I think Debbie Wasserman Schultz should apologize for issuing a statement with no basis in fact and wasting her time on a totally wrong-headed, insulting attack -- and for invoking the holiest day of the Jewish year to make her bogus points.
Democrats that bash, ignore, or are lukewarm toward Clinton do nothing to inspire and motivate the Democratic base. Instead they deflate them, and that's before even the first Democratic debate. They do this at their peril.
While Democrats bristle under the yoke of DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz ("DWS"), Republican insanity consumes all the political oxygen.
In the spirit of political sisters DeGeneres and Clinton, if breaking the glass ceiling and taking your place at the executive office conference room table is one of your goals right now, take note of these pointers from your politician sisters.
A Republican former secretary of state and a Democratic "Jewish mother" may have just given us the strongest case yet for the nuclear agreement with Iran. The first is a pillar of the "realist" camp in the American national security establishment. The second is a rising star in the Democratic Party from a heavily Jewish district in South Florida. Together, they represent key constituencies whose support for the historic accord is critical to isolating right-wing opponents and preventing last-minute sabotage attempts. Together, they also lay out a compelling narrative of why the agreement is so important to American national security.
The history of the 2016 presidential election is still being written and it's not too late for Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz to do the right thing and expand the debate format. If Republicans can have twelve debates, why must Democrats be mired in only six?
King Jeb only looks out for himself and people like him. He never has, and never will, fight for middle class families. And even though Americans already know what a Bush presidency will mean for them, Jeb Bush still plans to run for President in 2016.
Only when the Democratic Party takes Latino voters seriously enough to fully engage them, will their candidates be truly competitive in 2016.
Rep. Wasserman Schultz can save the day by evolving from being a shill for the Obama administration and the substandard leadership of Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats, into a visionary who can redefine the party's message and mission to capture the hearts and minds of American voters who are tired of ineffective governance in Washington.
The GOP wasted no time in creating yet another self-induced government shutdown showdown. Not even two full months into their control of Congress, and they are pushing a critical federal department towards shutting down, all in an effort to make a political point.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz's (D-FL), interest in running for the U.S. Senate has generated lots of political rumblings. As Politico noted today, groups working to end the criminalization of medical marijuana patients are lining up to make sure Floridians are aware of her archaic drug policy views.
Leave him up there as a glaring symbol of what your party stands for. Let Americans know who you support. Who you defend. Who you reward with power. Who you call a "man of character."
While Democrats debate the lack of a message and fight over what it should have been, they forget one major point: It is the presidential candidate who sets the party message in presidential election years.
The issue isn't what Wasserman Schultz said with regard to a 'top to bottom assessment' but rather who will do the assessment. If it is the same people who planned the mid-terms' non-message we are in for the same problems next time around.
Three of my political science colleagues conducted research showing that winning/losing that Saturday game could boost or cost the incumbent party and its gubernatorial candidate an average of 10 percent in the Tuesday election.
What does it signal to society when a person as accomplished as a former secretary of state, U.S. senator, and first lady is described as having "extraordinary, irrational, overwhelming ambition"? What is the message to a young woman who gets stellar results but is labeled "too assertive" or "abrasive"? Nothing good.