In the hours after his five-state primary sweep, Republican frontrunner Donald Trump declared the race to the party nomination was “over,” called himself “the presumptive nominee,” and baited Democrat Hillary Clinton for using “the woman card.” Clinton returned the favor, saying if playing that card meant fighting for equal pay, paid family leave and access to healthcare then “deal me in!” And with that, it seemed the tone of the upcoming presidential election was set.
“VOA will present the policies of the United States clearly and effectively, and will also present responsible discussion and opinion on these policies.” — VOA Charter
Imagine a different, more destabilizing, and (frankly) more likely scenario — which is that we’re living through the early stages of an ideological realignment of America’s two major political parties.
It’s not enough for them to win the New York primary today — they’ve got to win convincingly.
After Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump lost the Wisconsin primary to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, it seemed as though some of the air had come out of Trump’s balloon.
Sure, there have been weeks and weeks of criticism from mainstream GOP players, innumerable editorials calling for conservatives to do something, ANYTHING, to end Trump’s bid for the Republican presidential ticket. Journalists have been shamed for not taking his rise seriously— and for creating him by being his echo chamber. Calls have grown for reporters to conduct deeper truth-squadding.
But there appeared to be a new urgency in the form of Twitter feeds (#StopTrump, #NeverTrump) and, on Sunday, a faked cover by The Boston Globe, which imagined the world with Trump as president. Experts are furiously doing math, counting delegates and calculating the various possibilities the final 16 primaries may offer. And campaign operatives are going back to states where caucuses and primaries have already been held, trying to find delegates to sway or steal.
Next week’s New York primary — with 95 delegates at stake — will give us a clearer picture. In the meantime, the knives are out.
It is time for pro-life advocates to have the courage of their convictions and support punishing their fellow citizens — wives, daughters, mothers, teachers, colleagues, and neighbors of all ideological stripes — who decide to end an unwanted pregnancy.
The kind of conventional military conflict that NATO was designed to deter — a Red Army invasion of Western Europe — is more of a danger now that at any time since the fall of the Berlin War. Russia under Vladimir Putin has rebuilt its military and has undertaken a series of invasion of its […]
Republican front-runner Donald Trump would go farther, having described the 28-state alliance as “obsolete” more than once during his push for the GOP presidential ticket. Members don’t pay up their fair share, or at all, and the clunky security organization is ill-suited for the war on terror, according to Trump. After the deadly terrorist attacks on Brussels, which just happens to be NATO’s homebase, and moves by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Ukraine and elsewhere, others have also raised questions about the relevance of the alliance in a shifting world order.
But this week while hosting NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the White House, President Barack Obama declared NATO “…a linchpin, a cornerstone of our collective defense and U.S. security policy.” Still, influential pundits and columnists have raised legitimate concerns about NATO’s lack of agility, bloated bureaucracy and lopsided financing that leaves the military bills largely in the hands of the United States.
There have been other public figures (former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates for one) to voice dim views of NATO, originally created in 1949 after the Second World War—a time when the Soviet Union was fully intact and on a mission to expand. Which raises yet another set of questions: has NATO evolved along with the world? And is the alliance equipped to respond to modern threats?
Ah, but what about the delegates? If it’s a contested convention and neither Donald Trump nor Ted Cruz has enough delegates to lock up the nomination, won’t they turn to Kasich? Not necessarily. But don’t tell that to the Ohio governor, who goes from interview to interview insisting that he’d be the natural choice for the convention. […]
Republican party front-runner Donald Trump’s Twitter feed went uncharacteristically quiet in the immediate aftermath of his double-digit loss in the Wisconsin primary to Sen. Ted Cruz. Later in the night, the Trump campaign reverted back to status quo by insulting, not congratulating, the winner. “Ted Cruz is worse than a puppet— he is a Trojan horse, being used by the party bosses attempting to steal the nomination from Mr. Trump,” according to a statement from his campaign. As Trump pouted defiantly, pundits were dissecting Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders sixth straight win against Democrat Hillary Clinton, who is far ahead in the delegate count. As one newspaper editorial put it:
“For a guy who can’t win, Bernie Sanders is certainly defeating Hillary Clinton a whole lot…. ”
Next primary stop is in New York, where we may learn if Cruz and Sanders’ campaign ‘mojo’ will continue.
If Mr. Trump prevails, many Republicans are likely to stay home on Election Day, and more than a few will quietly support the Democratic nominee. If he falls short on the first ballot and is denied the nomination, he and his supporters will cry foul, and a formal party split would be likely.
For the most part, the presidential hopefuls from both parties have skirted the threat of climate change – instead, lacing their stump speeches with biting criticism of the current U.S. strategy to defeat ISIS. Despite this week’s deadly reminder of the gravity of Islamic extremism in Brussels, scientists argue strongly that the effects of global warming far outweigh terrorist attacks. Science tells us that 2015 was the warmest year on record. On the same day that 31 people died in twin attacks in the Belgian capital, retired NASA scientist James E. Hansen published a paper stating that the catastrophic consequences of greenhouse gas emissions headed our way at a much faster rate than previously predicted. Both Republican candidates Ted Cruz and Donald Trump disregard the growing consensus that global warming is real. Even two Republican mayors in Florida urged both men to stop denying the disaster that awaits the Earth and start coming up with policies to address the crisis. Democrat Hillary Clinton is a believer, but it has been her opponent, Bernie Sanders, who has clearly articulated the dangers of global warming while on the stump.
By Barbara Slavin In the aftermath of the terrible bombings in Brussels, the knee-jerk reaction among some American politicians is to close borders to immigrants and hit harder at the Middle Eastern enclaves of the Islamic State. Thinking aloud as his wont on Twitter, Republican frontrunner Donald Trump vowed, “This madness must be stopped and I will […]
Paul Ryan seems to find power and stature without truly seeking it. In 2012, Mitt Romney chose Ryan as his presidential running-mate to help energize the Republican Party’s base who were drawn to Ryan’s fiscal conservative ideas. In 2015, House of Representatives Republicans turned to Ryan as a compromise candidate for Speaker after the Tea Party wing revolted against the establishment leadership. Ryan’s name is once again being floated, this time as a to bail out a Republican Party faced with the possibility of Donald Trump as its standard-bearer. Ryan has publicly said he is not interested in being drafted by a contested convention as a presidential nominee. But can the highest-elected Republican resist taking a shot at being the highest elected American?
A crucial part of the job of President of the United States is steering relations with allies and enemies alike. American foreign policy, diplomacy, military action and much more all depend on perceptions. President Barack Obama was hailed as decisive and bold in 2011 when he signed off on a risky, and ultimately successful, covert operation to take out America’s most wanted man, Al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden, who was living in plain view in Pakistan. Five years later, Obama is taken to task by some, including current 2016 presidential hopefuls, for refusing to deploy a full-scale military effort to stop Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Which raises a question: how is the rise of the most unorthodox presidential hopeful ever, billionaire and reality television star Donald J. Trump, playing across the pond?
A new order is coming, and there are no guarantees about what will come next, whether the new order will bring more liberty, equality, peace and prosperity, or less…. That is essentially Hillary Clinton’s argument against Bernie Sanders: Change is hard.