Everybody has an opinion on the Democratic race for President, particularly those in the media. Outside of statistical polling, how does the media measure the public's subjective impression of the candidates? They don't and can't. They shouldn't even try. But it's futile to try and stop them. Or even to get the media to distinguish between presenting rank opinion and fact. The two have essentially merged.

Example today, from Slate, which I only came across because it was at the top of my Google News list. The article emphatically reports that Hillary won the debate last night. I may subjectively agree, but I have to question whether that is a fact or some writer's opinion. And if it's opinion, why is it leading the Google news section? [More...]

Last Democratic debate tonight before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

Here's a place for your thoughts. Mine are expressed by the photo.

Bump and Update: Since when did "gun control" become "gun safety legislation?". That's what O'Malley called it. [More...]

There's another Democratic debate tonight, the last before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. In what reads more like an op-ed than a news article, reporters at the Washington Post say Bernie Sanders seems to be picking up steam and Hillary could be in trouble.

She arrives here in the middle of a rocky stretch, all of a sudden on the wrong side of a new narrative that suggests Sanders is surging and she is weakening, facing possible defeat in the first two contests of the year.

The Vermont senator continues to lead the polls in New Hampshire, and now he has closed the gap in Iowa, the state where Clinton’s campaign fell off the tracks eight years ago. For Clinton, it wasn’t supposed to be this way against a septuagenarian, self-identified democratic socialist who began his campaign with no national profile and no financial network.

How is the following news rather than opinion?

[Heads up: This will not be a popular post with Sanders supporters, so if he's your idea of the best choice for President, you may want to stop reading now. Nor will Trump supporters like it, but I don't much care about them.] [More...]

The gold standard for polling in Iowa is the Selzer Poll for the Des Moines Register. And its latest poll of the Iowa Dem caucus shows a very tight race = it's now 42-40 Clinton. In their previous poll it was 48-39.

A couple of interesting points - (1) the tightening is due to some Clinton supporters moving to undecided. Sanders support has not moved up (up a point which is statistically insignificant with a MOE of 4.4.) (2) Sanders support is very concentrated in college towns and thus may not translate into a delegate win even if he prevails in the popular vote.

Iowa is a very strange state for reporting results. It is actually very hard to get a popular vote read out of Iowa. So watch for how the results in Iowa are reported.

But the reality remains the same - Sanders has to win to have a chance. A split of Iowa and NH (Sanders leads there) leaves an unchanged landscape with the primaries moving to South Carolina and Nevada where Clinton's dominating leads among PoC put Sanders in a very tough spot.

Of course it would be uphill for Sanders even if he sweeps Iowa and NH, but without that I see it as basically ending the race.

I'm honestly surprised to be asking the question in the title - thinking the answer would be "of course it is!" But the structure of ACA, with Medicaid expansion and means tested insurance subsidies makes this not so clear according to Austan Goolsbee:

2) Sanders is right that we shouldn't just think of his single-payer health plan as a $15 trillion tax increase. We should ask whether people would be better or worse off in total. But even by that measure, lots of low and middle income workers would, in fact, be worse off and paying higher taxes.

More . . .

There have been only a handful of truly pivotal congressional votes to broadly redefine gun rights in modern America [. . .] So where was Sanders in all this? As a second-term congressman, he steadfastly opposed the Brady Law [. . . ] In 2006, when he was running for Senate, he voted with pro-gun, pro-corporate Republicans on the odious immunity bill. [. . .I]t’s hard to see Sanders’ record as anything but grossly pro- [gun] industry.

[. . . H]ere’s the thing: When Sanders and his supporters defend his votes, they like to make the point that Sanders has represented Vermont, where an awful lot of pickup trucks sport NRA stickers, and where an awful lot of gun dealers make a decent living and don’t want to get sued out of business. In other words, Sanders was representing the interests of his constituents. And you know what that makes Bernie Sanders?

A politician, that’s what.

Yes, pols are pols and do what they do. Even Bernie Sanders.

Speaking for me only

You've probably seen the latest scheme from Move On:

MoveOn.org Political Action announced today that it will hold a formal vote of its membership to determine whether the organization will endorse a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination prior to the first caucuses and primaries.

Nothing wrong with that as far as it goes. I think we have a pretty good idea how that votes gonna go given Move On's hostility to Clinton. But no big deal Except for this:

29 days until the Iowa Caucus. Via HuffPo here is the polling state of play:

Nationally in the GOP race, Trump holds a wide lead over Ted Cruz 39-17. Everyone else is an also ran. But of course national polling doesn't mean much until later.

Among Dems nationally, Hillary Clinton leads Bernie Sanders by 57-31. I'd give the same general caveat but think the lead in the Dem race is more meaningful given the demographic makeup of the support for the candidates (yes PoC overwhelmingly support Clinton.)

More on the race in early states on the flip.

Let me stipulate a few things: (1) Debbie Wasserman Schultz, along with the entire Dem Establishment, from the top, President Obama, to the lowliest local official, wants Hillary Clinton to be the Dem nominee, (2) The debate schedule is travesty and is designed to minimize the exposure of Clinton opponents and (3) if there is a chance for the Dem Establishment to swing a close race to Clinton, they will take it (think Super Delegates.)

Now that that is out of the way, let me tell you about the easy “fix” the Dem Establishment COULD have done to insure a Clinton victory that would ALSO have been good for our democracy and our Party — end the Iowa/NH stranglehold on going first in the primary process.

More

Is something wrong with Donald Trump? Who makes these kinds of comments?

Donald Trump launched an aggressive attack on Hillary Clinton on Monday night, saying she was "disgusting" for using the restroom during the latest Democratic debate and that she was "schlonged" by a male political opponent.

... "She was favored to win, and she got schlonged," Trump said, turning a vulgar noun for a large p*nis into a verb.

"Schlonged?" I haven't heard that word since I was a kid. And why is it so "disgusting" that Hillary went to the bathroom? My response: Beware of the candidate who thinks his sh*t doesn't stink.

Ivanka should come out and disassociate herself from her father's spew of garbage. He is beginning to sound out of control.

If you respond in comments, please do not use profanity, as your comment will be deleted. You may use asterisks in place of a letter or two as I have done. [More...]

I barely knew he was in the race, but Lindsay Graham today ended his campaign for the Republican nomination for President.

It's time for several other Republicans to follow his lead.

The Democratic Debate at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H. begins at 8pm ET. ABC is hosting the debate. Here's a thread to discuss it.

ISIS is probably very happy tonight knowing the candidates all know what's in their videos. If the Government succeeds in taking them down, how will the candidates know what they are sayig?

O'Malley is like Henney Penny "We're Under Attack." He says we don't have enough spying. He wants CIA covert intelligence and diplomatic intelligence. And human intelligence. We need a cabinet member. ISIS is now a "genocidal threat." Even Central America is a threat. [More...]