacher pay to test outcomes.  There's no evidence.   There's no evidence.  Now, there is some evidence that it can help with school performance.  If everybody is on the same team and they're all working together, that's a different issue, but that's not the way it's been presented…
…I think with the ESEA, as I understand it, with the changes that have been made or at least we hope are going to be made, we'll move beyond that.  But then we'll have to do the hard work, and I would look to the AFT for advice on this.  OK, what are the tests, because you've got to have something? And what should they be, and how often should they be administered, and what should they be used for?  And I would be very open to your experience and your suggestions about that…
…[W]hat are we going to do to once again kind of open the curriculum?  If we're going to save time and stress from limiting the tests, then what are going to do about that?  What are going to bring back into the schools?
I think it's tragic that so many schools, and principally schools in poor areas that serve poor kids, have been stripped of arts education, of even PE, even recess time.  It's just crazy to me.  And so, we've got to be much more focused on how we re-create the classroom school experience so that kids have the chance for their talents to be recognized and blossom.  That's what I believe.
On special education:
When we accepted that opportunity to really get all of our kids in school, the federal government said it was going to pay 40 percent of the cost of special ed.  The most we've ever paid is like 17 percent.  I think that's one of the reasons why you don't have the services and the support that your students need to be able to get the education they deserve. 
So I have said I'm going to do everything I can to raise the federal contribution.  There are two big areas of federal funding that I feel strongly about.  One is the special ed funding, and the other is the Title I funding, the equalization of funding for poor schools... 
…Those were the earliest levels of commitment from the federal government, and we haven't really, in my view, fulfilled either one, and we've gotten diverted off into a lot of other stuff.  And so, I think I would do what I can to try to provide more support.  The same thing happened with No Child Left Behind.  The promise was there would be increased funding, and then it never came through.
So we have some work to do to try to get more resources directly into special ed, but we also have some research to do to try to figure out what's happening with these children.  Why are they in special ed, and is there something that could be done that we're not doing?  And is there a differential between special ed kids in wealthy districts versus special ed kids in poor districts? What works should be applicable for everybody.
On charter schools:
That's exactly what the original idea behind it was, and you're right to mention Al Shanker.  He was one of the leaders of the movement, and he did see them as laboratories, and he thought that the lessons would then be integrated into the public schools and would result in improving education in the public schools.  So there's no doubt in my mind that charters have to be held accountable.  There are good charters, and there are bad charters.
They have to be held to high standards, and if they are working like the one you work at, why aren’t there more using the model that you have pioneered?  And so, from my perspective, again, I want to go to the research.  What are the good models and where are they found, and how do you do more of what works instead of reinventing the wheel all the time? A lot of people show up and they want to do a charter, and they don't pay attention to the educational research.  They have a pet idea.  They may be, again, motivated to try to help kids, but they don't have the experience, and they don't necessarily know how to do it.
So let's look at what does work, like your charter school, which you said has been operating for eight years.  And there are examples of that, but there are also great examples of excellent public schools, and they should equally be held up as models.
And what I don't understand is why we can't do a better job saying, look, here's the kind of population you're serving, and here's a model that works. So what can we do to incentivize and fund more of those models, whether it's a public school, a charter school, and try to get more cooperation between the two?
So they should be supplementary, not a substitute, for what goes on.  And that was the original idea behind them.
On fads and chasing trends:
That's why I said in the beginning, let's get back to what does work instead of this constant reinvention, and the sale of new products, and the latest fad to come down the road.
Everybody feels so pressured to produce "results," but they then, I think, can be misled into adopting programs that are not particularly evidenced-based, that don't have a track record, and try to introduce those into either the curriculum or the teaching environment.  And I think we've been doing way too much of that.  I think we've wasted a lot of time, and money, and energy, instead of taking this deep breath that I'm calling for and saying what works.  What works for kids in special ed?  What works for kids in rural areas?  What works for kids who are impoverished but deserve the best instruction?  And you look to see where you can find examples—or what works for kids who are at risk of dropout—and you've got an example in Cleveland.
Every education problem that we face in America has been solved somewhere, and we act like everybody has to throw up the lesson plans and just deal every year, not just once, but maybe three or four times a year, to come up with this way you're going to deal with what is being asked of you…
…[F]rom my perspective, this has to be a collaborative effort.  School boards have to get out of the pressure that they feel to kind of produce results. The way you produce results is to produce an environment in which kids are able to flower, and learn, and not be beaten down.  And in many ways, that's going to take a lot more services than we have for certain populations of children.  But I believe it's doable.  I wouldn't be sitting here talking to you if I didn't, but I think we have to change mindsets, and that may be as important.
The return of the community school movement:
We've got to figure out what we're going to do direct more federal help into what will work, not just get siphoned off into useless, unproductive projects.  And using the school as a magnet or as an organizing institution makes a lot of sense to me.
The community school movement is back for a reason.  It started actually back in the 70s.  The first community school was in Little Rock, Ark.  An educational expert named Betty Caldwell started a community school, and it was a community center.  It was a place where adults could go.  They could get job training.  They could get remedial education.  They could get all kinds of help, and then that fell out of favor.  We're always doing things that actually work and then they get expensive or somebody comes up with a new, "better" idea, and then we move on, and we leave behind the communities…
… I think what the AFT, and the Manchins, and others have tried to do in McDowell is an important effort, and I hope it will show some success so we have more help.  And we may have to consider even more drastic interventions because, at a certain point, the kids are the ones who are the most damaged, and it's true whether you're in an inner city in one of our great cities around the country or out in rural West Virginia.  It's the kids who suffer, and there is no doubt rural poverty is as, if not more, grinding with fewer opportunities…
…I will do what I can to support what's going on in McDowell, and I want to know what we can learn about what works. I want to know how we recruit and keep teachers like you because I know it can't be easy when you are dealing with life or death issues a lot of days, not math or other learning issues.  And so, part of my hope is that we look at what the real problems are and not get diverted all the time to the shiny object in the corner.  And that's what I'm looking at.
We have too many poor kids attending, too many poor kids without the resources they need, without the support they should get, and that's the real tragedy in education, and it's not test scores.  It's that we're leaving all these kids behind because we're not providing an education that will give them a fighting chance to get ahead, and that's just wrong.
Vox reports on Clinton’s strategic use of language:
At Saturday night's Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton argued that it's not just wrong to broadly blame all of Islam for the acts of radical terrorists, but also potentially dangerous to America's national security interests.
Clinton said:
I think that you can talk about Islamists who clearly are also jihadists. But I think it's not particularly helpful.
To make the case that Sen. Sanders was just making that I agree with, we've got to reach out to Muslim countries, we've got to have them be part of our coalition. If they hear people running for president who basically shortcut it to say we are somehow against Islam, that was one of the real contributions — despite all the other problems that George W. Bush made after 9/11 — when he basically said after going to a mosque in Washington, we are not at war with Islam or Muslims. We are at war with violent extremism. We are at war with people who use their religion for purposes of power and oppression. And yes, we are at war with those people. But I don't want us to be painting with too broad a brush.
Since Muslim nations are crucial to fighting terrorist organizations in the Middle East — Jordan, for one, has participated in airstrikes against ISIS — potentially ostracizing these allies by decrying all of Islam can actually make taking on terrorism more difficult.
Politico reports on Clinton’s Florida campaign:
One number shows why Florida is Hillary Clinton country in the Democratic race for president: 152.
That’s how many top Florida Democrats — from current and former members of Congress to mayors to state and local party leaders and fundraisers — were announced Tuesday as members of Clinton’s Florida Leadership Council. The list is so big it took her campaign weeks to assemble it.
Leading the list of her endorsements is Florida’s lone statewide elected Democrat, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson. Eight of the party’s 10 U.S. House members from Florida have officially endorsed her, as have eight of the party’s 14 state senators and 28 of its 39 members in the state House of Representative.
Clinton’s campaign hopes the strong showing of support will give her a general-election edge in Florida. The state, which Republicans need to carry to win White House, tends to lean more Democratic in presidential election years. Most polls show Clinton runs neck-and-neck with various Republican challengers.
Clinton’s comments about 9/11 at Saturday’s debate is causing plenty of conversation.

The Huffington Post reports:
On Monday, her campaign doubled down, pointing to the same attacks as proof she is incapable of exploiting the tragedy for political gain.
"It's outrageous to suggest that Senator Clinton of all people, who went to Ground Zero … that she of all people would politicize 9/11 is an outrageous notion," Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said on a conference call with reporters.
Fallon said Clinton had been instrumental in securing aid funding for the region impacted by the attacks, which included much of New York City's banking district.
Clinton's wide lead over a relatively small Democratic field also consolidates her contributions from Wall Streeters who want to support a Democrat. Financial elite contributions to Republicans are spread among a many more candidates.
Former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) also defended Clinton's donations from Wall Street. Suggestions that Clinton is beholden to her Wall Street campaign contributors is "not just morally offensive, it's truly stupid," Frank said.
Politico reports:
Mayor Bill de Blasio defended Hillary Clinton’s independence from her Wall Street donors Monday, after she was criticized for saying at a Democratic presidential debate Saturday that she received major donations from Wall Street financial firms because she helped them after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
In response to the suggestion from Senator Bernie Sanders that Clinton's major financial sector and industry donors must want something in exchange for giving to her campaign, Clinton said, “So, I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is. I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. That was good for New York. It was good for the economy and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country.”
“I say, whoever you take donations from, you can’t let it influence your thinking,” de Blasio said. “I can certainly say there’s a lot of folks on Wall Street who don’t agree with her platform and her agenda, but she has stuck to it."
“She clearly strongly defended Dodd-Frank throughout," de Blasio continued. "She has spoken very powerfully about reining in executive compensation, about cracking down on shadow banking — she’s been strong on desire for closing the carried interest loophole. I think there are plenty of powerful folks on Wall Street who fundamentally hope that what she’s trying to achieve won’t happen. So I think she has clearly maintained the independence of her positions."
Hillary Men has a strong piece documenting the universal praise Clinton received for her work in rebuilding New York City after 9/11:
Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta noted after the debate: "When people attack her and call her quote-unquote the 'Senator from Wall Street,' they ought to remember that she was instrumental in trying to rebuild an important part of the New York economy."
Indeed they should – because in some ways helping to rebuild lower Manhattan and defending a crippled New York City economy against cuts in post-9/11 aid demanded by right wing Republicans was a defining moment in the newly-elected senator’s career. And Hillary did it without grandstanding; she simply dug in and fought for New York.