During the 2012 election cycle, the online gathering place for mothers, CafeMom, attended the national conventions of both the Republican and Democrat...
There is a growing concern in Democratic circles, which I share, about whether the Hillary Clinton who could run in 2016 is repeating the mistake she made in 2008, when she ran as the inevitable and invincible candidate of a political establishment held in widespread public disrepute.
Seven years later, Clinton is considering another run at the presidency. Once again, she is the dominant brand in the marketplace, the one to beat.
If a ticket of two women offers economic revival and transformational change based on financial justice championed by Pope Francis, the most popular figure on the world stage, support from women would be stratospheric and many men would join them.
Hillary Clinton supports the freedom to marry. And while she has not always supported it, that puts her in no different category than President Obama or any number of other high-profile Americans who have come to understand marriage as a fundamental right. It also puts her in the same category as me.
Elizabeth Warren, not Clinton, has taken on Wall Street, picked fights with prominent Republicans, and eloquently voiced the concerns of American around the country.
Why does GOP enthusiasm for the tea party senator translate into another Clinton in the Oval Office?
After a relatively quiet Spring, things are heating up in Washington even though it's not officially summer yet. As we move toward the 2014 mid-term e...
As Karl Rove keeps droning on and on, I think it is time that someone corrects the record. His latest piece on how it is "tough for a party to win a t...
Our world needs leaders who take climate change as seriously as they would a diagnosis of cancer. It sounds dire -- because it is dire. Countries will disappear, poverty will rise, and the health of our children will suffer. We have a moral obligation to address climate change.
The question this raises for the GOP, and whoever they nominate in 2016, is whether they are smart enough to run a campaign that focuses on Clinton's record, accomplishment, missteps and the like, rather than her gender and increasingly less polarizing personality. This would be hard for a party that has generally proved itself unable to avoid that temptation.
Put simply, Warren represents the strongest counterweight to the influence of moneyed interests over our political process.
How Clinton handles the inevitable swipes at her personality, the character of her husband, and Benghazi will determine whether or not she can win the election in 2016.
I forgave and forgot. I even grew to accept -- nay admire -- Hillary's silver-medal finish as Secretary of State, a consolation prize I had initially and irritably hoped she'd decline. It was back to life as usual, and I just can't deny it. I got... lazy. I was tired at the prospect of ever feeling that hope again. But I can't be tired any more. None of us can.
The Titanic was promoted as 'unsinkable.' It was touted as a symbol of technological and industrial might... until it crashed into a giant ice cube with catastrophic consequences. Which brings me to today's Republican Party.
No matter the outcome -- whether Republicans gain control or Democrats narrowly retain it -- it is worth taking a look at the underlying dynamics of the Senate field for the next two election cycles.