Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

Our Angel's Corner archive is here.

FEBRUARY 25,  2016

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET:

THE DEBATE – The clear winner of tonight's GOP debate was Zoloft.  It was an ear-ringing affair, with the first serious attacks on Trump that we've seen, and Trump punching back.  From what I've seen thus far, and I concur, Rubio was the most effective debater, landing serious blows on Trump.  The question is, will it matter?  Trump voters have proved to be stubbornly loyal, willing to stay with Trump no matter what sins he commits.  A Bloomberg poll released just before the debate showed Trump leading in Southern, Bible-belt states, with 37% support.  Rubio and Cruz tie at 20% each.  It's now accepted by pundits that Trump will sweep the field next week on Super Tuesday, except for Cruz's home state of Texas.  There'll be another GOP debate next Thursday, from Detroit, if they can get the electricity on.  That debate will reflect Super Tuesday's results.

A REASON TO ELECT TRUMP – From the Washington Examiner:   Rev. Al Sharpton told attendees at a Center for American Progress Action Fund event Thursday he would flee the country if Donald Trump won the election, in order to avoid being deported by Trump.  Sharpton, a Democrat, had positive feedback for many of the Republican presidential candidates until he got to Trump.  "If Donald Trump is the nominee, I'm open to support anyone [else], while I'm also reserving my ticket to get out of here if he wins, only because he'd probably have me deported anyway," Sharpton told attendees, who responded in laughter.  Vote for Trump for a Sharpton-free society. 

WHAT A SCHOLAR – Ms. Hillary forgets some pretty basic history.  From Fox:   Constitution, Declaration of Independence ... whatever.  That seemed to be Hillary Clinton’s take on the nation’s two most important documents during an interview Wednesday, as she confused the texts in making the case for more gun laws.  The Democratic presidential front-runner mistakenly cited a “constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” during the interview with host Steve Harvey....But the famous “life, liberty” line is, of course, from the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. It says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  Probably the greatest line written in American history, and the foundation of the American creed.  I wouldn't expect Hillary to know its origin, or care really.

GREAT LINE BY DOC – Dr. Ben Carson has a wonderful sense of humor, on display during the debate.  From the Washington Examiner:   Once again, Dr. Ben Carson became fed up with his lack of speaking time during a Republican presidential debate.  During a lengthy exchange between the four other candidates on stage Thursday night, Carson chimed in out of nowhere, asking for someone, anyone to attack him.  "Can somebody attack me, please?" Carson asked the candidates.  In recent debates, Carson has routinely been among the candidates with the least amount of speaking time. Dating back to the first debate in Cleveland, Carson has joked or complained about the lack of questions he's received.  A candidate gets time to respond if someone attacks him.  But no one wanted to attack gentle Ben.

February 25, 2016       Permalink

BULLETIN:  A new Quinnipiac poll shows Donald Trump leading Marco Rubio in Rubio's home state of Florida, 44-28%, with Ted Cruz trailing at 12%.   Florida votes March 15th.  This is devastating news for Rubio.  If he can't carry his own home state, he's probably out of the race.  Other polls show Ted Cruz carrying his home state of Texas on Tuesday.

TROUBLE IN RIVER CITY – AT 10:44 A.M. ET:   Always depend on Hillary Clinton to provide good scandal copy.  She has an expertise in that worthy of an honorary degree.  From Fox: 

Attorney General Loretta Lynch confirmed to Congress Wednesday that career Justice Department attorneys are working with FBI agents on the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email practices and the handling of classified material.

Legal experts say the assignment of career Justice Department attorneys to the case shows the FBI probe has progressed beyond the initial referral, or "matured," giving agents access to the U.S. government’s full investigative tool box, including subpoena power for individuals, business or phone records, as well as witnesses.

The Associated Press reported earlier this month that career lawyers were involved, but Lynch's comments are the most expansive to Congress.

"If the FBI makes the case that Hillary Clinton mishandled classified information and put America's security at risk, will you prosecute the case?” Republican Congressman John Carter asked Lynch during a budget hearing.

"Do you know of any efforts underway to undermine the FBI's investigation? And please look the American people in the eye and tell us what your position is as you are the chief prosecutor of the United States," Carter pressed.

Lynch replied, "...that matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents, FBI agents as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice. They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they'll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate."

COMMENT:  I can't see how this can be anything but devastating to Hillary.  It's a major investigation.  Some reports say that as many as 150 FBI agents are involved.  And now we know that Justice Department career lawyers – presumably non-partisan – are also involved.  This probe, more than anything else, could easily be the most important factor in who becomes the next president.

February 25, 2016       Permalink

A TRUMP TRIUMPH? – THAT'S WHAT ONE PREDICTION MODEL SAYS – AT 9:58 A.M. ET:  The claim is that this guy's model has predicted every presidential election but one going back 104 years.  I can't vouch for that, but the story is so fascinating.  From Daily Caller: 

A political science professor who claims his statistical model has correctly predicted the results of every election in the last 104 years has forecast that the odds of Donald Trump becoming America’s next president currently range from 97 percent to 99 percent.

The professor is Helmut Norpoth of Stony Brook University, reports The Statesman, the campus newspaper at the public bastion on New York’s Long Island.

Specifically, Norpoth predicts that Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of beating Bernie Sanders.

The predictions assume Trump will actually become the 2016 presidential nominee of the Republican Party.

And...

Norpoth’s general election formula measures candidates’ performances in primaries in caucuses to gauge party unity and voter excitement. It also focuses on certain patterns in electoral cycles. One major assumption is that the party which has just held the presidency for two consecutive terms is less likely to win a third term.

The model has been correct for every election since 1912 except for the 1960 election — which pitted winner John F. Kennedy against loser Richard Nixon.

In total, Norpoth observed, his forecasting formula he has created has been correct 96.1 percent of the time since 1912.

COMMENT:  Norpoth also says that Republicans have a 61% chance of winning the presidency with any candidate.  Well, we'll see after the election. 

Please note that Urgent Agenda doesn't make predictions.  And I predict that will continue.

February 25, 2016      Permalink

ELECTION LATEST – AT 9:37 A.M. ET:  Five days before Super Tuesday, and a new poll is out from Investor's Business Daily: 

Despite her win in the Nevada caucuses Saturday, Hillary Clinton’s lead among Democrats over Bernie Sanders has evaporated nationally, 45% to 43%, according to the latest IBD/TIPP poll. Last month, Clinton topped Sanders 50% to 38%.

On the GOP side, Donald Trump held steady at 31%. Ted Cruz dropped a point to 20%. Marco Rubio, however, saw his support climb eight percentage points to reach 18% — a clear sign that much of the support of candidates dropping out the race have been gravitating to Rubio.

Meanwhile, Ben Carson has 8% and John Kasich has risen to 7%. Both are resisting pressure to step aside.

Trump’s lead, however, narrows considerably when first and second choices are combined. While 42% picked Trump as either their first or second choice, Cruz and Rubio were tied at 39%.

An analysis of the 12 states that vote for GOP candidates on Super Tuesday shows that Trump holds a similar lead, with 31% support. However, Rubio moves into second place at 23%, followed by Cruz at 20%.

Given Trump’s definitive win in Nevada on Tuesday, a string of victories on March 1 could give him a virtually insurmountable lead for the GOP nomination.

Clinton performs better in the Democrats’ Super Tuesday states, where she leads Sanders by 50% to 39%.

COMMENT:  That is one poll, but a respected one.  What the political world will be talking about from now on is convention delegates.  In a race for the presidential nomination, that is all that counts.  Conventional wisdom holds that it will be a Clinton versus Trump race.  But, on the Republican side at least, there could be an open convention, meaning that no candidate enters the national convention with enough votes to be nominated.  Generally, delegates are pledged to a particular candidate only through the first convention ballot.  Then, chaos, and great television, as the convention struggles to nominate.

We haven't had a contested (open) convention since 1976, when Ronald Reagan challenged incumbent President Gerald Ford.  Ford won the nomination but lost the election.  Reagan bounced back four years later, and won both.

February 25,  2016     Permalink

FEBRUARY 24,  2016

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET: 

MESSAGE TO HOLLYWOOD – From mrctv.org:   Despite all of the controversy over the Oscars being #SoWhite, the reality is that a majority of Americans don’t actually care about the Academy Awards at all.  YouGov asked 1,000 Americans from Jan. 21-22 about their opinions on the alleged racial controversy in the Oscars. One of the questions was, bluntly, “How much do you care about the Academy Awards?”  In response, a vast majority — 62 percent — responded that they do not care “at all” about the Academy Awards. The poll found 29 percent of respondents care “a little” about the Oscars, while only seven percent care “a lot.”  An industry that ruined itself.  They forgot what "entertainment" means.  And they forgot what "story" means.

PATHETIC – Vermont's other senator, from the Washington Free Beacon:   Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) laid out a defense for Iran capturing U.S. Navy sailors during a Senate hearing Wednesday with Secretary of State John Kerry.  During the hearing for the State Department’s budget, Leahy asked Kerry what would have happened if the tables had been reversed in January.  “If we had an Iranian boat, warship, military, either boat or ship, armed Iranians on it, say it came, uh, along the coastal and pick a place within our waters, say South Carolina, and was well within the U.S. borders, perhaps had the engines stopped, but armed Iranians, would we not at least hold them until we found out what they were doing?” Leahy asked.  What a pathetic question for a United States senator, helping to provide a rationale for American sailors being captured.  The hippies of Vermont must love him.

POOR HILLARY, I FEEL HER PAIN – From the New York Post:   Hillary Clinton doubled down Tuesday on her resistance to releasing transcripts of her paid speeches, arguing that she’s being held to a different standard than other presidential candidates.  “Why is there one standard for me and not for everybody else?” she said to applause during a CNN Democratic town hall in Columbia, SC.  I agree with her!  It's time the media stopped judging Hillary by a lower standard.  Same goes for Obama.  This bigotry must end.

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK – From Daily Caller:   Rima Nelson disappeared from public view after the St. Louis Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital she managed potentially exposed 1,800 patients to HIV, was closed twice for serious medical safety issues and ranked dead last in patient satisfaction.  But Nelson wasn’t fired. Her VA superiors hid her literally on the other side of the Earth in 2013 at the department’s only foreign facility, a seldom-used clinic inside the palatial U.S. Embassy in the Philippines capital city of Manila.  She resides in a government-provided condo and gets the same $160,000 salary she made in St. Louis, which allows her to live like royalty in a country where the average person makes only $2,500 a year.  I guess this is what socialists mean when they say the government will take care of you.  Of course, it depends on what "you" means.

February 24,  2016     Permalink 

NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING – AT 10:32 A.M. ET:  That's what the writer William Goldman said about Hollywood.  It could just as easily been said about this election campaign.  "Analysts," and that includes me, do not normally predict the rise of a blowhard New York real-estate developer and reality TV star.  We normally don't put "President" and "Trump" together in the same sentence.  Nor do we confidently predict that an ancient socialist senator from Vermont could challenge the mighty Hillary for the Democratic presidential nomination.

And as for predicting the virtual numbing of the Democratic and Republican national committees, forget about it.  Who saw it coming?  Nobody knows anything.

What we do know is that Super Tuesday is six days away.  There is not much of value to be said between now and then, except for reporting the practice of politics itself.  But next Tuesday may be decisive.  From Chris Stirewalt at Fox:     

...party elders, including former presidents and nominees remain on the sidelines. With less than a week before D-Day, 2012 nominee Mitt Romney, former President George W. Bush and many others have at most offered modest reproofs of Trump even as Republicans have grown increasingly alarmed by Trump’s rhetoric.

And while endorsements have begun to flow in for second-place Sen. Marco Rubio, the kind of large-scale show of party unity in support that could signal to voters the urgency of the moment still seems beyond the horizon.

In a year in which we were told about the power of super PACs and outside money, tens of millions have been squandered to no great effect other than helping Trump. The relative pittance that has been spent against him is so small as to be meaningless. And there is no sign that the cash cavalry is coming in the week ahead.

What would have to be different for Trump to be denied? Focused attacks on Trump from candidates and outside groups as well as fewer candidates. Not all of those things would have to be accomplished in full before March 1, but the party would have to show significant movement in that direction for claims of Rubio’s viability and Trump’s vulnerability to be credible.

That’s a big to-do list for six days, especially for a party that has mostly stood mouth-agape and motionless for most of this cycle.

COMMENT:  Conventional wisdom this morning echoes Stirewalt's well-written analysis.  Something dramatic has to occur to deny Trump the nomination, and it ain't occurring, at least not yet.

There could also be a rethinking by voters in the Super Tuesday states.  But, if anything, rethinking by the public has simply brought greater strength to Trump.  Voting Tuesday.  Be there.

February 24, 2016       Permalink

MORE TROUBLE FOR HILLARY – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:  Is anyone surprised?  Hillary is trouble defined.  But, with an FBI probe hanging over her, she doesn't need more problems with the law, and that's what she's getting.  From the Washington Free Beacon:   

A federal court ruled on Tuesday that a watchdog group could request testimony from Hillary Clinton’s State Department aides in connection with her private email server, a decision that could eventually lead to a subpoena for Hillary Clinton.

D.C. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted a motion for discovery filed by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that is suing the U.S. State Department for records related to Clinton’s time as secretary of state.

Judicial Watch is seeking information about whether Clinton and her aides intentionally dodged public records laws by using a private email server. The organization said it would ask to depose former State Department officials as part of the discovery process.

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, called the judge’s decision “a major victory for the public’s right to know the truth about Hillary Clinton’s email system.” He also said it may eventually be necessary for Clinton to testify.

“Our proposed discovery, which will require court approval, will include testimony of current and former officials of the State Department,” said Fitton. “While Mrs. Clinton’s testimony may not be required initially, it may happen that her testimony is necessary for the Court to resolve the legal issues about her unprecedented email practices.”

COMMENT:  It's one thing after another.  Hillary might well be building to victory in her nomination struggle, but the law can get her before she claims her party's designation.  On the other hand, legal delay and friends in high places might help her out.

The dilemma:  What happens if Hillary is elected president and then is either indicted or damned by the legal process?  Under our legal system, there'd be nothing to prevent her from being inaugurated.  She might even be able to pardon herself, something she'd have the nerve to do.

But don't think the problems are all on one side.  If Trump is nominated, the opposition research will be HUGE, absolutely HUGE.  The man has been involved in zillions of lawsuits.  He may make Hillary look like Goody Two-Shoes.

February 24, 2016       Permalink

IN THE REAL WORLD – AT 9:38 A.M. ET:  Rather than jump right into politics, I thought we'd begin this morning by reminding ourselves that there's a real world out there, and our country isn't doing very well in dealing with it.  Field Marshal Obama has 11 months in his term.  From The Hill:

The U.S. has lost ground in the fight against Islamic extremism, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said in a recent interview.

"Unfortunately, we have lost ground over time," said retired Gen. John P. Abizaid, former commander of U.S. Central Command in an interview published in this month's West Point's Combating Terrorism Center's magazine.

"The scope of the ideological movement, the geographic dispersion of Islamic extremism, the number of terror attacks, the number of people swearing allegiance, and the ground they hold have all increased," said Abizaid.

"Groups like the Islamic State have now taken on state-like forms and features that are unlike anything we’ve seen in the past. So on balance we are in a worse position strategically with regard to the growth of international terrorism, Islamic terrorism in particular, than we were after September 2001," he said.

The dire assessment highlights the difficulty the Obama administration faces as it tries to accelerate the campaign against ISIS in its remaining 10 months in office.

The administration is also facing increased pressure — mostly from Republicans, but also from other quarters — to do more to stop ISIS in Libya.

The administration says the primary focus will remain on Iraq and Syria, but that it will also strike ISIS in other places, such as Afghanistan and Libya, if an opportunity arises.

However, with only 10 months remaining in the administration, there is little time for doing significantly more, and the administration has sidestepped questions into whether there will be a more robust effort to go after ISIS in Libya.

COMMENT:  It would have been nice had the reporter gotten the number of months left in the Obama administration correct.  It's 11, not 10.  But, as they say, we'll let it pass.

Abizaid assessment is grim.  Who we elect as president in November may well determine our fate in the war against Islamic extremism.  Then again, it may not.  Even a president with the right focus may come up with the wrong strategy. 

If Hillary is elected, I do believe she'd be better than Obama – although the standard is low – but she may be restrained by the divisions within her own party.

February 24,  2016     Permalink