This week, Hillary Clinton took on the war against voting. In a speech on Thursday, she called out governors Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Rick Perry, and Jeb Bush, demanding Republicans "stop fear mongering about a phantom epidemic of election fraud, and start explaining why they're so scared of letting citizens have their say." She followed it up with sensible proposals to make voting easier. Meanwhile, speaking of wars, on Monday Senator Lindsey Graham -- whose solution to every foreign policy problem boils down to armed conflict -- entered the 2016 race. Right on cue, three days later, responding to a question about the fact that Americans are tired of endless war, Graham said, "Well don't vote for me." Duly noted. It's an odd impulse to constantly want to start wars in the name of democracy while simultaneously undermining it here at home.
Should Americans join the military if the next commander-in-chief of the armed services is an arrogant, ignorant, irresponsible, war-happy hawk? Many of America's best and brightest join the armed services. But with the U.S. constantly at war, joining is a life or death decision, dependent on the judgment of whoever sits in the Oval Office.
Last night, Hillary Clinton announced several important voting reforms: expanded early voting, an end to voter ID laws, felon voting rights restoration and making election day a federal holiday. Most importantly, she came out in favor of universal, automatic voter registration.
The newspeople have noticed that Bernie Sanders is attracting crowds bigger and more enthusiastic than they'd have predicted. What's happening here, they've wondered?
Yesterday, in a speech in Texas on the importance of voting rights, Hillary Clinton made one of the most important remarks of her campaign so far: "We need a Supreme Court who cares more about the right to vote of a person than the right to buy an election of a corporation."
At a time when Clinton's Democratic rivals are exploiting a dip in her approval numbers, Clinton should be going on the offensive as the candidate fighting for full equality during a civil rights movement of our time. That would not only energize progressives in the party, it would speak to younger voters, including independents.
I have said that the central issue for the 2016 presidential contest is the restoration and protection of voting rights. It is therefore fitting that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading contender for the Democratic Party's nomination for president in 2016, made voting rights the centerpiece of a speech at a major campaign stop in Houston today.
In the plays for the presidency 2016, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is a Libertarian running as a Republican. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is a Socialist running as a Democrat. Each subscribes to an ideology that the American two-party system eschews.
If we learned that racism was not over with the election of Barack Obama as the first black president of the United States, we will learn that sexism is surely not over with the possible election of the first woman as president.
I firmly believe the pendulum swing in American politics is real, and I believed that in some swing toward the Democrats in the future, Beau would be president. That's how I'm going to remember him.
This isn't to say that she's any worse than other Republicans; it's merely to note that, like with Obama, her calling herself a 'Democrat' doesn't make any difference, other than to fool a different group of suckers.
Is there a disconnect between Clinton and real voters like Lenore and Gary Patton? Or is the disconnect between the frenzied media scrum and partisan Republican presidential candidates and real, everyday Americans?
We continue our running series of taking a serious look at all the announced candidates for president with two new entries this week. Republican Lindsey Graham made his formal announcement, and Democrat Lincoln Chafee is also set to announce his candidacy.
Mo Elleithee loves politics so much, he's quitting it. The practice of politics, that is. He still has faith and a passion for the perfection of politics -- with hope that a new generation will find better strategies than his has.
Congressman John K. Delaney, what are you talking about? In a recent Washington Post op-ed, headlined, "The last thing America needs? A left-wing version of the Tea Party," the Democratic congressman from Maryland scolds progressives and expresses his worry "about where some of the loudest voices in the room could take the Democratic Party." But the progressive agenda isn't "left wing." The progressive agenda is America's story -- from ending slavery to ending segregation to establishing a woman's right to vote to Social Security, the right to organize, and the fight for fair pay and against income inequality. Strip those from our history and you might as well contract America out to the US Chamber of Commerce the National Association of Manufacturers, and Karl Rove, Inc.