I'm a pro-choice liberal who voted for Sanders in the primary, so it should surprise no one that Tim Kaine, a Midwestern white man who voiced personal beliefs against abortion, was not my first pick for Hillary Clinton's running mate. But maybe that puts me in a unique position to contribute some thoughts about why I'm voting for Clinton/Kaine.
It's pretty damn important that a woman will now be the nominee for a major political party in America. Women haven't even had the right to vote for 100 years. For centuries, most of us couldn't own property or go to school. This final barrier must be broken.
Hillary Clinton worked for party unity, but only after a very hard-fought and contentious primary season. I offer these reminders up, because now she finds herself in the opposite role. And it seems like everyone's memory has gone fuzzy when recalling the final two months of the 2008 race.
After Secretary Clinton's sweeping wins yesterday, it appears as though Senator Sanders will not be able to win the nomination. While this may revive those same feelings of disenchantment and disillusionment from six years ago in those of us who "feel the Bern," we cannot afford another 2010.
If candidates (and presidents) are ultimately the ones who set the example for their supporters, Senator Sanders seems to have given the green light to his supporters to let loose on Senator Clinton -- and not on policy.
The Soviet Union seemed permanent and invincible, until it didn't. When it fell, far more suddenly than anyone thought it would or could, the festering rot of decades was exposed to the world. We're seeing this happen, in real time, with the Republican Party.
I won't ask you to ignore the superdelegate count. But I will request that as you process cable news, full of pundits exalting Clinton's inevitability, you remember a crucial fact: Pledged delegates matter more than superdelegates.
In June, when Donald Trump announced his presidential candidacy, many pundits dismissed him as not a serious contender. Six months have proven that wrong. Trump is a wily political operator with, so far, a winning strategy.
The comments of Obama, McCain, Hilary, Trump...etc. are mere reflections of the DC-area's widespread ignorance on this subject.
Bernie seems to be an alternative to the politics of Clinton. That makes him a threat to the "billionaire" class he is wont to criticize, to Super PACs fueled by Citizens United, and to establishment politicians like Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton ignores Bernie Sanders at her own peril.
The President of the United States is tired. Barack Obama, who came into office with so much hope and promise in 2009, is now simply marking time in the White House, steeling his resolve against years of bitter, relentless defeats that have stripped away his once-inspiring loftiness of purpose.
At each meeting, we are told the Republicans have done a better job than the Democrats at marketplace branding. Frustrated, I finally name the real problem: Democrats have not advanced any visionary new ideas since Franklin D. Roosevelt. The stale rhetoric is boring.
A digital policy for the new century, tailored not just to the moment but for the future, is vital if we are to unleash economic growth, shared prosperity, and the full potential of technology for citizens and consumers. But such a policy architecture requires a new consensus -- on privacy, on security, on customer protections, on growth and mobility.
For more than a century, Missouri was known as the "bellwether state" because of its tendency to swing between Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. However, recent elections suggest that presidential candidates in 2016 are highly unlikely to target Missouri as a battleground and that, just as in 2012, it will be nearly completely ignored.
Why is that man smiling? ...
Now, according to McConnell, is the time to listen to the American people. After 2008? Not so much.