Archive for enough about 2016

Premature speculation: Jon Stewart skewers 2016 election coverage

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

2016 election speculation Jon Stewart

premature speculation

Last time I looked, the 2016 elections come AFTER the 2014 elections, which seems obvious to those of us who can count. And who own calendars. And who aren't news dee jays. And who don't have zillions of dollars available to influence elections, dollars that they slather all over their favorite candidates and causes. So who better to mock the premature 2016 election speculation glut than-- ta daa!-- Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.

Presenting "Democalypse 2014: 2016 Foreplay Edition," the "prespeculation hypotheticals":

Jon Stewart:

Why speculate about the near future-- when you can speculate about the far future? Coming up: Your ten day forecast!-- For next February...

Clinton v. Bush! Thank god we fought a bloody war against England so that political power would no longer be consolidated in but one family, because in my mind, two just makes sense...

Does this mean [Hillary's] hungry for 2016? ... We don't know. Because we can't know. But still. What?...

I wonder if old Wyatt Oops [Rick Perry] is gonna get back in the saddle?... I know what he's doing!... He's going from the handsome bimbo to the bookworm!

He said that in reference to Perry's "glasses of ensmartenment."

And he didn't forget to skewer the Bushes. NosirreeGeorge.

H/t: The Week

jon stewart Hillary Clinton 2016 election speculation

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Warren not running for president, Sanders "willing to consider," GOP doesn't have candidates for U.S. Senate

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

2016 speculation jon stewart

Per the Burlington Free Press, 72-year-old Senator Bernie Sanders is well aware of the immense challenges one must confront in order to make a presidential run. However-- and this took me by surprise after hearing him declare repeatedly that he would not run-- he recently dropped a hint that contradicted his previous denials:

Still, Sanders says he is willing to consider making a run if no one else with progressive views similar to his ends up taking the plunge.

It is essential, he said, to have someone in the 2016 presidential campaign who is willing to take on Wall Street, address the “collapse” of the middle class, tackle the spread of poverty and fiercely oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

But then he jolted us back in time to recollections of Ralph Nader's candidacies, which would mean jumping through hoops to  get his name on the general election ballot in 50 states, not to mention being identified as "The Spoiler" candidate.

And don't get him started on the enormous demands of having to fundraise. He'd have nothing to do with corporate Wall Street money, which of course would whittle down his chances of raking in the big bucks.

And then there's that pesky "independent" label:

Sanders said if he does run, he would “probably” do so as an independent. It’s a label that has been of value to him in his statewide races but could become a complication as a presidential hopeful.“The disadvantages of being an independent are you not going to get in these big debates that you have on television,” he said. “But I’m very proud to be an independent.”

But then he added that he'd be "comfortable with an Elizabeth Warren presidential bid." Hey, so would a lot of people, including yours truly.

There's just one problem.

BuzzFeed:

Elizabeth Warren’s former national finance chair, Paul Egerman, has told several inquiring donors this month that, despite runaway speculation and a burning desire from the party’s left wing, the freshman senator will not run for president in 2016. [...]

One Democratic fundraiser said he spoke with Egerman roughly two weeks ago... “It’s not gonna happen” [...]

Lacey Rose, Warren’s press secretary, gave BuzzFeed the following statement: “As Senator Warren has said many times, she is not running for president,” Rose said.

Three attendees at last week’s Democracy Alliance meetings cautioned that there is already an understanding inside fundraising circles that Warren would not consider running unless Clinton bows out of the race — a possibility that looks increasingly unlikely...

On the upside, the National Journal is reporting on the 2014 U.S. Senate races and the Republican deficits therein:

Republicans are giddy about their chances to retake the Senate on the back of a disaster known as Obamacare. There's just one problem: The GOP doesn't have the right candidates to make it happen.

Sure, in the high-profile races of 2014, Republicans have recruited competitive contenders to take on red-state Democrats. But in the second-tier contests, the ones that could suddenly become competitive if the national mood turns increasingly toxic for Democrats, the GOP's cast of hopefuls ranges from the unknown to the unelectable.

The NJ described it as "the dearth of credible candidates." They nailed it. Why? Well, think about it: GOP credibility? Oxymoron.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"By the year 2016, Jeb Bush might change his last name to something less polarizing, like Hitler. Or Nixon."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

2016 election speculation

Today’s guest post by the one, the only, Will Durst:

THE FOGGY CRYSTAL BALL

The heck is going on here, people? Did someone drop the flag signaling the start of the 2016 Presidential election race in secret? Was there a furtive whispered “go now” left on the voice mail of all the major players in the 202 area code? 36 months before the election?

Is it possible to earn extra credit by skipping this one and moving right on to 2020?

The most recent media- consumed fever- dream boils down to Chris Christie versus Hillary Clinton. Although, two weeks ago, Ted Cruz was the presumptive GOP nominee. Didn’t Hillary use up her inevitability card in 2008? When she was destined to face off against Rudy Giuliani? How’d that end up?

But a lack of consistency hasn’t kept the talking heads from jabbering their HD faces off. Money is being raised. Polls conducted. Seriously? Can’t we wait until the midterms are over? Winter Olympics? Thanksgiving?

Predicting the nominees right now is like betting on what the weather will be like in Wisconsin in April. Ten years from now. If everyone is so damn clairvoyant, why don’t they throw some money down on lottery tickets? These modern day alchemists might be better off focusing their skills on spinning straw into gold.

A week in politics is a lifetime. A month is two eternities. But three years is like an afternoon at your great aunt’s, while uncle Harry with the mole on his nose that 4 inch hairs grow out of, shows slides of their recent trip to the Azores.
We’re not talking jumping the gun, this is more like jumping the application of the lane chalk. Think of all the stuff that could happen between now and 2016.

By the year 2016, Hillary Clinton could be on trial for domestic abuse.
By the year 2016, Chris Christie might have left politics for his one true love, the field of competitive eating.
By the year 2016, Joe Biden might have single-handedly pulled 6 Navy Seals out of a burning helicopter. And 2 puppies.
By the year 2016, the oceans could rise so high that California and Florida are totally taken out of the electoral equation.
By the year 2016, the Tea Party might be holding its annual convention in the banquet room of a Casper, Wyoming Applebee’s.
By the year 2016, the primaries may come down to whoever looks best in a full-body containment suit.
By the year 2016, Mitt Romney could very well have had a new user-friendly operating system installed.
By the year 2016, Elizabeth Warren might have resigned the Senate and moved to China to organize Apple workers.
By the year 2016, John Edwards could have found Jesus and rehabilitated himself. Probably not.
By the year 2016, Rick Perry, in the midst of another execution frenzy, may have accidentally signed an order resulting in his own.
By the year 2016, Sarah Palin might have said something so monumentally silly that her head exploded.
By the year 2016. Democrats might be holding their annual convention in the banquet room of a Cambridge, Massachusetts Olive Garden.
By the year 2016, Jeb Bush might change his last name to something less polarizing, like Hitler. Or Nixon.
By the year 2016, the city of Chicago could still be in flames from the celebration that followed the Cubs winning the World Series. Probably not.

Will Durst’s new one- man show “BoomeRaging: From LSD to OMG” in its final 4 shows: through Dec 17, Tuesdays at the Marsh. San Francisco. the Marsh. San Francisco. themarsh.org...Or willdurst.com to find his calendar.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Payback time: You want speculation, news media? Fine. Let's speculate about you for a change.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

payback time

Day in and day out, I watch, read, listen, and write about news. And because I do so much watching, reading, and listening. I tend to notice recurring themes. A major recurring theme is how much time the so-called "news" [sic] media spends on speculation.

breaking speculation

Most of that speculation centers on the 2016 presidential election, focusing specifically on Hillary Clinton vs (currently) Chris Christie. Newsflash, "journalists": It's only 2013, and you started this endless loop of What Ifs the day after Election 2012. This is ludicrous. This is not news, this is meaningless filler and a shameless ploy used to pull in viewers.

And hey viewers, how about you stop enabling?

Then again, there is very little "real" news reporting any more, not since news departments became commercialized all those years ago. Not since it became all about profit, which news stories sell, which headlines attract ratings, and as a result, attract sponsors and their buckets of money.

And don't get me started on media bias. The CBS "60 Minutes" Benghazi story scandal is only the latest, and if you're a regular reader, you know that the Sunday morning talk shows have an obvious rightward slant.

But back to that nasty speculation habit. When you watch the "news" shows, you see them produce hours upon hours of What If about future elections, about the *gasp!* doomed fate of the Affordable Care Act, about which freedoms we might lose if we don't do something about some catastrophe that might or might not happen, about which new scandal *could* result from Darrell Issa's umpteenth witch hunt about absolutely everything/nothing.

You can actually see concrete examples of all this speculation in their  TV chyrons, like, Low Obamacare enrollment numbers: Sign of problems to come?"; "A third 'Bush' in office?"; "Will the world end in 2012? Many people believe so." We get a ton of cowardly headlines in the form of a question, Alex, so that nobody has to commit to actual, you know, reporting.

Facts schmacts.

Well now it's our turn. News outlets want to speculate? Fine. Let's turn the tables and speculate about them for a change:

  • Will Fox finally become defunct when Americans wake up and realize they're a bunch of propagandists and liars? You decide.
  • Will MSNBChristie require financial assistance when viewers revolt after O.D.ing on their constant fawning over the ::cough!:: "moderate" New Jersey photo op glutton? Who knows?
  • Will ABC's ratings take a fatal plunge the next time syrupy panel regular Peggy Noonan condescends ad nauseam on "This Week"? We'll find out.
  • Will CNN change its name to Comedy Central 2 when they become self aware enough to realize what a parody they've become? It's anybody's guess.
  • "Some say" cable news has crossed a line by being bought and paid for by right wing corporate cash monsters who find themselves more than a little obsessed with Christie, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Marsha Blackburn, Reince Priebus, Marco Rubio, John Boehner, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham. Could this spell trouble for attracting future investors? We'll have to wait and see.
  • "Anonymous sources" tell The Political Carnival that the glut of Big Pharma ads-- especially for Cialis-- that saturate cable news channels could lead to a revolt among increasingly hypochondriacal viewers, specifically bathtub owners. True? We can't say for sure.
  • We're hearing that air time spent on trivia-- like how many shoppers are lining up to buy the new iPhone, instead of on hard news stories-- could possibly-- we're speculating here-- cause riots among viewers with functioning brains. More on that as details emerge.
  • Rumors abound about the habit and practice of cable show hosts inviting other cable show hosts to provide commentary that they just gave on their own shows. Incestuous? Tweet us with your answers.
  • We're learning-- well, we've heard-- well, okay, we overheard-- that cable news viewers are about to retaliate en masse over all the in-house backslapping, "my friend" references, "be safe" cautions, and insufferable book plugs. True or false? At this point, we can only make an educated guess.

speculation what do I know

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"Welcome to Extreme Campaigning. 24/7": GOP calls Hillary "too old. That’s right. Republicans. The party of Reagan."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

hillary clinton new website

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I watched about two minutes of the above Meet the Press segment before literally screaming "STFU!" at the Tee Vee Machine and turning the channel. This 3+-year-long election coverage and endless, pointless speculation turns my stomach when I think about all the actual news and events of the day that go unreported.

With that, today’s guest post by the one, the only, Will Durst:

LET THE PANTS SUIT DANCE

It’s time to address the burning question singeing the lips of every American this summer: What will happen to Bryan Cranston’s pork pie hat after Breaking Bad ends its run? Okay, maybe that’s number 2. The big one is who’s going to be the Democratic Presidential candidate in November of 2016? 38 months and counting.

Having gone almost a year without the least meager of Presidential Race morsels to munch on, journos are doing whatever it takes to jump- start a tasty plate of appetizers. Also, it’s August, which means politically, there’s less going on in Washington than a vacuum in a crater at the southern most base of Neptune’s thirteenth moon.

If you suspect this might all be a bit premature. YES. INDEED. YOU BET. Your instincts are correct sir. This sort of speculation normally doesn’t kick into gear until a year and a half out; two years, tops, but the accelerated pace is today’s norm. Rapid is the new sauntering. Welcome to Extreme Campaigning. 24/7.

Of course, they do have a point. President Barack Obama’s second term has already entered its 7th month. It is more than an eighth over. The guy is history. Spent. Taking up space. Got the “How Can We Miss You If You Won’t Go Away” Blues. Way beyond lame duck, he’s a differently-abled turducken. A quadriplegic platypus. His goose is undergoing severe cookage.

Barack could nip the suspense in the bud by stepping down and giving Joe Biden a leg up. Because the job will not be Biden’s for the taking. He’s going to need a crowbar the size of Idaho to pry the nomination from a certain someone who’s already spent 8 years in the White House. Albeit, in the East Wing. And not baking cookies thank you very much.

Even the GOP considers that former tenant their major threat since they’ve launched a couple preemptive strikes against the Clinton of Hillary. And isn’t it refreshing to see them get past their internal squabbles to concentrate on what’s really important to the Party?

They’ve threatened to boycott NBC and CNN if the networks run planned specials on the Former First Lady and have taken to calling her… too old. That’s right. Republicans. The party of Reagan. Same guys that ran Bob Dole whose campaign slogan was “hey you punks, get off my lawn.” Can’t wait for them to charge her with being too white as well. And too rich.

Last time Hillary was the front-runner, it didn’t turn out too well and other names being bandied about are: Andrew Cuomo, Rahm Emanuel and Cory Booker, who just locked up the Democratic slot for the New Jersey Senate special election to fill the seat vacated by the late Frank Lautenberg.

Booker may be the biggest wild card. Imagine Ms. Hill is sweating like a squad of Sumos in a sauna just thinking about a young charismatic fast-track black guy serving less than one full term in the Senate hijacking her coronation ceremony. Again.

His staff encouraged Bill Clinton to be Bill Clinton, with, “Let the Big Dawg Eat.” This time, it’s more of a “Let the Pants Suit Dance.” And everyone better start paying attention or the handicapping of the 2020 race will begin as well. My money’s on Chelsea.

5 time Emmy nominee, Will Durst’s new one- man show “BoomeRaging: From LSD to OMG” every Tuesday, at the Marsh, San Francisco. Go to… themarsh.org for more info. Or willdurst.com. Also info on other gigs like the Humor Times benefit @ the Sierra II Theater in Sacramento on August 23.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Poll-itics: Hillary Clinton clobbering Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio among Hispanic voters for 2016

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

limp

I have an aversion to writing or making predictions about 2016 presidential prospects, but this was too good to pass up because of the direct references to Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and Jeb Bush. As far as I'm concerned, all the Hillary Clinton talk has already devolved into overkill and, well, premature speculation.

gasp silent movie smaller

That said...

The Latino population is growing as the GOP grasp of reality is shrinking. So while so many Americans may suffer from  premature speculation, the Republican Bubble O' Oblivion brings this Moment of Seinfeld to mind:

shrinkage smaller

Their political impotence has led to revelations of what a sham their whole laughable "outreach effort" has become; it just hasn't clicked with voters, because Americans aren't the gullible pushovers that conservatives seem to think they are.

Check this out from The Hill:

A new poll of likely Hispanic voters in the 2016 presidential election shows strong support for the two candidates seen as potential Democratic nominees: former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice President Biden.

The survey, by Latino Decisions, also revealed Republican candidates continue to significantly trail among Hispanic voters, with even champions of immigration reform like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush significantly behind top Democrats.

73 percent of likely Hispanic voters give Hillary a big thumbs up. Biden scores with 58 percent.

Rubio, on the other hand? He has 31-29 positive favorability rating. And Jebby should go back to whatever it is Jebby does (ALEC-related, corporate, anti-union Bushy stuff):

Jeb Bush — also a proponent of immigration reform — is underwater with his favorability ranking. While a third of Hispanic voters don't know him, 39 percent view him unfavorably and 27 percent view him favorably.

oof

Oh, and a measly two in 10 Hispanic voters view Paul Ryan favorably, while Chris Christie rates a 38-12 percent, trailing Rubio when Hispanic voters were asked who they would vote for in a Republican primary.

Meanwhile, back at the '08 ranch, early supporters of Barack Obama support a Hillary Clinton run in 2016, per The Hill.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

VIDEO: Haven't had your fill of Clinton speculation yet? Chelsea Clinton open to run for office.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

chelsea

We've had enough speculation on whether or not Hillary Clinton will run for president in 2016 to last a lifetime.

But why stop there? Now everyone can also start speculating ad nauseam about Chelsea Clinton's political future:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Chelsea Clinton, a correspondent for NBC, was on the Today Show:

"Right now I’m grateful to live in a city, in a state and a country where I strongly support my mayor, my governor, my president, my senators and my representatives. If at some point that weren’t true and I thought I could make a meaningful and measurably greater impact, you know, I’d have to ask and answer that question."

Okay, ten-four, understood, the door is open.

Now can we please start speculating about something else?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare