First the Clinton's encourage Trump to run, and now The Face-Shooter wants Biden to run?


Dick Cheney Wants Joe Biden To Jump Into The Presidential Race
by Paige Lavender * August 31, 2015 * HuffPo

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said he hopes Vice President Joe Biden jumps into the 2016 presidential race.

"I'd love to see Joe get in the race," Cheney said Monday morning during a joint interview with his daughter Liz on CNN.

"Go for it Joe," Cheney added when asked why he thought Biden should run. "He's tried twice before, he obviously is interested. I think there's a lot of support for him in the Democratic party. I think it would stir things up. They're short candidates on their side."

Cheney also slammed Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton for using a private email server during her time as U.S. secretary of state.

"I think she should've known better," Cheney said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dick-cheney-joe-biden_55e444c5e4b0b7a963397221?utm_hp_ref=politics

Where is the outrage among Clinton supporters when DWS betrays her
own Democratic President, especially since Hillary says she supports the
Obama's Iran deal.

The Hill:
Wasserman Schultz blocked Iran resolution at DNC meeting
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/252255-report-dnc-chairwoman-blocked-iran-resolution-at-party-meeting

West Point professor calls on US military to target legal critics of war on terror
US military academy official William Bradford argues that attacks on scholars’ home offices and media outlets – along with Islamic holy sites – are legitimate
by Spencer Ackerman in New York * The Guardian * August 29, 2015

An assistant professor in the law department of the US Military Academy at West Point has argued that legal scholars critical of the war on terrorism represent a “treasonous” fifth column that should be attacked as enemy combatants.

In a lengthy academic paper, the professor, William C Bradford, proposes to threaten “Islamic holy sites” as part of a war against undifferentiated Islamic radicalism. That war ought to be prosecuted vigorously, he wrote, “even if it means great destruction, innumerable enemy casualties, and civilian collateral damage”.

Other “lawful targets” for the US military in its war on terrorism, Bradford argues, include “law school facilities, scholars’ home offices and media outlets where they give interviews” – all civilian areas, but places where a “causal connection between the content disseminated and Islamist crimes incited” exist.

“Shocking and extreme as this option might seem, [dissenting] scholars, and the law schools that employ them, are – at least in theory – targetable so long as attacks are proportional, distinguish noncombatants from combatants, employ nonprohibited weapons, and contribute to the defeat of Islamism,” Bradford wrote.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/29/west-point-professor-target-legal-critics-war-on-terror

It's in the interests of corporate media to ignore what Sanders is talking about. Can we fix that? 8/27/15 * by Meteor Blades * Daily Kos

CNN, The Washington Post and a few other media outlets took note Monday that Bernie Sanders made mention of something that's been on his mind for a very long time—the media's general failure to do what ought to be the serious work of covering election campaigns as well as political and economic issues in general. Here's Dan Merica:

"The American people, I think, increasingly understand that corporate media is prepared to discuss everything 24 hours a day, seven days a week except the most important issues facing the American people," Sanders said Monday during a town hall in Conway. "Increasingly what media sees campaigns being are soap operas and football games, rather than a serious discussion about the serious issues facing America."

Sanders used similar lines in Salem, New Hampshire, on Sunday night, lamenting the fact that Republican candidate Marco Rubio hitting a child in the head with a football during a trip to Iowa got "more coverage than Marco Rubio's position on Social Security."

Sanders wasn't bellyaching about how he himself has been treated by the media. Speaking with reporters in Conway after a rally there Monday, he made clear that he didn't think what they have been writing about him is unfair. But he didn't sugarcoat another element of their coverage, or rather the lack of it:

“I want you to talk about and force discussion about climate change,” he said. “Do you think you do that enough? I would like you to force discussion of poverty in America. I have talked over and over and over again that 51 percent of African American kids are unemployed or underemployed. You think that’s an important issue? I do. Are you going to discuss it?”
"So what I am asking you is help me. … The American people want a discussion of the real issues.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/25/1415433/-It-s-in-the-interests-of-corporate-media-to-ignore-what-Sanders-is-talking-about-Can-we-fix-that

4 Reasons Why a Biden Run Would Help Sanders
It would give more Democrats permission to question Clinton's candidacy.
By David Corn * Wed Aug. 26, 2015 * Mother Jones

The politerati are getting a slight break from Trumpalooza these days, thanks to the Biden Bump. The veep has been actively discussing a possible presidential run with Democratic donors and strategists as he moves toward a final decision, and political handicappers have upped the odds that Biden, still coping with the recent death of his 46-year-old son Beau, will enter the fray. This has led to a torrent of speculation about what Biden will do and what a last-minute leap might mean for the 2016 race. Could it hurt the once-inevitable-but-now-email-burdened Hillary Clinton by providing Nervous-Nellie Democrats with an alternative? Could it help Clinton by offering her a more establishment-oriented sparring partner to vanquish—which would yield a positive narrative for her campaign?

The other day, Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent seeking the Democratic nomination who has drawn thousands to rallies and boomed in recent polls, was asked how a Biden bid would affect the contest. He characteristically pooh-poohed the question. "Politics is not a soap opera," he said. "What impact it will have on the race, I honestly don’t know. I mean, I wish I could tell you, but I don’t. Will it help or hurt me? Will it help or hurt Hillary Clinton? I just don’t know."

Yet there are several reasons why a Biden run would be good for Sanders.
* Slicing up the pie. The most obvious benefit is a matter of basic math: If Biden is in the hunt, the establishment Democratic vote will be split. ~snip~
* Hey, look over there. A Biden-Clinton showdown would draw great media attention. ~snip~
* Permission to abandon ship. At the moment, there's only one establishment candidate in the race. ~snip~
* A longer free ride. The Clinton campaign so far has not blasted Sanders. It has watched warily as he has risen in the polls, but it has not fired at him. Team Sanders, though, does expect Clinton to confront the (possible) Sanders threat at some point. With Biden in the mix, Sanders may get a pass. ~snip~
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/4-reasons-why-biden-entering-race-would-help-sanders

Elizabeth Warren backers lukewarm on Joe Biden
Leaders of “Run Warren Run” say most of their members are already happy with Sanders.
By Edward-Isaac Dovere & Gabriel Debenedetti * 8/24/15 * Politico

Joe Biden is no Elizabeth Warren.

That’s the message being sent by former leaders and foot soldiers of the draft Warren movement after the vice president met privately with the Massachusetts senator on Saturday, in preparation for a possible presidential run.

Unlike Warren or Bernie Sanders, the Vermont progressive who’s assumed the support of many Warren backers, Biden is a pillar of the Democratic establishment, vice president in an administration that many progressives consider too centrist. That puts him in roughly the same position as Hillary Clinton: liberal on many issues, but a traditional party loyalist at the end of the day.

“He enters the race in the same place she is,” said Charles Chamberlain, president of Democracy for America, which helped operate the pro-Warren grass roots group Run Warren Run.

That’s a considerable problem because Biden, to be successful, would need to appeal to a large majority of progressives who are disenchanted with Clinton, while persuading them that he’s a better vehicle for their beliefs than Sanders, who’s been drawing huge crowds and gaining on Clinton all summer.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/elizabeth-warren-backers-lukewarm-joe-biden-2016-121688.html#ixzz3jqX2CXWo

How Much Are Pollsters Really Getting Paid?

Mark Blumenthal, Senior Polling Editor, The Huffington Post
Ariel Edwards-Levy, Reporter, The Huffington Post
Janie Velencia, Associate Polling Editor, The Huffington Post

Most pollsters wish they were paid as well as Donald Trump thinks they are, but FEC filings show that so far few if any are.

In an interview with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, the real estate mogul and Republican presidential contender explained that the other candidates “have pollsters; they pay these guys $200,000 a month to tell them, ‘Don’t say this, don’t say that, you use the wrong word, you shouldn’t put a comma here.’ I don’t want any of that. I have a nice staff, but no one tells me what to say."

The reality is that none of the Republican contenders has yet to pay a pollster anywhere near that much, although Hillary Clinton’s polling disbursements in 2015 come close. ~snip~



Hillary Clinton’s campaign and super PAC are the big exceptions, racking up over a million dollars in polling disbursements so far in 2015. The FEC reports show payments of $814,915 to lead polling firm Benenson Strategy Group and $90,000 to David Binder Research. The Priorities USA Action super PAC also paid out $139,734 to Global Strategy Group and $42,000 to Garin Strategic Research.

Keep in mind that these disbursements are taken from campaign spending reports for all of 2015 – they are not monthly amounts. They also include the total cost of polling and focus groups conducted for the campaigns, rather than reflecting net profit or the pollsters’ take-home pay.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-much-are-pollsters-paid_55d70f55e4b00d8137edded5?cps=gravity_5059_-8224929146900113401&kvcommref=mostpopular

Now this is quite interesting IMHO.

Biden holds meeting with Elizabeth Warren in DC
By Mark Hensch * August 22, 2015, 12:50 pm * The Hill

Vice President Joe Biden made a surprise visit to Washington, D.C.’s Naval Observatory on Saturday for a confidential talk with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), CNN reported. Biden’s return to the District comes amid buzz he is seriously weighing a 2016 Oval Office bid.

CNN said that two sources confirmed the pair’s face-to-face, the biggest indicator yet that Biden is seriously tempted by an Oval Office bid next year.

“The vice president traveled last minute to Washington, D.C. for a private meeting and will be returning to Delaware,” an aide told CNN. Biden spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff declined further comment on the alleged rendezvous.

CNN initially reported Saturday that Biden arrived in Washington around 11 a.m. and had planned on returning home to Wilmington, Del., later in the weekend.

Warren, a beloved figure in progressive circles, has resisted calls to mount her own presidential candidacy. She reportedly told WBZ radio in Boston on Friday that she considers the 2016 Democratic primary up for grabs.

“I don’t think anyone has been anointed,” said Warren, who has not yet endorsed a candidate.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/251725-biden-makes-unscheduled-trip-to-dc-for-private-political

With the FBI Investigating Clinton's Emails, Bernie Sanders Should Be Considered the Democratic Frontrunner
08/21/2015 * HuffPo * H.A. Goodman

Last year, if someone told you that by August of 2015, a poll would show Bernie Sanders ahead of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, what would you say? Six months ago, if you were told that Bernie Sanders would draw over 100,000 people at events across the country, how would you react?

The truth is that Bernie Sanders is long past the viewpoint that he's unelectable or "too liberal." Without serious interest from mainstream media, and without billions in campaign funding, the Vermont Senator has been able to generate a nationwide groundswell of enthusiasm. Money can't buy enthusiasm, and money certainly can't buy a person's trust -- Sanders has an abundance of both.

Since Bernie Sanders is sincere and known for his direct and forthright communication style, he won't have to spend any dollars convincing Americans that he's trustworthy. Sanders, unlike others, can simply remind people that he voted against the Iraq War, voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, fought hard against Keystone XL and the TPP, and favors breaking up "too big to fail" banks.

Up until now, the view that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic frontrunner was bolstered by an ever-dwindling poll among Democratic voters between the former Secretary of State and the Vermont Senator. However, with major polls today showing Sanders challenging or defeating Clinton and Republican, conventional wisdom has allowed the possibility of Clinton possibly losing a second run at the presidency. Furthermore, the momentum generated by the Sanders campaign is genuine and will only increase (among all demographics) with greater name recognition across the country.

Most importantly, Bernie Sanders is the only Democrat gaining attention nationwide who isn't linked to an FBI investigation. Why some Democrats still continue to believe a candidate can win the White House with the Justice Department, FBI, and other intelligence agencies investigating this candidate's email practices, seems to overlook one obvious fact. Nobody has ever won the White House with an ongoing FBI and Justice Department investigation, and it doesn't seem that the FBI or Justice Department will cease investigating Clinton's email saga by Election Day; 444 days away.

In reality, the real frontrunner within the race for Democratic nominee is the candidate gaining momentum every single day, without overwhelming media coverage. Bernie Sanders is in reality the likely choice for Democratic nominee, since his competition is linked to an ongoing FBI investigation. Statisticians and pundits can serve as naysayers, but the reality is that Hillary Clinton's lead over Bernie Sanders is constantly dwindling, and yet Clinton's email saga is just beginning. For these reasons and more, the realistic choice for Democratic nominee is the Vermont Senator, not the former Secretary of State who is now under scrutiny from various government agencies.

Fabricated or real, the scandal exists, and nobody can win the White House with the FBI as a running mate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/bernie-sanders-should-be-considered-the-democratic-frontrunner_b_8019264.html

K Street is banking on Hillary Clinton, with more than twice as many Washington lobbyists donating to the former secretary of State’s presidential campaign than any other candidate.

While many lobbyists are holding their pocketbooks in the early stages of the 2016 election cycle, Clinton — the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination — received at least $625,703 from 316 registered lobbyists and corporate PACs during the first half of the year, according to disclosure forms.

“She’s going at it for the second time, and there is a list of people who are very committed to her from eight years ago,” said Al Motteur, senior Democratic lobbyist at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck and longtime Clinton supporter. Motteur has not only given to the campaign, but is also bundling cash from other donors.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ranks as a distant second in the influence industry, collecting $444,500 from 140 lobbyists.
Source: The Hill
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/251456-k-street-betting-on-hillary