Do you really think Bloomberg will run for the White House?
Vanden Heuvel explains her ardor for Bernie while Cooke still thinks it'll be Marco. What a country -- an old Jewish socialist against a young Cuban neo-con? But after Obama, nothing's impossible. Panel agrees on one thing -- that Trump is entertaining, ignorant and an ugly disgrace.
We have serious doubts that we'll see Trump at any future debates -- after all, if he can blow them off with impunity, why would he subject himself to them in the first place?
Someone dies from gun violence every 16 minutes in America.
A Brooklynite turned "back-to-the-land" Vermont socialist who honeymooned in the Soviet Union and has far less executive experience than Sarah Palin vs. a fact-free braying bully boy billionaire real estate and gambling mogul bizarrely backed by evangelicals would be crazy enough. Toss in another New Yorker, a billionaire "daddy knows best" ex-mayor and media mogul who is no class traitor and we get the full banana republic experience.
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg must know that this is his last rodeo. If he does not run for President in 2016, the year in which he turns 74, there will be no opportunity for him in four years.
I may disagree with Bernie Sanders about healthcare, taxation and foreign policy but he's right that the people need to take back the political process so that candidates of greater quality from both parties will have a serious shot at leadership.
Two independents are not just doing extremely well. They are major players creating havoc for the establishment in the nomination process. This shows the broken nature of the two political parties and the depth of the desire for change from the status quo.
Paris has built upon emerging shifts towards a cleaner, greener and far smarter development path for the 21st century. It has sent a clear, unequivocal and determined low carbon signal to markets and economic sectors everywhere: The course is irreversible, but the pace and breadth must now be the focus.
As you have doubtless read or seen, Michael Bloomberg, former Mayor of New York, has put out the word that his minions are testing the waters for an independent candidacy. Bloomberg is supposedly the sensible moderate that the county needs, the one that political polarization has kept from the ballot of either party. But that's not an obstacle that a few billion dollars from the candidate's own fortune can't fix. Here's the problem. Bloomberg is center-right on economics and finance, and liberal on social issues and gun control. There is no clamoring for such a combination, except among fellow rich people. But if the Republicans nominate Trump, Bloomberg might capture a good slice of the moderate suburban vote -- even more so if Democrats choose Sanders. Don't we need just such a moderate? No, we don't.
The fact is that there's no reason that an independent couldn't rise to a larger share of the popular vote. Independents have won several elections for governor in the past 25 years when competing against two strong major party nominees.
In the days after San Bernardino we were back to pointing fingers of blame instead of taking a long hard look in the mirror and asking what we can do as individuals and as a society to make it stop.
By the time the 2016 election is over, America's Super Rich will have given the largest amount of the biggest contributions and the most secret money ever provided in our history to support candidates for President and Congress.
Co-authored with Steve Krawciw JP Morgan's announcement last week "to pull the plug" on all of their thousands and thousands of Bloomberg terminals i...
The more than 400 mayors descended upon Paris' Hôtel de Ville to send a strong message during this month's climate talks: Cities have emerged as major drivers of innovation and action in global efforts to confront climate change.
Credit: Creative Commons Internet Association by Fremont, CA Small Business Crawl (Irvington District). Protected under the CC BY license. Freelanc...