The Brooklyn debate is not Bernie Sanders’s last stand.

People have been predicting Sanders’s last stand for a while a while now—it started before people even began voting.

It’s true that Sanders does not have a likely path to the nomination. But it’s also true that he has both a movement behind him and a sizable campaign chest. He can and should keep fighting until June, as Hillary Clinton did in 2008, because his goal, the remaking of the Democratic Party, is not one that’s limited to this election cycle.

That said, this may very well be his last chance to hit Hillary Clinton hard about her ties to Wall Street and the political establishment. There are reasons to expect this debate to be significantly more contentious than the ones that proceeded it, but nothing to suggest that it will be as contentious as any of the boxing matches in 2008. For better and for worse, as my colleague Ryu Spaeth pointed out this morning, the differences between Sanders and Clinton are real and pronounced. These are two very distinct candidates with two very different wells of support. They have plenty of differences, but one reason the Democratic debates this cycle have generally been so dull is that they have rarely been competing for the same swath of the electorate.

Tonight may be the last time that Sanders has an opportunity to make an argument that he’s a better general election candidate than Clinton, but for him the election has been about much more than that. Tonight may be a testier debate for that reason, but the stakes of the Democratic primary extend beyond who becomes the eventual nominee. Clinton will almost certainly win that battle, but Sanders is fighting to win the war of the future of the Democratic Party.

October 27, 2016

Vine was good.

Today, Twitter announced that it is shutting down the Vine mobile app. For those of you dweebs who don’t know what Vine is, here’s a primer:

Started only three years ago, Vine has given us some of the internet’s best content and has proved that most videos shouldn’t be longer than six seconds. After all, that’s how long it takes to capture Jeb Bush’s entire presidential run:

Or the plight of being an animal in a human’s world:

And, as Doreen St. Felix has written in Fader, Vine has been an important creative outlet for black teens (although they’ve seen little of the profits). Take Peaches Monroee’s Vine that coined the term “on fleek”:

And aside from comedy, the app also served as an important tool for Black Lives Matter activists:

Vine was good. RIP Vine.

Tim Sloan/Getty

The Clinton Foundation is going to keep causing Hillary Clinton problems.

Emails released by WikiLeaks have revealed that a number of Hillary Clinton’s staffers and others were concerned about potential conflicts between the Clinton Foundation’s fundraising, Hillary Clinton’s work at the State Department and her presidential campaign, and Bill Clinton’s personal ventures, which have made him a considerable amount of money since leaving office.

Looking through the emails, there’s a general sense of anxiety about Bill’s various projects, and how they could affect his wife’s presidential ambitions—and a sense that political aides were largely powerless when they tried to intercede. When greater control over the Clinton Foundation was exerted—largely by Chelsea Clinton—it often resulted in chaos because various high-level officials there, most notably Doug Band, felt that their own moneymaking efforts were threatened.

Back in 2013, Alec MacGillis wrote in The New Republic about Band’s efforts to use his proximity to the Clintons to build a fortune. Band, entranced by power and by wealth, repeatedly put the Clintons in compromising positions to benefit himself, bringing in shady figures like Anne Hathaway’s ex-boyfriend (and later convicted money launderer) Raffaello Follieri into their orbit, regularly using the Clinton name to land flashy dining reservations, and insisting on staying in luxurious locations, despite Bill’s seeming disinterest. At the time, the Clinton Foundation called MacGillis’s reporting baseless, but it is borne out by the WikiLeaks emails.

The Clintons have tried to sever their connection to Band in recent years, but he is, in many ways, indicative of the Clinton Foundation’s larger problems. It’s often hard to disentangle its philanthropic work from its fundraising activities, Bill’s work on its behalf from Hillary’s political ambitions, and some of its shadier figures from its noble ambitions. It’s a problem that continues to baffle Hillary and her closest aides, if the Wikileaks emails are to be trusted. It will continue to be a thorn in her side if she is elected.

Brendan Hoffman / Getty Images

Paul Ryan better watch his back.

On Wednesday evening, Rep. Jason Chaffetz announced on Twitter that he would reluctantly vote for Donald Trump to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House, which marks the second time he has changed his mind about supporting the Republican nominee.

It’s a suspicious pivot from his statements earlier this month, in which he unequivocally condemned Trump following the leak of a tape in which he bragged about sexually assaulting a woman. “My wife, Julie and I, we have a 15-year-old daughter,” Chaffetz said on CNN. “Do you think I can look her in the eye and tell her that I endorsed Donald Trump for president when he acts like this and his apology? So I’m not going to put my good name and reputation and my family behind Donald Trump when he acts like this, I just can’t do it.”

Set aside for the moment whether Chaffetz has decided to never look his daughter in the eye again. What gives? Some pundits speculate that he might be jockeying for a promotion. He has been in the spotlight this week for announcing plans to launch “years” of House investigations into Clinton’s record, should she become president. And he was on the short list to replace John Boehner as speaker of the House back in 2015. If he still wants the job, he might be making a political calculus in tepidly supporting his party’s nominee.

A Ryan ouster isn’t unfathomable. FiveThirtyEight reported that his net favorability ratings have been rocky over the last few months as he has struggled to thread the needle of accepting Trump while preventing him from tainting the entire the GOP. And he’s facing an outright rebellion from pro-Trump members of his caucus. Trump himself might goad them on; according to the Times, Trump has “privately said that Mr. Ryan should pay a price for his disloyalty.”

Whether Chaffetz is the man to succeed Ryan is another question, given his previous statements against Trump. But at the very least, it appears that Ryan’s would-be successors detect blood in the water.


Donald Trump butchers Hindi in a desperate attempt to win the Indian-American vote.

“Ab ki baar Trump sarkar,” the Republican nominee says in a new ad, which translates the phrase as “This time Trump Government.” Business Insider reports that the phrase actually means “This Time, We’re With Trump’s Government.” But hey, Trump is too busy for trifling pronouns and prepositions.

According to BuzzFeed, the slogan is a spin on the one used in 2014 by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with whom Trump says he looks forward to working. Trump is also shown in the ad lighting a diya for Diwali—the festival of lights that begins this weekend—and speaking at a recent Bollywood event with the Republican Hindu Coalition. “We love the Hindus,” he says. “We love India.”

The 30-second spot, airing now on Indian-American channels, was produced in-house by Trump’s Indian-American Advisory Council, according to the group’s chairman. That makes sense, given that the erratically edited ad looks like something a middle-school student would produce on iMovie.

Karen Bleier/Getty Images

Donald Trump has a Mormon problem. That means Lou Dobbs has a problem with Mormons.

To their credit, Republican Mormons are balking at the prospect of voting for the most profane presidential candidate in modern history. Utah, a state that Mitt Romney won handily in 2012, is now a tight race thanks to the insurgent campaign of Evan McMullin. So naturally Dobbs, one of Trump’s biggest supporters in the media, decides to pour gasoline on the fire by tweeting

“Globalist” is a very popular conspiracy term among Trumpkins, and often has an anti-Semitic connotation. But what’s interesting is the phrase “Mormon mafia.” Mormons aware of their history will know that they were long subject to xenophobic conspiracy theories of the sort used also against Jews and Catholics. According to these theories, Mormons were an alien element trying to subvert the American republic. 

Dobbs is a bellwether on the populist right, with his own anti-Latino rants being a forerunner of Trump’s campaign. It could well be that if Trump loses Utah, his movement will turn against Mormons just as they’ve already turned against people of color, Muslim-Americans, and many other groups.   

Sean Rayford/Getty

Ted Cruz would rather neuter the Supreme Court than appoint Merrick Garland or any other Democratic nominee.

Poor Merrick Garland. Once upon a time, he was going to be a wedge issue in down-ballot races, but he’s spent the last few months largely being forgotten, presumably sitting at home watching baseball, waiting for the phone to ring. (It never rings.)

But slowly but surely, Garland has reemerged in the race, at least in the abstract. Eyeing defeat in November, Republicans are starting to panic about the future of the Supreme Court, which could very well have a liberal majority for the first time in five decades. There’s little that Republicans can do, which helps explain why they’ve started to come around to a permanent stonewalling of Garland’s nomination—their only hope of maintaining control of the Court.

Speaking in Colorado on Wednesday, death-mask lookalike Ted Cruz argued that there is precedent for starving the court of new justices for a sustained period of time. “There is certainly long historical precedent for a Supreme Court with fewer justices,” Cruz said. “I would note, just recently, that Justice Breyer observed that the vacancy is not impacting the ability of the court to do its job. That’s a debate that we are going to have.” In other words, the court can function just fine without a ninth justice, thank you.

This is not true, as having eight justices has one very obvious flaw—no one likes ties, as Sunday night’s Cardinals-Seahawks game testifies. But conservatives like Cruz nevertheless see gridlock as being better than the alternative.

Joe Raedle/Getty

The Trump campaign admits it has only one card left in its deck: voter suppression.

With twelve days to go, the Trump campaign knows that it is losing and losing badly. According to a new Bloomberg Businessweek story, Trump’s internal polling is “similar” to Nate Silver’s aggregate models, which currently give Trump only a 16.2 percent chance of winning and show him trailing in Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, and Iowa. The campaign has “identified 13.5 million voters in 16 battleground states whom it considers persuadable,” but it knows that Trump has only one path to victory: shrinking the electorate.

In keeping with Trump’s often shocking forthrightness and commitment to turning Republican subtext into text, the Trump campaign was surprisingly open about this.

We have three major voter suppression operations under way,” says a senior official. They’re aimed at three groups Clinton needs to win overwhelmingly: idealistic white liberals, young women, and African Americans. Trump’s invocation at the debate of Clinton’s WikiLeaks e-mails and support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership was designed to turn off Sanders supporters. The parade of women who say they were sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton and harassed or threatened by Hillary is meant to undermine her appeal to young women. And her 1996 suggestion that some African American males are “super predators” is the basis of a below-the-radar effort to discourage infrequent black voters from showing up at the polls—particularly in Florida.

There are two big takeaways here. The first is that this has been the Trump campaign’s most important tactic since the late summer, at least. Trump has consistently shown a high floor and a low ceiling—he has only polled about 44 percent in aggregate once, immediately after the RNC—which means that the only way to win is to take votes away from Clinton, who polling has shown has been more affected by third-party candidates than Trump. This is clearly a last-ditch strategy, the only card left in Trump’s deck, but it’s been the only card there for a while.

The second takeaway is that, as chilling as this plan sounds, the Trump campaign just isn’t very good at executing it. Bloomberg uses black voter suppression as a case study:

On Oct. 24, Trump’s team began placing spots on select African American radio stations. In San Antonio, a young staffer showed off a South Park-style animation he’d created of Clinton delivering the “super predator” line (using audio from her original 1996 sound bite), as cartoon text popped up around her: “Hillary Thinks African Americans are Super Predators.” The animation will be delivered to certain African American voters through Facebook “dark posts”—nonpublic posts whose viewership the campaign controls so that, as Parscale puts it, “only the people we want to see it, see it.” The aim is to depress Clinton’s vote total. “We know because we’ve modeled this,” says the official. “It will dramatically affect her ability to turn these people out.”

Maybe you have more faith in “South Park-style” animations than I do, but if that’s your best hope to stop people from voting, you’re probably screwed.

October 26, 2016

Miami Herald

Bernie Sanders’s millennial diehards are finally #WithHer.

As of Wednesday, Hillary Clinton held a 28-point lead over Donald Trump among younger voters—surpassing President Barack Obama’s advantage during his 2012 reelection campaign. In an age bracket that identifies mostly as Democratic or Independent, this was long overdue.

It was only last month that Clinton was still scrambling to attract young voters. It seems the campaign was riding out the residual effects of a hard-fought primary, in which Sanders emerged as the unequivocal favorite among millennials. The Vermont senator’s brand of progressivism won the youth vote by large margins in many states, at ratios of 5-to-1 and even 6-to-1. Meanwhile, Clinton seemingly could not figure out how to shake his portrayal of her as a pawn of Wall Street and Big Business, which was, at one point, parodied by Saturday Night Live:

When Sanders prolonged the primary well after it became clear that he would lose and offered a very lukewarm concession, the millennials who supported him did not rush over to the Clinton camp. It appears the tide really began to turn after the release of the video in which Trump described sexually assaulting a woman.

Getty/Jung Yeon-je

For a truly devastating email controversy, go to South Korea.

In the wake of Monday revelations that a trashed hard drive belonging to a longtime confidant of President Park Geun-hye contained 200 classified government documents, the president gave a rare public apology on Tuesday. But her claim that her exchanges with her friend had been conducted “with a pure heart” quickly became the target of national scorn, and many have called for her impeachment instead. While some see parallels to Clinton’s email server controversy, the level of corruption and mismanagement of national information attributed to Park are far more serious and bizarre.

The scandal is multi-fold. First, there’s the evidence that Park had intentionally entrusted state information to Choi Soon-sil, a mysterious figure who is neither a state official nor affiliated with any organization. Her only claim to the president is as the daughter of a cult-like figure who has been by Park’s side for most of her life and who claimed to channel Park’s dead mother. Prosecutors are also investigating whether the president’s influence helped Choi to receive expedited approval of two foundations that racked up multi-million dollar donations from South Korea’s conglomerates in the space of a couple days, which she then used as her own personal slush fund to purchase property and fund her personal expenses. The scandal even extended to prestigious Ewha Womans University, in which the school is alleged to have bent admissions policies and other regulations to allow Choi’s daughter to matriculate. The university president has already stepped down.

The most lasting damage, however, may be to Park’s public image as a modern political leader. The hard drive revealed that the president had sent drafts of her speeches and remarks to Choi before they were delivered, and Park admitted on Tuesday that she had consulted Choi for her opinions on these statements after her inauguration (a privilege not even extended to her own presidential staff). As a result, many now view the president as a blind follower of a fringe religious figure. As a representative of the main opposition party stated, “South Korea’s Constitution stipulates the country has only one president. But it turned out two presidents led the nation.” Even her own political party has asked her to leave the party.

As her approval numbers plummet, Park’s controversial proposal to amend the Constitution and extend presidential term limits, which some saw as a ploy to detract from the corruption probe, may be going nowhere fast.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Because Democrats passed laws when they had majorities, Republicans will boycott health legislation forever.

An anticipated 22 percent increase in average insurance premiums within the Affordable Care Act exchanges has Democrats facing a new round of partisan Obamacare attacks.

This was all perfectly predictable, but it raises the question, once again, of what, if anything, Republicans will be willing to do to sand down the health care system’s rough edges once the election’s over.

Conservative writer Ramesh Ponnuru attributes the gridlock to the fact that President Obama isn’t really as open-minded about reforms to his health law as he claims to be.

For instance, Ponnuru claims, “Obama says that people who are having trouble buying insurance on Obamacare’s exchanges should receive more generous subsidies. The conservative alternative—relax the regulations that make the insurance unaffordable for them—is unacceptable to him because it would be a retreat from comprehensiveness.”

The real problem here is that Obama isn’t negotiating with Ponnuru, but with Congressional Republicans, who have only been willing to discuss significant health care reforms if they’re premised on repealing the entire health care law, and replacing it with something far less comprehensive.

Republicans on Capitol Hill haven’t, as far as I’m aware, proposed introducing a catastrophic coverage option in to the exchanges as an opening bid in a narrow negotiation over how to shield consumers from premium increases. That’s because elected Republicans (and many conservative intellectuals, for that matter) have essentially decided that because Democrats passed laws when they had majorities, Republicans will boycott health legislation forever. Or until they finally control government and can implement more radical reforms on their own. Obama presents himself as “the picture of reasonableness” on this topic, because, Ponurru’s objections notwithstanding, nobody in the other party is behaving reasonably.