Mr. Trump’s win reclaimed control of the Republican race; Mrs. Clinton fought off another challenge from Bernie Sanders.
Trump's extremism does not entitle Clinton to waltz into power without serious scrutiny. Article criticized Paul Krugman in particular for his one sided defense of Hillary Clinton critiquing her critiques.Additionally the article points that millions of dollars received by the Clinton foundation while she was in office needs to be investigated.
A hacked document shows Wall Street donors, for instance, complaining bitterly about Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s influence over the direction of the party.
Glenn points out the hypocrisy of both Republicans and Democrats who have supported Wikileaks in times it advanced their agenda. He also puts out 5 principals for reporting on leaked material pointing out that once the leak is out the Journalist has a duty in reporting on what matters to the public
He will be in charge of reaching out to and engaging with all the voters that the Democratic Party lost during last week’s shocking electoral sweep by Republican nominee Donald Trump. In addition, Sanders is keeping his old spot as the senior minority member of the Budget Committee, leading the Democratic rebuttal against the inevitable Republican efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI) isn’t being quiet about her role in the election, which was being the canary in the coalmine regarding the incredibly fragile position of Hillary Clinton in the state of Michigan prior to Election Day. She warned that President-elect Trump could win the state for Republicans for the first time since 1988, but was ignored by those in her party, who said she was being hyperbolic.
Having taken some time to look back over the past six months, I list below what I believe are the four main underlying reasons for this defeat. As it turns out, none of the reasons is particularly complicated, but each will require consideration and systemic change by the party over the next two years.
Democrats who defended the extraordinary expansion of executive power under President Obama may suddenly be having second thoughts. The Democrats went silent on executive overreach when Obama was elected. When the New York Times revealed Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program in 2005, 60 percent of registered Democrats thought the program was “unacceptable.” But after NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed a dramatically larger surveillance apparatus in 2013, a 61 percent of Democrats said the opposite – presumably because they trusted the man in charge.
Surveying this wreckage last week, party stalwart Matthew Yglesias of Vox minced no words: “the Obama years have created a Democratic Party that’s essentially a smoking pile of rubble.” One would assume that the operatives and loyalists of such a weak, defeated and wrecked political party would be eager to engage in some introspection and self-critique, and to produce a frank accounting of what they did wrong so as to alter their plight. In the case of 2016 Democrats, one would be quite mistaken.
What Sanders’s remarks about "identity politics" say about the Democratic Party’s future. Having the party embrace both gender and racial diversity is a necessary first step, Sanders said. But if “identity politics” means promoting black and female candidates who don’t have “the guts to take on the oligarchy,” Sanders argued, it’s largely beside the point.