ComplexDataLab/Misinfo_Datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

relief efforts intensified in katmandu on sunday as nepal continues to reel from powerful aftershocks and a devastating earthquake that left more than 3,200 dead. the international effort geared up to hunt for survivors and provide aid as a second american victim was identified as one of 18 who died on mount everest in a massive avalanche triggered by saturday's magnitude-7.8 earthquake. marisa eve girawong, of edison township in new jersey, was working as a base camp medic for a seattle-based group leading a mountain-climbing expedition. the former physician's assistant joined madison mountaineering a year earlier. relief groups, which began arriving in nepal in large numbers sunday, say there is still time to save lives. government agencies and aid groups began rushing doctors, volunteers and equipment into nepal as katmandu's international airport reopened. some aid vehicles were able to travel overland from india to the stricken nepalese city of pokhara. "that means supplies could potentially come in overland from india. that is a positive sign," said ben pickering, save the children's humanitarian adviser in britain. "the airport opening is a small miracle." the pentagon dispatched a cargo plane sunday to nepal with about 70 disaster-relief and rescue personnel and their gear to aid the earthquake-ravaged country. the air force c-17 is expected to arrive in nepal on monday, according to army col. steve warren, a pentagon spokesman. pickering cautioned that chaotic conditions may create a bottleneck at the airport as governments and aid agencies try to bring in personnel and supplies in the coming days. unicef said sunday that at least 940,000 children in areas affected by the earthquake are in "urgent need" of humanitarian assistance. unicef staff reported dwindling water supplies, power and communications breakdowns. "day two is just as bad as day one. we get the aftershocks every five minutes," said basanta adhikari of biratnagar, in eastern nepal. adhikari said his uncle was killed in katmandu on saturday near where he was admitting his son to a hospital. "he was standing at a shop with his friend chatting when the earth started shaking. he ran out to try to survive, but to no avail as a tall house fell on him, and he was buried under the rubble," adhikari said. vast tent cities have sprung up in katmandu. the earthquake, the strongest to hit the country in 80 years, destroyed swaths of the oldest neighborhoods and was strong enough to be felt all across parts of india, bangladesh, china's region of tibet and pakistan. with people fearing more quakes, many nepalese felt safer spending the night under chilly skies, or in cars and public buses. sunday's aftershocks made people only more tense. "there were at least three big quakes at night and early morning. how can we feel safe? this is never-ending and everyone is scared and worried," katmandu resident sundar sah told the associated press. "i hardly got much sleep. i was waking up every few hours and glad that i was alive." nepal authorities said sunday that at least 2,430 people died in that country alone, not including the 18 dead on mount everest. another 61 people died from the quake in india and a few in other neighboring countries. at least 5,900 have been injured. with search and rescue efforts far from over, the death toll is expected to rise. but as the first stunned survivors of the avalanche on mount everest reached katmandu, they said that dozens of people may still be missing and were almost certainly dead. "the snow swept away many tents and people," said sherpa, a guide the first group of 15 injured survivors to reach katmandu. those 15 survivors, most of them sherpa guides or support staff working on everest, flew from lukla, a small airstrip not far from everest. none were believed to be facing life-threatening injuries, but many limped to a bus taking them to a nearby hospital, or they were partially wrapped in bandages. the overwhelming devastation destroyed or damaged many of nepal's traditional temples, palaces and historic sites. the dharahara tower, one of nepal's most famous landmarks, was reduced to little more than a pile of rubble. up to 180 people were killed and 200 people were trapped in what was left of the structure, britain's guardian newspaper reported. the world reacted quickly to the disaster, offering money, relief materials, equipment, expertise and rescue teams to the country of 28 million people that relies heavily on tourism, principally trekking and himalayan mountain climbing. the u.s. mission in nepal released an initial $1 million for immediate assistance. australia pledged $5 million in aid. pakistan, and britain said they would assist in the relief effort. at the vatican, pope francis led prayers for the dead and those injured in the massive earthquake. he called for assistance for survivors, and "all those who are suffering from this calamity," during his weekly sunday blessing. rescuers were continuing to dig through the rubble of concrete, bricks, wood and iron to hunt for survivors. in one particularly harrowing incident sunday, police in katmandu's kalanki neighborhood managed to save a man who was trapped under a dead person. his family stood nearby crying and praying. police were eventually able to dig out the man, who was surrounded by concrete and iron beams. his legs and hips were crushed under the weight of the debris. contributing: naila inayat in lahore, pakistan; cheryl makin in edison, n.j.; tom vanden brook and doug stanglin in mclean, va.; the associated press

relief efforts to find survivors intensify amid powerful aftershocks

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

68.0

8.0

5611.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

373.0

0.0

81.0

0.0

31.0

16.0

21.0

11.0

29.0

14.0

22.0

13.0

29.0

33.0

44.0

379.0

81.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the democratic national committee over the weekend<u+00a0>set its preliminary 2016 presidential primary calender, with the four traditional carve-out states -- iowa, new hampshire, south carolina and nevada -- holding contests in february and everybody else after that. the calendar mimics what we've seen from republicans, who have basically agreed on the same order of succession.<u+00a0>here's how that looks: from there, all other states would be permitted to hold contests between march 1 and june, with party conventions being held in the early or mid-summer. seems reasonable, right? well, the problem is that there isn't much hope<u+00a0>the calendar will stay this way.<u+00a0>and all it takes is for one state to be the spoilsport and force a re-casting of the entire calendar. (translation: new year's in des moines.) in recent years, a handful of the other 46 states have bucked the committees and moved their primary dates to compete with or preempt the early states, wanting the limelight (and campaign<u+00a0>spending) that comes along with being one of the primaries that actually, you know, matters. and it's pretty easy for a state like florida to just crash the party and set its date for late january, as it has done the last two presidential elections. about the only thing stopping it or others from doing so are the penalties, which generally entail decreasing the number of delegates they get to the national party conventions, among other, lesser things.<u+00a0>those penalties have been ratcheted up in recent years, with the republican national committee trying out even-harsher penalties this time around. as i wrote in january: penalties for states moving in february or january will be more serious than in the past. while the committee previously stripped them of half their delegates, they will now lose more than that, in most cases. states with at least 30 delegates would be left with just 12 representatives at the convention, while states with less than 30 delegates would have nine. the reason the rules have been tightened? because they didn't work. even faced with losing half their delegates,<u+00a0>florida, arizona and michigan all moved their contests ahead of march 1, pushing the earliest states to move from february to january. but while the rnc has tightened its rules for 2016, the dnc has not. rather than going further than the halving of delegates, the dnc is sticking with the same rules as last time, which allow for harsher penalties but don't mandate them. so while the dnc is reserving the right to increase penalties after a state sets a date in violation of party rules, it's all hypothetical. in reality, though, neither set of rules is likely to have the desired effect of actually stopping renegade states from jumping ahead. will florida really balk at jumping the line again<u+00a0>because it would have 12 delegates instead of 50? maybe. will a smaller state that loses only a few more delegates under the new rnc rules feel that strongly? probably not. and will the dnc actually increase penalties on<u+00a0>a state that has already set its primary date by deducting more delegates, just to send a message?<u+00a0>i guess we'll see. and delegates remain overrated anyway. despite the delegate races we've seen in recent years, it's still clear that momentum is a bigger factor in determining presidential nominees. the 2012 gop primary and 2008 democratic primary both included relevant delegate counts, but in both cases, the races continued in spite of their being a clear delegate frontrunner and likely nominee. in addition, all of the states that jumped ahead in 2008 and 2012 got the desired effect of holding an important presidential primary: relevance. and until those early states are actually boycotted by the candidates or somehow excluded from the horse-race/momentum game that is the early primary process, states will have motivation to move up -- delegates be damned. we aren't yet seeing the so-called "front-loading" of the primary calendar, but there's still lots of time. and the off-year (2015) is when the game of leap-frog usually begins.

the early 2016 primary calendar is now set. it will change.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

59.0

8.0

4070.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

237.0

1.0

0.0

83.0

1.0

0.0

42.0

7.0

6.0

4.0

7.0

2.0

9.0

5.0

9.0

15.0

17.0

241.0

84.0

43.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the most recent republican presidential nominee is taking shots at donald trump's fitness to be president. and he's not mincing his words. mitt romney, the former massachusetts governor, called the current gop front-runner "a phony, a fraud" in a speech thursday morning in salt lake city. and he didn't stop there. romney described trump as "a con artist" whose demeanor is "recklessness in the extreme." as for trump's record as a "huge business success"? "no, he isn't." and when it comes to trump's prescriptions to bring back jobs from china and japan? "flimsy at best." trump quickly hit back at romney during a rally thursday afternoon, again calling him a "choke artist" and saying he was disappointed by his 2012 campaign. "the guy ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of politics," trump said. trump added that romney "chickened out" from running in 2016 because of trump's candidacy. romney spoke for 20 minutes at the hinckley institute at the university of utah and got specific, digging into aspects of trump's record as a businessman. "his promises are as worthless as a degree from trump university. he's playing the american public for suckers: he gets a free ride to the white house and all we get is a lousy hat," romney said, referring to a real estate seminar trump launched in 2005 that was forced to change its name because it wasn't a real university. it is now the subject of multiple lawsuits alleging fraudulent behavior. romney then added to the list of failed business ventures: "there's trump magazine and trump vodka and trump steaks, and trump mortgage?" romney concluded, "a business genius he is not." then came the attacks on trump as a human being. "after all, this is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter's questions to her menstrual cycle, who mocked a brilliant rival who happened to be a woman due to her appearance, who bragged about his marital affairs, and who laces his public speeches with vulgarity." romney remarks are unprecedented in the way he <u+2014> the party's most recent presidential nominee <u+2014> attacks the man who seems on track to secure this year's gop nomination. romney began the speech by saying he is not declaring his own candidacy, adding, "i am not going to endorse a candidate today." he said one of three others still in the race <u+2014> sens. ted cruz or marco rubio, or gov. john kasich <u+2014> should be the nominee. then, without saying so specifically, he seemed to endorse a strategy to bring about a brokered gop convention this summer. "given the current delegate selection process, this means that i would vote for marco rubio in florida, for john kasich in ohio, and for ted cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating mr. trump in a given state," said romney. the goal would be to deny trump the 1,237 delegates he needs to win the nomination on the convention's first ballot in july. after reports surfaced that romney was planning to speak out against trump on thursday, the billionaire was quick to fire back at romney on twitter. will romney's blunt words have any impact? it's not likely trump supporters will be moved by the critique of a man they see as the ultimate establishment insider <u+2014> who failed in attempts to win the presidency. in the past year, trump has hardly needed excuses to lay into romney. in stump speeches, he regularly calls romney a "loser" who blew the chance to defeat president obama in 2012. in an interview thursday morning with the today show, trump called romney a "stiff." but it wasn't always so contentious between these two wealthy republican businessmen. trump endorsed romney's 2012 white house bid, and romney eagerly reciprocated the love. romney has been critical of trump's tone for months, but this speech comes as trump has won 10 of the first 15 nominating contests, holds a lead in convention delegates and shows little sign of flagging. while many republican insiders are eager to rally around a non-trump candidate, there's no indication voters are consolidating around an alternative. in addition to criticizing his temperament, romney argued that trump is unelectable in a general election. "trump relishes any poll that reflects what he thinks of himself. but polls are also saying that he will lose to hillary clinton," said romney. this week, a group of more than 60 conservative foreign policy experts wrote an open letter denouncing trump's statements, concluding that trump is "fundamentally dishonest" and would "use the authority of his office to act in ways that make america less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world."

mitt romney calls donald trump 'a phony, a fraud'; trump hits back

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

66.0

8.0

4665.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

298.0

0.0

88.0

2.0

0.0

31.0

18.0

14.0

11.0

9.0

7.0

11.0

8.0

20.0

29.0

27.0

300.0

88.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama indicated thursday that he is preparing to announce cuba<u+2019>s removal from the u.s. state department<u+2019>s list of state sponsors of terrorism, a move that should quickly lead to a full restoration of diplomatic ties and the opening of embassies in havana and washington. speaking at a gathering of caribbean leaders here, obama said the state department had finished a review of the issue. there is little doubt that it recommends he drop cuba from the list, and the only real question is when the announcement will be made. that could come as early as this week, as obama attends a summit of latin american leaders that for the first time will be joined by cuban president ra<u+00fa>l castro. administration officials said a decision on when the president will take action has not been finalized and awaits formal consultation with other affected government agencies. [read: rare poll shows vast majority of cubans welcome closer ties with u.s.] but anticipation is already running high, and caribbean leaders with whom obama met on thursday voiced strong approval for the new era in u.s.-cuba relations. in washington, sen. benjamin l. cardin (md.), the ranking democrat on the senate foreign relations committee, issued a statement saying he welcomed what he said was the positive state department recommendation. obama confirmed that the white house had received the review but said he would <u+201c>not make an announcement today.<u+201d> he added, <u+201c>i do think we<u+2019>re going to be in a position to move forward on opening embassies.<u+201d> as he began a meeting with jamaican prime minister portia simpson miller, obama noted that a new poll of cuban public opinion, published in thursday<u+2019>s edition of the washington post, demonstrated <u+201c>overwhelming support<u+201d> for the normalization process and <u+201c>overwhelming interest by most cubans to put one era behind us and move forward.<u+201d> [read: what it means to drop cuba from list of terrorism sponsors] a positive announcement on the terror-list decision would be welcomed at the two-day summit of the americas, which obama will attend on friday and saturday in panama with up to 35 other leaders from across the western hemisphere. the summit is held every three years, and this will be castro<u+2019>s first time in attendance. it will be obama<u+2019>s third time, following meetings in 2009 and 2012 that were overshadowed by u.s. insistence that cuba be excluded. administration aides have strongly hinted that obama and castro will meet for more than a handshake at the summit, but they have not specified the nature of the encounter. a white house official said thurwday: <u+201c>i can confirm that president obama spoke with president castro on wednesday, before president obama departed washington.<u+201d> secretary of state john f. kerry also met with cuban foreign minister bruno rodr<u+00ed>guez parrilla late thursday in panama city, the associated press reported. as delegations gathered on the eve of the summit, the presence of communist cuba made for some extraordinary and also ugly scenes. in one part of town thursday, at a forum for the chief executives of major u.s. companies including facebook, coca-cola and boeing, a cuban trade official invited america<u+2019>s corporate leaders to visit the island, telling them his country was open for business. but at a parallel event at a different location, raucous pro- castro crowds disrupted a gathering of nonprofit and civil society groups, blocking cuban dissidents from participating and denouncing the event<u+2019>s organizers for daring to invite them. the tensions, which had boiled over into a wild melee wednesday in a city park, were a reminder that cubans<u+2019> deep divisions will persist long after the united states reopens an embassy in havana. <u+201c>we are deeply concerned by reports of attacks targeting civil society representatives in panama for the summit of the americas exercising freedom of speech and harassment of those participating in the summit of the americas civil society forum,<u+201d> said state department spokeswoman marie harf, adding that the u.s. <u+201c>condemns those who use violence against peaceful protesters.<u+201d> the situation was also a sign that while the castro government is increasingly willing to tinker with its economic model, the experiment doesn<u+2019>t extend to politics. the government also remains determined to stifle critics well beyond cuba<u+2019>s borders. but rodrigo malmierca d<u+00ed>az, cuba<u+2019>s minister of foreign trade and investment, said in a speech that although u.s. sanctions continued to limit american business with the island, obama<u+2019>s recent moves were <u+201c>a positive step.<u+201d> malmierca said the castro government is seeking more than $8<u+00a0>billion in foreign investment in its new effort to spur growth. once obama approves the recommendation to delist cuba, congress will have 45 days to consider the proposal. but legislators have no power to alter such a recommendation except through new legislation, a move that is seen as unlikely. the administration has made the case to cuba that obama<u+2019>s decision <u+2014> even before the end of the 45 days <u+2014> should be enough for the two countries to move forward on reopening embassies. cuba has said it cannot envision having full diplomatic relations with a country that has charged it with supporting overseas terrorism. in many ways, the u.s. designation, first imposed in 1982, is a cold war relic. although the united states strongly objects to cuba<u+2019>s domestic policies, it has offered no evidence for decades that cuba is actively involved in terrorism abroad. leaders of 14 of the 15 members of the caribbean community, known as caricom, met here with obama. those in attendance <u+00ad>welcomed the broader move toward normalization, which <u+00ad>simpson miller called <u+201c>a bold and courageous move .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. for the good of all of our people.<u+201d> obama, she said, is <u+201c>on the right side of history.<u+201d> [obama moves to normalize relations with cuba as american is released by havana] while the focus of the caricom talks covered regional security and economic development, obama<u+2019>s visit here is also part of a larger plan, which includes his outreach to cuba. the move is directly related to the administration<u+2019>s efforts to improve u.s. standing in the region and to undermine venezuela<u+2019>s attempts to draw the caribbean states into its orbit. for years, venezuela has used cut-rate oil to buy anti- american support from cash-strapped caribbean governments. in recent weeks, caracas, with money problems of its own, has rolled back energy subsidies to caricom members. with an energy security program announced in january by vice president biden, the obama administration hopes to help fund island infrastructure to receive and use u.s. gas and petroleum, and then to subsidize u.s. sales of energy products to the caribbean. as they try to wean island governments away from venezuela, administration officials have also attempted to play down their difficulties with caracas. thomas a. shannon, a senior aide to secretary of state john f. kerry, was in venezuela on thursday for meetings with president nicol<u+00e1>s maduro. the visit aimed to give at least the impression that the united states is trying to smooth over its differences with the maduro government before the caricom meeting and the larger summit of the americas. miroff reported from panama city. david nakamura in washington also contributed to this story. where u.s.-cuba relations stand and what may change at the summit of the americas, focus is likely to be on the u.s. and cuba argument between u.s., venezuela puts cuba in awkward position today<u+2019>s coverage from post correspondents around the world

in jamaica, obama indicates that he will remove cuba from terrorism list

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

72.0

8.0

7595.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

554.0

1.0

0.0

118.0

0.0

75.0

8.0

16.0

9.0

16.0

10.0

11.0

7.0

27.0

28.0

52.0

561.0

119.0

75.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a verdict in 2017 could have sweeping consequences for tech startups.

cruz's immigration gambit

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

25.0

8.0

69.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican front-runner donald trump took a new round of shots at the gop's nominating process sunday, while his newly-hired convention manager paul manafort accused trump's rival ted cruz of using "gestapo tactics" to earn delegate support at nominating conventions across the country. speaking to thousands packed in a frigid airport hangar in western new york, trump argued anew that the person who wins the most votes in the primary process should automatically be the gop nominee. "what they're trying to do is subvert the movement with crooked shenanigans," trump said. the real estate mogul compared himself to democratic candidate bernie sanders, who is well behind hillary clinton in that party's delegate race despite a string of state wins. "we should have won it a long time ago," trump said. "but, you know, we keep losing where we're winning." trump was introduced at the rally by buffalo real estate developer and 2010 new york gubernatorial candidate carl paladino, who said that talk of a brokered republican convention "suggests that they can take that right away from the american people to choose their leader." manafort, a veteran gop strategist who worked on white house campaigns for president gerald ford in 1976 and kansas sen. bob dole in 1996, told nbc's "meet the press" that the cruz campaign was using a "scorched earth" approach in which "they don't care about the party. if they don't get what they want, they blow it up." manafort added that the trump campaign is filing protests because the cruz campaign is "not playing by the rules.<u+201d> <u+201c>you go to his county conventions and you see the gestapo tactics," he said. trump has a 743-to-545 delegate lead over the texas senator, with the end of the primary/caucus season fast approaching. over the weekend, cruz completed his sweep of colorado's 34 delegates by locking up the remaining 13 at the party's state convention in colorado springs. he already had collected 21 delegates and visited the state to try to pad his numbers there. cruz came out ahead in the colorado contest, though, after dedicating resources to the convention process and putting in personal face time on the day of the final vote, something trump did not do. the trump campaign<u+2019>s flyers in colorado naming their preferred delegates were also riddled with errors. while trump aides blamed the state party for giving them bad information, the party pushed back. and on twitter, the colorado gop retweeted a message, saying: <u+201c>you may not like co's caucus system, but it's representative, and claiming delegates were 'stolen' insults the republicans who participated.<u+201d> cruz spokeswoman catherine frazier also retweeted a message saying the rules <u+201c>were publicly available for months to people who know how to read and understand words.<u+201d> polls show trump holding a sizable lead in the next big state contest, new york's april 19 primary, but cruz is trying to chip away at trump's home-state advantage in conservative pockets of the empire state. ohio gov. john kasich is third with 143 delegates, behind florida sen. marco rubio, who ended his campaign march 15 with 171 committed delegates. manafort insisted sunday that he<u+2019>s still connected enough to wrangle delegates. "you would be surprised who's been calling me over the last week and where they're from," he said. "do i know the 25-, 30-year-old delegates? no. do i know the people who push buttons in a lot of these states? yes." however, manafort made clear the trump campaign won<u+2019>t use strong-arm tactics. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s not my style,<u+201d> he told nbc. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s not donald trump<u+2019>s style. that<u+2019>s ted cruz<u+2019>s style.<u+201d> manafort also dismissed the notion that the trump campaign has missed opportunities to get delegates through insider tactics and boasted that cruz has and will continue to lose that way. he said the trump campaign has gotten all of the committee spots in alabama and that it <u+201c>wiped [cruz] out" in a similar effort in michigan. <u+201c>you<u+2019>re going to see ted cruz get skunked in nevada,<u+201d> manafort added. manafort made clear the race to get 1,237 delegates will likely extend until early june, which includes california<u+2019>s gop primary, with 172 delegates, and the new jersey primary with 51 at stake. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m confident there are several ways to get to 1,237,<u+201d> he said. trump would need to win nearly 60 percent of all the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination before this summer's convention in cleveland. so far, he's winning about 45 percent. manafort insisted being hired by the trump campaign was not a shakeup, particularly amid cruz<u+2019>s come-from-behind win last week in wisconsin. he argued the campaign season is entering its end stages and that trump must move from the free-wheeling, free-media style that made the first-time candidate the gop presidential front-runner. <u+201c>donald trump has recognized that,<u+201d> manafort said, while arguing trump still runs the campaign. the associated press contributed to this report.

trump slams gop nominating process as top aide accuses cruz of 'gestapo tactics' to win delegates

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

9.0

97.0

8.0

4958.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

279.0

0.0

93.0

0.0

29.0

6.0

10.0

5.0

7.0

6.0

21.0

11.0

32.0

285.0

93.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the<u+00a0>unexpected death of justice antonin scalia comes less than a month before the supreme court hears its biggest abortion case in a decade. on march 2, the supreme court will hear oral arguments in whole women's health v. hellerstadt, a challenge to a texas law that has closed about half of the state's abortion clinics since 2013. if the law is allowed to stand, abortion rights supporters say it would close all but about 10 of texas's abortion clinics. advocates on both sides of the abortion issue say this case could be the most important decision on abortion in 25 years. scalia has been a staunch opponent of abortion rights, and critical of the landmark roe v. wade decision in 1972, which established a constitutional right to abortion.<u+00a0>"you want a right to abortion? there's nothing in the constitution about that," scalia<u+00a0>said in a 2011 interview. scalia was a near-certain vote in favor of upholding the texas law. without him, things get a bit more complicated. but the key thing to know is this: without scalia, its very hard to see a world where the supreme court affirms the texas law's constitutionality. here's why: there are almost certainly four votes against the law from the court's liberal wing. and it's possible there are five votes, as justice anthony kennedy has been a<u+00a0>swing vote on abortion cases. a 5-3 decision would be the best case for abortion rights supporters, as it would repeal the texas law and prevent other states from passing similar restrictions. the best case outcome for the abortion rights opponents, meanwhile, is a 4-4 tie. in that case, supreme court rules say that the decision of the circuit court is left in place without setting any constitutional precedent. in that case, this would let the texas law stand, since the fifth circuit court of appeals ruled in favor of the restriction. that would be far from an ideal outcome for the law's challengers and would leave abortion access greatly restricted in texas. but it also wouldn't give other states the clear signal that these types of restrictions are constitutional <u+2014> something that abortion opponents would very much like to see. the case,<u+00a0>whole woman's health v. hellerstedt, was brought by texas abortion providers challenging texas's house bill 2, which the legislature enacted into law in july 2013. that bill has two main restrictions, both of which the clinics challenge in this case. one was a requirement that all abortion clinics have admitting privileges at local hospitals. that piece of hb2 went into effect in september 2013, and forced<u+00a0>14 clinics that could not obtain admitting privileges to close. hb2 also requires abortion clinics to become ambulatory surgical centers, essentially mini emergency rooms that can handle complex medical situations. ambulatory surgical centers, for example, must have wide enough hallways to fit a gurney and larger operating rooms than abortion clinics typically use. abortion clinics in texas have said that upgrading to these new standards would cost upward of<u+00a0>$1 million. they have argued that the new requirements are unnecessary, as abortions tend to have a very low complication risk. approximately<u+00a0>0.05 percent of first-trimester abortions have complications that require hospital care. texas clinics have said because these upgrades are so costly, many facilities would close. their lawyers previous stated that about 900,000 of texas's 4.5 million reproductive-age women would live more than 150 miles from a clinic if hb2 stands. the supreme court has, in previous rulings, articulated standards for judging the constitutionality of abortion restrictions like these. and one key standard the justices have settled on is whether a restriction places an "undue burden" on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. the supreme court has previously defined an undue burden as a law with the "purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." the supreme court has previously ruled that laws requiring women to notify their spouses of their abortion, for example, are an undue burden, as it could make it impossible for some women to access the procedure. the texas law requires abortion clinics to become mini emergency rooms the texas clinics argue that hb2 ought to fit the "undue burden" definition: because it would force most texas abortion clinics to close, it would become the type of "substantial obstacle" that the supreme court has previously found to be unconstitutional. if the texas law stands, the clinics argue, "every woman in texas would have to live under a legal regime that fails to respect her equal citizenship status and would force her to grapple with unnecessary and substantial obstacles as a condition of exercising her protected liberty." texas has defended its new restrictions as not placing a substantial burden on those seeking abortions. as evidence, it points to the fact that the admitting privileges portion of the law has been in effect for more than a year, forcing 14 clinics to close. the clinics, they pointed out, presented no evidence of women who wanted to obtain an abortion not being able to do so. the fifth circuit court of appeals used that argument to<u+00a0>uphold the law in october. "demand for abortion services in texas may decrease in the future, as it has done nationally over the past several years," the fifth circuit ruled. "the record lacks evidence that the previous closures ... have caused women to be turned away from clinics. without any evidence ... plaintiffs do not appear to ... show that the ambulatory surgical center provision will result in insufficient clinic capacity." the fifth circuit continued that "the evidence does not indicate, without specificity, that by requiring all abortion clinics to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers, the overall costs of accessing an abortion provider will likely increase." texas has also challenged the clinics' argument that the new restrictions are unnecessary because abortion is generally a safe procedure, saying it's not the place of the courts to second-guess the possible outcome of the law. abortion rights supporters have pointed to<u+00a0>new research that suggests the state was wrong on this. according to<u+00a0>the texas policy evaluation project, major texas cities have seen significant increases in wait times at abortion clinics. in dallas, where the average wait time for an abortion was five days prior to hb2, women may now wait as long as 20 days.

scalia<u+2019>s death comes just a month before the court<u+2019>s biggest abortion case in years

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

83.0

8.0

6533.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

490.0

1.0

0.0

105.0

0.0

60.0

14.0

15.0

7.0

21.0

8.0

14.0

9.0

21.0

30.0

25.0

497.0

106.0

60.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with another deadline looming, whispers of iran nuclear deal emerge as iran and world powers faced yet another self-imposed deadline on monday, whispers of a deal began to leave the negotiating room. quoting two unnamed diplomats, the associated press reported that the deal, which would limit iran's nuclear program in exchange for a lifting of sanctions, would be announced monday. npr's peter kenyon, who is reporting from vienna, reports that iranian tv is adding to an expectation for a deal. he filed this report for our newscast unit: "the signals from iran are positive, with state-run media predicting an agreement will happen, and iranian officials describing the document as running to almost 100 pages, including several technical annexes. "most reports of an imminent deal, however, include the caveat that a few issues need to be worked out, and the various capitals must sign off on any agreement. "if they do get an accord, exhausted negotiators will have little time to celebrate their achievement. critics in congress warmed up their attacks on sunday talk shows in washington, and israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu re-stated his argument that iran is a bigger threat than the self-proclaimed islamic state." the bbc rounds up what high-level officials said on the record about the negotiations on sunday: "us secretary of state john kerry said 'a few tough things' needed to be resolved but added: 'we're getting to some real decisions.' "french foreign minister laurent fabius, who cancelled a trip to africa to stay at the talks, said: 'i hope we are finally entering the final phase of these marathon negotiations. i believe it.' "in iran, president hassan rouhani said the sides had 'come a long way.' 'we need to reach a peak and we're very close,' the isna news agency quoted him as saying." if, indeed, the deal is reached, it would mark the culmination of decades of diplomacy. the deal, however, would have to be approved by several capitals <u+2014> including the u.s. congress.

with another deadline looming, whispers of iran nuclear deal emerge

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

67.0

8.0

2015.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

151.0

2.0

0.0

32.0

1.0

0.0

14.0

2.0

11.0

3.0

2.0

5.0

3.0

6.0

13.0

7.0

18.0

157.0

34.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in a speech wednesday outlining his would-be foreign policy, donald trump tried to sound presidential. the republican presidential candidate succeeded in sounding tough if contradictory. but he outlined a foreign policy that isn<u+2019>t so different from that of hillary clinton. take isis for example.<u+00a0>trump acknowledged in his speech the jihadist army that is slipping its tentacles into the west and promised that its <u+201c>days are numbered.<u+201d> but trump refused to provide any details of how he would fight isis<u+2014>implying he doesn<u+2019>t want to telegraph his brilliant strategy to the enemy. this is too clever by half.<u+00a0> given that isis is rampaging in the middle east and has massacred americans there, in europe, and right here in the united states, it<u+2019>s insufficient for a presidential candidate effectively to say <u+201c>yadda, yadda i<u+2019>ll beat isis<u+201d> and provide no more information. frankly, it sounds like a teenager who has failed every quiz during the semester but implausibly promises to save the day by acing the final. the reality is trump<u+2019>s strategy to defeat isis is basically the same as that of president obama and secretary clinton, which is to say he has no strategy at all. earlier wednesday trump all but endorsed obama<u+2019>s announcement that he<u+2019>ll send 250 more troops to syria, saying <u+201c>i could agree with it,<u+201d> but declaring he would dispatch them secretly. trump doesn<u+2019>t know how to go beyond the obama-clinton foreign policy of using gestures to appear be reacting to events without actually solving anything. evidently, trump would also mirror clinton on russia.<u+00a0> despite promises to regard moscow <u+201c>with open eyes<u+201d> trump observed wednesday, <u+201c>we are not bound to be adversaries,<u+201d> and added, <u+201c>i believe an easing of tensions and improved relations with russia.<u+201d> this is no different than the self-regard and conceit that led clinton to offer the russians a plastic <u+201c>reset<u+201d> button, believing the force of her personality would change the russians<u+2019> calculation of their national interests. wednesday in washington trump laudably called for containing the spread of radical islam while observing that is not just a military struggle but a <u+201c>philosophical contest<u+201d><u+2014>a reality that has eluded much of the u.s. government since 9/11. it seems like trump is newly willing to borrow a few ideas from ted cruz and other conservatives who have been pressing these issues throughout the presidential campaign.<u+00a0> however, the businessman undercut himself by saying he will stick with the iran nuclear deal he allegedly disdains, promising merely to implement it strictly. there is no way to defeat radical islam without ceasing the grand accommodation of the iranian regime that obama enacted as secretary clinton cheered. the biggest takeaway from trump<u+2019>s foreign policy speech should be that the only remaining candidate with a conservative, reaganesque foreign policy prepared for today<u+2019>s threats is ted cruz. trump<u+2019>s speech was helpful for that reason alone. christian whiton is a member of the cruz national security coalition. he was a state department senior advisor in the george w. bush administration and a policy advisor on the giuliani and gingrich presidential campaigns. he is author of "smart power: between<u+00a0>diplomacy and war" (potomac books 2013).

donald trump's clintonesque foreign policy

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

42.0

8.0

3262.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

252.0

0.0

54.0

0.0

26.0

4.0

6.0

1.0

8.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

13.0

16.0

22.0

255.0

54.0

26.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a verdict in 2017 could have sweeping consequences for tech startups.

backers: romney more open to 2016

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

33.0

8.0

69.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

convicted boston marathon bomber dzhokhar tsarnaev<u+2019>s mother, zubeidat, has reportedly posted a statement online declaring americans <u+201c>the terrorists here<u+201d> and calling her son <u+201c>the best of the best.<u+201d> in a message sent to a family friend on russian social media site vkontakte, zubeidat tsarnaev wrote, <u+201c>i will never forget it. may god bless those who helped my son. the terrorists here are the americans and it<u+2019>s known to everyone. my son is the best of the best.<u+201d> dzhokhar tsarnaev was found guilty on all 30 counts against him and now faces the death penalty. zubeidat said she was outraged at the verdict<u+00a0>in an interview with vocativ over whatsapp: "today they are killing muslims, and tomorrow will come your turn and he, who doubts this is deeply mistaken!!!!!<u+201d> . "they will pay for my sons and the sons of islam, permanently!!! the tears of their mothers will be fuel for them in hell, and also their blood, i am doubtless and eternally glad that i know this from the words of the creator, not just anyone<u+2019>s words!!!!!!"

tsarnaev mom: americans are <u+2018>terrorists<u+2019>

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

65.0

40.0

8.0

1026.0

0.0

14.0

3.0

0.0

62.0

0.0

30.0

0.0

9.0

6.0

7.0

2.0

8.0

7.0

1.0

8.0

9.0

65.0

30.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the election in 232 photos, 43 numbers and 131 quotes, from the two candidates at the center of it all.

clinton braces for nevada nail-biter

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

36.0

8.0

103.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

7.0

3.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in a political season marked by nonstop polling, a lively exchange took place recently about the state of public opinion research and what to believe about all of the numbers describing the state of the race. the context for the discussion was set by a series of national and state surveys showing donald trump gaining on or overtaking hillary clinton in the general-election campaign. it broadened into an examination how polls are produced and used in a competitive media environment. earlier this spring, clinton enjoyed a substantial lead over trump. now, the realclearpolitics poll average in the presidential race shows clinton with a lead of just one point: 43.8 to 42.8 percent. some recent polls showed trump ahead, including a washington post-abc news poll of registered voters released a week ago. the shift raised questions: is this merely a bounce for trump because he has wrapped up the republican nomination while clinton is still fighting a campaign against bernie sanders? in that case, will clinton reverse trump<u+2019>s gains once she has claimed the democratic nomination? do the current polls mean that the general election will be close and hard-fought? most provocatively, is there something wrong with some of these polls? the first salvo in the exchange came from norman j. ornstein of the american enterprise institute and alan i. abramowitz, a political scientist at emory university. both are scholars to whom i<u+2019>ve gone many times as i<u+2019>ve reported campaigns and politics generally. the two co-authored an op-ed for the new york times titled <u+201c>stop the polling insanity.<u+201d> they pointed to what they said were <u+201c>wild fluctuations and surprising results<u+201d> in recent trump-clinton polls. they also underscored how news organizations are producing polls at a rapid rate and using them to make news and generate clicks. <u+201c>too many of this year<u+2019>s polls, and their coverage, have been cringeworthy,<u+201d> they wrote. ornstein and abramowitz took issue with a reuters-ipsos tracking poll that showed clinton with a 13-point lead on may<u+00a0>4, a tie five days later and then a six-point lead for clinton on may 15. they questioned whether opinions could have shifted that much during a time <u+201c>when there were no major events<u+201d> in the campaign. they challenged an online nbc-surveymonkey poll that showed trump within three points of clinton and said that trump was receiving 28<u+00a0>percent of the hispanic vote when <u+201c>most other surveys have shown mr. trump eking out 10 to 12 percent among latino voters.<u+201d> they also raised doubts about a trio of quinnipiac polls in the battleground states of florida, ohio and pennsylvania, arguing that the samples used in the surveys were <u+201c>whiter than the states had in 2012<u+201d> exit polls. <u+201c>when polling aficionados see results that seem surprising or unusual, the first instinct is to look under the hood at things like demographic and partisan distributions,<u+201d> they wrote. <u+201c>when cable news hosts and talking heads see these kinds of results, they exult, report and analyze ad nauseam. caveats or cautions are rarely included.<u+201d> the two scholars went on to cite well-known challenges for all types of polls. traditional polls, considered the most reliable over a long period of time, use random samples of the population, call landlines and cellphones, and use real people to conduct the interviews. but those surveys are extremely costly, and response rates for many have plummeted over the years. online surveys use panels of potential respondents rather than randomly drawn samples. the methodology differs among the practitioners and is in a regular state of examination and refinement. they are much less expensive to produce. ornstein and abramowitz<u+2019>s op-ed prompted a rejoinder from jon cohen, surveymonkey<u+2019>s chief research officer, and mark blumenthal, the firm<u+2019>s head of election polling. (for the record, cohen is a former polling director at the post and someone with whom i<u+2019>ve worked closely and collaboratively over many years.) the surveymonkey duo took issue with the suggestion that polls showing trump and clinton in a close race are almost by definition to be questioned. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not enough for trump<u+2019>s opponents to wish him away,<u+201d> they wrote. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s important for political professionals to actually explore what is buoying trump <u+2014> even if they find his rise unfathomable.<u+201d> they argued that the polls have not been on a wild ride. in fact, they said, there was a clear trend based on the moving average of an average of all polls. once trump became the presumptive gop nominee after his victory in the may 3 indiana primary, clinton<u+2019>s lead began to shrink. as for the nbc-surveymonkey poll showing trump winning 28<u+00a0>percent of the hispanic vote, they noted that six other national surveys taken after the reality tv star effectively secured the nomination showed his hispanic support ranging from 15<u+00a0>percent to 31<u+00a0>percent, while acknowledging they were on the high end. but they said clinton<u+2019>s margin over trump among hispanics across the six polls ranged from 23<u+00a0>points to 53<u+00a0>points. the nbc-surveymonkey poll<u+2019>s margin was in the middle of that range at 37 points. citing the late andrew kohut, the founder of pew research, they said those in the field of survey research should be measurers not handicappers. <u+201c>now more than ever at this moment of reinvention for public opinion polling, we need many independent estimates of voter preferences, not a herd of handicappers issuing their best guesses about the eventual outcome,<u+201d> they wrote. those exchanges prompted another voice to enter the conversation, that of mark mellman, a respected democratic pollster to whom many journalists long have gone for his insights into polls and elections. noting that ornstein, abramowitz, cohen and blumenthal were all <u+201c>very smart people,<u+201d> mellman sought to avoid taking sides and instead offered a few thoughts of his own on the issues raised. writing in the hill, mellman began by saying that an examination of polling averages of realclearpolitics and the huffington post<u+2019>s pollster<u+2019>s model showed that there is <u+201c>little doubt that the presidential race has tightened considerably<u+201d> since march and april. but he added that the current state of the race does not necessarily mean the outcome in november will be close. he reminded everyone that, in the spring of 2008, when john mccain had wrapped up the republican nomination while barack obama was still engaged in a hard contest against clinton, the general-election polls showed the arizona senator ahead. he lost the general election by 7<u+00a0>percentage points. looking at the issue of trump<u+2019>s support among hispanics in the nbc-surveymonkey poll, he said that 28<u+00a0>percent <u+201c>seems high, but not bizarrely out of sync,<u+201d> given other polls and history. he also said that if trump were getting, say, 13<u+00a0>percent of the hispanic vote rather than 28<u+00a0>percent, trump<u+2019>s overall number in the horse race would be just 1.5<u+00a0>points lower. polls have played a significant role in this campaign. they<u+2019>ve determined participation in the gop debates and how the candidates were aligned on the stage, and they<u+2019>ve driven a lot of coverage of the race. there is no question that news organizations have sometimes been indiscriminate in the way they have highlighted individual polls. so there is food for thought in this series of exchanges. the traditional method of polling has become prohibitively expensive for most organizations at a time when the demand for public opinion surveys continues to grow, in politics and other fields. the methodology of all types of polls is under challenge. there is a serious and urgent debate underway among public opinion researchers about the way forward. for the rest of us, the exchanges lead to common points of agreement, all of which might seem obvious but should not be forgotten. don<u+2019>t put too much emphasis on any single poll. look closely at averages of groups of polls to determine whether there are real shifts in the race. and don<u+2019>t expect polls to predict the future. leave that question to the voters in november.

a sharp exchange over election-year polling offers thoughts for the rest of us

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

78.0

8.0

8048.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

513.0

1.0

0.0

175.0

0.0

63.0

7.0

18.0

4.0

10.0

8.0

12.0

13.0

26.0

22.0

50.0

516.0

176.0

63.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

will mitt 3.0, as he<u+2019>s already been dubbed, be a better model than the earlier two incarnations? without so much as a single syllable uttered in public, mitt romney has shaken up the 2016 race, employing a strategy of calculated leaks to indicate that he wants to mount a third presidential bid. i was skeptical of what seemed like a trial balloon to buy some time as jeb bush claimed the mantle of establishment candidate, but this has mushroomed into mitt trying to get the gang back together. but given that romney muffed what republicans viewed as a prime opportunity to oust president obama, the media are asking this question: what exactly would be different next time? the exercise is reviving some bad memories of romney<u+2019>s flaws as the gop nominee. and romney would have to explain his change of heart after he (and ann) so repeatedly declared that they were done trying to move into the white house. what<u+2019>s his rationale? to save the party from jeb? or has he just been badly bitten by the presidential bug? let<u+2019>s stipulate that beating an incumbent president, even with an anemic economic recovery, was tough. let<u+2019>s also stipulate that romney is an experienced businessman, has a good temperament, can raise truckloads of money, and proved to be a strong debater. but there were so many self-inflicted wounds that it<u+2019>s hard to catalogue them. self-deportation. i like being able to fire people. binders full of women. the 47 percent. not even romney<u+2019>s biggest fans would suggest he<u+2019>s a natural campaigner. i watched him up close with crowds and while he gamely tried to connect with folks, there<u+2019>s an awkwardness rooted in his natural reserve. and that extended to his arm<u+2019>s-length relationship with the press corps. part of the chatter now is that romney could fare better politico quoted one romney campaign alumnus as saying the new effort would <u+201c>tell the story of mitt better.<u+201d> several romney veterans recalled how well the accounts from parishioners in romney<u+2019>s mormon community resonated with voters who had been bombarded with ads about his tenure at bain capital.<u+201d> romney, of course, mostly avoided talking about his religion. politico quoted another former top adviser as saying <u+201c>he really has to<u+00a0>show<u+00a0>people that he<u+2019>d do it differently, rather than just<u+00a0>say<u+00a0>he<u+2019>d do it differently. he needs to assure folks he<u+2019>d take a much more direct approach to laying out the vision for his campaign versus having those decisions driven by a bunch of warring consultants.<u+201d> so why is romney gearing up to do this? the washington post<u+2019>s robert costa, who has set the pace on this story, quoted yet another anonymous romney adviser as saying, <u+201c>mitt<u+2019>s a very restless character. he is not the type to retire happily, to read books on the beach.<u+00a0>.<u+2009>.<u+2009>.<u+00a0>he believes he has something to offer the country and the only way he can do that is by running for president again.<u+201d> but that explanation is more about romney<u+2019>s feelings than how he<u+2019>d be a stronger candidate than last time around. and not everyone in the gop is wild about the idea. john mccain, who defeated romney in 2008 (and wants his friend lindsey graham to run this time) says: <u+201c>i thought there was no education in the second kick of a mule.<u+201d> <u+201c>why would republicans, who grudgingly submitted to a romney nomination in 2012 only after every other possibility had exhausted itself, give him another try when so many alternatives are available? what qualities would make a romney candidacy more attractive to republican voters in 2016 than it was in 2012?<u+201d> the fix columnist chris cillizza admits he<u+2019>s stunned by the prospect of a third mitt campaign: <u+201c>i don't doubt romney's sincerity. but i do think he and those close to him are fooling themselves that he can simply proclaim that he is running a new and different campaign --<u+00a0>one based on foreign policy and poverty, according to politico<u+00a0>-- and that will be that. it's literally impossible for me to imagine such a scenario.<u+201d> breitbart goes back to the netflix film <u+201c>mitt<u+201d> that some acolytes are fondly remembering, and doesn<u+2019>t give it two thumbs up: <u+201c>the best that can be said for the romney portrayed in <u+2018>mitt<u+2019> is that, had he conveyed his behind-the-scenes personality to voters better, romney might have mitigated the damage from obama<u+2019>s attacks. maybe some of his self-effacing humor, or seeing romney wear duct-taped gloves while skiing and pick up hotel-room trash like a normal person might could have offset the ruthless out-of-touch businessman image portrayed by his opponent. <u+201c>but the subtext of <u+00a0><u+2018>mitt<u+2019> is romney<u+2019>s tragic inability to actually be that person in public. <u+201c>for a man seeking his third shot at the presidency amidst the strongest gop bench in decades, it<u+2019>s not a flattering portrait.<u+201d> the former massachusetts governor doesn<u+2019>t have to win over the pundits, of course, but he does need a smarter approach to using the media to get out his message. there<u+2019>s already talk that he won<u+2019>t be bringing back his old communications team, which often didn<u+2019>t bother to respond to reporters. the media love the idea of a mitt-vs.-jeb showdown. but romney, who once mused about how those who lose presidential elections are branded losers, needs to offer a compelling rationale for why he can win. click for more from media buzz howard kurtz is a fox news analyst and the host of "mediabuzz" (sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. et). he is the author of five books and is based in washington. follow him at @howardkurtz. click here for more information on howard kurtz.

romney<u+2019>s reboot: can the 2012 loser really fix his problems in 2016?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

68.0

8.0

5508.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

350.0

2.0

0.0

110.0

0.0

48.0

15.0

14.0

10.0

15.0

9.0

16.0

7.0

24.0

34.0

38.0

353.0

112.0

48.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

at the end of last week<u+2019>s republican debate, moderator bret baier questioned each of the candidates about their commitment to the republican party. would marco rubio, ted cruz and john kasich support donald trump if he was chosen as the gop<u+2019>s presidential nominee? after the past few weeks of intense in-fighting <u+2014> in which trump has been called a <u+201c>con artist<u+201d> and a threat to conservative principles <u+2014> a casual spectator would have expected an unequivocal <u+201c>no<u+201d> from at least one candidate. but, of course, that wasn<u+2019>t the case. all said they would support the businessman and, instead, strongly denounced their democratic counterparts. the moment illustrates the widely discussed notion of political polarization, a growing disdain our two parties have for one another and the subsequent dysfunction from divided government. members of the republican party have made clear that winning the white house back from our democratic president is their highest priority, even if that means handing it over to a man they expressly detest. our political parties are more polarized today than they were in the decades after the civil war, the result of decades of growing political divide. bipartisanship is openly scorned by congressional leaders, and even the more moderate senate republicans have refused to consider a nomination by president obama to fill the supreme court vacancy, suggesting that a growing part of the party is unwilling to negotiate with the president on any level. democrats, on the other hand, have also rejected cooperation. obama has routinely made it clear that he would use whatever power he has to work around or override republicans in congress. he has threatened vetoes outright in his state of the union addresses and his chief of staff, denis mcdonough, assured reporters this year that <u+201c>audacious<u+201d> executive action would continue throughout the election year. there<u+2019>s no sugarcoating it. no one gets along. and this polarization is not just a washington phenomenon. polling suggests a sustained decline in centrism among the general public. both conservative and liberal voters see their opposing party with greater animosity than in the past two decades, and as a result, liberal republicans and so-called <u+201c>blue dog<u+201d> conservative democrats have become a dying breed. political polarization has become so entrenched that some commentators are beginning to predict doomsday scenarios for the u.s. political system. under this narrative, polarized politics stem from flaws in our constitution and are the norm of u.s. history, and over the past few decades we have been exiting an unnaturally civil period of post-world war bipartisanship. eventually, these pundits say, polarization will continue to rebound and increase to the degree that the federal government won<u+2019>t be able to sustain itself or deal with national emergencies. thinking back to the government shutdown in 2013 and multiple threats to repeat it, such a scenario doesn<u+2019>t seem out of the realm of possibility. these predictions are somewhat extreme, but at the same time, there doesn<u+2019>t seem to be a quick-and-easy solution on hand. that<u+2019>s because consensus among political scientists studying polarization is as rare as consensus among politicians. there is little agreement as to what is causing the trend. some academics blame electoral policies, such as gerrymandering or an emphasis on the primary system, that have resulted in a mismatch between the more moderate general public and extreme political representatives. others suggest that the problem is a deeper trend, reflecting the complicated political movements that have occurred in the past half-century. and still others have blamed a long list of other factors, from media coverage to genetic selection to women taking a greater role in populist movements. but there<u+2019>s one thing most experts agree on: polarization at this heightened level is a problem. that<u+2019>s because, in addition to halting crucial legislative initiatives and making it difficult to fill key government appointments, it hurts the economy by leading to more regular federal crises, such as debt ceiling impasses or the <u+201c>fiscal cliff.<u+201d> the stakes are high and warrant an energetic debate. is polarization a design flaw of our presidential system? what would be necessary to curtail our legislative dysfunction, and from where does it stem? what does the future hold for our two-party system? over the next few days, we<u+2019>ll hear from: thomas mann and norman ornstein, authors and scholars at the brookings institution and american enterprise institute, respectively; dana nelson, author and professor of english at vanderbilt university;

is it possible to fix the polarization of american politics?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

60.0

8.0

4669.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

340.0

1.0

0.0

79.0

2.0

0.0

42.0

12.0

16.0

10.0

14.0

5.0

11.0

5.0

25.0

39.0

350.0

80.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

prime minister benjamin netanyahu warned supporters at a rally here sunday that he and his likud party may not win tuesday<u+2019>s election, a potentially dramatic fall for a consummate political survivor whose nine years in office transformed him into the public face of contemporary israel. a loss by netanyahu <u+2014> or a razor-thin win and the prospect that he would be forced to enter into an unwieldy <u+201c>government of national unity<u+201d> with his rivals <u+2014> would mark a sobering reversal for israel<u+2019>s security hawks, in a country where the electorate has been moving steadily rightward for the past 15 years. the final round of opinion polls friday showed netanyahu and his right-wing likud party facing a surprisingly strong challenge by isaac herzog, leader of the center-left labor party, and his running mate, former peace negotiator <u+00ad>tzipi livni, who hold a small but steady lead. their campaign has emphasized economic issues and the soaring cost of living. [read: a guide to the political parties battling for israel<u+2019>s future] netanyahu charged in a radio interview sunday that hostile israeli journalists and shadowy <u+201c>foreign powers<u+201d> were behind an anti-netanyahu campaign that could be his undoing. livni, his longtime rival and the former justice minister, countered that netanyahu was panicking and looking for scapegoats. <u+201c>the citizens of israel will replace netanyahu, not because of what is written in the newspapers,<u+201d> she said sunday, <u+201c>but because they don<u+2019>t have enough money to buy a newspaper<u+00a0>.<u+2009>.<u+2009>. or buy apartments for their children.<u+201d> the netanyahu campaign assumed the prime minister would get a bump in support after his speech before a joint meeting of congress two weeks ago, when he<u+00a0>directly challenged president obama and warned that the united states was about to sign a disastrous pact that would not halt iran<u+2019>s nuclear ambitions. [read: why israel<u+2019>s top right-winger wants his people to <u+2018>stop apologizing<u+2019>] his supporters boasted of his churchillian skills as a master orator. their high hopes were raised as a rapturous congress gave him repeated standing ovations. yet the speech did little to move the electorate <u+2014> even as it angered the white house and congressional democrats and undermined bipartisan relations between israel and its closest ally. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s clear that netanyahu thought what he did in washington would help him, but it didn<u+2019>t do him any good at home,<u+201d> said yehuda ben meir, a director at the institute for national security studies in tel aviv. [read: could isaac herzog become israel<u+2019>s next prime minister?] two highly critical reports released in the past month have also taken a toll on the prime minister and the likud campaign. netanyahu was personally hurt by embarrassing revelations about profligate spending of state money at his official residence in jerusalem and his private beachside villa north of tel aviv. israelis were mildly shocked to see how much the premier and his wife, sara, spend on hairdressers and maid service <u+2014> in addition to an eye-popping $24,000 a year on takeout food. netanyahu and his party were also dinged by a scathing report last month that concluded they had failed to do much to address the soaring cost and availability of housing for financially strapped israelis, who are frustrated by the high cost of living here. netanyahu<u+2019>s ally on the hard-line right, naftali bennett, the economy minister, said he was surprised that threats at israel<u+2019>s borders were not as important in this campaign. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s the first time that i can recall that the voters are zeroing in on the economy,<u+201d> bennett said in an interview. <u+201c>some thought there might be other issues, like iran, but there hasn<u+2019>t been.<u+201d> bennett is leader of the jewish home party, which draws electoral support from religious nationalists and the pro-settler camp. according to opinion polls, backing for his party has not grown since the 2013 election. <u+201c>bennett was the darling who got a lot of attention at the expense of everyone around him, but he made some serious mistakes,<u+201d> said reuven hazan, who chairs the department of political science at the hebrew university of jerusalem. bennett tried to bring a retired israeli soccer star onto his list of candidates for parliament, but core party members revolted, complaining that eli ohana was a celebrity who played games on the jewish sabbath and supported israel<u+2019>s unilateral withdrawal from the gaza strip in 2005, anathema to the pro-settler wing of the party. both netanyahu and bennett, a tech millionaire and former commando, are viewed as strong on security, and both talk tough about the palestinians. bennett is out front saying he would never give away occupied land in the west bank to create an independent palestinian state. during the campaign, netanyahu also distanced himself from peace talks. he vowed there would be no concessions or withdrawals from the west bank and suggested that the two-state solution was no longer relevant. both may be sailing into contrary winds. the last polls for israel army radio found that more than half of israelis surveyed plan to vote based on social and economic issues and that fewer than 1 in 3 put security at the top of their concerns. nine of 10 respondents said the cost of living would influence their choice. after shunning debates, public appearances and media interviews for most of the campaign, netanyahu in the past few days has popped up on radio and television and, on sunday, at a large rally in tel aviv. at the event, attended by thousands, netanyahu warned, <u+201c>if we don<u+2019>t close the gap, there is a real danger that a left-wing government will rise to power.<u+201d> on israeli channel 2<u+2019>s <u+201c>meet the press<u+201d> show saturday night, the host pressed netanyahu on why he is trailing in opinion surveys. <u+201c>i am liked,<u+201d> he protested. <u+201c>the public prefers me to continue to lead by many percentage points over my rival.<u+201d> he referred to polls that ask voters who they would like as prime minister (which is different from which party they will vote for). the prime minister complained that the world was against him and wanted to weaken israel. <u+201c>foreign consultants are here in droves,<u+201d> he said in an interview with the jerusalem post, <u+201c>and the money is flowing here. all of it is intended to make the likud lose.<u+201d> bennett blamed outsiders, too. <u+201c>all the media and all the ngos are out to overthrow the right,<u+201d> he told students at bar-ilan university outside tel aviv. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve never seen such a concentrated effort, with money from abroad.<u+201d> neither bennett nor netanyahu has alleged which foreign governments are seeking influence, but both have pointed the finger at an israeli grass-roots organizing group calling itself v15, which is dedicated to ousting netanyahu. its social media networks helped bring 35,000 people out to a rally last week in a tel aviv park under the banner <u+201c>anyone but bibi,<u+201d> netanyahu<u+2019>s nickname. one of v15<u+2019>s top advisers is a former obama campaign director named jeremy bird, an expert on grass-roots politicking and voter mobilization. a shift from right to center in israel would likely please the obama white house. it would help obama if the administration reaches an imperfect deal with the iranians. it might also reinvigorate moribund peace negotiations between israel and the palestinians and give secretary of state john f. kerry another chance to help solve one of the world<u+2019>s longest-running conflicts. it is possible that netanyahu and likud could either win or come in a close second and then emerge as the ultimate victors, because their challengers could not put together a governing coalition from the small parties, whose leaders can emerge as kingmakers. many likudniks blame moshe kahlon, a former likud minister who started a new party called kulanu, for siphoning off moderate voters. the candidate is popular in israel because he broke up the cellphone monopolies and slashed mobile per-minute rates. he gets high marks for focusing on socioeconomic issues but is also tough on security, seemingly an ideal candidate for today<u+2019>s voter mood. kahlon is expected to win more than enough seats to help form a coalition government for either netanyahu or herzog. he has not said which candidate he would join in the next government. -a guide to the political parties battling for israel<u+2019>s future -why israel<u+2019>s top right-winger wants his people to <u+2018>stop apologizing<u+2019> -could isaac herzog become israel<u+2019>s next prime minister?

netanyahu warns supporters he may lose in tuesday<u+2019>s election

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

60.0

8.0

8440.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

611.0

1.0

0.0

160.0

0.0

58.0

14.0

23.0

9.0

15.0

13.0

14.0

39.0

30.0

56.0

613.0

161.0

58.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the president and republican leaders are pushing hard to pass legislation known as trade promotion authority that allows a white house to fast-track trade deals through congress with no amendments, no procedural hurdles or filibusters, and a simple up-or-down vote in limited amount of time. that fast-track authority likely would make it possible for the obama administration to sign the trans-pacific partnership with a dozen pacific rim nations, and the transatlantic trade and investment partnership with europe. together, those pacts would cover about 80 percent of the global economy. the much-maligned north american free trade agreement of the 1990s covered about 10 percent of the word's trade, and reid said that deal and many since have all been disastrous for american workers, costing millions of jobs. "it causes huge job losses," reid said. "as einstein said, you keep doing the same thing over and over again, and you expect a different result, that's the definition of insanity." "we can look at these trade bills over the years -- every one of them without exception causes to american workers job losses. millions of job losses," reid added. "but yet they're going to try the same thing again and hope for a different result. that's insanity." obama has tried to counter such complaints by pointing to some of the benefits of free trade deals, insisting they do create jobs, and that his will be the "most progressive" trade pact in history. he's also accused people like reid and sen. elizabeth warren (d-mass.) of "making stuff up." "i would not be promoting any agreement that i didn't think at the end of the day was going to be creating jobs in the united states and giving us more of an opportunity to create ladders of success, higher incomes and higher wages for the american people, because that's my primary focus," obama argued last week. democrats have pushed back on that, though, with warren releasing a report this week that details the same sorts of promises made in trade agreements for decades, most of which were broken, according the report. obama got support wednesday from his would-be trade ally, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell (r-ky.), who spoke just before reid, accusing democrats of blocking progress and jobs for america. <u+201c>our friends on the far left may try to cynically spin their war against the future as something other than what it truly is, but we know better," mcconnell said. "it<u+2019>s no wonder president obama has called them 'wrong' and suggested they make stuff up." he said the main result of failing to craft trade agreements that lower barriers would be to cost the united states and its businesses markets. <u+201c>what happens if the far left actually succeeds in its apparent quest to retain foreign tariffs that unfairly impact american workers and their paychecks?" mcconnell said. <u+201c>it would mean lost opportunities for american risk-takers. ... it would mean lost opportunities for american manufacturing, lost opportunities for kentucky farmers and lost opportunities for more jobs, better wages and a growing economy that can lift everyone up." a vote on the senate's fast-track bill could come by the end of the week. if mcconnell can find a way to satisfy about a dozen democratic fast-track backers in negotiations of amendments, it is likely to pass. such agreement remained uncertain wednesday, however, and prospects for the measure's success in the house are also highly uncertain, with most democrats there, as well as dozens of republicans, opposed.

harry reid calls trade push by obama and gop 'insanity'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

55.0

8.0

3542.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

236.0

0.0

51.0

1.0

0.0

39.0

11.0

15.0

3.0

10.0

9.0

5.0

22.0

18.0

28.0

240.0

51.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

david m. perry is an associate professor of history at dominican university in illinois. he writes regularly at his blog: how did we get into this mess? follow him on twitter. the opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. (cnn) the horror began late wednesday morning in san bernardino as at least two gun-wielding people stormed into a conference center at the inland regional center, a state-funded nonprofit that works with the california department of developmental services, and killed 14 people. the killers fled, and two suspects have been killed, and so far we still can only speculate at their motives. reports suggest the violence was focused on a holiday banquet celebrating county workers, with at least some suggesting it was a targeted killing , and police identified one of the attackers as syed rizwan farook , an inspector for the county health department. the shootings took place at a government center that provides services to adults and children with developmental disabilities. it's an important facility, one of about 20 that serve tens of thousands of individuals throughout california. as reporters rushed to the scene, rumors flew that the killing involved disabled children, or a mental health patient, or a disgruntled parent, or any number of horror stories. the disability community braced, then felt a kind of guilty relief. the killers, it seems, were not aiming at children with disabilities nor the people who provide them with services. but they hurt those children, their parents and caregivers, and the staff who have dedicated their lives to serving disabled americans, nonetheless. as the father of a child with down syndrome, though not a californian, i know these types of buildings well. i've spent so much of the last decade in and out of such offices, signing up for services, getting treatments and learning about the world of disability. while every mass shooting is horrific, the carnage can often feel remote, especially as americans become inured to the regularity of the violence. there have, after all, been more mass shootings in 2015 than days in the year and yet, this time it was far too easy for me to imagine the terror of people with and without disabilities as the guns fired, the fire alarm sounded, and the sirens rang out. we'll certainly start hearing stories about children and adults with disabilities as we begin to sort through the aftermath. i spoke with one parent in the area, shannon jenkins, who told me that her daughter, "receives services at inland regional center. at any given time, there are hundreds there between employees, kids and adults with special needs, and their parents/(caregivers)." on a crowded wednesday afternoon, we're lucky the body count wasn't worse. but the survivors don't escape unscathed. some of the children and adults with developmental disabilities experienced the trauma of being present at a mass shooting. my son, as is relatively common, reacts with real panic to certain kinds of sounds and lights, including close proximity to alarm. what kind of trauma will disabled children carry forward from this event? and, of course, disabled children are not the only ones at risk for trauma and its consequences. post-traumatic stress disorder is one of the most common forms of disability in america, a condition for which everyone involved is now at risk. the social media feeds of the inland regional center are filled with pictures of joy and friendship. a christmas party with a child sitting on santa's lap. people dancing and singing to "celebration." signs for the upcoming winter dance on friday, perhaps intended to be held in the very hall now riddled with bullets and blood. this was a place that was doing the hard work of building an inclusive community. worst of all, there continues to be no reason to think that any degree of horror will spur cultural or policy change when it comes to the easy access to firearms in america. the empathy i felt for the people at a disability services building made the violence more real to me. but i've felt this degree of empathy before. when adam lanza killed all those first-graders on december 14, 2012, i thought about my own son, then a 5-year-old, and imagined him experiencing the horror of a shooter in his school. surely every parent in america had such thoughts as they sent their children off to school in the following days, and perhaps every day since. and yet, we've done nothing. the pace of mass shootings is accelerating . thanks to the power of the gun lobby and their cronies in congress, all we do is offer empty thoughts and prayers, while we slowly become more and more afraid.

san bernardino massacre: a horror that affects us all

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

53.0

8.0

4695.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

339.0

0.0

88.0

0.0

51.0

15.0

9.0

30.0

13.0

16.0

7.0

23.0

34.0

41.0

341.0

88.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the speech israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu is slated to give to a joint session of congress tuesday is one of the most critical of recent times.<u+00a0>it concerns not only the very existence of his nation, but also the terribly real possibility of nuclear holocaust in the foreseeable future. our own security is at stake as well: iran is developing intercontinental missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons that will reach our shores. the question isn<u+2019>t why should congress listen to what he has to say, but rather why in the world would certain members not to hear him out? prime minister netanyahu will speak on the prospect of iran being able to develop nuclear weapons.<u+00a0> he is making this speech because <u+2013> like many people <u+2013> he is fearful that the agreement president obama wants to strike with iran would not put in place effective controls to prevent the mullahs <u+2013> and plausibly in turn the many terrorist organizations they actively support <u+2013> from acquiring weapons-grade fissionable material. the obama administration has tried to discredit prime minister netanyahu and dismiss his appearance on capitol hill as a political stunt tied to the upcoming israeli elections.<u+00a0> some of the president<u+2019>s followers in congress have vowed to boycott the speech.<u+00a0> but their red herring arguments cannot be allowed to disguise the crucial importance of his visit or of the issue that has prompted it. allowing iran to join the nuclear club <u+2013> or come perilously close -- would trigger a frightening round of weapons proliferation.<u+00a0> egypt, turkey, saudi arabia, and other countries in the region would all be understandably motivated to similarly arm themselves.<u+00a0>the middle east of today, which far too often teeters on the brink of meltdown, could in comparison seem a relatively stable, peaceful place. and make no mistake, the specter of the revolutionary government of iran armed with nuclear weapons does not just threaten the middle east. iran is believed to already possess missiles capable of delivering a warhead to israel and perhaps even europe.<u+00a0> development of more powerful models that would extend their range to include the united states is just a matter of time.<u+00a0>iran<u+2019>s ability to not only attack, but also to intimidate other countries into meeting its demands would increase exponentially with its acquisition of nuclear capabilities. imagine tehran <u+201c>suggesting<u+201d> to european countries how to treat their growing muslim populations? sharia law, anyone? but obviously, the nation most likely to first suffer from iran<u+2019>s nuclear ambitions is israel.<u+00a0> that is why it is so important for members of congress to listen to prime minister netanyahu.<u+00a0> the united states and israel have a longstanding friendship that has always enjoyed strong bipartisan support.<u+00a0> we cannot refuse our close ally at least the opportunity to explain how a nuclear iran would affect it.<u+00a0> no one demands that every member of congress agree with the prime minister, but they all have a duty to listen to him. additionally, congress definitely has a fundamental obligation <u+2013> to the american people and the world - to be actively involved in this policy decision.<u+00a0> this is not obamacare or regulating the internet.<u+00a0> the consequences of allowing president obama to go it alone with another opaque executive action could not only be catastrophic, but also impossible to remedy with after-the-fact legislation.<u+00a0> once iran has the bomb, the game is over. the stakes here could not be higher <u+2013> israel<u+2019>s continued existence, america<u+2019>s moral authority, nuclear conflict, and the ghastly breakdown of world order.<u+00a0> party politics cannot be allowed to interfere with bringing this matter to the most successful resolution possible.<u+00a0> congress must listen to prime minister netanyahu -- and so should president obama. steve forbes is chairman and editor-in-chief of forbes media. his latest book, "reviving america: how repealing obamacare, replacing the tax code, and reforming the fed will restore hope and prosperity" (mcgraw-hill education, december 10, 2015).

netanyahu's iran speech: why it's important for congress to at least listen to israel's leader

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

94.0

8.0

4050.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

316.0

0.0

69.0

1.0

0.0

40.0

13.0

14.0

7.0

15.0

8.0

12.0

5.0

31.0

24.0

45.0

321.0

69.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

elizabeth warren announced a bill creating a financial product safety commission with house and senate democrats in march 2009. the body was designed to have oversight over mortgages and other financial instruments to protect consumers against predatory practices. she said if the agency had existed before the subprime collapse then "there would have been millions of families who got tangled in predatory mortgages who never would have gotten them." huffpost's ryan grim reported : without all these toxic assets on banks' balance sheets, the institutions wouldn't be on the brink of collapse and the recession would be more manageable. "consumer financial products were the front end of the destabilization of the american economic system." sen. charles schumer's cosponsorship of the bill is notable because of his proximity to wall street. the bill's merit, the new york democrat said, is that it regulates the actual financial product rather than the company producing it.

obama: warren 'absolutely wrong' on trade deal

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

46.0

8.0

978.0

0.0

64.0

0.0

23.0

0.0

8.0

2.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

7.0

9.0

64.0

23.0

8.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

did donald trump really just surge past hillary clinton in two of the election's most important battlegrounds? new swing-state polls released wednesday by quinnipiac university show trump leading clinton in florida and pennsylvania <u+2014> and tied in the critical battleground state of ohio. in three of the states that matter most in november, the surveys point to a race much closer than the national polls, which have clinton pegged to a significant, mid-single-digit advantage over trump, suggest. the race is so close that it's within the margin of error in each of the three states. trump leads by three points in florida <u+2014> the closest state in the 2012 election <u+2014> 42 percent to 39 percent. in ohio, the race is tied, 41 percent to 41 percent. and in pennsylvania <u+2014> which hasn't voted for a republican presidential nominee since 1988 <u+2014> trump leads, 43 percent to 41 percent. clinton's campaign responded to the surveys by cautioning that while the swing states were always expected to be close, the urgent stakes of a possible trump election remain high. "we know the battlegrounds are going to be close til the end. that's why we need to keep working so hard," clinton press secretary brian fallon tweeted wednesday morning. "trump is a serious danger, folks." trump, meanwhile, thanked his supporters for the strong showing, tweeting a celebratory series of images featuring fox news graphics showing the quinnipiac results. "thank you!" trump tweeted, adding "#imwithyou," an implicit shot at the clinton campaign's initial slogan, "i'm with her." in another blow to clinton, a mcclatchy-marist poll of registered voters nationwide released on wednesday showed clinton's lead over trump slip to three points, 42 percent to 39 percent, after leading by six points in a fox news poll conducted in late june. but other polls give clinton an advantage in all three states. including the new quinnipiac surveys, politico<u+2019>s battleground state polling average <u+2014> which include the five most-recent polls in each state <u+2014> gives clinton a 3.2-point lead in florida, a 2.8-point edge in ohio and a larger, 4.6-point advantage in pennsylvania. by wednesday afternoon, a quartet of battleground polls painted a hazy picture of the race in those three states, as well as in colorado and wisconsin. the latest nbc news/marist/wall street journal polls showed clinton up by three points against trump in iowa (42 percent to 39 percent), tied in ohio (41 percent to 41 percent) and up by nine points in pennsylvania (45 percent to 36 percent), in contrast to her two-point deficit in the quinnipiac poll. monmouth university's survey of likely colorado voters found clinton with a significant 13-point advantage, while trump cut into clinton's wisconsin advantage by five points compared to last month, trailing 45 percent to 41 percent compared to last month, when clinton led 46 percent to 37 percent. while the quinnipiac results are eye-popping, they don<u+2019>t represent any significant movement <u+2014> except in florida. in three rounds of polling over the past two months, the race has moved from a four-point trump lead in ohio in the first survey, then tied in the next two polls. in pennsylvania, clinton led by one point in the first two polls and now trails by two. but in florida, the race has bounced around. clinton led by one point in the first poll two months ago, but she opened up an eight-point lead in june <u+2014> a lead that has been erased and more in the new quinnipiac survey. the polls from the connecticut-based school are likely to be met with some skepticism. when quinnipiac released their first round of polls in the same three states two months ago, they prompted a round of sniping from democrats and an f-bomb on twitter from nate silver, the fivethirtyeight founder who has built a career using poll results to make political predictions. but subsequent polls later confirmed the may quinnipiac surveys: trump pulled virtually even with clinton nationally after knocking out his rivals for the gop nomination. it<u+2019>s possible the results of the fbi investigation into clinton<u+2019>s private email server dating back to her service as secretary of state <u+2014> fbi director james comey called clinton and her staff <u+201c>extremely careless,<u+201d> even as he said the government shouldn<u+2019>t press charges because there wasn<u+2019>t evidence of criminal intent <u+2014> are driving clinton<u+2019>s poll numbers down leading into the conventions, typically a critical time for campaigns. in the poll release, the school suggested the investigation could have played a role, pointing to other lingering questions about clinton<u+2019>s honesty and trustworthiness. <u+201c>while there is no definite link between clinton<u+2019>s drop in florida and the u.s. justice department decision not to prosecute her for her handling of emails,<u+201d> quinnipiac pollster peter brown said, <u+201c>she has lost ground to trump on questions which measure moral standards and honesty.<u+201d> but the quinnipiac polls are imperfect measures of a post-email investigation race. that<u+2019>s because, like many of the school<u+2019>s other polls, they were conducted over an unusually lengthy, 12-day time period: june 30 through july 11. the national polls conducted since comey<u+2019>s statement are mixed: clinton posted a 3-point lead in this week<u+2019>s nbc news/surveymonkey online tracking poll, down from a 5-point lead the week prior. morning consult, another online tracking poll, gave clinton identical 1-point leads in the days before and after comey<u+2019>s statement. overall, clinton leads by 4.3 points in the latest national huffpost pollster average, and she has a 3.7-point advantage in the realclearpolitics average. the polling in other battleground states since the announcement are also cloudy. monmouth university surveys conducted after the comey statement gave clinton a 4-point lead in nevada <u+2014> but showed trump ahead by two points in iowa. in the quinnipiac polls, there are warning signs for both candidates in all three states. first, despite near-universal name-id, neither candidate can break out of the low 40s on the ballot test. that points to two very unpopular candidates. but, in a reversal from earlier surveys, it<u+2019>s a more acute problem for clinton. clinton<u+2019>s unfavorable ratings (59 percent in florida, 60 percent in ohio, 65 percent in pennsylvania) are higher than trump<u+2019>s (54 percent in florida, 59 percent in ohio, 57 percent in pennsylvania) in all three battleground states. and majorities in all three states <u+2014> which together account for 67 electoral votes, or nearly a quarter of the 270 necessary to win the presidency <u+2014> have a <u+201c>very unfavorable<u+201d> view of clinton. another measure of voters<u+2019> ambivalence about clinton in the quinnipiac poll: a second ballot-test question, this time adding two third-party candidates to the mix. when voters are asked to consider the general election again, this time given the option of choosing libertarian candidate gary johnson and green party candidate jill stein, trump<u+2019>s advantage over clinton grows in each state. trump leads on the four-way ballot by five points in florida, one point in ohio and six points in pennsylvania. there are some eyebrow-raising results from the polls, however. on the two-way ballot test in florida, clinton trails trump despite the republican winning just 21 percent of non-white voters in the increasingly diverse state. in ohio, clinton wins 90 percent of democrats, but trump only captures 77 percent of republicans, putting him at a significant disadvantage. in pennsylvania, where democrats outnumber republicans by close to 10 percentage points, both candidates are at 82 percent among their own partisans, with trump only three points ahead among self-identified independents. former presidential candidate herman cain on wednesday said he was not surprised by trump's upswing. "and that's because donald trump's substance is finally starting to cut through some of the media clutter and hillary clinton's shallowness is also starting to emerge. she is the free-stuff candidate disguised as wanting to help people, but that's not coming through. but donald trump's substance is what's finally starting to emerge," cain told "fox & friends," in the same interview in which he praised former 2012 rival newt gingrich as the right choice for trump's vice president. for bernie sanders, clinton's dismal showing is more proof that his former rival needs to more effectively make her policy-based case against trump. "this is not a beauty contest between trump and hillary clinton," sanders said on abc's "good morning america." "this is the fact that the middle class of this country is in trouble. which candidate has more to say about education, more to say about health care, more to say about climate change, more to say about income and wealth inequality, more to say about a sensible foreign policy? and i think the more the people hear the contrast between the two i think secretary clinton's support will grow."

swing-state stunner: trump has edge in key states

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

49.0

8.0

8946.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

624.0

0.0

135.0

0.0

35.0

7.0

15.0

8.0

13.0

11.0

18.0

14.0

35.0

25.0

38.0

626.0

135.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

thursday marked the close of the two-month window for determining eligibility based on averages of national polls. the results were based on 14 polls including interviews with more than 6,000 potential republican primary voters. the top 10 candidates overall -- plus fiorina, whose average support places her within the top 10 in polls conducted after the first debate held august 6 -- have all qualified for the 8:00 p.m. debate next wednesday in simi valley. the remaining four candidates will appear during an earlier debate beginning at 6:00 p.m. the overall rankings based on an average of all qualifying polls for the 16 candidates who met the requirements for participation are: the rules for inclusion were amended late last month so that any candidate who made the top 10 in an average of polls conducted after the fox news/facebook debate held on august 6 would also be included in the later debate. fiorina is the only candidate to move from the bottom six to the top 10 in that post-debate average. here are the averages for qualifying polls conducted after the august 6 debate and released by september 10: former virginia governor jim gilmore, who participated in the august 6 debate, did not meet the criteria for inclusion in next wednesday's debate. candidates were required to average 1% support in any three polls released during the two-month window. out of the 14 polls released during that time, gilmore had 1% support in only one poll. the post-debate polls were also used to determine the order that the candidates would appear on stage. trump will anchor the center of the stage for the 8:00 p.m. debate, flanked by carson to his right and bush to his left. walker, fiorina, kasich and christie, in that order, will stand to bush's left, while cruz, rubio, huckabee and paul will appear to carson's right. in the earlier debate, santorum and pataki will stand to the left and jindal and graham will be on the right. perry was originally tabbed to be center stage before he announced on friday that he was dropping out of the race. the overall average includes results from a fox news poll released july 17; a washington post/abc news poll released july 20; a cnn/orc poll released july 26; a quinnipiac university poll released july 30; a nbc news/wall street journal poll released august 2; a monmouth university poll released august 3; a fox news poll released august 3; a bloomberg politics poll released august 4; a cbs news poll released august 4; a fox news poll released august 16; a cnn/orc poll released august 18; a quinnipiac university poll released august 27; a monmouth university poll released september 3; and a cnn/orc poll released september 10

carly fiorina will appear in top-tier reagan library debate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

9.0

59.0

8.0

2689.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

153.0

0.0

43.0

0.0

9.0

2.0

4.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

7.0

3.0

17.0

159.0

43.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

that<u+2019>s not to say that his campaign was especially successful. many observers felt kasich was pursuing a replay of former utah governor jon huntsman<u+2019>s failed 2012 bid for the republican nomination. huntsman and kasich even shared a campaign architect, the heterodox gop strategist john weaver. the playbook may have gotten kasich farther than it did huntsman, but that still wasn<u+2019>t enough to win the nomination, or even to come close. (as for huntsman, he now backs trump .) while hardly anyone predicted trump<u+2019>s success in the republican campaign, few expected kasich would get this far either. in a crowd of young, charismatic gop figures, kasich was the odd man out, a somewhat more grizzled figure who had run abortively for president in 2000, and a comparatively moderate figure in a party trending increasingly to the right. somehow, kasich managed to hold on to the bitter end, the final challenger to trump. the ohio governor<u+2019>s exit leaves donald trump as the last man standing in the republican field. though he<u+2019>d already assumed the mantle of presumptive nominee with senator ted cruz<u+2019>s exit tuesday night <u+2014>after trump trounced both of them in the indiana primary<u+2014>kasich<u+2019>s exit seals the deal. kasich has been mentioned for weeks as a potential vice-presidential candidate for trump, who will need to shore up his policy and political credentials ahead of the general election. john kasich will end his bid for the presidency wednesday afternoon in columbus, according to multiple reports. kasich had planned to hold a press conference at dulles aiport near washington wednesday morning, but he never took off<u+2014>perhaps an apt metaphor<u+2014>staying home and scheduling a press conference for 5 p.m., where he is expected to make his announcement. for a time, before trump<u+2019>s ascendancy became inevitable, kasich<u+2019>s plan seemed plausible. in new hampshire, the nation<u+2019>s first primary and second nominating contest, he placed (a distant) second to trump, and hoped to portray himself as the reasonable alternative to the entertainer. but having placed a huge bet on the granite state, kasich had little infrastructure in place for the rest of the campaign, and was a non-entity in the south carolina primary. by the time the campaign reached his home state, kasich was effectively out of the running. ohio turned out to be the only state that he won. he closes out the campaign with fewer delegates than senator marco rubio, who dropped out on march 15. kasich<u+2019>s sell to voters was that amid a sea of volatile, unpredictable characters like trump and wild-eyed radicals like cruz, he was an old-style true conservative who could also win swing states like ohio. to the extent that his campaign had a policy theme, it was his advocacy for a balanced-budget amendment<u+2014>a vague promise, tethered to his work on balancing the national budget while in the u.s. house in the 1990s. (opinions about just how central kasich had been in that work differed widely.) but some of his other policy stances were at odds with much of the republican party. as governor, he had circumvented the gop-led ohio legislature to accept medicaid expansion under the affordable care act. as though that were not bad enough, he compounded his offense in the eyes of conservatives by justifying his choice by faith. <u+201c>now, when you die and get to the meeting with st. peter, he<u+2019>s probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>but he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. you better have a good answer.<u+2019><u+201d> many of kasich<u+2019>s former colleagues viewed his image as a soft, cuddly, friendly politician with skepticism<u+2014>they remembered a more irritable, angry kasich<u+2014>it seemed to take with many voters. the problem was that republican primary voters didn<u+2019>t want a sane, rational nominee in 2016. they wanted a trump.

the end of the road for john kasich

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

35.0

8.0

3844.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

243.0

2.0

0.0

81.0

0.0

27.0

5.0

13.0

5.0

10.0

4.0

6.0

18.0

14.0

27.0

244.0

83.0

27.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

why negotiators at paris climate talks are tossing the kyoto model negotiators and heads of state from nearly 200 countries are meeting for the next two weeks near paris to craft a new treaty to slow global warming. it's the 21st "conference of the parties" held by the united nations to tackle climate change. one treaty emerged, in 1997, after the conference in kyoto, japan. that's no longer in effect, and, in fact, the kyoto protocol, as it's known, didn't slow down the gradual warming of the planet. now governments are ever more desperate to do something to slow warming <u+2014> so much so that they've thrown out the model set in kyoto and opted for a new approach for paris. valli moosa, a former climate negotiator from south africa, says the main reason kyoto failed to slow warming lies largely with who wasn't included in the treaty. "you actually cannot have a meaningful agreement without china and the united states being part of it," he says. the u.s. senate refused to ratify the kyoto treaty, so the world's biggest greenhouse-gas emitter didn't have skin in the game. and developing countries, including china and india, were not required to reduce emissions. now those countries are becoming the biggest sources of greenhouse gases as their economies thrive. china, in fact, is now the world's biggest emitter, and india isn't far behind. moreover, the kyoto treaty had u.n. bureaucrats and negotiators setting goals for the participating countries to lower their greenhouse gases. many countries didn't make their targets; others dropped out. economies were at stake, and few countries were comfortable marching to a u.n. beat. so what negotiators are bringing to the table at the paris talks is an arrangement whereby each country is offering to reduce its own emissions by whatever amount it can manage. and everybody participates, not just developed countries. most nations arrive with a reduction target already in hand. what will be difficult is deciding who will pay how much to developing countries to build economies that won't keep producing high emissions. french negotiator laurence tubiana points out that the key to success is convincing governments that those economies can be "low-carbon," and that this won't be a bar to developing wealth. "how much i'm sacrificing for the sake of emissions reductions, that's no more," she says of the message that negotiators are pushing. "and now ... the chinese, even the indians are really coming in. it's about low-carbon economy." previous attempts to replace the kyoto treaty have failed. this new approach is voluntary, and most of the world has agreed theoretically to participate, which negotiators hope will sweeten things enough to get a deal. still to be determined, however, is who will pay for this massive revolution in the world's energy economy, and what strings will be attached to their largesse.

why negotiators at paris climate talks are tossing the kyoto model

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

66.0

8.0

2893.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

187.0

1.0

0.0

47.0

0.0

18.0

2.0

8.0

0.0

3.0

5.0

3.0

4.0

14.0

4.0

21.0

191.0

48.0

18.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the election in 232 photos, 43 numbers and 131 quotes, from the two candidates at the center of it all.

how barack will juggle bibi, vlad and hillary

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

45.0

8.0

103.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

3.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

two of the republican party<u+2019>s top white house hopefuls clashed sharply friday over president obama<u+2019>s new cuba policy, evidence of a growing gop rift over foreign affairs that could shape the party<u+2019>s 2016 presidential primaries. sen. rand paul (ky.), who backs obama<u+2019>s move to normalize relations with communist cuba, accused sen. marco rubio (fla.) of being an <u+201c>isolationist<u+201d> with his hard-line opposition to opening up trade and diplomatic engagement with the island nation. paul suggested that rubio <u+201c>wants to retreat to our borders and perhaps build a moat.<u+201d> paul<u+2019>s comments came after rubio <u+2014> the son of cuban exiles who has stepped forward as a leading voice of resistance to obama<u+2019>s policy <u+2014> told fox news that paul had <u+201c>no idea what he<u+2019>s talking about<u+201d> when it comes to cuba. the feud is the loudest public dispute so far between potential gop 2016 candidates and lays bare the divergent world views of traditional hawks <u+2014> including rubio and past republican presidents and nominees <u+2014> and the emerging, younger libertarian wing represented by paul. for decades, rubio<u+2019>s position has been the gop<u+2019>s natural default. but paul is testing that convention. <u+201c>are we still cold warriors or are we entering a brave new world in diplomacy?<u+201d> republican strategist john feehery said. <u+201c>rubio<u+2019>s perspective is we have cuba, we have north korea, we need a bold, internationalist, america-led world that fights the bad guys. rand paul is taking his father<u+2019>s position to a new level, which is constructive engagement, but america isn<u+2019>t really the policeman of the world.<u+201d> hawkish republicans have long called paul<u+2019>s foreign policy <u+201c>isolationist,<u+201d> a label he rejects. in this week<u+2019>s cuba debate, paul applied the label to rubio. paul<u+2019>s comments were unusually personal, beginning with a series of tweets aimed at rubio followed by a two-paragraph message on his facebook page. <u+201c>senator rubio is acting like an isolationist<u+201d> and <u+201c>does not speak for the majority of cuban-americans,<u+201d> he wrote. paul followed up with an op-ed on time<u+2019>s web site friday afternoon in which he wrote that he grew up learning to despise communism but over time concluded that <u+201c>a policy of isolationism against cuba is misplaced and hasn<u+2019>t worked.<u+201d> he noted that public opinion has shifted in favor of rapprochement <u+2014> especially among young people, including young cuban americans <u+2014> and that u.s. businesses would benefit by being able to sell their goods in cuba. <u+201c>communism can<u+2019>t survive the captivating allure of capitalism,<u+201d> paul wrote. <u+201c>let<u+2019>s overwhelm the castro regime with iphones, ipads, american cars, and american ingenuity.<u+201d> sen. jeff flake (r-ariz.), who traveled to cuba this week with the u.s. entourage to secure contractor alan gross<u+2019>s release, shared paul<u+2019>s sentiments. flake said that he supported obama<u+2019>s decision to normalize relations and that after a five-decade embargo, it was time <u+201c>to try something different.<u+201d> rubio responded to paul<u+2019>s comments friday evening, telling conservative radio host mark levin, <u+201c>i think it<u+2019>s unfortunate that rand has decided to adopt barack obama<u+2019>s foreign policy on this matter.<u+201d> for both paul and rubio, there are short-term political benefits to the tussle. with potential donors and other influential republicans deciding between roughly a dozen presidential hopefuls, the pair are generating media attention and staking out ground on a high-profile policy issue. the spat was also the latest example of paul<u+2019>s combative tendencies. he has been the most aggressive gop presidential contender in taking on hillary rodham clinton, a former secretary of state and likely democratic candidate, and showed friday that he will not hesitate to throw punches at fellow republicans as well. ana navarro, a miami-based republican strategist close to rubio and former florida governor jeb bush, said it was an example of the <u+201c>silly season.<u+201d> <u+201c>there are some issues, like eye surgery and kentucky bourbon, paul knows something about,<u+201d> she said of the ophthalmologist turned lawmaker. <u+201c>but to try to outdo rubio on cuba policy <u+2014> and to do it by trolling him on twitter in 140-character spurts <u+2014> is frankly not productive, mature or senatorial.<u+201d> paul is trying to chart a new course for republicans on foreign policy and areas such as race relations, working with democrats on legislation to address drug sentencing guidelines. <u+201c>paul is going to stretch the limits and try to grow the party in directions republicans aren<u+2019>t used to,<u+201d> said ari fleischer, a former white house press secretary to george w. bush. <u+201c>i think the only upside he<u+2019>ll have is with young people. outside of that, i think it<u+2019>s going to be tough going for him. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. the history of the party is much more interventionist, muscular, strong, ronald reagan foreign policy.<u+201d> paul<u+2019>s aides said the senator considers cuba policy an economic and diplomatic issue and not a partisan one. but gop primary voters may see it differently. <u+201c>there<u+2019>s a certain willingness among conservatives to reconsider our cuba policy, but the fact that it<u+2019>s been negotiated by obama <u+2014> whom we have no confidence or trust in <u+2014> makes it suspect,<u+201d> said richard viguerie, a longtime conservative leader. <u+201c>if this had been done by a trustworthy, conservative republican, it would have been different.<u+201d> rubio, as a member of the senate foreign relations committee, has worked to distinguish himself as a leading voice on international affairs. almost immediately after wednesday<u+2019>s cuba announcement, rubio spoke out aggressively and in personal terms. raised in miami by parents who fled cuba in the 1950s, rubio grew up surrounded by other cuban american families and now represents them in washington. <u+201c>it is just another concession to a tyranny by the obama administration rather than a defense of every universal and inalienable right that our country was founded on and stands for,<u+201d> rubio told reporters on capitol hill. most 2016 gop hopefuls <u+2014> including bush, texas gov. rick perry, sen. ted cruz (tex.) and wisconsin gov. scott walker <u+2014> issued statements similar to rubio<u+2019>s. new jersey gov. chris christie has not spoken specifically on cuba but generally shares rubio<u+2019>s more hawkish worldview. william kristol, a prominent neoconservative and editor of the weekly standard, noted that most of the potential candidates, as well as the party<u+2019>s congressional leaders, are <u+201c>all in the same neighborhood<u+201d> on foreign policy. <u+201c>rand paul is a lonely gadfly,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>rand paul speaks for a genuine sentiment that<u+2019>s always been in the republican party, but maybe it<u+2019>s 10<u+00a0>percent? 15<u+00a0>percent? 20<u+00a0>percent? i don<u+2019>t think he<u+2019>s going to be a serious competitor for guiding republican foreign policy.<u+201d>

in rand paul and marco rubio<u+2019>s feud over cuba policy, a preview of gop<u+2019>s 2016 foreign policy debate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

6.0

99.0

8.0

6668.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

486.0

0.0

81.0

0.0

44.0

16.0

15.0

6.0

15.0

7.0

9.0

4.0

33.0

35.0

49.0

492.0

81.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the former florida governor, appearing at a business roundtable here, also called for a strategy to "take out" isis but did not go into specifics. he mostly argued that the war started during his brother's administration helped create stability in iraq and since been unraveled because of obama's policies. "the focus ought to be on knowing what you know now, mr. president, should you have kept 10,000 troops in iraq?" said bush, who's expected to announce his presidential bid in the coming months. in december 2011, the united states withdrew its final combat troops from iraq, bringing an end to the nearly decade-long conflict that started under george w. bush. the obama administration asked for more troops to remain on the ground, but negotiations with the iraqi government did not ensure that u.s. military personnel would be granted immunity. jeb bush argued that obama "could have kept the troops in and he could have had an agreement," adding "the united states had enough influence to be able to deal with the immunity issue." "he made the decision to get out. i don't begrudge him that. it was a decision made based on a campaign promise," he told reporters in new hampshire. "it wasn't based on conditions in iraq at the time and i think we're paying a price for it." critics at the time warned that extremist elements would grow more powerful without a u.s. presence, and now republican presidential contenders are pointing to the rise of isis as proof that the united states should have pushed harder to stay in iraq. in his remarks at the business roundtable -- an event organized by new hampshire activist renee plummer -- bush defended his brother's leadership during the iraq war. "isis didn't exist when my brother was president. al qaeda in iraq was wiped out when my brother was president," he said. "there were mistakes made in iraq, for sure, but the surge created a fragile but stable iraq that the president could've built on and it would've not allowed isis." he called for a plan to "take out isis" with help from other countries, saying there is currently "no strategic imperative" to restore stability in iraq. asked later by reporters what that strategy should be and whether it should include combat troops in the area, bush said he would rely on advice from military advisers. "we have ground troops in iraq. i would take the best advice that you could get from the military. make the decisions based on conditions on the ground, not for some political purpose," he said. "whether we need more than 3,000 -- which is what we have now -- i would base that on what the military advisers say." panel: bush should have been prepared for iraq question panel: bush should have been prepared for iraq question bush struggled to answer questions last week about whether he would have gone into iraq knowing what's known now about faulty intelligence that initially spurred military action. after multiple days of unclear answers, he ultimately said he would not have invaded in hindsight. related: can jeb bush escape his brother's legacy on iraq? his difficulty in answering the question -- one that pits his loyalty to his brother against political calculation -- created a narrative that drew criticism from other white house hopefuls and sparked questions of whether bush was ready for prime time. at the roundtable in wednesday, however, bush was met with encouragement from voters. when one man called bush's family an "asset," the room broke out into applause. as he's done at every event, bush maintained that he loved his family, and he sought to assure the audience that he's gotten through last week's storm. "it got bumpy, but all is well now," he said. "the ship is stable." former florida gov. jeb bush waves as he takes the stage as he formally announces he is joining the race for president with a speech june 15, 2015, at miami dade college in miami. former florida governor jeb bush shakes hands with attendees after speaking at the 42nd annual conservative political action conference on february 27 in national harbor, maryland. bush takes a selfie with a guest at a luncheon hosted by the chicago council on global affairs on february 18 in chicago. bush delivered his first major foreign policy speech at the event. bush hands out items for holiday food baskets to those in need outside the little havana offices of camacol, the latin american chamber of commerce on december 17 in miami. bush waves to the audience at the tampa bay times forum in tampa, florida, on august 30, 2012, on the final day of the republican national convention. bush (left) and wife columba bush attend the 2012 lincoln center institute gala at frederick p. rose hall, jazz at lincoln center on march 7, 2012, in new york city. president barack obama (left) speaks about bush (center) while visiting miami central senior high school on march 4, 2011 in miami, florida. the visit focused on education. bush (left) speaks with brazilian president in charge jose alancar during a meeting at planalto palace in brasilia, april 17, 2007. bush was in brazil to speak about sugar and ethanol business. then-texas governor rick perry (center) testifies as bush (right) and then-arizona governor janet napolitano (left) listen during a hearing before the house committee on homeland security on capitol hill october 19, 2005. bush gives a thumbs up signal from his car as he leaves a local polling station after casting his vote in coral gables, florida, november 5, 2002. bush walks out of the west wing after meeting with his brother, then-president george w. bush, at the white house january 9, 2002. governor bush participated in the signing ceremony of the everglades protection agreement. then-mexican president vincente fox (left) and bush hold a press conference september 7, 2001, in miami. fox visited florida to attend the americas conference and deliver a speech to speak about issues such as immigration. then-president george w. bush (right) is greeted by jeb bush on march 21, 2001, at orlando international airport in orlando, florida. president bush was in orlando to attend the american college of cardiology annual convention. bush speaks during a press conference at the carandolet government palace in quito, january 18, 2006. bush and a businessmen delegation were in a two-day visit to talk about a free trade agreement. bush speaks to reporters after meeting with the florida state cabinet at the florida state capitol building november 16, 2000, in tallahassee, florida. then-president george w. bush (left) and jeb bush (right), raise their arms onstage following a rally at the florida state fairgrounds, october 25, 2000, in brandon, florida. jeb bush (left) and then-president george w. bush stand with their arms around each other's shoulders at a rally in miami, florida, september 22, 2000. then-president george w. bush (right) and jeb bush go through the line for strawberries during a stop at the stawberry festival march 12, 2000 in plant city, florida. the bush family, (left to right) former u.s. president george w., former florida governor jeb, former president george h.w. and his wife barbara, watch play during the foursomes matches september 25, 1999 at the country club in brookline, massachusetts the site of the 33rd ryder cup matches. former president george h.w. bush (second left), his wife barbara bush (left), their son jeb bush (center), then-first lady hillary clinton (second right), and former then-president bill clinton (right) look up to see the u.s. army golden knights parachute team november 6, 1997 at the conclusion of the dedication ceremony of the george bush library in college station, texas. portrait of the bush family in front of their kennebunkport, maine house august 24, 1986. pictured, back row: margaret holding daughter marshall, marvin bush, bill leblond. pictured, front row: neil bush holding son pierce, sharon, george w. bush holding daughter barbara, laura bush holding daughter jenna, barbara bush, george bush, sam leblond, doro bush lebond, george p. (jeb's son), jeb bush holding son jebby, columba bush and noelle bush.

jeb bush blames iraq unrest on obama

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

36.0

8.0

8129.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

586.0

0.0

149.0

0.0

64.0

8.0

23.0

1.0

16.0

14.0

7.0

35.0

16.0

50.0

589.0

149.0

64.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a member of al qaeda's branch in yemen said friday that the group directed the massacre earlier this week at a paris magazine, as the u.s. state department issued a travel warning to citizens, saying they faced an increased risk of reprisals. earlier friday, near simultaneous raids by french police killed the two islamist brothers behind the attack and another terrorist. the raids, conducted at locations 25 miles apart, took out cherif and said kouachi and a suspect in a policewoman's killing who had seized hostages at a paris grocery on the brothers' behalf, but also left four hostages dead, according to authorities and reports from the scene. the al qaeda member on friday provided a statement in english to the associated press saying "the leadership of aqap directed the operations and they have chosen their target carefully." there was no independent confirmation of the report, and u.s. intelligence and counterterrorism officials say it is too early to conclude who is responsible for the massacre on wednesday that left 12 dead. however, cherif kouachi told a french tv station before friday's raid at an industrial park that he was sent by al qaeda in yemen and had been financed by the cleric anwar al-awlaki, who was killed by a u.s. airstrike in yemen in 2011. the state department's warning says attacks against americans are becoming increasingly prevalent. it also cites an increased risk of reprisals against u.s. and western targets for the u.s.-led intervention against islamic state militants in syria and iraq, and comes in the aftermath of terrorist attacks in australia and canada, as well as the paris massacre. if confirmed, the attack would be the first time al qaeda's branch in yemen has successfully carried out an operation in the west after at least two earlier attempts. the al qaeda member said the attack was in line with warnings from the late al qaeda leader usama bin laden to the west about "the consequences of the persistence in the blasphemy against muslim sanctities," adding that it was "revenge for the honor" of islam's prophet muhammad, which the satirical charlie hebdo had occasionally lampooned. the lightning-quick strikes earlier friday ended two tense, hours-long standoffs, one at a printing plant north of the city and the other at a kosher supermarket on paris' east side, where four hostages were killed, as many as 15 were freed. a hostage held north of the city by the brothers, who killed 12 in a commando-style attack at the offices of charlie hebdo, was reportedly freed. the fast-moving developments, signaled by explosions and gunfire at a printing plant in dammartin-en-goele, followed by similar sounds at hypercacher (hyper kosher), a jewish supermarket in eastern paris, brought to a climax a three-day terror ordeal and manhunt involving nearly 90,000 police and military personnel. the kouachi brothers, the radicalized french-born slackers whose attack on charlie hebdo left two police officers among the dozen dead, were both killed in the first raid. the brothers, 32 and 34, respectively, are believed to have ties to al qaeda in yemen, and military experts who viewed footage of their bloody, late-morning raid on wednesday said they appeared to be well-trained terrorists. charlie hebdo had long angered muslim radicals with its penchant for publishing cartoon images of prophet muhammed. in paris, police said amedy coulibaly, who is believed to have know the brothers and was suspected of killing paris police officer clarissa jean-philippe thursday, as she attended to a routine traffic accident in the city, was killed in a raid moments later, ending his supermarket siege. police had identified him and his longtime girlfriend, hayat boumeddiene, as suspects in the police killing, but her whereabouts were not immediately known. police were searching for another possible suspect who may have escaped the grocery store siege, but it was not clear if that person was boumeddiene. at the kosher grocery near the porte de vincennes neighborhood of the capital, the gunman burst in shooting just a few hours before the jewish sabbath began, declaring "you know who i am," an official recounted. the attack came before sundown when the store would have been crowded with shoppers, and president francois hollande called it "a terrifying anti-semitic act." coulibaly killed the four people in the market shortly after entering, molins said. several people wounded in the grocery store were able to flee and get medical care, the official said. coulibaly, 33, and cherif kouachi were committed followers of convicted terror kingpin djamel beghal, according to le monde. earlier friday, a french security official told the ap that shots were fired as the brothers stole a car in the town of montagny sainte felicite in the early morning hours.<u+00a0>french officials told fox news that the suspects threw the car's driver out at the side of the road. the driver, who recognized the suspects, then called police and alerted them to the suspects' whereabouts. on thursday, u.s. government sources confirmed that said kouachi, 34, had traveled to yemen in 2011 and had direct contact with an al qaeda training camp. the other brother, 32-year-old cherif, had been convicted in france of terrorism charges in 2008 for trying to join up with fighters battling in iraq. the sources also confirmed that both brothers, who had been orphaned as youngsters and spent years committing petty crimes and doing menial jobs, were on a u.s. no-fly list. fox news was told the investigators have made it a priority to determine whether he had contact with al qaeda in yemen's leadership, including a bomb maker and a former guantanamo bay detainee. hollande called for tolerance after the country's worst terrorist attack since 1961, in the middle of the conflict over algerian independence from france. "france has been struck directly in the heart of its capital, in a place where the spirit of liberty -- and thus of resistance -- breathed freely," hollande said. charlie hebdo had long drawn threats for its depictions of islam, although it also satirized other religions and political figures. the weekly paper had caricatured the prophet muhammad, and a sketch of islamic state's leader was the last tweet sent out by the irreverent newspaper, minutes before the attack. nothing has been tweeted since. eight journalists, two police officers, a maintenance worker and a visitor were killed in the attack. charlie hebdo planned a special edition next week, produced in the offices of another paper. editor stephane charbonnier, known as charb, who was among those slain, "symbolized secularism ... the combat against fundamentalism," his companion, jeannette bougrab, said on bfm-tv. "he was ready to die for his ideas," she said. authorities around europe have warned of the threat posed by the return of western jihadis trained in warfare. france counts at least 1,200 citizens in the war zone in syria -- headed there, returned or dead. both the islamic state group and al qaeda have threatened france -- home to western europe's largest muslim population. the french suspect in a deadly 2014 attack on a jewish museum in belgium had returned from fighting with extremists in syria; and the man who rampaged in southern france in 2012, killing three soldiers and four people at a jewish school, received paramilitary training in pakistan. fox news' greg palkot, catherine herridge and the associated press contributed to this report.

al qaeda rep says group directed paris magazine attack; us issues travel warning

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

5.0

80.0

8.0

7526.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

521.0

0.0

161.0

0.0

49.0

24.0

18.0

6.0

37.0

8.0

15.0

11.0

26.0

39.0

34.0

527.0

161.0

49.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the islamic state claimed responsibility for the foiled terrorist attack at a muhammad cartoon contest in texas sunday. but that doesn't mean the group had much to do with the attack. the attempted terror attack by two muslim-americans in garland, texas, sunday so far appears to confirm what terrorism experts have been saying for months: the islamic state has no ability to carry out attacks in the united states. but the incident shows that the islamic state<u+2019>s ability to inspire and, to a limited degree, direct <u+201c>lone wolf<u+201d> jihadis remains a challenge with no simple answers. no evidence yet shared with the public suggests that the two men killed by a security officer when they opened fire on a building hosting a <u+201c>draw muhammad<u+201d> contest were hardened islamic state operatives. they pledged fealty to the islamic state in a tweet minutes before the attack. but one of them, elton simpson, had been on the federal bureau of investigation<u+2019>s radar screen since 2006, and he faced charges in 2011 over claims that he wanted to join jihad in somalia. the degree to which he and his phoenix-area roommate, nadir soofi, reached out to the islamic state <u+2013> or the islamic state (also known as isis) reached out to them <u+2013> is unclear. the fbi is combing through the men<u+2019>s social media histories for clues. but it is becoming increasingly clear that the islamic state<u+2019>s greatest threat to the us is in its online messaging, which jessica stern, co-author of the new book <u+201c>isis: the state of terror,<u+201d> calls a <u+201c>social contagion.<u+201d> what is known about sunday<u+2019>s attack underscores that <u+201c>it<u+2019>s less important that isis actually speaks [directly to attackers], because isis<u+2019>s goal is to inspire this kind of attack.<u+201d> this is terrorism on the cheap. the islamic state doesn<u+2019>t have to try to send operatives to the us. it can simply prod disgruntled americans and claim the credit. for the islamic state, <u+201c>trying to get guys from syria or iraq into the united states [to fight] would be stupid and fruitless, because it would take time and money, it would take guys away from the fight, and why would you even do it when you have a great force multiplier in the internet, where you can get people to pop up anywhere, making you seem omnipotent and universal?<u+201d> asks tim clemente, a former fbi counterterrorism agent. on one hand, sunday<u+2019>s attack gave that impression. but it also suggested the limitations of outsourcing terrorism operations. america<u+2019>s legal dockets are strewn with the stories of homegrown terrorists who were rumbled by the fbi or simply failed. cnn notes that the attackers had body armor and semiautomatic weapons and yet were killed by a traffic officer with a pistol. the events showed that the attackers were <u+201c>wannabes who have never really done anything legitimate, and who hope this act will give them acceptance,<u+201d> mr. clemente says. for that reason, the attack in garland <u+201c>doesn<u+2019>t suggest to me that this is a clear escalation,<u+201d> says ms. stern. rather, it points to the islamic state<u+2019>s opportunism <u+2013> both in recruiting would-be terrorists and in capitalizing on their exploits. <u+201c>this is something isis has been hoping will happen,<u+201d> she says. the islamic state has made many claims of responsibility in attacks throughout north africa and europe, though this is the first time it has done so for an attack in north america. the attack last october on the canadian parliament in ottawa by a lone gunman seemed taken out of the islamic state playbook, investigators said, but canadian intelligence never found a credible connection. the garland attack also stirred memories of the attack by jihadists on the satirical paris magazine charlie hebdo, as well as an attack at an event this spring attended by lars vilks, a swedish cartoonist who has caricatured muhammad. sunday<u+2019>s event, sponsored by controversial free-speech activist pam geller, promised the artist behind the best cartoon of mohammad a $10,000 prize. it included a keynote address from controversial dutch politician geert wilders, who has decried the <u+201c>islamicization of the netherlands.<u+201d> the islamic state message does appear to hold some appeal for a minuscule fringe. in addition to islamic state-inspired attacks, an estimated 3,000 westerners <u+2013> including perhaps <u+201c>hundreds<u+201d> of americans <u+2013> have traveled to syria since 2011 to join violent jihad. as of last october, norwegian terrorism analyst thomas hegghammer found a low <u+201c>blowback rate<u+201d> for those fighters coming back to their home countries to engage in terrorism <u+2013> only about 1 of every 150 to 300, much lower than the rate for foreign fighters in afghanistan, for example. he suggested that was because of the islamic state<u+2019>s primary focus on establishing a caliphate in the middle east. <u+201c>isis is unlikely to go all in on global [terrorism] operations the way al qaeda central has. the organization is not designed for that, and such a strategy is not compatible with its state-building ambitions,<u+201d> he wrote on cnn. in the months since, isis<u+2019>s messaging campaign has become more global, but its operational reach has apparently remained focused on the middle east. the result, experts say, is attacks like the one sunday. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not as if isis has a cell in the united states or trains people,<u+201d> aymenn jawad al-tamimi, an islamic state expert at the interdisciplinary center in harzliya, israel, tells the new york times. <u+201c>this is not isis coming to america.<u+201d>

what 'draw muhammad' shootings say about islamic state reach (+video)

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

16.0

69.0

8.0

5413.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

407.0

0.0

98.0

0.0

46.0

13.0

14.0

7.0

15.0

8.0

7.0

8.0

24.0

26.0

36.0

411.0

98.0

46.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

while some justice department investigations are adversarial, a new model of collaborative reform is surprising police in some cities, as<u+00a0>they find themselves included as part of the solution. searching for a "framework ... [to] heal," baltimore mayor stephanie rawlings-blake put in a 911 call to the us department of justice to ask for a civil rights investigation into the baltimore police department<u+2019>s beat cop tactics. her call, not even a week after a local prosecutor charged six police officers with crimes including murder for their alleged role in the death of freddie gray, is part of a broader trend of "collaborative reform" between washington and local jurisdictions. what's striking about such investigations is that they don't just slam the police, but also aim to help officers stay safe and protect citizens, as well as show that they are part of the solution. in fact, following a baltimore sun series on police abuses in the city last year, police commissioner anthony batts approached the justice department to conduct a collaborative review, which had been under way the day mr. gray died while in police custody. some doj investigations are adversarial, as police bristle at court orders and federal monitors. but a federal investigation into whether baltimore cops routinely violate people<u+2019>s civil rights is likely to mirror similar probes in las vegas and philadelphia, where police chiefs have been able to use federal findings to gain leverage with elected officials and also use facts to rebut claims by police officers that they<u+2019>re doing nothing wrong, says sam walker, a criminologist at the university of nebraska at omaha. to be sure, mr. walker says, it<u+2019>s <u+201c>too early to tell<u+201d> whether such interventions can bring the kind of fundamental reforms that mayor rawlings-blake is hoping to find in the aftermath of gray<u+2019>s death and injuries to nearly 100 cops during violent riots. but there is growing evidence that such collaborative efforts can help communities grapple with deep tensions between police and neighborhoods and build trust around common goals like respect, dignity, and sanctity of life. after las vegas police shot a record 25 people in 2010, the city began its own reforms and asked the department of justice for help a year later. in 2011, the doj began the new collaboration program, delving deep into practices, training procedures, and policies to root out where officers were going wrong and where policies failed the people. as of 2012, the las vegas department had completed dozens of difficult reforms, including rewriting its use-of-deadly-force policy to include a reference to officers acknowledging the <u+201c>sanctity of human life<u+201d> as they make critical split-second decisions. the department added so-called reality-based training to give officers more options than quick deployment of deadly force as they interacted with drugged, drunk, or mentally ill citizens. since then, the number of officer-involved shootings in las vegas has stayed below historical averages, year to year. in march, the justice department reported back on practices of the philadelphia police department, which had seen a stretch of years in which police killed a person nearly every week, many of them unarmed. the doj team, which was made up of policing experts and not prosecutors, released a string of findings that pointed to problems in both policy and training. surprisingly to some, many complaints came from officers themselves. among the findings were complaints from officers that they were not properly trained to deal with violent suspects. the training needed to be less staged and more reality-based, officers said, including allowing trainees to grapple with each other to learn tactics. <u+201c>interview participants generally thought that the defensive tactics training offered at the academy focused too much on legal liability and not enough on teaching practical and realistic methods for surviving a physical encounter,<u+201d> the doj report stated. <u+201c>they did not believe that [training] sufficiently prepared them for a physical encounter.<u+201d> aside from giving leaders hard facts to work with, such reports can also help defend police officers. even though many police shootings have a racial backdrop, the justice department found that philadelphia police did not have a problem with racial stereotyping. in fact, unarmed white males were more likely to be shot and killed by philadelphia police than unarmed black males. <u+201c>i want to express regrets for all who have been shot in philadelphia, civilians or police officers.... every life is precious in this city and this country, so we need to maintain this level of focus," philadelphia mayor michael nutter said in march. "we're one big city. everyone wants to be safe. citizens want to be safe. police officers want to be safe." the justice department has conducted 19 civil rights investigations since 2000, stepping up the efforts in the obama era, with five police departments coming under federal monitoring in 2012 alone. some of those investigations have been scathing, including a report in march that documented abuses by the ferguson (mo.) police department that helped fuel protests in the wake of michael<u+2019>s brown death last august, at the hands of a police officer. so far, attorney general loretta lynch has not replied to the baltimore mayor<u+2019>s request for a separate civil rights abuse probe. but the request makes clear that the city<u+2019>s police probably have problems that go beyond the treatment of gray. since 2011, the city has settled more than 100 lawsuits equaling nearly $6 million in cases where people were bruised and battered by officers, only to have trumped-up charges later dropped by a judge. true, institutional change can be difficult. after the baltimore police department promised the courts in 2010 it would curb the large percentage of false arrests in the city by offering better training, the department dragged its feet, the american civil liberties union has alleged. the issue has reared up again in the gray case, since prosecutor marilyn mosby has charged that officers falsely arrested gray for carrying a legal knife. but so far in philadelphia and las vegas, one key to success has been the efforts to engage police officers in the process by showing them that they are part of the solution, and that the collaboration isn't about outsiders second-guessing their actions. in philadelphia, commissioner charles ramsey sent every officer a link to the las vegas report, so they could see for themselves that it was more an attempt to help officers stay safe and protect citizens than blaming them for their actions. "cops are always leery of something," mr. ramsey told the baltimore sun. "we did as much as we could to alleviate any concerns and fears."

in baltimore's call for federal police probe, a new search for answers (+video)

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

79.0

8.0

6812.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

499.0

0.0

99.0

0.0

63.0

13.0

16.0

9.0

23.0

12.0

14.0

11.0

32.0

20.0

46.0

503.0

99.0

63.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the iowa caucuses are 11 weeks away. that is a lifetime in a political campaign. except that it<u+2019>s really not. the campaign is about to enter its holiday period <u+2014> a time when people, including iowans and new hampshire types, start paying much more attention to how to stuff their turkey and what<u+2019>s under the christmas tree than they do to politics. tv ads, stump speeches and even debates tend to get lost <u+2014> or plain ignored <u+2014> in the holiday maelstrom. thanksgiving is in less than two weeks. christmas is four weeks after that. a week later, it<u+2019>s new year<u+2019>s eve/new year<u+2019>s day. suddenly, it<u+2019>s jan. 4, and the caucuses are only 28 days away. that<u+2019>s the real calendar math of 2016. the race is almost certain to freeze in place <u+2014> or close to it <u+2014> in 10 days, only to thaw a few days into the new year. that prospect should worry republicans who have an eye on retaking the white house after eight years in the political wilderness. why? because the top tier of the gop field, as of today, is just two candidates large: former pediatric neurosurgeon ben carson and real estate investor donald trump. in virtually every national poll of republican voters, carson and trump not only lead the rest of the field by a wide margin, but also combine to take well north of 50 percent of the total vote. carson is the favorite in iowa, while trump remains the front-runner in the new hampshire primary. [time for gop panic? establishment worried carson or trump might win.] the problem for republicans is that in an election likely to be focused on foreign policy <u+2014> the paris attacks late last week make this an even greater likelihood <u+2014> neither carson nor trump have demonstrated a depth of knowledge likely to reassure voters that they are up to the job of commander in chief. trump, in particular, would be a very problematic nominee for republicans <u+2014> not just because of his relative cluelessness on foreign policy but also because of his comments on immigration, women, prisoners of war, iowans and lots (and lots) of other things. establishment republicans had long believed that former florida governor jeb bush<u+2019>s massive financial edge <u+2014> a super pac that supports him raised $100 million in the first six months of the year <u+2014> would allow him to overtake the likes of carson and trump as actual votes neared. but bush has been far less than advertised as a candidate, and it<u+2019>s not clear that all the money in the world can sell a message that republican caucus and primary voters simply don<u+2019>t want to buy. that leaves marco rubio, the senator from florida, as the establishment pol best positioned to overtake the outsiders at the top of the field. and it could happen. but, rubio<u+2019>s fundraising has been less than impressive, and although he has moved up in polling, he has less than half of the support enjoyed by trump or carson in both early-state and national surveys. [the take: why no one is dropping out of the gop presidential race] put simply: any republican who tells you that trump and/or carson are a fad who will fade before iowa is engaging in the most wishful of thinking. it<u+2019>s a near-certainty at this point that the top tier going into iowa will look almost exactly like it does today <u+2014> carson and trump at the top, with rubio and sen. ted cruz (tex.) inching upward. the state of the democratic race is far less in flux <u+2014> and, therefore, is causing much less agita for the party establishment. hillary rodham clinton, after months of listless campaigning, almost certainly secured the democratic nomination with her strong showing in october <u+2014> a month bookended by a standout performance in the first presidential debate and her marathon testimony in front of the house committee investigating the 2012 attacks in benghazi, libya. clinton remains far from a perfect candidate <u+2014> her decision to exclusively use a private e-mail server while at the state department will be a major point of emphasis for republicans in the general election <u+2014> but she is by far the most complete candidate in the democratic field. vermont sen. bernie sanders seems comfortable being a protest candidate rather than a serious challenger to clinton <u+2014> as evidenced by his refusal in each of the first two debates to use questions about clinton<u+2019>s e-mail issue to draw a broader contrast between the two candidates. sanders<u+2019>s viability in iowa and, especially, new hampshire, a state where he is a slight favorite as of today, means that he will remain a relevant part of the race all the way through february. but it<u+2019>s hard to see a path to victory for sanders unless he can significantly expand his coalition beyond whites or peel voters off of clinton <u+2014> neither of which seem likely. the state of both parties<u+2019> races today will almost certainly be the state of those races when actual voters begin to start paying attention again right around jan. 4. that prospect should make republicans frown and democrats smile.

the iowa caucuses are closer than you think

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

43.0

8.0

4925.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

316.0

1.0

0.0

83.0

0.0

29.0

5.0

16.0

2.0

7.0

11.0

10.0

6.0

24.0

16.0

35.0

319.0

84.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) even before the debris from the paris terrorist attacks was swept away, politicians began sounding the alarm that syrian refugees could be a national security threat to the united states. the issue has dominated the u.s. political conversation during the week since gunmen and suicide bombers terrorized paris on a friday night. all republican presidential candidates called on president barack obama to renege on his pledge to admit 10,000 refugees fleeing syria's brutal civil war into the u.s. and argued instead for a full stop, fearing terrorists could infiltrate their ranks. thirty-one governors have declared syrian refugees unwelcome in their states and on thursday the house passed a bill to bar refugees from syria and iraq from entering the u.s. nearly 50 democrats joined 242 republicans to pass the bill, which the white house has threatened to veto. sen. ted cruz, a republican presidential candidate, suggested the u.s. only accept christian refugees . ben carson, another candidate, likened refugees to "rabid dogs" threatening the neighborhood. but those responses ignore one very important fact: the refugee program is quite simply the toughest way for a foreigner to legally enter the united states. there are other security gaps that would be easier for would-be terrorists to exploit. were any of the paris attackers refugees? as of now, none of the paris attackers have been confirmed as having entered europe as refugees. in fact, most of the paris attackers were european citizens born in france or belgium. two of them appear to have entered europe through greece although it doesn't appear that they came in through a refugee program. perhaps more importantly, the european refugee admission system is dramatically different from the u.s. system for syrians, in large part because the u.s. is geographically separated from syria. the u.s. has the opportunity to do far more vetting before refugees arrive on their shores. how does a refugee get into the u.s.? refugees must undergo an 18- to 24-month screening process, minimum, that the united nations' refugee arm oversees. and that's before individual countries even begin to consider a refugee's application and conduct their own additional interviews and background checks. the screening process generally includes multiple interviews, background checks and an extensive cross-referencing process that tests refugee's stories against others and accounts from sources on the ground in their home country. throughout that process, u.n. officials and local government officials in temporary host countries like turkey, jordan and lebanon look to determine the legitimacy of asylum seekers' claims and ensure that they meet the criteria of a refugee, including that they are not and have not been involved in any fighting or terrorist activities. refugees also have their retinas scanned and have their fingerprints lifted. christopher boian, a spokesman for the united nations high commission for refugees, called the process "stringent" and "long and complex." "if at any stage in that process there is ever the slightest shadow of a doubt or the slightest whisper of suspicion, they are removed from the process. that is that," boian said. "the very, very few syrian refugees who are accepted and referred for consideration for resettlement in another country -- there simply is no more closely scrutinized population on earth these days," he added. that's because other countries have so far pledged to resettle just 159,000 of the more than 4 million syrian refugees -- setting an extremely high bar for resettlement. and refugees aren't automatically considered for resettlement: only the most vulnerable refugees -- such as torture victims, female heads of household, people with serious medical conditions and other especially vulnerable groups. so after they go through that process by the u.n., the u.s. does an additional screening? that's right. after a rigorous screening process and several interviews carried out by the u.n. refugee agency, refugees the u.s. agrees to consider for resettlement have to undergo an additional interview, medical evaluation and security screening. according to one u.s. government official, there's an additional layer of vetting that's specific to syrian applicants, including special briefings for interviewers and information from the u.s. intelligence community. the security screening involves checks against several government agencies' databases and terrorist watch lists using biographic and biometric information. it's a process mark toner, a state department spokesman, recently called "the most stringent security process for anyone entering the united states." and syrian refugees get an additional, more targeted layer of screening involving the u.s. intelligence agency, according to a government official. sounds pretty rigorous. how does the refugee process stack up to other ways of getting into the u.s.? the refugee program is simply the toughest way for any foreigner to enter the u.s. legally. for most people, getting a tourist visa to enter the united states is much easier, but still requires an in-person interview and involves a typical background check. the process takes anywhere from a few days to a couple months. but there's an even easier way to get into the u.s. if you're a citizen of one of 38 mostly european countries, including france and belgium. as a sign that the obama administration agrees that there are gaps that need closing, one of the u.s. officials said, in the coming days the administration expects to announce plans for additional steps to be taken with european countries that participate in the visa waiver program. sen. angus king, an independent from maine who sits on the intelligence committee, said it "would be much harder" for a terrorist to get into the country through the refugee program than with a passport from one of the 38 countries in the visa waiver program. "(the refugee process) would take 18 months to two years. under the visa waiver program, it could take 24 hours," king told cnn in a phone interview. "the target of our work should be strengthening the visa waiver program." "we do need to pay attention to whether the terrorists could infiltrate the refugee flow. i don't think it's something we should ignore, but the amount of vetting that goes on there already is very through," king added. so is that program getting strengthened? a bipartisan proposal to do just that is gaining momentum on capitol hill. noting that 20 million people each year use the visa waiver program to visit the united states, sen. dianne feinstein, d-california, said in a thursday news conference that a bill she is proposing with sen. jeff flake, r-arizona, would help guard against terrorists trying to exploit the program. "terrorists could exploit the program, could go from france to syria, as 2,000 fighters have done, come back to france, use the visa waiver program and without further scrutiny come into the united states," said feinstein, a senior member of the intelligence committee. the feinstein-flake bill, which is set to be formally introduced after thanksgiving, would keep foreigners who've traveled to syria or iraq in the last five years from using the visa waiver program. it would also mandate fingerprinting for all travelers entering the u.s. from visa waiver countries and requires all foreigners from those countries to have a modern passport that has an embedded e-chip that is more secure and includes an individual's biometric information and other data. flake, the bill's republican sponsor, told reporters thursday the refugee program could be strengthened to include better tracking of refugees once they arrive in the country, but said touted the rigorous process as something that shouldn't be a source of concern. "on the front end, it is a very thorough vetting that they get. so of all the things that we ought to be concerned about, that is not at the top of the list," he said.

entering u.s. as refugees would be hard for terrorists

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

54.0

8.0

8056.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

518.0

0.0

144.0

0.0

67.0

10.0

14.0

5.0

21.0

8.0

9.0

2.0

24.0

25.0

36.0

520.0

144.0

67.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hey, you! any interest in running for the us house or, maybe better, the us senate? a few seats are up for grabs in 2016. it's a very powerful, prestigious, decently well-paying job. lots of important decisions. great on a r<u+00e9>sum<u+00e9>. what's that you say? not interested. not for you? yeah, i get it. i wouldn't want to run for congress either. i know, you're probably a reasonable person, a nuanced thinker with a bit of an independent streak. you don't want to get drawn into the maw of that tribal trench warfare down there on the dc swamp. it's a bitter, angry place. and no fun. but hey, somebody has to do the job. and, flippant tone aside, it really matters who does do the job. if reasonable, level-headed people like you don't want to run for congress, that means only hair-on-fire ideologues will put run the place, and ... oh wait. that does seem to be happening a bit these days. which takes us to that upcoming 2016 congressional election.<u+00a0> yet another golden opportunity to bring some fresh talent into washington, maybe for some folks who are more excited about governing than about trying to make government disappear altogether? if such optimism sounds like the triumph of hope over experience, it probably is. which raises an important question: why don't we get many moderates, especially moderate republicans, running for office these days? i've gathered here two good explanations from some recent political science literature: say you're a moderate republican. you might look at the republican party in congress and feel like it's not exactly your people in charge of the place. you'd see that the leaders in congress tend to be on the extremist side, and you'd make a reasonable guess that you wouldn't get too far in congress as a moderate. by contrast, if you're a true conservative, you'd see an opportunity to fit right in. this is the "party fit hypothesis," as developed by political scientist danielle thomsen in a paper titled "ideological moderates won't run: how party fit matters for partisan polarization in congress." (she also has a forthcoming book on this.) thomsen looked at some surveys of state legislators and some data on who actually runs for congress. her conclusion based on the data is simple: "the more liberal the republican state legislator, the less likely she is to run for congress; the more conservative the democratic state legislator, the less likely she is to do so." in an email, thomsen told me that there are indeed moderates in the state legislatures. she estimates that "about 20% of republican state legislators are as liberal as former senator olympia snowe (r-me) and nearly 30% of democratic state legislators are as conservative as former representative john tanner (d-tn)." it's just that they are much less likely to run for congress. like most aspects of polarization, the "party fit" story is asymmetrical <u+2014> the polarizing impact is much stronger for republicans. democrats have maintained more ideological diversity and get more moderates to run. this is not true for republicans. and like most aspects of polarization, it feeds on itself. as thomsen also wrote in her email to me, "<u+00a0>as moderates gradually lost their place in both parties, polarization has become self-reinforcing.<u+00a0> the hyper-partisanship in congress has discouraged moderates from running for and remaining in congress, which has further exacerbated the ideological distance between the parties." again, say you're a moderate republican. chances are your local and state party leaders are not all that interested in encouraging you to run. most likely, they are ideologues themselves, and they'd like to find people who share their beliefs, especially if they are republicans. they want true conservatives. this is a conclusion i draw from a fascinating survey of 6,000 county-level political party leaders, conducted by political scientists david broockman, nicholas carnes, melody crowder-meyer, and christopher skovron. they asked what qualities party leaders wanted. sure, the party leaders said they looked for the usual things <u+2014> honesty, experience intelligence, dedication, good looks, and, yes, ability to raise money. but they also cared about ideology <u+2014> particularly the republicans. broockman et al. write: and party leaders do play a very important role in candidate recruitment, as broockman documented in a separate paper: in pretty much every study trying to explain why candidates decided to run for office, recruitment was a major factor. again, we have a self-reinforcing loop here: the more ideologues run the party, the more they are going to recruit other like-minded candidates to run for office. there is also probably a fundraising aspect to this. most of the big donors tend to be<u+00a0>pretty ideological (again, especially on the right). if they give a lot of money, it's almost always because they feel very strongly that one or the other of the two major parties needs to be in charge. active passion and strong partisanship tend to go together. for example, in explaining "leapfrog representation" (the phenomenon of extremist candidates jumping over the median voter in a district when a seat changes partisan control), political scientists joseph bafumi and michael c. herron point that active donors tend to be more extreme than non-donors. they argue that this may offer one explanation why candidates do not converge on the middle <u+2014> if you can't raise money from (ideological) donors, it's harder to run for office. sure, you might argue, party leaders may be ideologues themselves, especially on the right. but most of all, they want to stay in power. and to stay in power, they need to win elections.<u+00a0> and to win elections, they need to converge on the median voter who is, by definition, in the middle of the left-right ideological distribution. ergo, the moderating pressures of electoral competition should overcome these forces of extremism. fair enough. in close races, party leaders may indeed face a trade-off between ideology and electability. but one problem is there just aren't that many close races. by the latest cook political report 2016 projections, 378 out of 435 house seats are considered safe <u+2014> that's 87 percent. add in the 25 "likely" seats, and we're at 403 out of 435, or 93 percent, at low or no risk. so it doesn't matter whether parties pick moderates or ideologues <u+2014> they're almost certainly going to win as long as they don't pick a convicted felon (or maybe even if they do). in the senate, 19 or 33 seats up in 2016 are solid for one party or another by the cook assessment. if we add in the likely seats, we're at 25 or 33, or 75 percent low or no risk. in state legislatures, meanwhile, 43 percent of seats are not even contested. in other words, the proposed moderation of the median voter theory doesn't have very many seats on which to work its supposed magic. but then again, it's not even clear that competitive elections actually bring candidates to the middle. research by political scientists anthony fowler and andrew b. hall suggests that partisans who win in close congressional elections vote just as extreme as partisans who win by landslides. fowler and hall conclude, "elected officials do not adapt their roll-call voting to their districts' preferences over time, and ... voters do not systematically respond by replacing incumbents." no wonder, then, that political scientists jacob hacker and paul pierson have described the median voter theory as a failure in a recent paper criticizing the "downsian" paradigm (anthony downs popularized the median voter theory). as hacker and pierson conclude, "parties not only fail to converge, they diverge asymmetrically." one key reason for this, they argue, is that organized interests within the parties make strong demands, and "party leaders will be attentive to such demands because groups can provide resources they need, offering critical financial and organizational support." okay, so you're probably not going to run for congress in 2016. nor am i. but somebody out there is going to put up with all the endless fundraising calls and the invasions of privacy and the negative ads attacking them and the endless recitation of the same platitudinous speeches over and over again. and, especially on the right, that somebody is probably going to be an ideologue. because who else wants to run these days? and who else do party leaders want to recruit? the obvious suggestion is that we need to get some different people running for national office <u+2014> again, especially on the right. more broadly, we might want to think a little more about the pipeline of who's getting involved in politics at all. and yeah, we probably also ought to do something about this problem of only a tiny share of the millennial generation viewing politics as a worthwhile career. but there's plenty of time ahead to work through these problems. so watch this space for some ideas in the months ahead. i'm going to be thinking a bit about this problem. this post is part of<u+00a0>polyarchy, an independent blog produced by the political reform program at<u+00a0>new america, a washington think tank devoted to developing new ideas and new voices. see more polyarchy posts<u+00a0>here.

here's why moderate republicans aren't running for congress anymore

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

67.0

8.0

9241.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

578.0

1.0

0.0

155.0

0.0

88.0

10.0

24.0

9.0

14.0

17.0

9.0

10.0

34.0

21.0

55.0

580.0

156.0

88.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington <u+2014> the supreme court agreed tuesday to define what it meant by "one person, one vote" a half century ago. the justices will consider a challenge brought by two rural voters in texas who claim their state senate ballots carry less weight than those cast in urban areas with large numbers of non-citizens ineligible to vote. under the current system in nearly all states, state legislative districts are drawn with roughly equal populations. the standard dates back to decisions made by the supreme court in the early 1960s. if the justices change the standard from total population to legal voters, illegal and some legal immigrants would not be counted, along with children and most prisoners who have committed felonies. that would equalize the power of each vote but result in districts of unequal population. it also would make it harder for hispanics in ethnic areas to elect the candidate of their choice, because their voting strength would decline, or the districts would be less compact and subject to legal challenge. that could help republicans in rural areas and hurt democrats in cities. states and localities most likely to feel the effect of any change include texas, california, arizona, new mexico, florida and the new york metropolitan area. while only state legislative districts would be affected, a separate challenge could be filed to change the way congressional districts are drawn. in the texas case, sue evenwel's mostly rural district has about 584,000 citizens eligible to vote, while a neighboring urban district has only 372,000. as a result, voters in the urban district have more sway to influence the outcome. a federal district court in texas ruled that the state legislature's use of total population could not be appealed. but as far back as 2001, at least one justice, clarence thomas, had said the issue should be reviewed by the supreme court. "the one-person, one-vote principle, by its terms, entitles voters to an equal vote," the challengers said. "unless the districting process no longer protects that right, the judgment below cannot stand." the organization behind the challenge, the project on fair representation, also was the source of other major supreme court cases challenging minority preferences. among them: fisher v. university of texas, challenging the use of affirmative action policies in college admissions, and shelby county, ala., v. holder, challenging a major section of the voting rights act. the challengers were backed by a half-dozen conservative and libertarian groups, an unusually large number for a case that had yet to be granted by the high court. texas responded that the justices had never required legislative districts to be drawn based on the number of voters, rather than total population. "multiple precedents from this court confirm that total population is a permissible apportionment base under the equal protection clause," the state said. the case will be taken up during the court's next term, which begins in october.

supreme court to consider redefining 'one-person, one-vote' principle

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

69.0

8.0

3027.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

194.0

0.0

49.0

0.0

20.0

8.0

7.0

3.0

9.0

3.0

7.0

4.0

14.0

12.0

26.0

201.0

49.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

des moines <u+2014> it's iowa's<u+00a0>nightmare scenario revisited: an extraordinarily close count in the iowa caucuses <u+2014><u+00a0>and reports of chaos in precincts and computer glitches <u+2014><u+00a0>are<u+00a0>raising questions about accuracy of the count and winner. this time it's the democrats, not the republicans. even as hillary<u+00a0>clinton trumpeted her iowa win in new hampshire on tuesday, aides for bernie sanders said<u+00a0>the eyelash-thin margin<u+00a0>raised questions and called for a review.<u+00a0>the chairwoman of the iowa democratic party rejected that notion, saying<u+00a0>the results are final. the situation echoes the events on the republican side in the 2012 caucuses, when one winner (mitt romney, by eight votes) was named on caucus night, but a closer examination of the paperwork that reflected the head counts showed someone else pulled in more votes (rick santorum, by 34 votes). but<u+00a0>some precincts were still missing entirely. like republican party officials<u+00a0>in 2012,<u+00a0>democratic party<u+00a0>officials worked into the early morning on caucus night trying to account for results from a handful of tardy<u+00a0>precincts. but at 2:30 a.m. tuesday,<u+00a0>iowa democratic party chairwoman andy mcguire<u+00a0>announced that<u+00a0>clinton had eked out a slim victory, based on<u+00a0>results from 1,682 of 1,683 precincts. after voters from the final missing democratic<u+00a0>precinct tracked down party officials tuesday morning to report their results,<u+00a0>sanders won by two delegate equivalents<u+00a0>over clinton in the final missing precinct, des moines precinct no. 42. the iowa democratic party said the updated final tally of delegate equivalents for all the precincts statewide was: that's a 3.77-count margin between<u+00a0>clinton, the powerful establishment favorite who early on in the democratic race was expected to win in a virtual coronation, and sanders, a democratic socialist who few in iowa knew much about<u+00a0>a year ago. sanders campaign aides told the register they've found<u+00a0>some<u+00a0>discrepancies between tallies<u+00a0>at the precinct level and numbers that were<u+00a0>reported to the state party. the iowa democratic party<u+00a0>determines its winner not based on a head count like in the republicans' straw poll, but<u+00a0>based on delegate equivalents<u+00a0>tied to a math formula.<u+00a0>and there was enough confusion, and untrained volunteers on monday night, that errors may have been made. "we feel like that there<u+2019>s a very, very good chance that there is," said rania batrice, a sanders spokeswoman. "it's not that we think anybody did anything intentionally, but human error happens." team sanders<u+00a0>had its own app that allowed supporters and volunteers to send precinct-level results directly to the campaign. at the same time, caucus chairs sent their official results to the state party, either over a specially built microsoft app or via phone. sanders aides hope<u+00a0>to sit down with the state parties and review the paperwork from the precinct chairs, batrice said. "we just want to work with the party and get the questions that are unanswered answered," she said. mcguire, in an interview with the register, said no. "the answer is that we had all three<u+00a0>camps in the tabulation room last night to address any grievances brought forward and we went over any discrepancies. these are the final results," she said. mcguire in her 2:30 a.m. statement said: "hillary clinton has been awarded 699.57 state delegate equivalents,<u+00a0>bernie sanders has been awarded 695.49 state delegate equivalents, martin o<u+2019>malley has been awarded 7.68 state delegate equivalents and uncommitted has been awarded .46 state delegate equivalents. we still have outstanding results in one precinct <u+2014><u+00a0>des moines 42 <u+2014><u+00a0>which is worth 2.28 state delegate equivalents. we will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair." team clinton quickly embraced that news, and flatly stated that nothing could change it. clinton's iowa campaign director, matt paul, said in a statement at 2:35 a.m.: "hillary clinton has won the iowa caucus.<u+00a0>after thorough reporting <u+2014> and analysis <u+2014> of results, there is no uncertainty and secretary clinton has clearly won the most national and state delegates.<u+00a0>statistically, there is no outstanding information that could change the results and no way that senator sanders can overcome secretary clinton's advantage." mcguire repeated that tuesday afternoon, saying the reporting app had a built-in failsafe to prevent volunteers from reporting more delegates than were assigned to each precinct. clinton, who saw her expected iowa win slip away in 2008,<u+00a0>grasped the<u+00a0>prize tuesday. "i can tell you, i've won and i've lost there, and it's a lot better to win," she<u+00a0>said<u+00a0>at a rally in new hampshire, the state that votes next on the presidential nominating calendar. but that didn't quell doubts back in iowa. <u+201c>politics is a contact sport with few referees, so torturing your opponents with questions about the transparency of an election can be very harmful and damaging,<u+201d> said steffen schmidt, a longtime political observer and professor at iowa state university in ames. discrepancies can occur in official elections, and caucuses are not even official election events run by the secretary of state's office, noted<u+00a0>dennis goldford, a drake university professor who closely studies the iowa caucuses. "the caucus system isn't<u+00a0>built to bear the weight placed on it," he said. "there aren't even paper ballots (in the democratic caucuses)<u+00a0>to use for a recount<u+00a0>in case something doesn't add up." democrats have never released actual head counts, and mcguire said they would not be released<u+00a0>this time, either. determining a winner based on state delegate equivalents rather than head count is a key distinction between how the democrats conduct their caucuses versus conducting a primary, she said.<u+00a0>new hampshire and iowa are generally careful to maintain such distinctions as part of their effort<u+00a0>to preserve their status as the first caucus state and first primary state. there were reports of disorganization and lack of volunteers monday evening.<u+00a0>party officials reported a turnout of 171,109, far less than the record of 240,000 seen in 2008. democratic voters reported<u+00a0>long lines, too few volunteers, a lack of leadership and confusing signage. in some cases, people waited for an hour in one line, only to learn their precinct was in a different area of the same building. the proceedings were to begin at 7 p.m. but started late in many cases. the scene at<u+00a0>precinct no. 42 <u+2014> the one with the final missing votes <u+2014><u+00a0>was "chaos" monday night, said<u+00a0>jill joseph, a rank-and-file democratic voter who backed sanders in the caucuses. none of the 400-plus democrats<u+00a0>wanted<u+00a0>to be in charge of the caucus, so a man who had shown up just to vote reluctantly stepped forward. as joseph was leaving with the<u+00a0>untrained caucus chairman, who is one of her neighbors,<u+00a0>"i looked at him and said, 'who called in the results of our caucus?' and we didn't know." the impromptu chairman hand-delivered the results to polk county democratic party chairman tom henderson tuesday.<u+00a0>sanders won seven state delegates, clinton won five. ames precinct 1-3 started caucusing two hours late, at 9 p.m., because the crowd was so big and the check-in line so slow, said<u+00a0>peter d. myers, a finance major and member of the student government at iowa state university, who caucused for the first time. capacity at the caucus site, heartland senior center, was 115, but 300 people turned out, myers said. at one point, they considered moving to the parking lot of the hy-vee grocery store. <u+201c>it was so chaotic that we ended up making the building work even though capacity was doubled,<u+201d> he said. myers said he registered to vote in august but <u+201c>was alarmed to find out i wasn't on the list, so i had to go to the back of the line. the gentleman in front of me has caucuses the past three cycles and he wasn't on the list, either.<u+201d> no one was there to lead the caucus, so <u+201c>a pregnant lady took charge and counted the bernie supporters, and a hillary captain took the small group to a corner and counted the supporters,<u+201d> he said. sanders ended up with four delegates and clinton one, he said. an indianola precinct that gathered in hubbell hall at simpson college had a discrepancy between the number who checked in, and people counted in the first vote. <u+201c>the chair and secretary knew the count was off but proceeded anyway,<u+201d> said paige godden, a reporter for the record herald and indianola tribune. <u+201c>we did the final count at least three times. people were very frustrated by the end.<u+201d> new voters made up nearly 40% of the caucusgoers <u+2014> 207 of 521 <u+2014> at democratic precinct no. 59 on at des moines central campus, organizers said. the precinct ran out of voter registration forms and had to print more. when the caucus began, the one-by-one head count discovered 58 more people voting than had checked in. organizers asked anyone who had not signed in to do so, and then recounted. iowa attorney general tom miller, a clinton supporter who lives in the precinct, stepped in to help with the recount. the precinct<u+2019>s caucus chair, mark challis, wasn<u+2019>t sure if the counts were accurate, but changes wouldn<u+2019>t have affected the final vote tally, which had sanders substantially ahead. democrat mary ann dorsett of des moines told the register<u+00a0>that<u+00a0>492 voters turned out in her precinct, but there were only a handful of people assigned to check people in. <u+201c>it was a very large room, so clearly they expected a large turnout,<u+201d> dorsett said. <u+201c>the lines snaked through the corridor and out the door. it took over an hour to check in.<u+00a0>republicans in the same precinct were seated long before this, and already listening to speeches.<u+201d> dorsett thinks the one-by-one head-counting system is <u+201c>a real head-scratcher in terms of the possibility of inaccuracy as well as time wasted.<u+201d> <u+201c>if all the smartphones were eliminated, it could have been 1820, and we were re-enacting the roles of a bunch of farmers sitting in a church hall, counting heads. is this the 21st century?<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>this may well be my last caucus unless the democratic party cleans up its act.<u+201d> meanwhile, republican party of iowa officials are doing a review <u+2014> they<u+2019>re comparing the app results for each candidate with what the precinct chairs jotted down on their <u+201c>e-forms<u+201d> on caucus night. <u+201c>when you<u+2019>re counting thousands of votes you<u+2019>ve always got to be careful,<u+201d> iowa gop spokesman charlie szold said. microsoft, one of the premier tech companies in the world, had developed websites to deliver results in real time. but both the democratic website,<u+00a0>idpcaucuses.com, and gop website,<u+00a0>iagopcaucuses.com, struggled intermittently throughout the night, crashing for periods of time and locking out the public from access to the results. mcguire said the<u+00a0>app system the volunteers in the precincts used to file their numbers<u+00a0>was never down. "they (microsoft) had plenty of capacity for our results," she said. microsoft spokeswoman<u+00a0>angela swanson-henry said: "national interest in the iowa caucuses was high, and some who attempted to access websites may have experienced delays which were quickly addressed." contributing: tony leys and kevin hardy, the des moines register. follow jennifer jacobs on twitter:<u+00a0>@jenniferjjacobs

iowa nightmare revisited: was correct winner called on caucus night?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

68.0

8.0

11215.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

690.0

0.0

206.0

1.0

0.0

66.0

13.0

16.0

5.0

17.0

15.0

11.0

9.0

39.0

29.0

62.0

697.0

206.0

67.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump said in an interview that economic conditions are so perilous that the country is headed for a <u+201c>very massive recession<u+201d> and that <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a terrible time right now<u+201d> to invest in the stock market, embracing a distinctly gloomy view of the economy that counters mainstream economic forecasts. the new york billionaire dismissed concern that his comments <u+2014> which are exceedingly unusual, if not unprecedented, for a major party front-runner <u+2014> could potentially affect financial markets. <u+201c>i know the wall street people probably better than anybody knows them,<u+201d> said trump, who has misfired on such predictions in the past. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t need them.<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s go-it-alone instincts were a consistent refrain <u+2014> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m the lone ranger,<u+201d> he said at one point <u+2014> during a 96-minute interview thursday in which he talked candidly about his aggressive style of campaigning and offered new details about what he would do as president. the real estate mogul, top aides and his son don jr. gathered over lunch at a makeshift conference table set amid construction debris at trump<u+2019>s soon-to-be-finished hotel five blocks from the white house. just before, he had met there with his foreign-policy advisers and just after he visited officials at the republican national committee <u+2014> signs that, in spite of his trump-knows-best manner, the political novice is making efforts to build a more well-rounded bid. [read the full transcript of the trump interview] over the course of the discussion, the candidate made clear that he would govern in the same nontraditional way that he has campaigned, tossing aside decades of american policy and custom in favor of a new, trumpian approach to the world. in his first 100 days, trump said, he would cut taxes, <u+201c>renegotiate trade deals and renegotiate military deals,<u+201d> including altering the u.s. role in the north atlantic treaty organization. he insisted that he would be able to get rid of the nation<u+2019>s more than $19<u+00a0>trillion national debt <u+201c>over a period of eight years.<u+201d> most economists would consider this impossible because it could require taking more than $2 trillion a year out of the annual $4 trillion budget to pay off holders of the debt. trump vehemently disagrees: <u+201c>i<u+2019>m renegotiating all of our deals, the big trade deals that we<u+2019>re doing so badly on. with china, $505 billion this year in trade.<u+201d> he said that economic growth he foresees as a consequence of renegotiated deals would enable the united states to pay down the debt <u+2014> although many economists have said the exact opposite, that a trade war would be crippling to the u.s. economy. trump also said that the united states has lost its standing in the world and that he would make people <u+201c>respect our country. i want them to respect our leader.<u+201d> asked how he would do so, trump cited an <u+201c>aura of personality.<u+201d> as a group of world leaders attended president obama<u+2019>s nuclear security summit less than a mile away, trump said that, like obama, he would support full-scale nuclear disarmament but quickly added: <u+201c>i love that. but from a practical standpoint, not going to happen.<u+201d> were he to be elected president, trump said he would want high-level employees of the federal government to sign legally binding nondisclosure agreements so that staffers couldn<u+2019>t write insider accounts of what it<u+2019>s like inside a trump white house. <u+201c>when people are chosen by a man to go into government at high levels and then they leave government and they write a book about a man and say a lot of things that were really guarded and personal, i don<u+2019>t like that,<u+201d> trump said. but first, trump must get elected, and his campaign is struggling through one of its most challenging stretches. in the past week, his campaign manager has been charged with battery for grabbing a reporter, trump has been criticized for mocking the looks of an opponent<u+2019>s wife as compared with those of his own spouse, and he has backtracked from comments about abortion that offended many in his own party. trump said that everyone close to him <u+2014> family, friends, republican leaders <u+2014> has been urging him to tone down his attacks and reach out to former rivals, both to reassure wary voters and to begin the difficult process of unifying a party in which many have sworn to never back him. trump does not intend to take the advice. he said such overtures are <u+201c>overrated.<u+201d> <u+201c>i think the first thing i have to do is win,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>winning solves a lot of problems. and i have two people left<u+201d>: his two remaining republican rivals, sen. ted cruz of texas and ohio gov. john kasich. <u+201c>sometimes you have to break an egg,<u+201d> trump said, and cruz and kasich were the two remaining eggs. trump did offer some concessions to the realities of being a political novice, saying that he would not pick an outsider like himself as a vice-presidential running mate, but rather, <u+201c>somebody that can walk into the senate and who<u+2019>s been friendly with these guys for 25 years, and people for 25 years. and can get things done. so i would 95<u+00a0>percent see myself picking a political person as opposed to somebody from the outside.<u+201d> in another unprecedented move, trump said he plans to announce a list of 10 to 12 judges from which he would pick to fill vacancies on the supreme court to allay concerns from conservatives that he wouldn<u+2019>t choose someone to their liking. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m getting names. the federalist people. some very good people. the heritage foundation,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m going to announce that these are the judges, in no particular order, that i<u+2019>m going to put up. and i<u+2019>m going to guarantee it. i<u+2019>m going to tell people. because people are worried that, oh, maybe he<u+2019>ll put the wrong judge in.<u+201d> and after a series of violent incidents at his rallies between supporters and protesters, trump acknowledged that, at least for a little while, he has tried to calm things down. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve purposefully kept the crowds down this past week,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>you know, we<u+2019>ve gone into small venues and we<u+2019>re turning away thousands and thousands of people, which i hate, but we didn<u+2019>t want to have the protest. you know, when you have a room of 2,000 people, you can pretty much keep it without the protesters.<u+201d> the question posed to trump about his decision to run: <u+201c>where do you start the movie?<u+201d> a wry smile spread over his face as he repeated the question about the moment when he decided to turn what had long been a flirtation with running for the presidency into something real. asked who he talked to about this critical decision, trump answered: <u+201c>to myself.<u+201d> <u+201c>to my family, but to myself.<u+201d> so it was an interior dialogue? <u+201c>this is thought process. and i<u+2019>m saying to myself, you know, look, they put me in these polls. i<u+2019>m number one.<u+201d> trump said his interest really started to pick up in the summer of 2014, when he was still busy with his hit nbc reality show, <u+201c>the apprentice.<u+201d> he kept his ambition mostly to himself, slowly thinking it through into early last year, when he hired political advisers, months before he formally jumped in. trump said his experience throughout the last two years wasn<u+2019>t like 1987, when he first made a speech in new hampshire that he <u+201c>forgot about<u+201d> soon after delivering it. this time, as he read the daily newspapers, printed-out online articles (his preferred method of reading) and kept tabs on cable news, he felt the pull. <u+201c>i said, <u+2018>you know, this is something i really would like to do.<u+2019> i think i<u+2019>d do it really well. obviously the public seems to like me,<u+201d> trump recalled. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ll tell you a moment when it kicked to yes. because it was a monetary moment also. . . . there was a moment in, i would say february of last year, so that would be four months, three, four months before i announced, when steve burke, great guy, of comcast . . . came to see me with the top people at nbc. and they wanted to extend my contract.<u+201d> trump told them he was going to run for president instead. <u+201c>i just felt there were so many things going wrong with the country,<u+201d> trump said of his thinking at the time. he was frustrated with what he saw as the <u+201c>stupidity<u+201d> of trade deals and iran nuclear negotiations that were <u+201c>terrible<u+201d> and dominated by <u+201c>persians being great negotiators.<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s wife, melania, heard most of his complaints, but was not enthused about him becoming a candidate. <u+201c>she said, <u+2018>we have such a great life. why do you want to do this?<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> <u+201c>i said, <u+2018>i sort of have to do it, i think. i really have to do it.<u+2019> .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. i could do such a great job.<u+201d> later, melania said, <u+201c>i hope you don<u+2019>t do it, but if you run, you<u+2019>ll win,<u+201d> according to trump. now, more than a year later and with the republican nomination in sight, trump<u+2019>s family is giving him different advice. <u+201c>my family said to me <u+2014> and don [jr.] has said this, and ivanka, and my wife has said this <u+2014> <u+2018>be more presidential.<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> trump said he is getting similar guidance from close friends. he had a story to share. a couple weeks ago, a friend, a famous athlete, called. this was right after trump beat sen. marco rubio in florida, the senator<u+2019>s home state. <u+201c>that was a big beating. don<u+2019>t forget, he was the face of the republican party. he was the future of the republican party. so [the athlete] called me up. and he said, <u+2018>hey donald, could you do us all a favor? we love you. don<u+2019>t kill everybody. because you may need them on the way back.<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> but trump doesn<u+2019>t see it that way, at least not yet. <u+201c>i think you have to break the egg initially,<u+201d> he said, adding that he has to beat his opponents and secure the nomination before he is willing to consider reaching out or easing off in any way. when it was suggested that he seems comfortable being the lone ranger <u+2014> the famous old-time tv and radio masked vigilante who fought for good outside the law <u+2014> trump immediately concurred. <u+201c>i am,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>because i understand life. and i understand how life works. i<u+2019>m the lone ranger.<u+201d> asked how he would build a coalition for the general election, trump responded that he hasn<u+2019>t focused on hillary clinton yet <u+2014> an implication that once he starts attacking her, voters would rally to his side. pressed on whether it is incumbent on him to tame the anger within his party, trump said it was, but also: <u+201c>i bring rage out. i do bring rage out. i always have. i think it was, i don<u+2019>t know if that<u+2019>s an asset or a liability, but whatever it is, i do. i also bring great unity out, ultimately. i<u+2019>ve had many occasions like this, where people have hated me more than any human being they<u+2019>ve ever met. and after it<u+2019>s all over, they end up being my friends. and i see that happening here.<u+201d> not with everyone, though. trump acknowledged that he has been <u+201c>rough<u+201d> and <u+201c>nasty<u+201d> in debates <u+2014> so much so that some relationships with his former rivals are likely beyond repair. <u+201c>one of the problems i have is that when i hit people, i hit them harder maybe than is necessary,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>and it<u+2019>s almost impossible to reel them back.<u+201d> like rubio, and former florida governor jeb bush. <u+201c>some of the people that i was competing against, i<u+2019>m not sure they can ever go back to me,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>i was very rough on jeb.<u+201d> it was <u+201c>jeb: low energy. little marco. names that were devastating.<u+201d> trump seemed unsure whether cruz would ultimately fit that category. trump noted that they had gotten along quite well for many months and suggested they could again, but he was also ambivalent about potentially reaching out to cruz if he beats the senator from texas for the nomination. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ll never have to call him,<u+201d> to get his help and support, trump said, adding that if cruz did reach out, he would congratulate him. <u+201c>because out of 17 people, you beat 16. okay? which is pretty good.<u+201d> still, trump admitted that he needed to do more outreach. <u+201c>honestly, a lot of people are calling me, but i should be calling them,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>because to a certain extent, i should be calling them, they shouldn<u+2019>t have to be calling me.<u+201d> trump noted that two of his former rivals, ben carson and new jersey gov. chris christie, are supporting him. as for some others, <u+201c>they will be loved. at the right time, they will be loved.<u+201d> asked specifically at this uncertain moment in his campaign whether <u+201c>all politics, all successful politics, is about coalition building,<u+201d> he responded: <u+201c>it<u+2019>s true.<u+201d> <u+201c>i do,<u+201d> trump said, his arms folded across his familiar dark suit, white shirt and red tie, as he sat in what he hopes will be his newest trophy hotel. <u+201c>i agree. i agree.<u+201d> pressed on when that coalition building might begin, he turned to stories about boxing great muhammad ali and football coaching icon vince lombardi. ali, he said, earned respect <u+201c>through having the goods. you know, so muhammad ali is a friend of mine. he<u+2019>s a good guy. i<u+2019>ve watched many people over the years. muhammad ali would get in the ring, and he<u+2019>d talk and talk and scream and talk about the ugly bear, and this, that <u+2014> you know. and then he<u+2019>d win. and respect is about winning. we don<u+2019>t win anymore. i see it in my <u+2014> we don<u+2019>t win anymore. and he<u+2019>d win. i<u+2019>ve seen many fighters that were better than muhammad ali, in terms of talking. i<u+2019>ve seen guys that were so beautiful, so flamboyant, they<u+2019>d get into the ring <u+2014> and then they<u+2019>d get knocked out. and guess what? it<u+2019>s all gone.<u+201d> <u+201c>the coalition building for me will be when i win. vince lombardi, i saw this. he was not a big man. and i was sitting in a place with some very, very tough football players. big, strong football players. he came in <u+2014> these are tough cookies <u+2014> he came in, years ago <u+2014> and i<u+2019>ll never forget it, i was a young man. he came in, screaming, into this place. and screaming at one of these guys who was three times bigger than him, literally. and very physical, grabbing him by the shirt. now, this guy could<u+2019>ve whisked him away and thrown him out the window in two seconds. this guy <u+2014> the player <u+2014> was shaking. a friend of mine. there were four players, and vince lombardi walked in. he was angry. and he grabbed <u+2014> i was a young guy <u+2014> he grabbed him by the shirt, screaming at him, and the guy was literally. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. and i said, wow. and i realized the only way vince lombardi got away with that was because he won.<u+201d> trump has for months contended that the u.s. economy is in trouble because of what he sees as an overvalued stock market, but his view has grown more pessimistic of late and he is now bearish on investing, to the point of warning americans against doing so. <u+201c>i think we<u+2019>re sitting on an economic bubble. a financial bubble,<u+201d> trump said. he made clear that he was not specifying a sector of the economy but the economy at large and asserted that more bullish forecasts were based on skewed employment numbers and an inflated stock market. <u+201c>first of all, we<u+2019>re not at 5 percent unemployment. we<u+2019>re at a number that<u+2019>s probably into the twenties if you look at the real number,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>that was a number that was devised, statistically devised to make politicians <u+2014> and, in particular, presidents <u+2014> look good. and i wouldn<u+2019>t be getting the kind of massive crowds that i<u+2019>m getting if the number was a real number.<u+201d> [the bizarre optimism in donald trump<u+2019>s theory of the economy] trump<u+2019>s assertion does not match data from the bureau of labor statistics. its analysis of joblessness beyond the unemployed <u+2014> such as <u+201c>marginally attached<u+201d> workers and those who have dropped out of the labor force <u+2014> was under 10 percent nationally last month. trump<u+2019>s view also runs counter to that of most economists, whose rough consensus is that the u.s. economy has about a 20 percent chance of slipping into recession this year largely because growth remains weak across the world, according to a wall street journal survey of economists in march. most economists aren<u+2019>t overly worried about an imminent downturn because job creation remains strong, workers are starting to see their wages grow and the federal reserve remains cautious about shifting away from the low-interest-rate stance that has helped stimulate the economy. any number of trump<u+2019>s predictions haven<u+2019>t worked out. in 2012, for instance, he predicted that if obama were reelected, oil and gas prices would go <u+201c>through the roof like never before.<u+201d> in 2011, trump said that when obama<u+2019>s health-care law took effect, national unemployment would <u+201c>go even higher<u+201d> than 9 percent. he was also bullish on real estate investments in the run-up to the housing bust. nonetheless, trump said, <u+201c>it<u+2019>s precarious times. part of the reason it<u+2019>s precarious is because we are being ripped so badly by other countries. we are being ripped so badly by china. it just never ends. nobody<u+2019>s ever going to stop it. and the reason they<u+2019>re not going to stop it is one of two. they<u+2019>re either living in a world of the make-believe, or they<u+2019>re totally controlled by their lobbyists and their special interests.<u+201d> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m pessimistic,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>unless changes are made. changes could be made.<u+201d> by trump, for instance: <u+201c>i can fix it. i can fix it pretty quickly.<u+201d> trump firmly believes that a turnaround on trade would be the necessary beginning of a solution to any looming recession. he mentions the trans-pacific partnership as one pact he would immediately seek to renegotiate, putting him at odds with congressional republicans who supported giving the president fast-track trade authority last year. coupled with his push on trade would be a <u+201c>very big tax cut,<u+201d> which trump unveiled last september. that proposal increases taxes on the <u+201c>very rich<u+201d> but reduces taxes for most taxpayers and would cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent. to woo companies back to the united states, he would offer an incentive of a deeply discounted rate and would no longer allow corporations to defer taxes on income earned overseas. in the center of washington on thursday, world leaders were attending a summit focused on reducing nuclear stockpiles around the world. a day earlier, trump had made headlines for saying at an msnbc forum that he would <u+201c>possibly<u+201d> use a nuclear weapon as president. less than a week before, in an interview with the new york times, trump had suggested that japan and south korea should consider acquiring nuclear arms as a way of disengaging the united states from its role as a military protector <u+2014> a proposal that the obama white house promptly called <u+201c>catastrophic.<u+201d> told that obama had said in 2010 that his greatest worry is a nuclear device exploding in an american city, trump at first took a dig at the president. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s funny. it<u+2019>s very interesting. i<u+2019>m surprised he said that because i heard him recently say that the biggest problem we have is global warming, which i totally disagree with. okay?<u+201d> trump said. but after mocking, trump turned solemn on the topic, calling the nuclear threat the <u+201c>single greatest problem<u+201d> for global peace. <u+201c>you look at hiroshima and multiply it times a thousand,<u+201d> he said, shaking his head. trump said if other countries would agree to do so simultaneously, he would be open to eliminating nuclear weapons held by the united states. <u+201c>if it<u+2019>s done on an equal basis, absolutely,<u+201d> he said. but trump added a caveat. he said as much as he supports the idea of eliminating nuclear weapons, it may not be feasible in the current climate and with countries such as russia and pakistan perhaps unwilling to relinquish their arms since they are <u+201c>spending a tremendous amount of money.<u+201d> <u+201c>that<u+2019>s something that in an ideal world is wonderful, but i think it<u+2019>s not going to happen very easily. i would love to see a nuclear-free world. will that happen?<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>look, russia right now is spending a tremendous amount of money on redoing their entire nuclear arsenal.<u+201d> turning to russia<u+2019>s leader, vladimir putin, trump said he continues to appreciate praise from putin, even though his human-rights record and incursions into ukraine and elsewhere have alarmed many. <u+201c>i want putin to respect our country, okay?<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>i think he respects strength. okay? i think putin respects strength. and i<u+2019>ve said it before, i think i will get along well with putin. now you never know. i don<u+2019>t say that <u+2014> only a fool would say, <u+2018>i will,<u+2019> but i feel that i will get along well with putin.<u+201d> after talk of putin and strength, trump was read a few lines from jeffrey goldberg<u+2019>s interview with obama in the atlantic, which quotes obama as saying, <u+201c>real power means you can get what you want without having to exert violence.<u+201d> trump listened carefully and said: <u+201c>well, i think there<u+2019>s a certain truth to that. i think there<u+2019>s a certain truth to that. real power is through respect. real power is, i don<u+2019>t even want to use the word, fear. but you know, our military is very sadly depleted. you look at what<u+2019>s going on with respect to our military, and it<u+2019>s depleted from all of the cuts,<u+201d> trump said, noting that he frequently sees advertisements for former u.s. military bases being available for purchase. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t want people to be afraid. i want them to respect our country,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>right now, they don<u+2019>t respect our country.<u+201d> trump said the united states should not retreat from the world but should reevaluate its relationships and role in many international groups and alliances, including nato. <u+201c>first of all, it<u+2019>s obsolete,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>our big threat today is terrorism. okay? and nato<u+2019>s not really set up for terrorism. nato is set up for the soviet union more than anything else. and now you don<u+2019>t have the soviet union.<u+201d> but for trump, nato, putin, nuclear weapons, all of that is for later. for now, against mounting calls from friends, loved ones and fellow republicans, remains the fight. <u+201c>my natural inclination is to win,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>and after i win, i will be so presidential that you won<u+2019>t even recognize me. you<u+2019>ll be falling asleep, you<u+2019>ll be so bored.<u+201d> jim tankersley and evelyn m. duffy contributed to this report.

in a revealing interview, trump predicts a <u+2018>massive recession<u+2019> but intends to eliminate the national debt in 8 years

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

116.0

8.0

21742.0

0.0

12.0

0.0

1447.0

1.0

0.0

424.0

0.0

176.0

40.0

45.0

24.0

46.0

33.0

37.0

25.0

83.0

78.0

112.0

1459.0

425.0

176.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

susan goldberg is the editor in chief of national geographic magazine, which dedicated its entire november issue to climate change. the opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. (cnn) when national geographic first sent some of the world's best photographers and mapmakers on assignment more than 125 years ago, we didn't set to capture the "before" photos for an imperiled planet. but that's exactly what happened. over the decades, from the matterhorn to the great barrier reef to the west antarctic ice sheet, these intrepid explorers became the visual record-keepers of climate change. today, that record is alarmingly clear. since the late 19th century, earth's average temperature has increased 1.5 degrees fahrenheit, melting glaciers and raising sea levels. as president barack obama noted this year, "shrinking ice caps forced national geographic to make the biggest change in its atlas since the soviet union broke apart." meanwhile, roughly a fifth of the amazon rainforest , which stores a quarter of the world's carbon found on land, has been destroyed over the past 40 years. in 1980, scientists logged 291 "catastrophic" floods, droughts, storms and other weather events; last year, that number tripled to 904. humans are a highly adaptive species. just ask greenland's inuits who, in the words of one anthropologist, "went from subsistence hunting to facebook in less than a century." but our adaptability has limits. climate change is affecting nearly everything. it's displacing entire cultures, posing challenges to our health, weakening our economies and threatening our national security. the question we face as journalists who chronicle the state of the planet is stark: will we write a new chapter in the progress of humankind? or will we write the obituary of earth? as world leaders meet in paris this month for the u.n. climate change conference, it appears, thankfully, that the years of dithering and denial finally may be behind us. while some leading presidential candidates continue to question the science and impact of climate change, recent polls show that three-quarters of americans now acknowledge that climate change is happening. it is critical that we build on this momentum. for all the talk of alternative energy technologies, ultimately, the most important source of energy is all of us. that's why all of us -- individuals, businesses and governments -- have a responsibility to fix the problems we have caused. take personal consumption. it's easy to assume that one person can't affect our warming world, and that's part of what makes climate change such a daunting issue to tackle. but one person can make a difference. leaving your car at home twice a week can cut 2 tons of carbon emissions annually. if the average american family did laundry with cold water, that could save 1,600 pounds of co2 a year. as for all the phone chargers and other electronics that we plug in and don't use? those consume the equivalent of a dozen power plants , meaning that simply switching on and off a power strip could save your household up to $200 a year while also helping to save the planet. it just goes to show that when it comes to climate change, there's no such thing as chump change. at the same time, scientists, business leaders and entrepreneurs alike are realizing the benefits of a green economy, whether it's major u.s. corporations saving millions by cutting energy use to nascent businesses selling solar lights to off-grid vendors in india and myanmar. currently, just 13% of electricity in the united states comes from renewable technology. but if american industry truly commits to this undertaking, the united states could be to the age of climate change what we were for the information age -- the driver and beneficiary of a revolutionary economy. finally, governments need to galvanize a national and international response to this defining challenge of our time. whoever takes the oath of office in 2017 will not only need to negotiate and adhere to strict limits on carbon emissions, but he or she will need to encourage america's transformation into a sustainable society. already, we've seen countries such as germany lead the way, generating more than a quarter of its electricity from renewable sources. in the united states, policymakers at every level will be responsible for upgrading outdated infrastructure, building smarter cities and spurring the development of wind, solar and other renewable technologies. the message of magazines past and future is clear. one way or another, we inhabitants of earth need to cool it. the choice -- and the opportunity -- is ours.

climate change: what you can do (opinion)

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

41.0

8.0

4684.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

322.0

0.0

72.0

0.0

36.0

8.0

10.0

3.0

9.0

6.0

2.0

20.0

16.0

36.0

325.0

72.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama and wisconsin gov. scott walker traded barbs monday after the president suggested that the likely republican presidential candidate "bone up on foreign policy." obama made the remarks in an interview with npr published monday, responding to a question from reporter steve inskeep about walker's vow to undo a nuclear pact with iran on his first day in the white house. in defending his administration's tentative framework with iran over its nuclear program, obama told npr that he is confident that it does not need congressional approval. he added that he hopes lawmakers "won't start calling to question the capacity of the executive branch of the united states to enter into agreements with other countries. if that starts being questioned, that's going to be a problem for our friends and that's going to embolden our enemies." obama added: "and it would be a foolish approach to take, and, you know, perhaps mr. walker, after he's taken some time to bone up on foreign policy, will feel the same way." walker, who has been eager to establish his foreign policy chops ahead of a likely bid for the gop presidential nomination next year, didn't take long to fight back with a string of twitter messages. walker has been overshadowed the past two weeks as a pair of rivals<u+00a0><u+2014> sens. ted cruz (tex.) and rand paul (ky.)<u+00a0><u+2014> announced their candidacies for the republican nomination. the governor has not impressed many of the party's leaders with his knowledge of international affairs, drawing mockery last month for refusing to talk about foreign policy on a trip to london and then for comparing his experience battling labor protesters to taking on islamic state terrorists. obama has been eager to sell the iran nuclear framework to a skeptical congress as his administration seeks to finalize a deal without lawmakers approving additional sanctions on tehran that could scuttle the talks.

obama: gov. scott walker needs to <u+2018>bone up<u+2019> on foreign policy

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

61.0

8.0

1914.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

126.0

0.0

30.0

0.0

16.0

1.0

8.0

2.0

6.0

1.0

4.0

16.0

8.0

18.0

128.0

30.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the battle over the budget that president obama will submit monday is emerging as a preview of the 2016 presidential election debate on national security, an area that for now appears to be the greatest vulnerability of obama and the democrats. the president will ask congress to break through its own spending caps <u+2014> commonly referred to as <u+201c>sequestration<u+201d> <u+2014> and allocate about $561<u+00a0>billion for pentagon expenditures, about $38<u+00a0>billion more than is currently allowed under the law. there<u+2019>s broad consensus in both parties that the military needs more money to modernize its forces and meet its responsibilities in a world that seems to have grown more chaotic and dangerous in the past 12 months. it<u+2019>s unclear, however, how congress and the white house can come to an agreement on where to find the additional funds. even if both parties share the blame, a cash-strapped pentagon could still provide an opening for republicans <u+2014> whose standing on national security issues was damaged by the iraq war <u+2014> to make an argument that they are the party best positioned to keep the country safe. <u+201c>a lot of republicans see opportunity in an election that<u+2019>s a referendum on obama<u+2019>s foreign policy,<u+201d> said danielle pletka, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the conservative american enterprise institute. a presidential election featuring hillary rodham clinton, who served as obama<u+2019>s secretary of state, would raise the profile of international issues. democrats, though, are determined to prevent the re<u+00ad>emergence of their pre-iraq-war reputation as being the weaker party on defense. the impasse over the defense budget has left the pentagon<u+2019>s top generals complaining that the spending caps, which have been in place since 2013, are damaging the military at a time when the country can least afford it. the list of new threats includes islamic state fighters, who last year seized major cities in iraq and syria, a russian-backed insurrection in eastern ukraine and the collapse of the government in yemen. <u+201c>the global security environment is more dangerous, and sequestration is still on the books as the law,<u+201d> gen. martin dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said last week. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s absolutely crazy for this country.<u+201d> obama has in recent months been able to cite a resurgent economy, strong job growth and a low unemployment rate as proof that his economic policies are delivering for the nation. <u+201c>because of the policies that this administration put in place, our economy has bounced back stronger than ever,<u+201d> white house press secretary josh earnest told reporters friday. the public perception of the president<u+2019>s handling of national security matters, amid the growing unrest in the middle east and ukraine, has not been nearly as strong. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve had an interesting and, i would acknowledge, up-and-down year with respect to the perception of our foreign policy,<u+201d> said a senior administration official who was not authorized to speak publicly ahead of the formal budget announcement. in recent years, republicans and democrats have been able to blunt the worst effects of the budget caps by cobbling together short-term deals that modestly increased defense and domestic spending by finding offsets <u+2014> essentially, cuts to other programs or fee increases. but each year that the budget caps are in place, it gets harder to find new savings to meet the pentagon<u+2019>s needs, lawmakers and white house officials said. republicans have shown little willingness to raise taxes to cover the costs of a bigger military budget. the white house, meanwhile, is not likely to back a budget compromise that would boost defense spending at the expense of prized domestic programs that have also been slashed in recent years. <u+201c>it looks like the administration is trying, but i don<u+2019>t think the fundamentals are there for a compromise,<u+201d> said kathleen hicks, who served as a top official in the pentagon under obama and now is a senior vice president at the center for strategic and international studies. republicans, long divided between deficit and defense hawks, have not made additional spending on defense a top priority in recent years. but as the economy improves and the presidential election nears, they appear to be coalescing around the need for more pentagon spending <u+201c>for no reason other than expediency,<u+201d> hicks said. <u+201c>they<u+2019>ll have to move to the center<u+201d> on defense spending, she said. <u+201c>and i do think world events are pushing them in that direction.<u+201d> it is unclear how hard the obama administration is willing to fight for more military spending. although the president<u+2019>s blueprint includes a big boost for the pentagon, some in the president<u+2019>s party have questioned his commitment on the issue. the president did not mention the need for more military spending in his state of the union address or in a major foreign policy speech at the u.s. military academy in late may<u+2014> an omission that some hawkish democrats found <u+201c>worrisome,<u+201d> hicks said. white house officials, though, insist that a failure to provide relief to the pentagon would be devastating to the country<u+2019>s military and its national security and that obama will not accept a budget that carries the caps forward. the promises of more money from congress and the white house have yet to ease concerns in the pentagon. the top brass have been complaining for years that the budget caps have forced them to pare back training, slash troop levels and gut their modernization programs. now their biggest worry is that lawmakers and the public have stopped listening to them on the issue and, absent a major crisis, will not fix the problem. <u+201c>at what point do we lose our soldiers<u+2019> trust, the trust that we will provide them the right resources, the training and equipment?<u+201d> said gen. ray odierno, the army chief of staff. the military<u+2019>s case for more money also has been hindered by the turmoil at the top of the defense department. former defense secretary chuck <u+00ad>hagel, who was essentially fired by obama in november, had little background in pentagon budget issues and generally seemed overwhelmed by the job, military officials said. obama<u+2019>s pick to replace him, ashton b. carter, has not been confirmed by the senate. he has a long background serving at top levels of the pentagon and is expected to be a more forceful and articulate advocate for lifting the budget caps. meanwhile, liberal democrats, eager to fend off the republican critique that excessive domestic spending and government waste have caused the pentagon<u+2019>s budget woes, cite the supporters of the 2003 iraq war as the real problem. <u+201c>these are the same guys who voted for a war in iraq and forgot how it was going to be paid for,<u+201d> said sen. bernard sanders (i-vt.), a possible democratic presidential candidate. <u+201c>you know how it<u+2019>s paid for? it<u+2019>s paid for on the credit card. we don<u+2019>t know how much it will cost by the time we take care of the last veteran .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. $3<u+00a0>trillion or $4<u+00a0>trillion. they weren<u+2019>t worried about that.<u+201d> missy ryan and steven mufson contributed to this report.

obama<u+2019>s plan to boost defense budget points to brewing national security debate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

79.0

8.0

7058.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

474.0

0.0

127.0

1.0

0.0

65.0

17.0

19.0

8.0

22.0

9.0

17.0

4.0

35.0

33.0

50.0

478.0

127.0

66.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump is looking for a veep with the political experience trump lacks, while hillary clinton is looking to diversify the ticket. democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton (l.) stands with sen. elizabeth warren at a campaign rally in cincinnati, ohio, june 27. according to campaign insiders, senator warren is on the shortlist to be mrs. clinton's running mate. according to insiders, donald trump wants a running mate who has what he lacks <u+2013><u+00a0>political experience <u+2013>while hillary clinton is putting a premium on competence and diversity. yet the presidential rivals are running strikingly similar processes for tapping their vice presidential picks: relying on prominent washington lawyers to comb through the background of top contenders, seeking guidance from a small circle of trusted advisers and family members, and weighing their personal chemistry with prospects. mr. trump, a wealthy businessman who has never held public office, is mulling a small number of political veterans. he's seriously considering former house speaker newt gingrich, new jersey gov. chris christie, alabama sen. jeff sessions, and indiana gov. mike pence, according to people with direct knowledge of the vetting process. "we're vetting a lot of good people, and we have a lot of interest in people that want to leave high positions and do this," trump said thursday. the right vp candidate could help bring party leaders, republican voters, and big donors into the trump fold, all people the campaign desperately needs ahead of the general election.... with<u+00a0>more than 60 percent of voters<u+00a0>feeling unfavorable about trump at the end of june, the right vp pick could help voters feel more positive about the republican ticket. but in light of their own low favorability ratings, ms. hinckley wrote, "gingrich and christie might not be the ones to do it." the presumptive republican nominee appears less concerned about diversity, considering only white men over age 50 for the role. his campaign chairman said that trump is not interested in choosing a woman or minority for the sake of appealing to a particular segment of the electorate. former secretary of state clinton has said she wants a running mate who is well-prepared to become president, and democrats say she's giving priority to diversity and has been weighing women, hispanic candidates, and black candidates <u+2014> a nod to the voting blocs democrats need to win in presidential elections. top contenders for the democratic ticket include massachusetts sen. elizabeth warren, one of washington's most prominent female lawmakers; housing and urban development secretary julian castro, a telegenic 41-year-old hispanic politician; and virginia sen. tim kaine, a white man over 50 from a swing state. new jersey sen. cory booker, one of two black senators, was also being considered, though it's unclear whether he is still in the running. a running mate rarely shifts the trajectory of a presidential race, but it's still among the most important decisions nominees face during the general election, and their choice is viewed as a reflection of their priorities and values. clinton has veteran democratic lawyer james hamilton overseeing her selection process, with input from longtime confidants john podesta and cheryl mills. clinton is expected to begin meeting with candidates herself next week, according to two democrats with knowledge of the process. given clinton's decades in the public eye, her advisers don't expect her selection of a running mate to change her electoral prospects significantly. but one clinton aide said it was important that her running mate help tell the "story" of her candidacy. clinton has increasingly said her campaign is about americans being "stronger together" <u+2014> a phrase intended to convey the importance of a diverse country fighting for common goals. aides who have worked in senior white house posts under president obama and former president bill clinton have also been emphasizing the need for personal chemistry, noting that a strained relationship between a president and vice president can be destructive in the west wing. clinton and trump face fast-approaching deadlines as they evaluate their choices. trump has said he plans to announce his running mate at the republican national convention, which kicks off in cleveland in just over two weeks <u+2014> but the campaign has also considered pushing up the date. a person familiar with trump's decision-making process said the one-time reality television star is weighing how to maximize the suspense of his choice. he might do it showbiz-style at the convention. trump has spent weeks discussing his options with his adult children, business associates, and even friends from his country clubs. a.b. culvahouse, a lawyer who has overseen vice presidential vetting for previous gop nominees, sent vetting paperwork to top contenders late this week. while the businessman has made clear he'll tap a political veteran for the post, those close to him say that's not the only element. "he's not going to pick someone he doesn't personally like," according to one person with knowledge of the process. like others who spoke to the associated press on the condition of anonymity, they were not authorized to discuss the vice presidential process publicly. the businessman has a close relationship with most of the vice presidential finalists. he's less familiar with governor pence, though<u+00a0>marc lotter, a spokesman for the indiana governor, has said<u+00a0>the two plan to meet this weekend. in choosing a political veteran, trump would not be sending a message only to voters, but to the numerous gop leaders who are wary of his candidacy. "that would soothe some concerns <u+2014> but not all of them," said kevin madden, a former adviser to mitt romney, the 2012 republican nominee. clinton is expected to wait until after the republican convention to announce her running mate, allowing her to use her pick to distract from any boost trump receives from the gop gathering. she and her running mate will be nominated at the democratic convention in philadelphia the last week in july. lemire reported from erie, penn. associated press writer steve peoples contributed to this report.

what trump and clinton are looking for in a vp

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

5.0

46.0

8.0

6244.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

475.0

0.0

114.0

0.0

51.0

6.0

16.0

6.0

8.0

4.0

7.0

21.0

19.0

36.0

478.0

114.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

but before you really devote yourself to purging this cherisher of women from your mind, do yourself a favor and read evan osnos<u+2019>s recent new yorker piece on the <u+201c>loose alliance<u+201d> of scared and angry americans who are driving the trump phenomenon. as osnos understands, trump<u+2019>s supporters, who are part of a nativist resurgence throughout western politics, are more important than the man himself. and regardless of trump 2016<u+2019>s ultimate fate, these people aren<u+2019>t going anywhere. i<u+2019>ve written previously about the trumpites (or trumpeteers, if you prefer) and how they<u+2019>re defined as much by their authoritarianism as their ethno-nationalism. but while those characteristics are certainly present among the people osnos<u+00a0>spoke to for his report, another trait jumps out, too. and it<u+2019>s one that helps explain why the republican party establishment is so out of touch, and so incapable of defeating trump in a zero-sum battle for influence. the trait is a lack of belief. not in god or country, both of which trump supporters rather enjoy, but rather in the fundamental legitimacy of american society<u+2019>s most powerful and entrenched institutions; the government, the banks, the media, the academy, etc. because aside from one extremely notable exception (which we<u+2019>ll talk about in a bit), there<u+2019>s not a single major institution of american political life that these folks wouldn<u+2019>t like to see trump conquer <u+2014> the republican party itself very much included. for a sense of how this plays out in the real world, think of the now-infamous opening question of the gop<u+2019>s first top-tier presidential debate. in truth, the question was more of an order: any candidate who would not promise to support the gop in 2016, regardless of the candidate, was asked to raise their hand. the request was ostensibly directed toward all of the debate participants, but everyone knew its real target was the only candidate who hadn<u+2019>t ruled out a third-party run: trump. the question was an attempt to bring trump to heel by leveraging the republican party<u+2019>s institutional prestige against him. the goal was simple: expose trump as a bad team-player. and if we lived in a time when party loyalty mattered, it probably would<u+2019>ve worked. but the devoted reactionaries who now comprise the gop base don<u+2019>t trust <u+2014> much less like <u+2014> the <u+201c>rinos<u+201d> among them. the patent anti-trump bias of the fox news/republican party borg only made them love him more. that<u+2019>s certainly the impression you get reading osnos<u+2019>s piece, or this time report on a recent focus group run by frank luntz. one woman tells luntz that she is <u+201c>frustrated beyond belief.<u+201d> she says she feels like she<u+2019>s been <u+201c>lied to,<u+201d> because despite republican gains in the 2014 midterms, <u+201c>[n]othing<u+2019>s getting better.<u+201d> her sentiment was widely and deeply shared. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve got to show the republicans that we<u+2019>ve had it with them,<u+201d> another woman said. <u+201c>they treat us like crap,<u+201d> she added. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s why we want trump.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s hard to imagine there<u+2019>s anything the republican party can do in this climate to win the favor of trump<u+2019>s supporters. but state<u+00a0>republican party<u+00a0>efforts in north carolina, south carolina, and virginia to <u+201c>compel<u+201d> trump to swear loyalty to the gop are especially doomed. such an ultimatum is not only <u+201c>[t]he kind of thing that could make [trump] bolt the gop,<u+201d> as ex-trump advisor roger stone tweeted. it<u+2019>s the kind of thing that could make trump supporters in those states vote for a third-party. or simply not vote. so the gop is in quite a bind. if it goes after trump, it will only bring him and his supporters closer together. but if the republican party tries to ignore him, or allow him to transform it into an american version of ukip, then it will no longer be able to serve its fundamental purpose of winning elective office for republican candidates <u+2014> especially the ones aiming for the white house. and if you<u+2019>re looking at this from the perspective of the gop as an institution, that<u+2019>s unacceptable. for conservatives trying to win the trumpites back to the gop, it seems, the holy grail would align the party with an institution that has even more gravitas and authority than donald trump. and as i said earlier, polling suggests there is at least one institution that fits the bill. using it as a wedge to separate trump from his admirers, however, would raise some major ethical questions. for example, what if the cure for trumpism is somehow even worse? because the institution in question is the military <u+2014> which americans trust far more than the media, organized religion, and the rest of the government <u+2014> that<u+2019>s a real concern. it was when he spoke of the armed forces that luntz<u+2019>s focus group adored trump the most. <u+201c>[t]he military is going to be so strong,<u+201d> he promised, <u+201c>nobody is going to mess around with the united states.<u+201d> he got nearly unanimous 100s for that boast, apparently; <u+201c>a seldom occurrence among focus groups,<u+201d> according to time. perhaps the world should be thankful, then, that there is no war hero or celebrity general for the gop to task with destroying trump. (thanks, paula!) but if we assume that trump is succeeding mainly because he reaches voters who felt otherwise ignored, and not because of any extraordinary political talents, then there<u+2019>s no reason to think the problem trump represents will go away once he does. it could just as easily come back again and again and again, each time in a slightly different form. and if the gop eventually does find a military figure who is acceptable to the establishment while simultaneously bringing the trumpites back into the party tent? well, then there may be a time in the not-so-distant future when we<u+2019>ll pine for the relatively benign and innocent days of the summer of trump.

the gop<u+2019>s nuclear option for donald trump: why the only way to beat him is so scary

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

11.0

83.0

8.0

5716.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

0.0

378.0

3.0

0.0

133.0

0.0

58.0

16.0

17.0

9.0

15.0

18.0

11.0

8.0

38.0

33.0

58.0

381.0

136.0

58.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as part of a partnership with factcheck.org, a look at hillary clinton's recent claim regarding the various congressional investigations into the 2012 benghazi attacks. clinton claimed that the seven investigations have found that 'i and nobody did anything wrong.' did they really? former secretary of state hillary clinton said all of the government investigations into the terrorist attacks on u.s. diplomatic facilities in benghazi concluded that "nobody did anything wrong." that's not exactly accurate. an independent accountability board appointed by clinton found "systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels." on the day the report came out, four state department employees were placed on administrative leave, and all four were later reassigned.

checking a claim that 'nobody did anything wrong' on benghazi

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

61.0

8.0

791.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

64.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

4.0

6.0

69.0

10.0

4.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the election in 232 photos, 43 numbers and 131 quotes, from the two candidates at the center of it all.

who's winning indiana? it's anybody's guess

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

43.0

8.0

103.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

9.0

3.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the escalating feud between donald trump and ted cruz has expanded into a fight for the backing of the gop<u+2019>s anti-establishment establishment, with both seeking validation from figures with immense influence on the right. trump unfurled a highly anticipated endorsement from former republican vice-presidential nominee sarah palin while campaigning in iowa on tuesday, giving him a jolt among the party<u+2019>s restless base. palin<u+2019>s endorsement came a day after trump received the effusive praise of evangelical leader jerry falwell jr., whose views could help trump among religious voters. but other conservative voices, many of whom had cheered trump in recent months, have rallied to cruz<u+2019>s side. on talk radio, mark levin and glenn beck have fumed over trump<u+2019>s recent questions about cruz<u+2019>s canadian birth. in cruz, they see a movement leader who champions their values, whereas they say trump is an interloper who lacks an ideological core. the frenzied courting of conservatives is testament to their power in shaping a contest that is being dominated by two washington outsiders. neither has won the backing of a single governor or senator <u+2014> and it<u+2019>s unclear that either man even wants to. in this race, it is the media titans, personalities and activists who have long stood on the gop<u+2019>s fringe who now have all the cachet. <u+201c>you need a scorecard to keep track,<u+201d> said craig shirley, a conservative historian. <u+201c>talk radio and bloggers <u+2014> anyone outside of the system is at the center of the party, and we<u+2019>re witnessing in real time the shift away from the republican establishment in deciding who the nominee will be.<u+201d> palin on tuesday described trump as someone who could change the status quo in american politics, and she praised his values as a father and community leader. <u+201c>he builds big things, things that touch the sky,<u+201d> she said as trump looked on, glowingly. <u+201c>he has spent his life looking up.<u+201d> of the gop leadership and critics of trump, she said: <u+201c>they are so busted. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. what the heck would the establishment know about conservatism?<u+201d> after palin finished, trump waved and put his arm around her. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re going to give them hell,<u+201d> he said as the crowd roared. the value of palin<u+2019>s endorsement was hotly debated tuesday, with trump supporters saying her popularity in iowa will give the reality-tv star a significant lift and cruz backers playing down her impact. barry bennett, ben carson<u+2019>s former campaign manager, sided with those who thought it was consequential. <u+201c>i think sarah palin actually helps trump a lot because she<u+2019>s showing them that it<u+2019>s okay,<u+201d> bennett said. <u+201c>whatever lack of credentials he has, he<u+2019>s making some inroads into places where we didn<u+2019>t think he<u+2019>d play.<u+201d> one key cruz ally said palin could help trump win over women. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s a thrice-married, non-churchgoing billionaire, and she gives him credibility with conservative women,<u+201d> said kellyanne conway, who manages a cruz super pac. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a net positive.<u+201d> palin<u+2019>s move came as a surprise to some in her orbit, given her friendly rapport with both trump and cruz. in 2011, she dined with trump at a pizza shop in new york as she mulled her own white house bid, and, according to republicans familiar with her thinking, she has been increasingly enthusiastic about trump as he has surged in the current race. their circles also overlap: trump<u+2019>s political director, michael glassner, is a former palin aide. aside from palin, trump<u+2019>s campaign is backed by prominent conservatives such as activist phyllis schlafly and radio host michael savage. willie robertson, a star of the <u+201c>duck dynasty<u+201d> <u+00ad>reality-tv show, is with trump, too. last week, it was cruz who won the support of another <u+201c>duck dynasty<u+201d> star, when phil robertson signed on. the senator from texas is also backed by longtime activists such as l. brent bozell iii and richard viguerie, social conservative leader james dobson, and actor james woods. it is on talk radio, especially, where cruz has built support, which has proved critical now that trump has taken to attacking him relentlessly. most of these drive-time and lunch-hour heroes to rank-and-file republicans were initially complimentary of trump<u+2019>s focus on illegal immigration last year, but they have since soured. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m sick and tired of stupid talk!<u+201d> levin said monday on his program. <u+201c>this is why i<u+2019>m sick and tired of stupid issues! i didn<u+2019>t spend 40 years of my life <u+2014> 45 to be exact <u+2014> to reach a point where we actually might take back the white house with somebody who is conservative, whomever that is, to be discussing birther issues!<u+201d> on saturday, beck will appear in waterloo, iowa, at a rally hosted by a pro-cruz super pac. those who are planning to be with beck onstage attest to cruz<u+2019>s strength on the right in the state: rep. steve king, conservative author david barton and christian organizer bob vander plaats. cruz is banking on that deep goodwill, carefully built up over the course of the 2013 government shutdown and the 2014 elections, to sustain him. trump and cruz had spent most of the campaign praising each other, but they have switched to attack mode ahead of the iowa caucuses on feb. 1. trump<u+2019>s case against cruz is more temperamental than ideological. he has called the texan <u+201c>nasty<u+201d> and disliked by his senate colleagues, and has wondered aloud, repeatedly, whether cruz<u+2019>s birth in canada leaves him vulnerable to lawsuits over his citizenship. <u+201c>when you talk about temperament, ted has got a rough temperament,<u+201d> trump said tuesday in winterset, iowa, ahead of the palin event. <u+201c>you can<u+2019>t call people liars on the senate floor, when they are your leader.<u+201d> cruz has a more understated approach. he mostly avoids taking personal shots at trump and keeps his emphasis on the policy differences between them, pointing out where the businessman has sided with democrats, in particular. <u+201c>if you<u+2019>re looking for someone who<u+2019>s a dealmaker, who will capitulate even more to the democrats and give in to chuck schumer and harry reid and nancy pelosi, then perhaps donald trump is your man,<u+201d> cruz told reporters tuesday at a stop in barnstead, n.h. palin<u+2019>s endorsement, which came after days of teasing by trump<u+2019>s campaign and widespread speculation on cable tv, riled the right in the hours before it was made official. appearing tuesday morning on cnn, cruz spokesman rick tyler called palin<u+2019>s expected nod a <u+201c>blow<u+201d> to her reputation because <u+201c>she would be endorsing someone who<u+2019>s held progressive views all their life.<u+201d> <u+201c>i think if it was sarah palin <u+2014> let me just say, i<u+2019>d be deeply disappointed,<u+201d> he said. supporters of palin and trump responded with fury. in a blog post, palin<u+2019>s eldest daughter, bristol, wrote that tyler<u+2019>s remark <u+201c>makes me hope my mom does endorse trump.<u+201d> by the afternoon, after sarah palin<u+2019>s endorsement, cruz felt compelled to clarify that tyler<u+2019>s view did not reflect his own. <u+201c>i love sarah palin. sarah palin is fantastic,<u+201d> he told reporters. <u+201c>i will always remain a big, big fan of sarah palin<u+2019>s.<u+201d> the drama tuesday was not limited to the right. fault lines were beginning to be drawn by members of the gop leadership as they grappled with the possibility of having the race come down to trump or cruz, rather than a candidate who is a more natural fit with donors and party brass. speaking at an iowa energy summit, gov. terry branstad (r) called cruz an <u+201c>opponent of renewable fuels<u+201d> who should be defeated. trump reacted gleefully on twitter: <u+201c>wow, the highly respected governor of iowa just stated that <u+2018>ted cruz must be defeated.<u+2019> big shocker! people do not like ted.<u+201d> branstad<u+2019>s position reflects a broader unease with cruz among republican leaders. in trump, most party leaders see a candidate who is unpredictable and controversial, but far less ideological than cruz and, therefore, more likely to work with them. several have reached out to trump in recent weeks as their preferred candidates have stalled in the polls. cruz was dismissive of branstad and said the development signals his own stature as the race<u+2019>s only true conservative outsider. <u+201c>it is no surprise that the establishment is in full panic mode,<u+201d> cruz told reporters tuesday. rush limbaugh, who has not picked a side in the trump-cruz standoff, said on his program tuesday that <u+201c>trump is trying to position cruz as angry, unstable, can<u+2019>t get along with anybody, and thus will not be able to do deals. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. cruz is trying to highlight trump<u+2019>s past liberalism, <u+2018>new york values,<u+2019> what have you. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. now, we<u+2019>ll see if this works.<u+201d> jenna johnson and jose delreal in iowa, and philip rucker, david weigel and katie zezima in new hampshire contributed to this report.

palin<u+2019>s endorsement the latest prize as trump, cruz battle for conservatives

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

11.0

76.0

8.0

8634.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

591.0

1.0

0.0

157.0

0.0

74.0

23.0

14.0

8.0

24.0

11.0

14.0

9.0

29.0

37.0

43.0

595.0

158.0

74.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

there is an path for democrats to regain the presidency <u+2014> and it does not run through ohio, michigan or wisconsin.

'there appear to be no rules anymore'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

37.0

8.0

114.0

0.0

9.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

3.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

to watch the video of photographer tim tai getting pushed around by a turf-protecting scrum of protesters at the university of missouri is to experience constitutional angst. <u+201c>you don<u+2019>t have a right to take our photos,<u+201d> said one protester at the university<u+2019>s mel carnahan quadrangle following the news that university system president tim wolfe and chancellor r. bowen loftin would resign amid an uproar about racial issues on campus. <u+201c>i do have the right to take photos,<u+201d> replied tai, a 20-year-old senior at the university who was shooting the proceedings on monday on assignment for espn.com. a former staff photographer for the columbia missourian, tai was forced by circumstances to double-task as he attempted to take photographs and provide civics lessons. following the announcement of the resignations, tai chronicled a celebration including the protest group concerned student 1950. after 10 minutes or so of jubilation, said tai in an interview with the erik wemple blog, protesters decided that it was time to push the media away from an encampment of tents on the quad<u+2019>s lawn. <u+201d> <u+2018>media, get off the grass,<u+2019> <u+201d> said the organizers, as tai recalls. yet he wasn<u+2019>t backing up. he wanted some good shots of the tents, and that<u+2019>s where the trouble started. <u+201c>you<u+2019>re an unethical reporter; you do not respect our space.<u+201d> those were just a few of the taunts that tai received as he attempted to do his work. his references to a certain founding document persuaded precisely none of his opponents. <u+201c>ma<u+2019>am, the first amendment protects your right to be here and mine,<u+201d> he said. at one point, tai tangled with a protester about the absence of any law proscribing his presence on this disputed grass. <u+201c>forget a law <u+2014> how about humanity?<u+201d> protested the protester. so much for the ideal of the american collegiate quad as a locus of tolerance and free expression. time to usher in a new ethic of intimidation, a twist that carries some irony at the columbia, mo., campus. back in february 1987, 58 protesters seeking the university<u+2019>s divestiture from companies that do business in south africa were arrested for trespassing on the quad. they were dropped in all cases but one, who secured an acquittal on the grounds that the quad was a highly public space. <u+201c>the people who were trying to impede the photographer, in effect, were trying to impede his rights to be there,<u+201d> says sandy davidson, a curators<u+2019> teaching professor at the university of missouri school of journalism. nor was tai intent on peering into the tents with his lenses. <u+201c>i was not trying to get into the tents,<u+201d> says tai. <u+201c>i wanted a picture of the tents, placing it in the quad <u+2026> because that<u+2019>s part of the story.<u+201d> regarding the restraint that the protesters were demanding, tai felt this wasn<u+2019>t the time. <u+201c>i think <u+2026> there are times when it<u+2019>s best for photographers to put their camera down,<u+201d> he says. however: <u+201c>in this situation, this was national news, breaking news <u+2026> at a public university and the students involved have become public figures.<u+201d> upon checking his photos, tai realized that the obstruction worked. <u+201c>they didn<u+2019>t turn out well because all the hands were in the way, and you know <u+2026>,<u+201d> he says. were he to be given a redo, he<u+2019>d likely just move to another spot. <u+201c>at the moment, i felt i had to stand up for being there,<u+201d> he says. tom warhover, executive editor of the columbia missourian, said the tai video aligns with recent events. <u+201c>the protesters all week have asked people kind of to stay out of the tent area proper, if you will, and so we<u+2019>ve had many confrontations because it is a public space and <u+2026> other students have a right to be there,<u+201d> says warhover, who approves of how tai carried himself: <u+201c>i<u+2019>m pretty proud of tim<u+2019>s actions, both standing up for himself and his job but doing it in a way that didn<u+2019>t provoke.<u+201d> through his travels, tai has learned that on one hand, the protesters <u+201c>want to protect idea of privacy and protect a safe space where not they<u+2019>re not overwhelmed with the attention. on the other hand, they want to control the narrative themselves because they feel the media has not treated minority or black stories accurately.<u+201d> there<u+2019>s no excuse for protesters to push a photographer in a public square; there<u+2019>s no excuse for protesters to appeal for respect while failing to respect; there<u+2019>s no excuse for protesters to dis the same rights that allow them to do their thing. and there<u+2019>s even less excuse for faculty and staff members at the university of missouri to engage in some of this very same behavior. in his chat with this blog, tai cited the involvement of richard j. <u+201c>chip<u+201d> callahan, professor and chair of religious studies at the university. in the opening moments of the video, callahan faces off with tai over whether the photographer can push to get any closer to the tents. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not gonna push them,<u+201d> says tai. moments later, the protesters resolve to throw up their hands (literally) to show tai who owns this public roost. callahan participates in this collective action. as tai swivels his camera from place to place, callahan shuffles to block the sight paths. behold these screenshots: callahan, after moving a bit to the left and holding up his hands. callahan again, after moving to the right with hands aloft. the religious studies prof paired agility drills with his censorship. a source with access to callahan<u+2019>s tweets (they<u+2019>re <u+201c>protected<u+201c>) passes along these screenshots to yield some insight on his views regarding the media and the protests at the university: callahan didn<u+2019>t respond to e-mails and phone calls. the university<u+2019>s media office said it has no comment at this point on the staffers. not only did tai identify callahan as the person at the start of the video, but so did peter legrand, a graduate who took courses from callahan. at the 2:00 minute mark in the above video, janna basler, the university<u+2019>s assistant director of greek life and leadership, adds her own thuggish sensibilities to the mix: <u+201c>sir, i am sorry, these are people too. you need to back off. back off, go!<u+201d> in her showdown with tai, basler lays bare how little she knows about photography. as they tussle about a woman with whom tai had just finished arguing, basler says, <u+201c>she gets to decide whether she<u+2019>s going to talk to you or not.<u+201d> tai responds like someone who<u+2019>s interested in securing images, not quotes: <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t want her to talk to me,<u+201d> he says as basler gets in his face. when tai asks her whether she<u+2019>s with the office of greek life, basler responds, <u+201c>no, my name is concerned student of 1950.<u+201d> and the video ends with assistant professor of communication melissa click essentially threatening a journalist: <u+201c>who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? i need some muscle over here.<u+201d> these three university employees had a chance to stick up for free expression on monday. instead, they stood up for coercion and darkness. they should lose their jobs as a result. update: the university<u+2019>s journalism school dean has released a statement reading, in part, as follows:

university of missouri, please immediately fire employees who taunted media

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

75.0

8.0

7031.0

0.0

1.0

11.0

0.0

474.0

0.0

184.0

1.0

0.0

63.0

10.0

17.0

5.0

13.0

8.0

10.0

4.0

29.0

22.0

40.0

485.0

184.0

64.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a prospective general election between donald trump and hillary clinton could significantly alter which states are in play this fall and heighten more than in any recent election the racial, class and gender divisions within the national electorate. after successive campaigns in which president obama expanded the democrats<u+2019> electoral map options by focusing on fast-growing and increasingly diverse states, a 2016 race between clinton and trump could devolve principally into a pitched battle for the rust belt. with a focus on trade issues and by tapping anti-establishment anger, trump would seek to energize white working-class americans, who republicans believe have been on the sidelines in recent elections in substantial numbers. trump would also attempt to peel away voters who have backed democrats, a potentially harder task. at the same time, clinton could find trump a powerful energizing force on her behalf among african americans and latinos, which could help to offset the absence of obama on the ticket after two elections that drew huge minority turnout. that could put off-limits to trump some states with large hispanic populations where republicans have competed intensely in recent elections. although polls give clinton a solid advantage over trump in a general election, many democrats remain wary because of what one party strategist called <u+201c>the unpredictability of trump.<u+201d> as one former member of obama<u+2019>s campaign team put it, <u+201c>i feel like in some ways my brain has to think differently than it ever has.<u+201d> democrats will assess the landscape in several ways: which states are likely to be in play, which of those are different from past elections, and which voting groups present particular problems. they expect to update their analyses constantly, given how quickly trump can have an impact on events. a washington post-abc news poll from earlier this month showed stark divides among those backing trump and clinton. overall, the former secretary of state led 50 to 41 percent among registered voters. trump led 49 to 40 percent among white voters, while clinton led 73 to 19 among non-whites. trump led by five points among men, and clinton was up by 21 among women. trump led by 24 points among whites without college degrees, while clinton led by 15 among whites with degrees. many republicans fear that numbers like those could doom the party to defeat in the fall, and they remain hopeful that they can stop trump in the primaries or at a contested convention. but some democrats worry that polling data about trump could provide a false sense of security because voters might be reluctant to acknowledge that they intend to back him. party strategists and independent analysts have just begun to explore in-depth the contours of a trump vs. clinton election, examining in particular how the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate might affect the preferences of specific voter blocs. more difficult to assess, but no less important, is how a trump-clinton contest would affect turnout among those groups. the main conclusion to date is that a trump nomination would test theories among some republicans about the potential strength and power of the white vote to change the electorate and give the gop the white house. given what is known, trump would appear to have no choice but to center his energies on states in the industrial and upper midwest. the eventual conclusions of party strategists about trump<u+2019>s possible route to victory will affect critical choices for both campaigns as they decide where to invest tens of millions of dollars in resources for television ads, where to deploy their most extensive voter mobilization and get-out-the vote operations, and where the nominees will concentrate their campaign travel in the fall. ruy teixeira, a senior fellow at the progressive center for american progress, said trump<u+2019>s only path to victory lies in <u+201c>a spike of white working-class support. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. it<u+2019>s trying to break apart the heartland part of the <u+2018>blue wall,<u+2019> with less emphasis on the rest of the country.<u+201d> the <u+201c>blue wall<u+201d> is a term coined by journalist ronald brownstein of atlantic media and refers to the 18 states plus the district of columbia that democrats have won in the past six elections. those states add up to 242 electoral votes, giving democrats a foundation and therefore several combinations of other states to get to 270. among the 18 states that have been in democratic hands since the 1992 election are michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin and minnesota. along with ohio and iowa, those heartland states are likely to be the most intensely contested battlegrounds in the country if a trump-clinton race materializes. all those states have higher concentrations of white voters, including larger percentages of older, white working-class voters, than many of the states in faster-growing areas that obama looked to in his two campaigns. <u+201c>if he drives big turnout increases with white voters, especially with white male voters, that has the potential to change the map,<u+201d> said a veteran of obama<u+2019>s campaigns, who spoke anonymously in order to share current analysis of the fall campaign. steve schmidt, a republican strategist and veteran of past presidential campaigns, said trump<u+2019>s overall general election strength is unpredictable at this point, in part because trump could campaign as a different candidate from the one on display throughout the primaries. but he said that what trump has shown to date is an ability to surprise his opponents and offer crosscutting messages to draw support. <u+201c>to be successful as a republican candidate you have to be the equivalent of a neutron bomb,<u+201d> schmidt said. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s a neutron bomb. donald trump has been disruptive in the way uber has been disruptive in the taxi industry.<u+201d> no one expects a totally different electoral map in a trump-clinton campaign, given the hardening of red-blue divisions. analysts say that nearly all the same states that have been fought over in recent elections will remain potential targets, especially at the start of the general election. ohio, florida and likely virginia in particular will be fought over until the very end of the election. on the other hand, states such as nevada, new mexico and possibly colorado could see less competition unless trump can overcome his extraordinarily high negative ratings within the hispanic community. the two pairs of presidential campaigns since the beginning of the 21st century proved to be remarkably static in terms of the number of battleground states and whether they voted republican or democratic. those campaigns collectively also highlight the shrinking number of truly contested states. in 2000, there were 12 such states decided by fewer than five points. by 2012, there were just four. the 2000 and 2004 campaigns produced close finishes in the electoral college, with republicans winning both with fewer than 290 electoral votes. the 2004 campaign was a virtual rerun of 2000, with just three states shifting to the other party: iowa and new mexico in the direction of the republicans and new hampshire to the democrats. obama<u+2019>s 2008 campaign changed the map, with nine states that had supported then-president george w. bush in 2004 backing the democratic nominee. the 2012 campaign, like 2004, reinforced the status quo. by the end of the campaign, there were only a handful of real battlegrounds and just two states shifted from 2008: indiana and north carolina. both moved in the direction of the republicans. william frey, a demographer and senior fellow at the brookings institution, said that if trump were to carry iowa, michigan, ohio, pennsylvania, wisconsin and either new hampshire or minnesota, he would not need some of the traditional southern battlegrounds. frey hastened to add that such a sweep of the midwest appears highly unlikely. nonetheless, he said that path through the midwest would hold the keys to victory for republicans if the new york businessman is their nominee. what makes the coming campaign so intriguing is that trump<u+2019>s and clinton<u+2019>s demographic strengths are near-mirror opposites. he has drawn significant support among white working-class voters during his march toward the republican nomination, especially white men. clinton has drawn sizable support among minority voters, particularly african americans, in her contest against sen. bernie sanders of vermont. trump<u+2019>s strength among men is offset by his weakness among women. clinton has at times struggled to attract younger women in her battle with sanders, but few doubt she would have a significant advantage in a general election campaign against trump. similarly, trump<u+2019>s support among white voters without college degrees could be offset by the prospect of similarly strong support among whites with college degrees <u+2014> a growing force in the democratic coalition. the focus on white working-class voters will not negate the key role minority voters could play in the outcome next november. <u+201c>i think that energy underneath the wings of the minority community could be as strong as it was for barack obama, only this time against donald trump,<u+201d> frey said. one democratic strategist said that on the basis of preliminary analysis of poll data, trump<u+2019>s vote share among hispanics could be lower than mitt romney<u+2019>s 27 percent share in 2012 and that his margin among african americans could be nearly as low as romney<u+2019>s. a recent washington post-univision poll of hispanic voters showed trump currently doing worse than romney, trailing clinton in a hypothetical general election by 73 to 16 percent. republican schmidt, however, warned democrats that trump could prove more appealing to minority voters, especially african americans, than they assume. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s an asymmetric threat,<u+201d> schmidt said. <u+201c>he fits into none of the conventions. he has a completely unorthodox style.<u+201d>

how trump vs. clinton could reshape the electoral map

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

53.0

8.0

9900.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

645.0

1.0

0.0

162.0

0.0

70.0

10.0

25.0

3.0

19.0

12.0

13.0

14.0

32.0

29.0

60.0

646.0

163.0

70.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

encouraged by a new poll giving him a double-digit lead in the state and eager to pivot to the general election, the republican front-runner stressed the importance of indiana's tuesday gop primary more than he or his top advisers have previously. "indiana is so important and we have to win it," trump said to a crowd of approximately 1,500 people packed into a theater here in terre haute, indiana. "if we win indiana, it's over." while also echoing his top advisers' comments that he can clinch the nomination without indiana's 57-delegate prize, trump urged indiana republicans to put him over the top -- a victory that would solidify trump's increasingly clear path to winning the gop nomination on the first ballot of the party's summer convention. still, trump didn't relent in his attacks against the texas senator, whom trump accused of being a liar. trump also focused on cruz's now non-existent path to winning the gop nomination on the first ballot of the convention and mocked cruz for announcing a running mate , former gop candidate and businesswoman carly fiorina , under those circumstances. cruz can only stake a claim to win his party's nomination if he can keep trump from clinching the 1,237 delegates needed before the party's july convention. "i've been saying that!" trump exclaimed. cruz was born in canada to an american citizen mother -- his cuban-born father later became a citizen. trump has that used to claim cruz is not a "natural-born citizen" and therefore ineligible to be president. the cruz campaign did not respond to a request for comment. a win in indiana tuesday could depress trump's rivals' hopes of keeping him from the 1,237 delegate mark necessary for a gop nomination win. trump suggested cruz and ohio gov. john kasich -- who formed a pact with cruz to stay out of indiana and focus on other states -- might drop out if trump triumphs in the hoosier state. that, trump said, would give him a chance to try and bring much-needed unity to a fractured republican party. "it's really important that we win because if we win -- you know, we want to raise money for the party and we want to raise money for the senate races and the congressional races and do a lot of things instead of wasting our time with these people," trump said. but trump's ongoing primary battle didn't stop him on sunday from knocking the former secretary of state repeatedly before a rowdy crowd of hoosier supporters. still, he pressed a plea for indiana voters to deliver him a victory tuesday that he said would empower him to focus on clinton. "please. let's focus on hillary," he said.

trump ups the ante in indiana

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

29.0

8.0

2620.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

0.0

187.0

1.0

0.0

47.0

0.0

11.0

3.0

11.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

19.0

9.0

24.0

190.0

48.0

11.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a cnn/orc poll released wednesday<u+00a0>pins<u+00a0>jeb bush<u+2019>s favorable<u+00a0>rating at 35 percent compared to 57 percent who view<u+00a0>him unfavorably. the only good news is that he<u+2019>s 30 points above water among<u+00a0>republicans, 61 percent to 31 percent, and republicans are the demographic that counts in a republican primary. (he remains underwater among tea party supporters, though.)<u+00a0>he<u+2019>s way underwater among democrats <u+2014> but also among independents, who view him unfavorably 30 percent to 62 percent. then there<u+2019>s ol<u+2019> don trump, who<u+2019>s long held the position of candidate viewed most unfavorably (though<u+00a0>very much liked<u+00a0>by the people who do view him favorably, hence the high national and early-state polling numbers). trump<u+2019>s favorability rating sits at 38 percent, with his<u+00a0>unfavorable at 58 percent. not that different from bush. and then consider how each fares in a matchup with hillary clinton, whose favorables aren<u+2019>t<u+00a0>in such great shape<u+00a0>either. clinton defeats trump by six<u+00a0>percentage points, 51 percent to 45 percent. against bush? she leads by<u+00a0>nine<u+00a0>percentage points, 52 percent to 43 percent. all of which raises some questions about what, exactly, the gop establishment and the many, many wealthy donors who have donated to bush see in him, expect from him. or as the new york times<u+2019> nate cohn puts it: jeb bush is supposed to be the electable one. that<u+2019>s why establishment donors flock to him: get him past the primary by giving his super pac over $100 million, with which he can slam everyone else for as long as necessary, and then he can win the general election in a way that cruz or walker or trump cannot. that<u+2019>s because jeb is supposedly<u+00a0>the most reasonable of the general election candidates, the least beholden to ideological overreach, and the one most rhetorically open-armed about wooing hispanic voters into the republican coalition. the only problem is that the more the public sees of jeb, the more they dislike him and the thought of him becoming president. that wretched 30-62% figure among independents, combined with a head-to-head hypothetical in which he fares worse against hillary clinton than trump! does, would seem to throw the whole rationale behind the jeb bush campaign down the toilet. which is funny, because jeb bush doesn<u+2019>t come across as nearly as much of an asshole as many of the other candidates do. he can seem<u+00a0>mumbly or boring or stilted, but not actively malevolent. that he<u+2019>s doing so poorly among independents <u+2014> and that 92<u+00a0>percent<u+00a0>of independents know enough about him to have an opinion <u+2014><u+00a0>is likely a function of his last name. bush<u+00a0>hopes that the more he shows himself and explains his plans, the more he<u+2019>ll be viewed as his own person.<u+00a0>he<u+2019>s not executing this plan especially well. the smartest thing that jeb bush<u+00a0>has<u+00a0>done this year was convince a whole host of wealthy republican donors and establishment operatives to get behind his candidacy<u+00a0>early.<u+00a0>now<u+00a0>that they<u+2019>ve invested<u+00a0>so much into this candidate, they<u+2019>re willing to stick it out well past the point at which the candidate has proven himself to be a boob.

plutocrats love jeb, but voters don<u+2019>t: bush<u+2019>s <u+201c>electability<u+201d> argument is getting even weaker

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

92.0

8.0

3057.0

0.0

1.0

6.0

0.0

169.0

0.0

80.0

1.0

0.0

14.0

8.0

3.0

6.0

5.0

11.0

17.0

18.0

175.0

80.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

new jersey gov. chris christie is refusing to hand over $800,000 in credit-card bills as part of a probe into his travel expenses. the monitoring organization new jersey watchdog alleges that christie has been costing the public a pretty penny for his travels, including an 1,800 percent increase in the governor<u+2019>s security detail since he took office. <u+201c>last year, christie traveled out-of-state more than 100 days while visiting 36 states, mexico, and canada, primarily to help raise $106 million in campaign contributions as chairman of the republican governors association,<u+201d> wrote reporter mark lagerkvist. christie<u+2019>s office denied the request for the american express bills because <u+201c>the monthly statements indicate the names of the executive protection unit members, the number of executive protection unit members, and the location of these members on a day-to-day basis.<u+201d>

christie hides $800,000 in travel bills

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

39.0

8.0

877.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

73.0

0.0

16.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

8.0

2.0

9.0

78.0

16.0

6.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

russia deployed long-range air defense missiles at its air base in syria thursday in a rapid response to the downing of one of its bombers by a turkish warplane. russia's state-owned ria novosti news agency, quoting its own reporter on the ground, reported that the shipment of s-400 long-range missiles had been delivered. they will be based in syria's coastal province of latakia, just 30 miles away from the border with turkey and are capable of striking targets within a 250-mile range with deadly precision. the deployment of the missiles came hours after turkey released audio recordings of what it says are the turkish military's warnings to the pilot of the russian su-24 bomber that was shot down at the border with syria early tuesday. the recordings indicate that the plane was warned several times that it was approaching turkey's airspace and asked to change course. the voice is heard saying: "this is turkish air force speaking on guard. you are approaching turkish airspace. change your heading south immediately." turkey has informed the united nations that two russian planes disregarded warnings and violated turkish airspace "to a depth of 1.36 miles and 1.15 miles in length for 17 seconds. the plane's surviving pilot has denied that his jet veered into turkey's airspace "even for a single second"and rejected turkey's claim that it had issued repeated warnings to the russian crew. the other pilot was killed by militants in syria after bailing out, while his crewmate was rescued by syrian army commandos and delivered in good condition to the russian base early wednesday. a russian marine was also killed by the militants during the rescue mission. the kremlin also moved the navy missile cruiser moskva closer to the shore to help protect russian warplanes with its long-range fort air defense system. "it will be ready to destroy any aerial target posing a potential danger to our aircraft," russian defense minister sergei shoigu said at a meeting with military officials. he also announced the severance of all military ties with turkey and said that from now on, russian bombers will always be escorted by fighters on combat missions over syria. tuesday's incident was the first time in half a century that a nato member shot down a russian plane. if russia responds by downing a turkish plane, nato member turkey could proclaim itself under attack and ask the alliance for military assistance. most observers believe that a direct military confrontation is unlikely, but that the shooting down of the plane will further fuel the syrian conflict and complicate international peace efforts. the situation is also alarming because the russian and turkish presidents both pose as strong leaders and would be reluctant to back down and seek a compromise. the announcements came as russian forces launched a heavy bombardment against syrian rebel-held areas in latakia province. at least 12 airstrikes hit the area wednesday as pro-government forces clashed with fighters from the nusra front, which is affiliated with al qaeda, and turkmen insurgents, the british-based syrian observatory for human rights told reuters. the russian plane's downing has marked a dramatic turnaround in relations between russia and turkey, who have proclaimed themselves to be "strategic partners" in the past and developed booming economic ties despite differences over syria. putin described the turkish action as a "crime" and a "stab in the back," and called turkey an "accomplice of terrorists." in a sign of the escalating tensions, protesters in moscow hurled eggs and stones at the turkish embassy, breaking windows in the compound. police cleared the area and made some arrests shortly after the protest began. putin has also dismissed turkey's claim that the russian warplane intruded its airspace, voicing particular annoyance about ankara turning to nato instead of speaking to russia, "as if it were us who shot down a turkish plane." turkish prime minister ahmet davutoglu sought to ease tensions wednesday, calling russia turkey's "friend and neighbor" and insisting relations cannot be "sacrificed to accidents of communication." he told his party's lawmakers that turkey didn't know the plane was brought down tuesday was russian until moscow announced it. nato secretary-general jens stoltenberg in turn said that the downing of the plane "highlights the need to strengthen mechanisms to avoid such incidents in the future." "we should not sleepwalk into unintended escalation," he wrote in an op-ed that is to be published thursday and was made available to the associated press. iran meanwhile lashed out at turkey, with the official irna news agency quoting presidednt hassan rouhani as saying ankara is responsible for the heightened tensions in the region. the associated press contributed to this report. click for more from sky news.

russia deploys missiles in syria after turkey shoots down bomber

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

64.0

8.0

4887.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

379.0

0.0

78.0

0.0

37.0

15.0

13.0

3.0

24.0

4.0

9.0

22.0

24.0

27.0

385.0

78.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

let<u+2019>s dispel once and for all with this fiction that marco rubio knows what he<u+2019>s doing. a week ago, the youthful senator from florida was in great shape. his surprisingly strong finish in the iowa caucuses left him with a clear chance to consolidate mainstream republican support <u+2014> and a path to the gop presidential nomination. but in just a few minutes saturday night, rubio undid everything he had worked for during the past year <u+2014> really, the past five years. his singularly disastrous debate performance, in which he repeated irrelevant, canned phrases, caused would-be supporters to flee for ohio gov. john kasich and other more stable candidates. and tuesday night, rubio proved true the axiom popularized by alan simpson, the wisecracking former senator from wyoming: <u+201c>one day you<u+2019>re the toast of the town, the next you<u+2019>re toast.<u+201d> the culprit here, as in most things that have gone wrong this campaign season, is donald trump, who after his convincing win in new hampshire is once again the front-runner for the nomination. typically, iowa and new hampshire serve as proving grounds for the candidates. voters there scrutinize the contenders, who rise and fall in the polls as various candidates gain and lose the status of front-runner. but trump<u+2019>s celebrity short-circuited the process. with trump dominating the coverage and the polls, iowa and new hampshire failed to fulfill their traditional vetting roles. rubio was one who never got the scrutiny. and when he emerged, blinking, into the spotlight after iowa, voters found an empty suit. watching him campaign last week, i wrote: <u+201c>rubio<u+2019>s strong iowa finish has brought new attention <u+2014> and overcapacity crowds <u+2014> in new hampshire. but the would-be supporters are greeted by a robot.<u+201d> [what marco rubio would have said if he had won new hampshire] this wasn<u+2019>t necessarily a surprise to those who watched rubio closely (or even to those who recall his water-gulping response to the state of the union three years ago). buzzfeed<u+2019>s mckay coppins, who wrote about rubio in a 2015 book, observed that he had an <u+201c>incurable anxiousness <u+2014> and an occasional propensity to panic in moments of crisis, both real and imagined.<u+201d> he had seemed to be a good debater <u+2014> but with 10 or more candidates crowding the stage in early debates, he didn<u+2019>t have to go far beyond canned lines. on saturday, exposed to withering attacks from rival chris christie, a former prosecutor, rubio suffered what was perhaps the most memorable lapse at the presidential level since edmund muskie appeared to weep in the new hampshire snow in 1972. <u+201c>let<u+2019>s dispel once and for all with this fiction that barack obama doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s doing,<u+201d> rubio proclaimed early in the debate, as ungrammatical and off-point. <u+201c>he knows exactly what he<u+2019>s doing.<u+201d> a moment later, rubio said again: <u+201c>but i would add this. let<u+2019>s dispel with this fiction that barack obama doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s doing. he knows exactly what he<u+2019>s doing.<u+201d> and again: <u+201c>here<u+2019>s the bottom line. this notion that barack obama doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s doing is just not true. he knows exactly what he<u+2019>s doing.<u+201d> even when called out by christie for the mindless repetition, rubio said again: <u+201c>we are not facing a president that doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s doing. he knows what he is doing. that<u+2019>s why he<u+2019>s done the things he<u+2019>s done.<u+201d> the reviews were savage, and then, on monday night, rubiobot malfunctioned again. <u+201c>janette and i are raising our four children in the 21st century, and we know how hard it<u+2019>s become to instill our values in our kids instead of the values they try to ram down our throats,<u+201d> he told supporters, then added: <u+201c>in the 21st century, it<u+2019>s becoming harder than ever to instill in your children the values they teach in our homes and in our church instead of the values that they try to ram down our throats.<u+201d> exit polls left little doubt that rubio<u+2019>s glitches ruined his prospects in new hampshire. two-thirds said the debates were important, and of the nearly half of gop voters who made choices in the last few days, kasich did far better than rubio. this left rubio, with 70 percent of precincts reporting tuesday night, languishing at 10<u+00a0>percent of the vote. he trailed not only trump (34 percent) but also kasich (16<u+00a0>percent), ted cruz and jeb bush, who was once left for dead. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m disappointed with tonight,<u+201d> rubio said tuesday, acknowledging that <u+201c>i did not do well on saturday night.<u+201d> the results also left republicans, once again, without a consensus alternative to trump <u+2014> and with dwindling hope of finding one. had rubio received scrutiny earlier, voters might have been able to find a candidate who didn<u+2019>t wilt in the spotlight. but iowa and new hampshire didn<u+2019>t serve their functions this time. trump got in the way. read more from dana milbank<u+2019>s archive, follow him on twitter or subscribe to his updates on facebook.

marco rubio self-destructs in new hampshire

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

43.0

8.0

4856.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

329.0

0.0

104.0

0.0

30.0

9.0

11.0

6.0

11.0

13.0

12.0

13.0

18.0

27.0

28.0

332.0

104.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in the end, elections usually come back to the economy<u+2014>to jobs, wages, taxes, imports and exports, the price of goods and the cost of an education. differences over all these issues<u+2014>from tax rates and immigration to globalization and the minimum wage<u+2014>are particularly sharp this year between donald trump and hillary clinton. here<u+2019>s a look at where the two candidates stand on the top economic issues.

where donald trump and hillary clinton stand on economic issues

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

63.0

8.0

401.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

24.0

1.0

0.0

11.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

28.0

12.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

if you<u+2019>re looking to stop trump, history won<u+2019>t be providing you with any roadmaps. let<u+2019>s say you<u+2019>re a republican who is looking with abject terror at the thought of a donald trump nomination. you look at poll numbers from upcoming states<u+2014>trump by six! trump by eight! you read and hear about <u+201c>vectors<u+201d> and <u+201c>glide paths<u+201d>, and you start looking for reassurance that it<u+2019>s still early, that the last shall be first. examples abound in sports<u+2014>didn<u+2019>t the red sox trail the yankees 3-0 in the 2004 league championship series? weren<u+2019>t the new york giants 13 1/2 games out of first in 1951? surely there are cases where a doomed candidate turned the campaign around, right? well<u+2026>sort of. there are any number of primary campaigns that saw a significant shift of fortunes, but they provide cold comfort for the anti-trumpeteers. why? because 1) they happened a relatively long time ago, 2) they all happened in two-candidate races and 3) none of them resulted in a victory for the come-from behind candidate. when president gerald ford barely beat ex-california governor ronald reagan in new hampshire in 1976, it might have been seen as a strong showing against a sitting president. but because the reagan campaign had touted his strength there, the close finish was portrayed as a loss. when ford won the next four primaries, including a landslide win in illinois, reagan<u+2019>s challenge was on life-support. in north carolina, however, a combination of senator jesse helms<u+2019> organizational muscle and a half-hour tv speech centered on foreign policy gave reagan a victory that kept his campaign alive. over the next 10 weeks, reagan won 10 primaries, turning the fight into a delegate-by-delegate battle. in the end, the power of incumbency and a last-minute flip by the mississippi delegation on a crucial rules fight gave the nomination to ford. we have not seen a genuinely contested nomination fight since. of the first ten contests, he won only his native massachusetts. with polls showing him headed to a big loss in new york, his campaign prepared to fold its tents. but the polls were wrong. kennedy won the state by an 18-point landslide. that gave his campaign enough energy to keep the fight going all the way through the primaries<u+2014>he won california, new jersey, and seven other states<u+2014>and the convention. he was never able to close the gap, but with more than a third of the delegates, kennedy was able to win platform concessions and a much-celebrated prime-time speech. (he was also able, intentionally or not, to subject carter to the humiliation of pursuing him at the rostrum in an attempt to stage a hands-clasped unity photo opportunity.) few campaigns have seen more twists and turns than the 1984 democratic primary. what began as a ceremonial coronation of former vice president walter mondale was upended, with no advance warning, when senator gary hart and his <u+201c>new ideas<u+201d> campaign won a landslide in new hampshire. he followed that with five wins in the next two weeks; only mondale victories in georgia and alabama, with crucial margins provided by black voters, kept him afloat. then a tried-and-true pattern -- rise, scrutiny, decline<u+2014>kicked in. hart (unlike reagan and kennedy) was a relatively unknown political commodity. when the spotlight turned on him, questions great and small arose: why had his changed his name from hartpence? why was his real age a mystery? more seriously, did the core of the democratic party freely want to nominate a figure who regularly challenged liberal orthodoxy (<u+201c>we<u+2019>re not a bunch of little hubert humphreys,<u+201d> he once said to a party that revered humphrey<u+2019>s liberal passions). with big-city democrats, labor, and african-americans rallying to his side, mondale won illinois and then new york by a landslide. once again, the nomination seemed to be in mondale<u+2019>s grasp. but hart then won a string of primaries in may, and in june beat mondale in california. pre-primary polls also showed hart with a big lead in new jersey. but when he told a california audience by telephone that he was consigned to a <u+201c>toxic waste dump in new jersey,<u+201d> garden state democrats responded by giving mondale a 16 point win. but for that careless comment, hart might well have turned the convention into a genuine battle. that was more than thirty years ago. and in the decades since, there<u+2019>s been nothing like a sharp turn of fortune in any nominating contest. there have been early challenges to favorites; there has been at least one case<u+2014>clinton in 1992<u+2014>where it took a month or so for the ultimate nominee to win his first primary. there have been years<u+2014>2008 for democrats, 2012 for republicans<u+2014>when it took months for the nominee to claim enough delegates to end the contest. moreover, there<u+2019>s no historical parallel to today<u+2019>s republican race. far from being an unknown commodity like hart in 1984, trump is better known than any of his rivals. and given that what he has handily survived, it is hard to imagine what he might say or do that could properly be described as <u+201c>self-destructive.<u+201d> this doesn<u+2019>t mean a trump nomination is a done deal. with a majority of the party still opposing him, a two-person race offers a theoretical possibility. there may be enough left of <u+201c>traditional republicans<u+201d> that a unified chorus proclaiming trump a disaster could prove effective. but if you<u+2019>re a republican looking to find a clue to derailing trump, history is not going to offer you anything like a roadmap.

can anyone beat trump in the primary? history says no

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

53.0

8.0

5449.0

0.0

2.0

3.0

0.0

344.0

2.0

0.0

101.0

0.0

32.0

6.0

23.0

6.0

12.0

15.0

8.0

27.0

26.0

46.0

347.0

103.0

32.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

today, president obama will roll out the final version of the epa<u+2019>s<u+00a0>clean power plan, an ambitious effort to reduce carbon emissions from power plants by nearly one-third from 2005 levels by 2030. this seems likely to set in motion an ideological death struggle that will rival the one over obamacare <u+2014> but with arguably even higher stakes. that<u+2019>s because the long-term success of the new epa rule <u+2014> presuming it survives legal challenges <u+2014> will depend to no small degree<u+00a0>on the actions of the next president. the states don<u+2019>t have to tell the federal government how they will seek to meet the rule<u+2019>s carbon emissions targets <u+2014> many gop states may not comply <u+2014><u+00a0>until around the time obama<u+2019>s presidency is ending and beyond. with implementation set to stretch out over many years, a republican president could seek to relax or undo the plan, as jason plautz notes. what<u+2019>s more, the stakes are extremely high here because the success of this plan could help determine the viability of long-term<u+00a0>international efforts to combat climate change. with an international climate accord expected soon, the fate of obama<u+2019>s plan will help determine whether the u.s. can keep its end of the carbon-emission-reducing bargain. as the new york times puts it: climate scientists warn that rising greenhouse gas emissions are rapidly moving the planet toward a global atmospheric temperature increase of 3.6 degrees fahrenheit, the point past which the world will be locked into a future of rising sea levels, more devastating storms and droughts, and shortages of food and water. mr. obama<u+2019>s new rules alone will not be enough to stave off that future. but experts say that if the rules are combined with similar action from the world<u+2019>s other major economies, as well as additional action by the next american president, emissions could level off enough to prevent the worst effects of climate change. ben adler adds that obama<u+2019>s plan is <u+201c>the centerpiece of any realistic program to meet<u+2026>the intended targets we have outlined ahead of the paris climate talks that will take place later this year.<u+201d> (indeed, congressional republicans are encouraging gop governors to resist the new rule with the explicit purpose of undermining the chances of getting an international climate deal by sowing doubts as to whether the u.s. can meet its own pledges.) thus, the next president may well determine whether<u+00a0>this plan helps lay the foundation for future international cooperation designed to avert an outcome that many scientists think could be irreversible. that will thrust the issue into the presidential race, making it perhaps more important than in previous cycles. hillary clinton issued a strong statement pledging to defend obama<u+2019>s plan against <u+201c>republican doubters and defeatists,<u+201d> a sign her campaign sees this issue as a good point of contrast with which to cast the gop as the party of the past.<u+00a0>and indeed, the major republican presidential candidates have already come out against the plan. but this is only the beginning. an international climate accord could be reached at the end of the year <u+2014> just when the gop presidential primaries are (sorry, i can<u+2019>t resist this) heating up in a big way. given that this would combine obummer mandates with a new<u+00a0>effort at<u+00a0>international engagement that many gop primary voters will likely oppose, it could perhaps make obama<u+2019>s climate push even more ideologically toxic to republicans, requiring the gop candidates to outdo one another in their zeal to oppose it. * key dem congressman backs iran deal: dem rep. adam schiff,<u+00a0>a pro-israel moderate who is respected on foreign policy by many democrats,<u+00a0>comes out in favor of the iran deal in an interview with jeffrey goldberg: as goldberg notes, this could influence<u+00a0>undecided jewish dems. proponents are increasingly pushing back on the notion that opposing the deal is the only <u+201c>pro-israel<u+201d> position. * schumer leaning against iran deal? politico reports on the intense pressure from both sides on senator chuck schumer as he makes up his mind on whether to support the iran deal. politico suggests he<u+2019>s leaning against it. but: keep an eye on that: if schumer does oppose the deal, he may not do so all that loudly, and enough dems could still support it to prevent obama<u+2019>s veto of disapproval measure from being overridden. the white house can<u+2019>t lose more than a dozen dems. * warren comes out for iran deal: senator elizabeth warren has just come out in favor of it. that isn<u+2019>t surprising, but it<u+2019>s a reminder that if schumer opposes it, he<u+2019>ll antagonize the left in a big way <u+2014> and he<u+2019>s set to become next senate dem leader. * poll finds broad opposition to iran deal: a new quinnipiac poll finds that americans oppose the <u+201c>nuclear deal with iran<u+201d> by 57-28. the poll doesn<u+2019>t define the deal, and<u+00a0>a recent washington post poll that did define it found<u+00a0>majority support. but this does suggest that proponents may have a great deal of work to do if americans are broadly inclined against it out of distrust of iran. meanwhile, a new yougov poll that does define the deal found support for the deal has dropped from 51 percent to 36 percent, though only 38 percent oppose it. * republicans oppose hiking taxes on rich: another interesting tidbit from the new quinnipiac poll: 61 percent of americans think the federal government should<u+00a0>try to reduce the gap between well off and less well off americans, and 60 percent support increasing taxes on higher income earners to reduce middle class taxes. but republicans oppose both those things by 57-35 and 65-31. * hillary goes up on the air: the clinton campaign is airing two ads in iowa and new hampshire with strong biographical emphasis: one discusses her mother<u+2019>s influence on her, and the other talks about her work for children. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re going to make sure everyone knows who hillary clinton really is,<u+201d> the clinton camp says. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve planned for a competitive primary with hillary herself working to earn every vote.<u+201d> the beltway pundit consensus appears to be that clinton<u+2019>s favorability ratings are in free fall, so perhaps this is also part of an effort to <u+201c>get her positives up,<u+201d> as the jargon has it. * what really matters at gop debate: e.j. dionne has a nice column arguing that what really matters at this week<u+2019>s gop debate isn<u+2019>t donald trump<u+2019>s antics; it<u+2019>s the question of whether the gop candidates will deviate even a tiny bit from stale gop economic doctrine: nope. all signs are that the gop candidates all believe the answer to stagnating wages and the failure of the recovery to achieve widespread distribution is to get government out of the way. * and trump-mentum rages across the land: a new nbc news poll finds donald trump continues to surge among republican voters nationally: he<u+2019>s first with 19 percent; scott walker has 14; and jeb bush has 13. breakdown: so trump is winning lots of gop-leaning independents while also cutting into the conservative support of walker and cruz.

morning plum: get ready for another ideological death struggle, this time over climate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

63.0

86.0

8.0

6958.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

442.0

2.0

0.0

133.0

0.0

48.0

13.0

26.0

10.0

18.0

17.0

14.0

13.0

36.0

35.0

52.0

449.0

135.0

48.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

nairobi, kenya <u+2014> armed terrorists stormed a university in northern kenya on thursday, killing 147 people, wounding dozens and taking hostages during a 15-hour siege until four militants were killed by security forces. christians and converts to islam appeared to have been the targets. more than 550 students were evacuated and 79 were injured in the standoff on the garissa university campus, about 90 miles from the somali border. the somali-based islamic terrorist group al-shabab claimed responsibility for the attack <u+2014> the al-qaeda-linked organization's deadliest in kenya. students said the gunmen separated christians from muslims and held hostages in a dormitory, where they placed explosives around the christian hostages, according to kenya's national police service. kenyan interior cabinet secretary joseph nkaissery said some students were killed during morning prayers at the mosque. jackson kamau, a student at the university, said the militants killed those who were likely converts to islam. locals can differentiate between somali muslims born into islam and those who have converted because they come from different ethnic groups. "we'll not allow terrorists to divide our country on religious lines," said aden duale, majority leader in kenya's national assembly. most of the 147 dead were students. two security guards, one policeman and one soldier also were killed in the attack, nkaissery said. one suspected extremist was arrested as he tried to flee, nkaissery told a news conference in nairobi. heavy gunfire erupted at the college as the kenyan military worked to end the siege. police inspector general joseph boinett said a dusk-to-dawn curfew will be in place in garissa and three neighboring counties starting friday through april 16. the white house strongly condemned the attack and said the united states was providing assistance to the kenyan government. "we extend our deep condolences to the families and loved ones of all those killed in this heinous attack, which reportedly included the targeting of christian students," white house spokesman josh earnest said in a statement. kenyan police offered a $220,000 bounty for mohammed mohamud, also known as dulyadin and gamadhere, who they suspect planned the attack. students who were able to escape said gunmen stormed the university, setting off explosives and shooting people on the campus just after 5 a.m. local time. "most of us were asleep when the incident happened," said nicholas ntulu, a student at the university. "we heard heavy gunfire and explosions. every person ran for dear life as we passed the gunmen. several (students) were shot dead. "there was nobody to help us at the time of the attack," he said. "the police officers took more than an hour to arrive at the scene." president uhuru kenyatta urged kenyans to stay calm. "this is a moment for everyone throughout the country to be vigilant as we continue to confront and defeat our enemies," he said. kenyatta ordered the inspector general of police to accelerate the applications of 10,000 recruits for the kenya police college. "we have suffered unnecessarily due to shortage of security personnel," he said. "kenya badly needs additional officers, and i will not keep the nation waiting." frightened students rescued from the university gathered at a military camp near the garissa airstrip. "the sounds of gunfire was all over <u+2014> we couldn't tell what was the right direction to go to be safe," said ann musyoka, a second-year student. "we had to face the gunmen <u+2014> they shot several people as we escaped towards the gate." victims were rushed to a hospital, and those critically injured were airlifted to the capital, nairobi. "i was not at the institution when the incident occurred, but several students phoned me, crying over the attacks," said jacktone kweya, the dean of students. "when i tried calling them back, their phones were off. it's very disturbing." robert godec, the u.s. ambassador to kenya, said the united states "strongly condemns" the attack. "we extend our deepest condolences to all who have been affected," he said in a statement. "the attack once again reinforces the need for all countries and communities to unite in the effort to combat violent extremism." the assault comes in the wake of an intelligence report issued last week by security officials warning that al-shabab was planning an attack on major institutions in retaliation for kenyan military action in somalia as part of an african union initiative against the group. al-shabab has carried out several attacks in garissa and across kenya in the past few years, including an attack in 2013 at the westgate shopping mall in nairobi that left 67 people dead, and others on mosques in mombasa, a coastal city in the east. nairobi-based security analyst abdiwahab sheikh said the incident highlights how the government has failed to shore up security in the country. "the government has not learned anything from the westgate attack," he said. "how do you allow terrorists to take students hostage for more 10 hours? i think our security forces need to learn from the past."

terror attack over, 147 dead at kenya university

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

48.0

8.0

5151.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

345.0

0.0

98.0

1.0

0.0

44.0

17.0

14.0

3.0

30.0

8.0

9.0

7.0

28.0

25.0

41.0

347.0

98.0

45.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) millionaire real estate heir robert durst was "lying in wait" when he shot and killed his longtime friend because she "was a witness to a crime," prosecutors alleged monday. the evidence behind that accusation wasn't revealed in the los angeles county district attorney's court filing, which charged durst with first-degree murder. if he's convicted in the december 2000 killing of susan berman, prosecutors said, he could face the death penalty. the charges, filed two days after fbi agents arrested durst in new orleans, set the stage for a new courtroom battle for a man who's no stranger to run-ins with the law. durst's alleged connections with berman's death and two others became the focus of hbo's true crime documentary, "the jinx." he admitted to shooting and dismembering his neighbor but was acquitted of murder. he was suspected in his first wife's disappearance, but no one could pin him to it. and just before berman, his longtime confidante, was going to speak to investigators about his wife's case, she was killed. he's long denied any connection to her death or his wife's disappearance. but some say his mutterings picked up on a live microphone and broadcast in the hbo documentary make it sound like durst could be changing his tune. "what the hell did i do?" durst says from a bathroom at the end of the documentary. "killed them all, of course." his attorney says not to read too much into those comments. but more on that later. to understand the complexities of durst's life -- and the deaths linked to it -- we have to start at the beginning: his first wife, kathie mccormack, was on her way to medical school in new york when she vanished in 1982. "i put her on the train in westchester to go into the city that evening. that was the last time i ever saw her," durst testified in a separate case over a decade later. despite a cloud of suspicion over the years, durst has never been arrested in the disappearance. what we know: crime writer susan berman was a longtime friend of durst's. in 2000, when investigators reopened the 1982 disappearance case of durst's first wife, they made plans to visit berman in los angeles. "she was a confidante of robert durst. she knew him well," cnn's jean casarez said. "and it was just days before investigators were to fly out to california to talk with her about what she may have known about the disappearance of kathleen durst that she was shot execution-style in her living room." fast forward 15 years, to this past weekend: durst's arrest was in connection with berman's death. (see below.) what we don't know: we don't know whether durst was the person who sent an anonymous letter to police telling them there was a body in berman's home. a police handwriting analysis said the writing on that card looked like durst's, author miles corwin told cnn in 2004. but even with that, at the time, corwin said police didn't have enough evidence to arrest durst. so what's changed? in "the jinx," berman's stepson reveals a letter from durst he found among her possessions. "you look at the letter, and the handwriting is astonishingly similar," said michael daly, a special correspondent for the daily beast. what we know: in 2001 -- almost two decades after his wife's disappearance and after berman's killing in late december 2000 -- millionaire durst was living in the coastal texas city of galveston. durst testified that he hid out in galveston and posed as a mute woman because he was afraid as he faced increasing scrutiny, court tv reported at the time. he got into a scuffle with his neighbor, morris black, and admitted to shooting and killing him. prosecutors said durst planned black's killing to steal his identity. defense attorneys said black sneaked into durst's apartment, and durst accidentally shot him as both men struggled for a gun. durst testified he panicked and decided to cut up black's body and throw away the pieces. what we don't know: why durst chose pennsylvania to escape to after shooting and dismembering his neighbor. he had jumped bond and almost got away -- if not for a sandwich that the heir stole from a store. he was captured in pennsylvania for shoplifting, even though he had hundreds of dollars in his pocket. what we know: durst is now accused of killing berman, the crime writer. authorities found him saturday at a new orleans hotel, where he was staying under a false name and was carrying a fake driver's license, according to a law enforcement official who's been briefed on the case. durst had a smith & wesson .38-caliber revolver on him when he was arrested, according to new orleans police department records. he'd paid for the hotel in cash, and authorities believe he was preparing to leave the country and flee to cuba, the official said. investigators found marijuana and a "substantial" amount of cash in durst's hotel room, a source familiar with the investigation told cnn. police said they arrested durst "as a result of investigative leads and additional evidence that has come to light in the past year." the los angeles county district attorney's office on monday charged him with first-degree murder. in new orleans, he's also facing felony firearms and drug charges. what we don't know: what the new evidence is that led authorities to arrest durst, why they arrested him when they did and when he'll be taken to los angeles. susan criss, a former texas district court judge who presided over the 2003 murder trial, told cnn that producers of "the jinx" gave all the evidence they uncovered to police, and it's likely durst's statements on the show are part of the case against him. "that case has been several years in the making," she said. "the investigation has been going on. the making of the cases has been going on. and i think these are pieces of evidence that are going to be used, and they're going to be very powerful pieces of evidence." but that doesn't mean investigators only learned about evidence as the show aired, she said. "they turned over the handwriting sample a couple years ago, at least two or three years ago," she told cnn. "they told me when they did it. the police had it. the police didn't just learn this when they watched television. they've had that." "do i think this is a coincidence? hell, no," he said. "there has been rumor, innuendo and speculation for a number of years, and now we're going to get our day in court on this." once that day comes, prosecutors said monday that durst could face the death penalty if convicted. he waived his right to fight extradition to los angeles during an appearance monday before a new orleans magistrate court. but durst remains in jail in new orleans, where he was booked monday on charges of being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of a firearm with a controlled substance. that could delay his extradition. the los angeles county district attorney's office says he'll be brought back to los angeles for arraignment "at a future date." durst's lawyers deny that he had anything to do with berman's death and say they're eager for him to go to los angeles. "bob durst didn't kill susan berman," deguerin told reporters monday. "he's ready to end all the rumor and speculation and have a trial." what we know: the hbo documentary series "the jinx" aired in six episodes, ending sunday. immediately after the finale's last shot, durst went into the bathroom, apparently not realizing his microphone was still on. "there it is. you're caught," he said. he then rambled a series of seemingly unrelated sentences before saying, "he was right. i was wrong." then, the most intriguing remarks: "what the hell did i do? killed them all, of course." what we don't know: what did those words really mean? criss told cnn that it wasn't the first time durst made statements that seemed to incriminate himself while being recorded. "in our trial, he had been recorded on the phone talking to his wife and friends, making a lot of admissions, and the state never used that," she said. "but he was aware that he had been recorded, saying things that could implicate him in the murder we were trying. earlier in those interviews, in a previous interview for that very program ('the jinx'), there was a break where he was caught practicing his testimony. and so he realized, he knew he had a mic on. this is the third time he's made that mistake." while the comments may appear incriminating, his attorney told fox news' "justice with judge jeanine" that the offhand remarks might not mean anything. "your honesty would lead you to say you've said things under your breath before that you probably didn't mean," attorney chip lewis said. when asked for comment, hbo praised the series' director and producer in a statement sunday. "we simply cannot say enough about the brilliant job that andrew jarecki and marc smerling did in producing 'the jinx,' " said hbo, which is owned by time warner -- the parent company of cnn. "years in the making, their thorough research and dogged reporting reignited interest in robert durst's story with the public and law enforcement." jim mccormack, the brother of durst's first wife, said he's glad durst's ability to avoid conviction may be unraveling. "the dominoes of justice are now starting to fall," he said. "through our faith, hope and prayers the last domino will bring closure and justice for kathie."

robert durst of hbo's 'the jinx' charged with murder

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

15.0

52.0

8.0

9427.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

627.0

1.0

0.0

225.0

1.0

0.0

65.0

32.0

26.0

11.0

39.0

13.0

25.0

12.0

32.0

58.0

47.0

629.0

226.0

66.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

american officials said this week they plan to train up to 25,000 iraqi troops in a major mission to retake mosul, iraq<u+2019>s second-largest city, from islamic state militants sometime this spring. the mission is welcome, but frankly it is unlikely to succeed unless there is, at the same time, a deeper understanding on the part of our government of the real threat that the islamic state and its adherents pose to us as a nation<u+2014>and what our role in this broader fight must be. unless the united states takes dramatically more action than we have done so far in iraq, the fractious, largely shiite-composed units that make up the iraqi army are not likely to be able, by themselves, to overwhelm a sunni stronghold like mosul, even though they outnumber the enemy by ten to one. the united states must be prepared to provide far more combat capabilities and enablers such as command and control, intelligence, logistics, and fire support, to name just a few things. yet to defeat an enemy, you first must admit they exist, and this we have not done. i believe there continues to be confusion at the highest level of our government about what it is we<u+2019>re facing, and the american public want clarity as well as moral and intellectual courage, which they are not now getting. there are some who argue that violent islamists are not an existential threat and therefore can simply be managed as criminals, or as a local issue in iraq and syria. i respectfully and strongly disagree. we, as a nation, must accept and face the reality that we and other contributing nations of the world are at war, and not just in iraq. we are in a global war with a radical and violent form of the islamic religion, and it is irresponsible and dangerous to deny it. this enemy is far broader than the 40,000 or so fighters in the islamic state in iraq and syria. there also exists a large segment of this radical version of islam in over 90 nations abroad as well as here at home. just ask those countries from which foreign fighters are flowing into the levant to support this <u+201c>jihad.<u+201d> nor is this enemy going away any time soon. as abhorrent as this form of radical islam is, we must recognize and understand that it is a political ideology with the foundation of its laws emanating from the qur<u+2019>an and the prophet<u+2019>s life as its guide<u+2014>and nothing else is needed. this form of radical islam is in direct conflict with a large segment of the islamic community; a community that must stand taller and be counted right now or they will be counted among the dead<u+2014>killed at the hands of these radical militants (this includes both sunni and shia). having served in the theaters of war of iraq and afghanistan for many years, and faced this enemy up close and personal, i have seen first hand the unrestrained cruelty of our enemy. while they may be animated by a medieval ideology, they are thoroughly modern in their capacity to kill and maim as well as precisely and very intelligently transmit their ideas, intentions and actions via the internet. in fact, they are increasingly capable of threatening our nation<u+2019>s interests and those of our allies, and it would be foolish for us to wait until they pose an existential threat before taking decisive action. doing so would only increase the cost in blood and treasure later for what we know must be done now. not surprisingly, the recent draft authorization for the use of military force, or aumf (a minor component of a still required comprehensive strategy), signals that we are willing to wait for them to become existential. again, this is irresponsible and dangerous thinking. this authorization requires far more and far stronger objectives and authorities for our military commanders and not be simply another limiting timetable that sets unreal expectations. instead, this authorization should be broad and agile, and unconstrained by unnecessary restrictions. these restrictions cause not only frustration in our military and intelligence communities but they also significantly slow down the decision-making process for numerous fleeting opportunities. if this is due to a lack of confidence in our military and intelligence leadership, get rid of them and find new ones. and if there is not a clear, coherent, and comprehensive strategy inclusive of all elements of national power forthcoming from the administration, there should be no authorization at all, simply leave the existing one in place. there are solutions to this problem. however, solving tough, complex problems such as eliminating this radical form of islam from the face of the planet will require extraordinary intellect, courage, and leadership. leadership that isn<u+2019>t consensus building, but thoughtful, insightful, yet, when it matters, decisive. we have seen this type of leadership throughout world history and we have examples in our own history<u+2014>washington, lincoln, fdr to ronald reagan. when faced with threats to our way of life and the lives of our friends and allies around the world<u+2014>they stepped up to lead. whether that leadership meant forcing our will on the enemy or outmatching them with our wits and imagination, they faced the difficult reality head on. to that end, i offer the following three strategic objectives: <u+2022> first, we have to energize every element of national power in a cohesive synchronized manner<u+2014>similar to the effort during world war ii or the cold war<u+2014>to effectively resource what will likely be a multi-generational struggle. there is no cheap way to win this fight. <u+2022> second, we must engage the violent islamists wherever they are, drive them from their safe havens and kill them. there can be no quarter and no accommodation. any nation-state that offers safe haven to our enemies must be given one choice<u+2014>to eliminate them or be prepared for those contributing nations involved in this endeavor to do so. we do need to recognize there are nations who lack the capability to defeat this threat and will likely require help to do so inside of their own internationally recognized boundaries. we must be prepared to assist those nations. <u+2022> third, we must decisively confront the state and non-state supporters and enablers of the violent islamist ideology and compel them to end their support to our enemies or be prepared to remove their capacity to do so. many of these are currently considered <u+201c>partners<u+201d> of the united states. this must change. if our so-called partners do not act in accordance with internationally accepted norms and behaviors or international law, the united states must be prepared to cut off or severely curtail economic, military and diplomatic ties. winning doesn<u+2019>t come without cost and solving difficult messy problems is never easy, but that<u+2019>s what leaders do. let<u+2019>s lead!

why the iraq offensive will fail

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

32.0

8.0

6761.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

0.0

547.0

1.0

0.0

134.0

0.0

77.0

20.0

13.0

8.0

25.0

9.0

6.0

26.0

37.0

50.0

551.0

135.0

77.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the debacle in congress last week over president barack obama's trade agenda was further evidence that domestic political wrangling is harming u.s. leadership in the global economy. by failing to pass trade adjustment assistance, which provides help to american workers affected by international trade, congress has raised doubts about the u.s.'s ability to conclude the trans-pacific partnership, an agreement with 11 other pacific rim economies. it also dims the prospects for the negotiations on the trans-atlantic trade and investment partnership with europe. it wasn't the first time recently that congress sought to derail an agreement the executive branch had successfully advanced abroad. in recent months, lawmakers have again failed to approve reforms to the international monetary fund that were crafted by the administration, approved by most of the fund's global membership and are in the u.s. national interest (and they entail neither additional financial obligations nor an erosion of u.s. influence, representation and veto power on major imf decisions). as with trade, congressional blockage of imf reforms had less to do with the merits of the case than with the posturing of individual lawmakers as they prepare to seek re-election. the dysfunction reflects a legislative branch that has been operationally undermined not just by extreme polarization of the two parties, but also by the influence of the extremes within the parties as they set up the terms of the debate for the next presidential-nomination primaries. outside the u.s., the image of an uncooperative congress has also been fueled by the republican lawmakers who took the unprecedented step of sending a letter to iran's leadership warning that the nuclear agreement being pursued by obama could well be overturned after the november 2016 elections. to be fair, such signals to the rest of the world haven't been emitted by congress alone. the administration itself slipped in its handling of the asian infrastructure investment bank. ignoring advice to join this new institution and seek to shape and influence it from within, the u.s. embarked on a concerted public campaign to block it. those efforts were thwarted as u.s. allies joined the china-led initiative, forcing a rather embarrassing retreat. all this justifiably worries those who believe that effective u.s. economic leadership is essential to a well-functioning global system. this is especially true now, when world growth is struggling, there are genuine concerns about currency wars and countries have fallen further behind in dealing with some collective challenges, including environmental ones. historically, the u.s. has been the most effective in coordinating crisis management efforts, pushing forward multilateral reforms and enabling global policy cooperation. moreover, there is no credible alternative to u.s. leadership on the international economic stage. the group of seven isn't representative of the realities of recent global economic realignments. the g-20 is unwieldy and lacks sufficient continuity. europe, with its endless challenges, is too internally focused and preoccupied. china is hesitant to step up to broader international responsibilities. and too many international institutions are burdened with longstanding legitimacy and credibility deficits related to outmoded representation and governance features. after congress's loud statement last week, many hope that lawmakers will find a way to put trade authorization back on track this week. yet such a stop-go strategy is far from cost-free. it does little to restore confidence in congress, whose public approval rating languishes at or close to record lows. and it suggests to the rest of the world that, due to seemingly endless internal political polarization and dysfunction, the u.s. cannot be relied on to play its natural role as the world<u+2019>s economic conductor. congress would be well advised to take note of this before turning other international economic initiatives into spectacles. and, while it is at it, it should really move to approve imf reforms that are in both the national and global interest. this column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or bloomberg lp and its owners. to contact the author of this story: mohamed a. el-erian at [email protected] to contact the editor responsible for this story: max berley at [email protected]

congress undermines u.s. global economic standing

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

49.0

8.0

4446.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

317.0

0.0

75.0

0.0

48.0

5.0

10.0

3.0

8.0

5.0

6.0

2.0

29.0

12.0

42.0

320.0

75.0

48.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) no deal is better than a bad deal, say critics of president barack obama's nuclear talks with iran. but what if republican and democratic opponents succeed in their intensifying effort to derail the diplomacy? the price of failure could be an ugly blame game and cascade of political reprisals leading to nuclear chicken between iran and the west -- potentially leading to war. "we would have to deal with a resumption of iran's nuclear activities, which we don't want to see take place. iran would have to deal with the resumption of sanctions, which they don't want," said gary samore, a top nonproliferation official during obama's first term. for now, the grave consequences of a breakdown in talks are one reason the united states and iran are still at the table, as a grueling diplomatic process reaches critical deadlines and painful political decisions beckon. secretary of state john kerry and iranian foreign minister javad zarif are haggling over the remaining issues in lausanne, switzerland, ahead of an end-of-the-month deadline for a framework agreement, which then must be finalized by july 1. but time may be running out for a deal in which six world powers would lift sanctions that have throttled iran's economy in return for assurances that tehran will continue to stay a year or so away from developing a nuclear bomb. the white house puts the chances of a deal at only 50-50: disputes still rage over the scale of nuclear infrastructure iran will be allowed to keep, the pace of sanctions relief and the extent of nuclear site inspections. despite the controversy stoked last week in washington when 47 gop senators sent a letter to iran's leaders warning that the future of a deal was not guaranteed, many analysts believe that the talks will go on, even if the end-of-march deadline slips. "not because all sides are desperate to keep talking. but i think sufficient momentum has been created in the last month or so that they see real possibilities," said robert einhorn, a former senior u.s. state department arms control official. obama may now have slightly more political leeway on the talks than before -- ironically because of attempts by u.s. and israeli critics to pen him in. a few weeks ago, skeptical democrats appeared to be lining up with republicans and approaching a veto-proof senate majority that could have forced obama to submit a deal to congress or accept the passage of new sanctions. either move could have killed the agreement. but the republicans' letter and a fiercely critical speech to congress by israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu on the proposed deal prompted some skeptical democrats to close ranks, at least temporarily. but senate republican majority leader mitch mcconnell told cnn's dana bash on "state of the union" that obama was on the cusp of agreeing a "very bad" deal that would allow iran to keep its nuclear infrastructure intact. he said that if an agreement is reached, he would bring up legislation that would give congress 60 days to back or reject a deal, despite fresh pleas from the white house for the gop to hold off. if no deal is reached, mcconnell said on sunday that he would press ahead with toughening sanctions on iran, he said. republican sources, meanwhile, said that despite the furor over the letter from the senators, no democrats had yet formally pulled support for legislation requiring the senate to have a say on the deal. that leaves the real possibility of a pitched political showdown on iran in the coming months. the opening for diplomacy is meanwhile not endless. and if no deal emerges by july, political pressure for a tougher administration stance towards iran may be unstoppable. if diplomacy fails, how events unfold will be dictated by how the process collapses; who gets the blame; and the political pressures exerted on obama and iranian president hassan rouhani in washington and tehran. "if, at the end of june, there is not a deal, and talks have broken off, i think that it is inevitable that the congress will adopt new sanctions legislation," said einhorn, now with the brookings institution. "what that will mean is the iranians will reciprocate." iran could start up centrifuges halted during the nuclear negotiations, bring more advanced machinery online and enrich uranium to the potent 20% level that would get it closer to a weapon. and if it bars international inspectors, the world would have no idea how far iran is from making a bomb. the administration thinks that if the united states gets the blame for using hardball tactics that derail talks -- if, say, congress imposes more sanctions, as administration critics want -- there is no way its international partners would keep existing sanctions in place, let alone double down and impose new ones. in addition to unilateral u.s. sanctions congress has imposed, the united nations, european union and other countries have put in place their own sanctions cutting off iran from international partners and not just the american economy. cornelius adebahr, a european security specialist at the carnegie endowment for international peace, predicted iran would reap a propaganda victory. "it would give ammunition for iran to say the u.s. is not reliable," he said. massachusetts institute of technology's jim walsh, a specialist on the talks, said the iranian government would have little choice but to hit back at a tougher u.s. stance. "the iranians are just not going to take it. they are going to feel condemned to respond. both sides will take their shovels and dig the holes deeper." walsh continued, "we would be between a lame duck (u.s.) president for whom negotiations had just failed, a weakened rouhani, for whom negotiations have just failed, and a coming u.s. presidential election -- not exactly the best environment to return to talks and accomplish a diplomatic settlement." aborted negotiations that leave iran rededicated to its nuclear program raise the specter of tehran with a bomb -- or some enemy country taking military action to stop it. but critics of the deal being worked out in switzerland don't agree that such an outcome is the likeliest scenario. gop hawks and israel believe tehran is so desperate for sanctions relief, especially at a time of low oil prices, that it will have no choice but to offer a better deal than the one currently on the table and agree to the complete halt to uranium enrichment that israel and conservatives demand. "if iran threatens to walk away from the table -- and this often happens in a persian bazaar -- call their bluff. they'll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do," netanyahu maintained in his congress speech. former republican presidential nominee mitt romney made the case in a usa today op-ed friday that obama should "walk away from a flimsy nuclear agreement." those opposed to the deal reject the administration that follow their advice would likely blow up the talks and set washington on an inevitable path to war as the only remaining way to disable iran's nuclear infrastructure. instead, gop congressmen counter that several bills they are pushing, with significant democratic support, do not forestall the possibility of continued diplomacy if talks fail. they say that extra sanctions would increase obama's leverage in diplomacy, not weaken it. even if talks do succeed this year, the long-term future of an agreement still wouldn't be assured. the diplomatic effort has powerful critics among hardliners in tehran who, whatever's written on paper, could push to illicitly expand iran's nuclear program and close in on a bomb. it's not just republicans who fear tehran may violate any deal or test the limits of compliance. some people who back the talks admit that may be the case, too. in washington, congress will be required to lift the existing sanctions on iran to sustain the agreement in years to come -- a step that is hardly a given. and the stiff republican opposition means a deal is not assured of surviving the arrival of a new president in the white house come 2017. a future republican president could reverse obama's sanctions waivers fairly quickly, as the senators warned in their letter to iran. whether the new president would want to do so is another matter, however, especially if iran lives up to the terms of a deal, which would include stringent verification by international inspectors. he or she would risk a heavy political price. a unilateral washington pullout would likely infuriate u.s. partners and leave the rookie president facing a boiling crisis that could overwhelm the new administration's nascent foreign policy. "that's what the administration is counting on -- if there is compliance and the deal is working well," said einhorn. kerry reminded congress this week that britain, france, germany, china and russia would all be cosignatories of a deal. "if all those countries have said this is good and it's working, (will a new president) just turn around and nullify it on behalf of the united states?" he asked. "that's not going to happen." congress would face the same cost-benefit calculation when it comes to the sanctions only lawmakers can expunge. in the event of a democratic white house victory in 2016, the congressional math could also change in favor of a deal. and if republicans keep their majorities, lawmakers who are bent on thwarting obama may be less willing to handcuff a new gop president.

iran nuclear talks: what if the deal falls through?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

51.0

8.0

9504.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

671.0

1.0

0.0

144.0

0.0

94.0

18.0

27.0

10.0

26.0

11.0

13.0

8.0

40.0

42.0

55.0

673.0

145.0

94.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a stormy opening night of the democratic convention battered the philadelphia arena on monday as defiant bernie sanders supporters resisted attempts to persuade them to embrace hillary clinton. impassioned pleas for unity from a trio of democratic women led by michelle obama raised hopes that the tumultuous first day of the convention may provide catharsis. but despite a direct plea for calm from sanders, many of his 1,846 delegates in the arena repeatedly jeered at mentions of the party<u+2019>s presumptive nominee for the first hour or two of the evening. only after the vermont senator appeared on stage at the wells fargo center to urge them that the decision to choose between clinton and trump was <u+201c>not even close<u+201d> did the rebellion that has divided the party for much of the year show signs that it had reached its peak. <u+201c>any objective observer will conclude that <u+2013> based on her ideas and her leadership <u+2013> hillary clinton must become the next president of the united states,<u+201d> sanders said, after three minutes of trying to quiet the floor. signs that a week of big-name democratic speakers may help overcome the uncomfortable split also emerged when the first lady delivered a speech that brought the room to a standstill. <u+201c>because of hillary clinton our daughters, and all our sons and daughters, now take for granted that woman can be president of the united states,<u+201d> said obama with evident emotion in her voice. <u+201c>in this election we cannot sit back and hope that everything works out for the best ... between now and november we need to do what we did eight years ago and four years ago,<u+201d> added the first lady. <u+201c>we need to pour every last ounce of our passion and our strength and our love for this country into electing hillary clinton as president of the united states of america. earlier, even a live rendition of bridge over troubled water from paul simon, ripe with symbolism, could not disguise scenes of open revolt that proved far more vocal than expected and caused consternation on stage. <u+201c>can i just say to the bernie or bust people: you are being ridiculous,<u+201d> said sanders-supporting comedian sarah silverman as she called for unity and backed clinton <u+201c>with gusto<u+201d>. <u+201c>i will be respectful of you. and i want you to be respectful of me,<u+201d> demanded ohio congresswoman marcia fudge of the vocal sanders supporters after she was repeatedly interrupted. <u+201c>we are all democrats and we need to act like it.<u+201d> the tone of the evening was set when the religious invocation at the start of the session was interrupted by rounds of competitive chanting for different corners for the room: <u+201c>bernie! bernie!<u+201d> drowned out by <u+201c>hillary! hillary!<u+201d> and back again, as the pastor stood awkwardly on stage. congressman elijah cummings had his speech about the struggle of his family against racism interrupted by sanders supporters protesting against trade deals. other speakers nervously approached applause lines not knowing whether they would be booed or cheered by the fractious crowd. at times, there was a faint echo of the mood at the republican convention last week, where every mention of clinton<u+2019>s name also prompted boos, albeit much louder and without the balancing cheers of her supporters. during a two-minute pause while an official photograph was taken of the hall, a lone shout of <u+201c>bernie<u+201d> punctuated the awkward silence. and as a violent thunder storm forced the evacuation of marquee tents outside the arena, party officials sent a warning to those outside: a text to sanders delegates was also sent to try to calm the storm inside. <u+201c>i ask you as a personal courtesy to me to not engage in any kind of protest on the floor,<u+201d> said the text signed <u+201c><u+2013>bernie<u+201d>. <u+201c>it is of utmost importance you explain this to your delegations.<u+201d> yet the anger was intensified by leaked emails suggesting bias against the sanders campaign by party officials, and the democratic national committee began the night with an apology. <u+201c>these comments do not reflect the values of the dnc or our steadfast commitment to neutrality during the nominating process,<u+201d> it said. <u+201c>the dnc does not <u+2013> and will not <u+2013> tolerate disrespectful language exhibited toward our candidates. individual staffers have also rightfully apologized for their comments, and the dnc is taking appropriate action to ensure it never happens again.<u+201d> the turning point came when obama took to the stage, to a rapturous welcome from democrats waving a sea of <u+201c>michelle<u+201d> purple placards. she called clinton <u+201c>the president i want for my girls<u+201d> and someone <u+201c>who knows that the world is not black and white and easily boiled down to 140 characters<u+201d>. <u+201c>only one person i trust with the responsibility to be president and that is our friend hillary clinton,<u+201d> said obama. massachusetts senator elizabeth warren, a popular figure on the left, also focused her attention on defeating trump in a calm speech that drew out what was at stake in november<u+2019>s election. <u+201c>for me this choice is personal; it<u+2019>s about who we are as a people,<u+201d> said warren, blasting trump as <u+201c>a man who thinks of nothing but himself<u+201d>. in an extended call for sanders supporters to join her on the journey toward backing clinton, silverman memorably described her republican opponent as <u+201c>calling people names from his gold-encrusted sandbox because [he] was given money instead of human touch<u+201d>. richard trumka, president of the labor organisation the afl-cio, struck a similar note: <u+201c>he thinks he<u+2019>s a tough guy. well donald, i worked in the mines with tough guys. i know tough guys, they<u+2019>re friends of mine. and donald, you<u+2019>re no tough guy. you<u+2019>re a bully. but it fell to sanders himself to list the ways in which clinton<u+2019>s policies increasingly matched the priorities of his supporters. <u+201c>i understand that many people here in this conventional hall and around the country are disappointed at the result ... i think it<u+2019>s fair to say no one is more disappointed than i am,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>our revolution continues <u+2026> election days come and go but the struggle of the people to create a government that represents all of us and not just the one percent continues.<u+201d> after he left the stage, an email to supporters announced he was creating a new organisation, called our revolution, which would <u+201c>transform american politics to make our political and economic systems once again responsive to the needs of working families<u+201d>. john parker, a delegate from florida, said he was not too concerned with the rancor within the party on the first day of its convention. <u+201c>democracy is not always pretty and people have the right to their opinion,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>it is what it is. but look around, we<u+2019>re all good now. <u+201c>there<u+2019>s no choice but hillary clinton. we can<u+2019>t take donald trump.<u+201d> gary west, a sanders supporter and delegate from texas, said the email leaks revealed <u+201c>a major bias in the party<u+201d>. having volunteered out of pocket to organize for sanders across the country, west said he had not yet warmed up to clinton and the controversy <u+201c>made it more difficult<u+201d>. <u+201c>we all suspected that these things were going on, the rigging of the primaries and the collusion between the dnc and the hillary campaign,<u+201d> west said. <u+201c>and we were all told we were crazy. <u+201c>nobody on stage has brought it up as an apology to bernie, as an apology to the delegates.<u+201d> <u+201c>it<u+2019>s an uphill battle for hillary to get the support of the progressive movement,<u+201d> he added. <u+201c>she has to prove herself.<u+201d>

democratic convention: passionate end to day one steadies early drama

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

69.0

8.0

7402.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

456.0

0.0

149.0

0.0

50.0

24.0

21.0

8.0

22.0

17.0

16.0

11.0

38.0

36.0

57.0

460.0

149.0

50.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the move would make it easier for the trump administration to demolish the exchanges.

the gop's big-money plan to save the senate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

43.0

8.0

85.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

5.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican presidential candidate sen.ted cruz blasted donald trump friday as a phony conservative who must be stopped before he wins the presidential nomination. in a speech to the annual conservative political action conference in national harbor, md., cruz said, <u+201c>it<u+2019>s easy to talk about making america great again -- you can even put that on a baseball cap. <u+201c>but do you understand the principles that make america great in the first place?<u+201d> cruz said trump was in no position to answer that question. fresh from a bitter super tuesday battle and rancorous debate thursday night, cruz appeared relaxed in jeans. he took full advantage of trump<u+2019>s announcement earlier in the day that he would be skipping the event, which is typically considered a required stop for republican candidates seeking to woo the conservative base. dr. ben carson, who spoke after cruz on friday, announced he was formally leaving the race. sen. marco rubio was expected<u+00a0> to appear on saturday, while ohio gov. john kasich spoke earlier on friday. citing rallies in kansas and florida, where there are upcoming primary battles, trump demurred, leaving a hole in the cpac schedule. <u+201c>i think someone told him (fox news host) megyn kelly was going to be here,<u+201d> cruz said, joking. <u+201c>but worse, he was told conservatives were going to be here. even worse, he was told there would be libertarians here. even worse, young people were going to be here.<u+201d> <u+201c>i hope none of you have a degree from trump university,<u+201d> he said, referring to the lawsuits against trump<u+2019>s now defunct online school. cruz was only interrupted once by audience members chanting <u+201c>trump! trump! trump!<u+201d> the audience applause was otherwise enthusiastic as cruz revived a key charge against trump from thursday night - that he has been funding and cozying up to democrats for years. referring to the loss of conservative justice antonin scalia on the supreme court, cruz warned that the court is now <u+201c>one justice away<u+201d> from the loss of religious liberty and the second amendment right to bear arms. <u+201c>let me be very clear to every man and woman here at cpac, i will not compromise away your religious liberty. i will not compromise away your second amendment right to keep and bear arms,<u+201d> cruz said. he also poked at trump, whom he said suggested in a previous debate that the u.s. should be neutral in order to negotiate in the peace talks between israel and the palestinians. <u+201c>as president i have no intention of being neutral. america will stand unapologetically with the nation of israel.<u+201d> joking on stage with fox news<u+2019> sean hannity, cruz also suggested hillary clinton should get used to <u+201c>orange pant suits<u+201d> in case she's indicted in the ongoing email controversy and that for the first time, a general election debate may be <u+201c>convened in leavenworth.<u+201d>

cruz blasts trump as phony conservative in front of cpac crowd

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

2.0

62.0

8.0

2808.0

0.0

3.0

2.0

0.0

183.0

0.0

44.0

0.0

11.0

6.0

14.0

3.0

6.0

5.0

7.0

14.0

11.0

23.0

185.0

44.0

11.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump<u+2019>s supporters deserve to have their concerns taken seriously. if the media and commentators in 2016 can agree on nothing else, it<u+2019>s this. it<u+2019>s a bit of an odd meme. i can remember literally no one in 2012 dwelling on the importance of taking the concerns of mitt romney voters seriously, even though they made up a considerably larger share of the population than trump supporters. no one talks about taking the interests of hillary clinton supporters, a still larger group, seriously. but trump supporters, a smaller group backing a considerably more loathsome agenda, have received an unprecedented outpouring of sympathy, undertaken as a sort of passive-aggressive snipe at unnamed other commentators and politicians perceived to not be taking their concerns seriously. <u+201c>trumpism has, in part, made the rest of the nation all the more eager to ignore the millions of white voters living on the edges of the economy,<u+201d> michelle cottle worries at the atlantic. <u+201c>many decent, sincere people who feel disregarded, disrespected, and left behind <u+2014> in ways that i do not feel and have never felt <u+2014> can disproportionately embrace political opinions that i view as bigoted or paranoid,<u+201d> david blankenhorn empathizes at the american interest. <u+201c>today<u+2019>s upscale americans are less and less likely even to interact with, much less actually give a damn about, those other americans.<u+201d> <u+201c>their problems should still be addressed,<u+201d> michael brendan dougherty writes at the week, <u+201c>not because the elite views them as virtuous and thus deserving of the help of the state and its political class, but by virtue of our common citizenship.<u+201d> i agree with a lot of this. the government should help people who are materially struggling. globalization definitely left some segments of the population struggling, and they deserve help. white people, while still economically dominant over black and latino americans in basically every way possible, can suffer from poverty too. but there<u+2019>s something striking about this line of commentary: it doesn<u+2019>t take the stated concerns of trump voters, and voters for similar far-right populists abroad, seriously in the slightest. the press has gotten extremely comfortable with describing a trump electorate that simply doesn<u+2019>t exist. cottle describes his supporters as <u+201c>white voters living on the edges of the economy.<u+201d> this is, in nearly every particular, wrong. there is absolutely no evidence that trump<u+2019>s supporters, either in the primary or the general election, are disproportionately poor or working class. exit polling from the primaries found that trump voters made about as much as ted cruz voters, and significantly more than supporters of either hillary clinton or bernie sanders. trump voters, fivethirtyeight's nate silver found, had a median household income of $72,000, a fair bit higher than the $62,000 median household income for non-hispanic whites in america. a major study from gallup's jonathan rothwell confirmed this. trump support was correlated with higher, not lower, income, both among the population as a whole and among white people. trump supporters were less likely to be unemployed or to have dropped out of the labor force. areas with more manufacturing, or higher exposure to imports from china, were less likely to think favorably of trump. this shouldn<u+2019>t be surprising. lower-income whites are always likelier to support democrats than other whites. it<u+2019>d be very odd if trump singlehandedly reversed that longstanding trend in american public opinion. but it suggests that the image of trump supporters as whites on the economic margins, being failed by the elites in washington and new york, is wrong. so what is driving trump supporters? in the general election, the story is pretty simple: what<u+2019>s driving support for trump is that he is the republican nominee, a little fewer than half of voters always vote for republicans, and trump is getting most of those voters. in the primary, though, the story was, as my colleague zack beauchamp has explained at length, almost entirely about racial resentment. there<u+2019>s a wide array of data to back this up. ucla's michael tesler has found that support for trump in the primaries strongly correlated with respondents' racial resentment, as measured by survey data. similarly, republican voters with the lowest opinions of muslims were the most likely to vote for trump, and voters who strongly support mass deportation of undocumented immigrants were likelier to support him in the primaries too. in april, when the pew research center asked republicans for their views on trump, and their opinions on the us becoming majority nonwhite by 2050, they found that republicans who thought a majority nonwhite population would be "bad for the country" had overwhelmingly favorable views of trump. those who thought it was a positive or neutral development were evenly split on trump. by contrast, john mccain in 2008 and mitt romney in 2012 got less primary support from voters with high racial resentment and anti-immigration scores than they did from less racially resentful or anti-immigrant voters. those two primaries were lost by the white nationalist wing of the republican party at a time when that wing was gaining in number. as new america's lee drutman has found, republicans<u+2019> views of blacks and latinos plummeted during the obama years: the white nationalist wing was gaining in strength, and due for a win. it got one in trump. even in the general election, while support for trump is correlated most strongly with party id, the second biggest factor, per the analysis of hamilton college political scientist philip klinkner, was racial resentment. economic pessimism and income level were statistically insignificant. the message this research sends is very, very clear. there is a segment of the republican party that is opposed to racial equality. it has increased in numbers in reaction to the election of a black president. the result was that an anti<u+2013>racial equality candidate won the republican nomination. given that the us is one recession away from a republican winning the presidency, this is a concerning development. the american press is overwhelmingly made up of left-of-center white people who live in large cities and have internalized very strong anti-racist norms. as a result, it tends to be composed of people who think of racism as a very, very serious character defect, and who are riddled with anxiety about being perceived as out of touch with <u+201c>real america.<u+201d> <u+201c>real america<u+201d> being, per decades of racially charged tropes in our culture, white, non-urban america. so in comes donald trump, a candidate running on open white nationalism whose base is whites who <u+2014> while not economically struggling compared with poor whites backing hillary clinton and doing way better economically than black or latino people backing clinton <u+2014> definitely live in the <u+201c>real america<u+201d> which journalists feel a yearning to connect to and desperately don<u+2019>t want to be out of touch with. describing these people as motivated by racial resentment, per journalists<u+2019> deep-seated belief that racism is a major character defect, seems cruel and un-empathetic, even if it<u+2019>s supported by extensive amounts of social scientific research and indeed by the statements of trump<u+2019>s supporters themselves. so it becomes very, very tempting to just ignore this evidence and insist that trump supporters are in fact the wretched of the earth, and to connect them with every possible pathology of white america: post-industrial decay, the opioid crisis, labor force dropouts, rising middle-age mortality rates, falling social mobility, and so on. this almost always fails (globalization victims and labor force dropouts are less likely to support trump, per rothwell), but if there<u+2019>s even a small hint of a connection, as when rothwell found a correlation between trump support and living in an area with rising white mortality, you<u+2019>re in luck. if you can squint hard enough, the narrative will always survive. there<u+2019>s a parallel temptation among leftists and social democrats who, in their ongoing attempt to show that neoliberal capitalism is failing, attempt to tie that failure to the rise of trump. if economic suffering among lower-class whites caused trump, the reasoning goes, then the solution is to address that suffering through a more generous welfare state and better economic policy, achieved through a multiethnic working-class coalition that includes those trump supporters. yes, these supporters may be racist, but it<u+2019>s important not to say mean things about them lest they fall out of the coalition. i actually agree that the current capitalist regime is failing. we need truly universal health care, universal child care, a universal child allowance or basic income, and programs to address deep poverty. redistribution is a very good, necessary thing. but we have a good case study we can examine to see if western european<u+2013>style welfare states can prevent far-right racist backlashes from popping up. it<u+2019>s called western europe. and sweden<u+2019>s justly acclaimed welfare state did not prevent the rise of the viciously anti-immigrant sweden democrats, which has its origins in the swedish neo-fascist and white supremacist movements and is now the third-largest party in swedish parliament. nor did austria<u+2019>s welfare state prevent the far-right freedom party <u+2014> led by j<u+00f6>rg haider, who praised hitler for having a <u+201c>proper employment policy<u+201d> <u+2014> from entering government in 1999. france<u+2019>s cr<u+00e8>ches and best-in-the-world government health care didn<u+2019>t prevent jean-marie le pen, who has been repeatedly convicted of holocaust denial, from reaching the runoff for the 2002 presidential elections. it has not stopped his successor and daughter marine from leading polling for next year<u+2019>s presidential elections. the netherlands<u+2019> comprehensive welfare state has not prevented first pim fortuyn and then geert wilders from becoming major political forces, with the latter leading most polls for the next elections. nor has germany<u+2019>s strong, manufacturing-heavy and export-oriented economy, arguably the strongest in europe, kept the far-right afd party from gaining in recent local elections. it<u+2019>s telling to note that while economically thriving germany is facing a far-right menace, spain, where unemployment is 20 percent (similar to the us in the great depression), has no far-right movement of much consequence. comprehensive welfare states are very, very good. they do not solve racism. whites in both europe and america have made it very clear that they will not accept becoming a demographic minority without a fight, and will continue to vote for candidates that speak to that concern and promise immigration policies that put off white minority status for as long as possible. one thing this analysis decidedly does not imply is <u+201c>hey, trump supporters are just racists, let<u+2019>s give up on them.<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s nomination is a threat to america that must be addressed and never allowed to happen again. giving up is not an option. we have to figure out some way to respond. nor is somehow denying trump supporters material support they need an option (though this is a proposal i<u+2019>ve only ever heard attacked by journalists sympathetic to trump supporters; i<u+2019>ve never heard it actually proposed). hillary clinton, to her great credit, has offered programs ranging from expanded child care to free college to a plan to fight the opioid epidemic to child tax credit expansions to improvements to obamacare that will leave millions of white trump supporters much better off. this isn<u+2019>t worth doing to win back their votes; it<u+2019>s worth doing because it<u+2019>s the right thing to do. notably, trump is not proposing anything like this and would in fact raise taxes on many middle-class families. insisting, as many journalists have, that his supporters aren<u+2019>t voting for the white nationalist candidate because they agree with him on race seems like a way to be charitable to those voters. but the idea that voters are motivated by economic struggles and so are voting for a candidate who would make their economic situation far worse is much more insulting than accepting they are uncomfortable with racial equality. the implicit idea is that trump<u+2019>s voters aren<u+2019>t motivated by genuine political disagreement about race, but are just dupes voting for the wrong candidate because they<u+2019>re too dumb to google his tax plan. any solution has to begin with a correct diagnosis of the problem. if trump<u+2019>s supporters are not, in fact, motivated by economic marginalization, then even full bernie sanders<u+2013>style social democracy is not going to prevent a trump recurrence. nor are gop-style tax cuts, and liberal pundits aggressively signaling virtue to each other by writing ad nauseam about the need to empathize with the trump voter aren<u+2019>t doing anyone any good. what<u+2019>s needed is an honest reckoning with what it means that a large segment of the us population, large enough to capture one of the two major political parties, is motivated primarily by white nationalism and an anxiety over the fast-changing demographics of the country. maybe the gop will find a way to control and contain this part of its base. maybe the racist faction of the party will dissipate over time, especially as obama<u+2019>s presidency recedes into memory. maybe it took trump<u+2019>s celebrity to mobilize them at all, and future attempts will fail. but donald trump<u+2019>s supporters<u+2019> concerns are heavily about race. taking them seriously means, first and foremost, acknowledging that, and dealing with it honestly.

taking trump voters<u+2019> concerns seriously means listening to what they<u+2019>re actually saying

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

87.0

8.0

13610.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

990.0

1.0

0.0

199.0

1.0

0.0

148.0

30.0

38.0

20.0

33.0

30.0

39.0

16.0

55.0

69.0

88.0

997.0

200.0

149.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

ever since the donald descended that escalator at trump tower a couple of months ago to announce his entry into the presidential race, democrats have been laughing. watching the republicans squirm and fox news jump through hoops has made the gop presidential primary a delightful entertainment for their rivals on the other side of the aisle. i don<u+2019>t know how many of them had it in them to watch the whole trump town hall extravaganza in derry, nh,<u+00a0>on wednesday<u+00a0><u+2014> but those who did were unlikely to be laughing by the end of it. there was the standard braggadocio and egomania that characterizes his every appearance and weird digressions into arcane discussions of things like building materials (for the wall, naturally.) he complained about the press and politicians and declared himself superior to pretty much everyone on earth. but after you listen to him for a while, you come away from that performance with a very unpleasant sense that something rather sinister is at the heart of the trump phenomenon. trump was still talking when chris hayes opened his show<u+00a0>that night<u+00a0>with this comment: i want to talk about what we are seeing unfold here because i think what we are seeing is past the point of a clown show or a parody. i believe it is much more serious and much darker<u+2026>you have someone now who is getting huge crowds, who is polling at the top of the gop field, who polls show is beating jeb bush by 44 to 12 percent on the issue of immigration, going around the country calling little children, newborn babies, anchor babies saying that he<u+2019>s going to use that term which i find a dehumanizing and disgusting term. talking about giving the local police the ability to <u+201c>do whatever they need to do to round up<u+201d> the <u+201c>illegals<u+201d>. building a wall, talking about basically chasing 11 million people out, talking about deporting american citizens to <u+201c>keep families together<u+201d>, talking about what would essentially be the largest most intrusive police state in the history of the american republic to go about this task, that is the person that is right now at the head of the republican party<u+2019>s presidential contest. and the delirious crowd applauded all those those things just as they loudly cheered this reference to bowe bergdahl, the american soldier held by the taliban for more than five years: it<u+2019>s that pantomime of him shooting berghdahl dead and saying <u+201c>when we were strong, when we were strong<u+201d> that appeals so much. trump repeatedly paints a picture of america in decline <u+2014> weak, impotent and powerless, in terrible danger of losing everything unless we get a leader who will cast off all this <u+201c>political correctness,<u+201d> this effete insistence on following the rules. he promises to <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> by cracking down on the <u+201c>bad people<u+201d> and being very, very strong. when talking about iraq, he characterized the the iraqi people as cowards, <u+201c>running whenever the bullets are flying.<u+201d> he said <u+201c>the enemy has our best equipment, we have the old stuff<u+201d> <u+00a0>and that the country is a mess because of all the <u+201c>years of fighting unsuccessfully <u+2014> because of the way we fight.<u+201d> (the implication is that we didn<u+2019>t take the gloves off.) he said, <u+201c>the problem is that as a country we don<u+2019>t have victories anymore. when was the last time we had a victory?<u+201d> and he declared, <u+201c>i believe in the military and military strength more strongly than anybody running by a factor of a billion<u+2026> we are gonna make our military so strong and so powerful and so incredible, so strong that nobody<u+2019>s gonna mess with us, folks,<u+00a0>nobody.<u+00a0>and we don<u+2019>t have that right now.<u+201d> this garnered huge cheers from the crowd. on economics, it<u+2019>s all about other countries taking advantage of the us.<u+00a0> he said, <u+201c>they<u+2019>re up here, we<u+2019>re down there. i don<u+2019>t blame china or mexico or japan. their leaders are smarter and sharper and more cunning <u+2014> and that<u+2019>s an important word, cunning <u+2014> than our leaders. our leaders are babies<u+2026>our country is falling apart.<u+201d> he explains the problem: china is killing us. they<u+2019>ve taken so much of our wealth. they<u+2019>ve taken our jobs. they<u+2019>ve taken our business, they<u+2019>ve taken our manufacturing, [audience member screams out <u+201c>our land<u+201d>] our land? the way they<u+2019>re going they<u+2019>ll have that pretty soon.think about it, we have rebuilt china <u+2014> somebody said to me <u+201c>that<u+2019>s a harsh statement<u+201d> <u+00a0><u+2014> it<u+2019>s the greatest theft in the history of the united states.<u+00a0> now i have great respect for china and their leaders.<u+00a0> the largest bank in the world is from china. they<u+2019>re a tenant of one of my buildings. i love china i think it<u+2019>s great.<u+00a0> but we don<u+2019>t have the people that know what they<u+2019>re doing so <u+2026> they<u+2019>re killing us. you know what that is? they call it a sucking action. they<u+2019>re sucking the jobs and the money right out of our country.that<u+2019>s what they<u+2019>re doing. we<u+2019>ve rebuilt china. they have bridges, they have airports so do other countries and we<u+2019>re like a third world country<u+2026>they<u+2019>re taking our jobs, they<u+2019>re taking our money.they take our jobs they take everything and we owe them money. how does that happen? it<u+2019>s magic.<u+00a0> that<u+2019>s not gonna happen with donald trump. if a person feels as if this country isn<u+2019>t what it used to be, that they<u+2019>ve lost their place, that their future isn<u+2019>t promising, donald trump is telling them right up front that foreigners are to blame. it isn<u+2019>t the government being unwilling to collect taxes from people like donald trump so we can build infrastructure <u+2014> we<u+2019>re rebuilding china instead of our own country. it isn<u+2019>t that we spend vast sums of money to maintain the world<u+2019>s only superpower military, it<u+2019>s that people from other countries are stealing us blind. and trump will fight all these foreigners to take our country back from them wherever they are. of course, there is no foreigner who is wrecking this once great country more than the undocumented immigrant and he plans to cleanse our culture of their evil influence: <u+2026>we have crime all over the country, we have <u+2026> the borders, the southern border is a disaster<u+2026>the other night a 66 year old woman, a veteran, raped sodomized, brutally killed by an illegal immigrant. we gotta stop we gotta take back our country. we<u+2019>ve gotta take it back! [huge applause] i love this country and i know that i can make it great again. we have to build a wall, we have to get the bad people out. a lot of the illegals, if you look at chicago with the gangs,<u+2026> you look at baltimore, you look at ferguson, a lot of these gangs, the most vicious, are illegals. they<u+2019>re outta here. the first day i will send those people <u+2026> those guys are outta here. [cheers] they talk about guns, i<u+2019>m a big second amendment person, i believe in it so strongly [cheers]. big.<u+00a0> but they talk about guns and you look at chicago, chicago has the toughest gun laws in the us by far, and people are being shot with guns all over the place. you need enforcement but you also have to get the bad people out, the people that aren<u+2019>t supposed to be here and we<u+2019>re gonna get em out so fast, so quick <u+2014> and it<u+2019>s gonna be tough. it<u+2019>s not gonna be <u+201c>oh please will you come with us please will you please come with us.<u+201d> because you know these law enforcement people, and i know the guys in chicago, the police commissioner<u+2019>s a great man. they can do it, if they<u+2019>re allowed to do it. i know the guys, i know em, new york, they<u+2019>re great. bratton, great. they can all do it. they can all do it. but they have to be allowed to do their job, they have to be allowed to do their job. [cheers] it isn<u+2019>t just liberals like chris hayes who are becoming alarmed by this. republican strategist alex castellanos<u+00a0>sees the attraction of trump in similar terms: when a government that has pledged to do everything can<u+2019>t do anything, otherwise sensible people turn to the strongman. this is how the autocrat, the popular dictator, gains power. we are seduced by his success and strength<u+2026> as our old, inflexible government grows beyond its capacity to service a complex and adaptive society, and its failures deface our landscape, it creates demand for efficiency. who can bring order to this chaos? who has the guts and the strength to make the mess we have made work? then, the call goes out for the strongman. who cares what he believes or promises? and with the voice of the common man, though he is anything but, the strongman comes and pledges to make america great again. castellanos agrees with trump that america is going to hell in a handbasket largely due to liberal failure, but doesn<u+2019>t think that consolidating power in the hands of a single billionaire is a great way to deal with it. it<u+2019>s easy to dismiss trump<u+2019>s ramblings as the words of a kook.<u+00a0> but he<u+2019>s tapping into the rage and frustration many americans feel when our country is exposed as being imperfect. these republicans were shamed by their exalted leadership<u+2019>s debacle in iraq and believe that american exceptionalism is no longer respected around the world <u+2014> and<u+00a0>they<u+00a0>are no longer respected here at home. trump is a winner and i think this is fundamentally what attracts them to him: i will be fighting and i will win because i<u+2019>m somebody that wins. we are in very sad shape as a country and you know why that is? we<u+2019>re more concerned about political correctness than we are about victory, than we are about winning. we are not going to be so politically correct anymore, we are going to get things done. but his dark, authoritarian message of intolerance and hate is likely making it difficult for him, or any republican, to win a national election, particularly since all the other candidates feel compelled to follow his lead. (those who challenged him, like perry and paul, are sinking like a stone in the polls.) and while trump<u+2019>s fans may want to blame foreigners for all their troubles, most americans know that their troubles can be traced to some powerful people right here at home.<u+00a0> powerful people like donald trump. still, history is littered with strongmen nobody took seriously until it was too late. when someone like trump captures the imagination of millions of people it<u+2019>s important to pay attention to what he<u+2019>s saying. for all his ranting, you<u+2019>ll notice that the one thing trump never mentions is the constitution.

donald trump<u+2019>s campaign of terror: how a billionaire channeled his authoritarian rage <u+2014> and soared to the top of the polls

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

122.0

8.0

10151.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

670.0

3.0

0.0

239.0

1.0

0.0

111.0

35.0

21.0

24.0

38.0

19.0

28.0

12.0

29.0

60.0

63.0

677.0

242.0

112.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a group of senators is calling for higher wages and better health care for the contractors who work in senate office buildings. private companies receive contracts to provide many of the services for government buildings on capitol hill, from running the cafeterias to cleaning offices to restoring aging buildings.

senators seek <u+2018>living wage<u+2019> for capitol hill contractors

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

56.0

8.0

316.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

25.0

0.0

5.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

4.0

29.0

5.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"on this broadcast last week, in an effort to honor and thank a veteran who protected me and so many others after a ground-fire incident in the desert during the iraq war invasion, i made a mistake in recalling the events of 12 years ago," williams said. "it did not take long to hear from some brave men and women in the air crews who were also in that desert. i want to apologize." he clarified wednesday that he had been in a helicopter following the one hit by an rpg. he recalled how his nbc news team and the air crew next "spent two harrowing nights in a sandstorm in the iraq desert," a detail that is not in dispute. the on-air apology, however, may not suffice. williams' public recollection of the events that day has changed several times over the past decade, ranging from his being unaware of the lead helicopter having been struck when changing course, to his apparently witnessing the attack, to his most recently claiming that he was in the rocket-damaged helicopter. the iraq helicopter controversy is the first to shake williams' decade-long tenure as anchor of "nbc nightly news," the top-rated evening newscast. a network star, he may be able to ride out the unflattering press and social media swipes. but the same might have been said about then-"cbs evening news" anchor dan rather, whose career at the network unraveled in 2004 after bloggers challenged documents he reported as detailing the young george w. bush's service in the texas air national guard. "i don't know the particulars about that day in iraq. i do know brian," rather said in a statement provided to the huffington post. "he's a longtime friend and we have been in a number of war zones and on the same battlefields, competing but together. brian is an honest, decent man, an excellent reporter and anchor -- and a brave one. i can attest that -- like his predecessor tom brokaw -- he is a superb pro, and a gutsy one." williams, reporting from kuwait city, described how the lead helicopter pilot of four chinooks flying in formation had observed a man in a pickup truck fire an rpg and another man shoot a rifle. williams didn't say in the report that the helicopter in which he was traveling had been hit. he noted that "all four choppers dropped their load and landed immediately." "we quickly make our drop and then turn southwest," williams said. "suddenly, without knowing why, we learned we<u+2019>ve been ordered to land in the desert. on the ground, we learn the chinook ahead of us was almost blown out of the sky." that version of the story, in which williams doesn't witness the attack, matches what former crew members told stars and stripes. they described the anchor as being "nowhere near" the attack, having arrived in a fourth helicopter about an hour after the three helicopters in front were forced to make an emergency landing. in a television segment on downing's death, williams said that the helicopters "we were traveling in at the start of the iraq war were fired on and forced down for three days in a stretch of hostile desert in a sandstorm." he didn't distinguish between an rpg and small-arms fire, such as from a rifle. a couple of months later, williams again suggested that his helicopter had been fired upon. in a sept. 12, 2007, interview with gen. david petraeus, he said that "at the start of the war, when i was flying in a chinook with general downing, that helicopter was shot at by a farmer." later that month, he recounted the story to david letterman, saying that "two of our four helicopters were hit by ground fire, including the one i was in -- rpg and ak-47." on jan. 30 of this year, williams recalled on the "nightly news" that the "helicopter we're traveling in was forced down after being hit by an rpg." the segment was offering tribute to sgt. tim terpack, who led the platoon that protected the nbc news crew in the desert that day. williams and terpack were shown at a new york rangers game while the arena announcer described how the anchor's "chinook helicopter was hit and crippled by enemy fire."

brian williams under fire over his shifting story of iraq helicopter attack

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

10.0

75.0

8.0

4058.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

260.0

2.0

0.0

101.0

0.0

15.0

14.0

10.0

5.0

18.0

5.0

8.0

6.0

21.0

23.0

35.0

269.0

103.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as soon as the terror in brussels ended, the post-terror rituals began. photos and videos of the carnage emerged, victims were given names and faces and allies expressed their sorrow and pledged assistance. citizens of brussels, following the lead of new yorkers after 9/11 and parisians after two attacks last year, created shrines and odes to the dead. in america, security ramped up as millions feared their cities would be next, and officials vowed to harden our defenses in the fight against <u+00ad>islamic state. unfortunately, the rituals also include president obama doing something stupid. after each atrocity, obama acts weirdly detached, a pattern that continued after brussels. his happy-go-lucky tourist antics in cuba, followed by tango dancing in argentina, provided a shocking contrast to fear at home and manhunts in europe. to continue reading michael goodwin's column in the new york post, click here. michael goodwin is a fox news contributor and new york post columnist.

president obama's persistent and puzzling passivity on terrorism

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

64.0

8.0

990.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

70.0

0.0

13.0

1.0

0.0

8.0

5.0

2.0

3.0

7.0

2.0

4.0

2.0

5.0

9.0

11.0

76.0

13.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) french police say two suspects in wednesday's terrorist attack on charlie hebdo magazine are still on the loose after escaping onto the streets of paris. in a statement on their website, french national police ask for information on the whereabouts of suspects cherif kouachi and said kouachi, warning that both could be armed and dangerous. police released photos of the two men, who paris deputy mayor patrick klugman told cnn are brothers in their 30s. cherif kouachi, left, and said kouachi, right, are suspects in the paris attack. police found an id document of said kouachi at the scene of the shooting, cnn affiliate bfmtv reported. "it was their only mistake," said dominique rizet, bfmtv's police and justice consultant, reporting that the discovery helped the investigation. citing sources, the agence france presse news agency reported that an 18-year-old suspect in the attack had surrendered to police. cnn has not independently confirmed whether the suspect has surrendered. police fanned out across france in an intense manhunt for the suspects, who were masked and dressed in black when they burst into the satirical magazine's office wednesday, killing 12 people. a tactical unit was deployed in an operation about a 144 kilometers (about 90 miles) from paris in reims, france, following the attack, cnn affiliate bfmtv reported. authorities haven't revealed details about the target of the operation, but speculation surged in french media that investigators could be closing in on the suspects. french authorities vowed to step up security and apprehend those responsible. "everything will be done to arrest (the attackers)," french president francois hollande said in a speech wednesday night. "... we also have to protect all public places. security forces will be deployed everywhere there can be the beginning" of a threat. it's too soon to say whether the suspects were operating alone, cnn terrorism analyst paul cruickshank said. the gunmen said they were avenging the prophet mohammed and shouted "allahu akbar," which translates to "god is great," molins said. a witness who works in the office opposite the magazine's told bfmtv that he saw two hooded men, dressed in black, enter the building heavily armed. "we then heard them open fire inside, with many shots," he said. "we were all evacuated to the roof. after several minutes, the men fled, after having continued firing in the middle of the street." the men reportedly spoke fluent french with no accent. one unsettling video, posted to youtube, shows two men shooting on a paris street, then walking up to and firing point-blank at a seemingly wounded man as he lay on the ground. video shows a gunman approaching his getaway car and raising his finger in the air in what appears to be a signal, possibly to another vehicle or other people who might have played a role in the attack, a western intelligence source briefed on the french investigation told cnn. 'parisians will not be afraid' at an event in paris' place de la republique, demonstrators held up pens in honor of the slain cartoonists and chanted, "we are charlie!" pictures posted online showed similar demonstrations in other cities, including rome, berlin and barcelona. "parisians will not be afraid," klugman said. "we will fight terrorism with our common values, freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press. ... we are at war, but we still want to behave as a leading democracy." armed soldiers could be seen standing guard outside monuments, in transit stations and elsewhere in well-trafficked spots around france by wednesday evening. police impounded a black citroen in northeastern paris similar to the one purportedly used by the attackers as a getaway car. video from cnn affiliate bfmtv shows the vehicle being towed from porte de pantin, in paris' 19th district. investigators will do a complete dna work-up on the citroen, including soil signatures that might suggest where the gunmen came from, a western intelligence source briefed on the probe told cnn. the same source said that french authorities are searching all travel records from the past 17 days to see whether any of the attackers entered the european nation over the holidays. this includes checks at charles de gaulle and orly airports, as well as whatever limited information is available from train stations. thursday will be a national day of mourning for those killed in the attack, hollande said. he asked for a moment of reflection thursday and said flags will be at half-staff for three days. its last tweet before wednesday's attack featured a cartoon of isis leader abu bakr al-baghdadi. earlier cartoons depicting the prophet mohammed spurred protests and the burning of the magazine's office three years ago. a year later, in an interview with le monde newspaper, charbonnier gave little indication that he planned to change charlie hebdo's ways. "it may sound pompous," he said, "but i'd rather die standing than live on my knees." the attack on the magazine spurred a wave of support for the publication and its practices around france and the world.

charlie hebdo attack: suspects' names, photos released

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

17.0

54.0

8.0

5134.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

0.0

341.0

1.0

0.0

103.0

0.0

31.0

11.0

6.0

5.0

27.0

5.0

9.0

2.0

23.0

25.0

27.0

344.0

104.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

ted cruz and marco rubio, both rising in the polls, staged their own spirited debate on immigration and national security in tuesday's republican presidential debate. marco rubio, left, and ted cruz, right, both speak as ben carson, second from left, and donald trump, second from right, look on during the cnn republican presidential debate at the venetian hotel & casino on dec. 15, 2015, in las vegas. in the final republican presidential debate of 2015, no subplot mattered more than the growing feud between sens. ted cruz of texas and marco rubio of florida. senator cruz, surging in the polls, is an anti-gop-establishment outsider <u+2013> like front-runner donald trump <u+2013> but with stronger conservative bona fides than mr. trump and significant appeal among evangelicals. senator rubio, now polling third nationally, represents a kinder, gentler face of republicanism, one with a more collegial relationship with fellow senators than cruz and more potential to attract swing voters in the general election. with trump<u+2019>s national lead continuing to grow, to the chagrin of party leaders, the battle to become the main alternative to trump is more pitched than ever as the kickoff iowa caucuses on feb. 1 draw closer. but the battle didn<u+2019>t play out tuesday night in attacks on trump. indeed, cruz and rubio both went easy on the flamboyant billionaire, in a likely effort to woo his supporters should they cool to his unorthodox campaign persona and style. instead, the two cuban-american senators went after each other in las vegas on national security and immigration, the evening<u+2019>s dominant themes in the wake of terror attacks in paris and san bernardino, calif. here<u+2019>s how those exchanges played out: nsa phone record surveillance. rubio has been going after cruz lately over his vote for the usa freedom act, which imposed new limits on the collection of phone metadata by us intelligence agencies in an effort to protect civil liberties. <u+201c>i promise you, the next time there is attack on <u+2013> an attack on this country, the first thing people are going to want to know is, why didn't we know about it and why didn't we stop it?<u+201d> rubio said tuesday. <u+201c>and the answer better not be because we didn't have access to records or information that would have allowed us to identify these killers before they attacked.<u+201d> cruz defended the legislation as expanding the potential universe of records the government has access to. what he didn<u+2019>t say is that the government now must get a court order to access them, which defenders say does not represent a serious hurdle. defense spending and approach to islamic state. rubio also went after cruz for voting multiple times against legislation that authorizes defense spending. <u+201c>you can<u+2019>t carpet bomb isis if you don<u+2019>t have planes and bombs to attack them with,<u+201d> rubio charged, referring to the so-called islamic state. <u+201c>they cannot be defeated through air forces.<u+201d> cruz has promised to <u+201c>carpet bomb<u+201d> isis with air strikes, and is less enamored of sending us ground troops to syria and iraq than is rubio. in the debate, he defended his <u+201c>no<u+201d> votes against the defense authorization act as fulfillment of a promise to oppose the federal government<u+2019>s authority to detain us citizens without due process. cruz also tried to lash rubio to the policies of president obama and former secretary of state hillary clinton, the front-runner for the democratic nomination. "we need to focus on killing the bad guys, not getting stuck in middle eastern civil wars," cruz said. immigration. for rubio, this issue is the most fraught, as it gives some conservatives pause over his candidacy. as a new senator, he co-authored comprehensive immigration reform legislation, only to renounce the bill <u+2013> which included a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. rubio has sought to paint cruz as favoring <u+201c>legalization<u+201d> of the undocumented, over his support for big increases in the caps on green cards and the number of visas for high-tech workers. cruz has since backed off that position, and in the debate, he fought back. <u+201c>i led the fight against [rubio<u+2019>s] legalization and amnesty,<u+201d> cruz said, adding that <u+201c>to suggest our record's the same is like suggesting the fireman and the arsonist have the same record because they are both at the scene of the fire." in debate post-mortems, both senators were deemed to have had strong performances, and their duel is likely to intensify in the weeks ahead. that cruz and rubio are both cuban-american first-term senators in their mid-40s may be an accident of history, but it matters to a republican party anxious to showcase diversity. whether either could make major inroads into the hispanic vote is an open question, particularly for cruz, who doesn<u+2019>t speak spanish and who only uses his heritage to highlight his cuban-born father<u+2019>s journey to freedom in the us. rubio, on the other hand, is fluent in spanish and has made his cuban-immigrant parents<u+2019> humble lives as service-workers a central part of his optimistic view of the american dream. if any of the republican candidates are capable of channeling ronald reagan, whose sunny demeanor helped him to the presidency twice, it may be rubio. likability is a key ingredient to presidential campaign success, and if support for trump begins to wane, one can<u+2019>t assume that his voters go to cruz. <u+201c>too often [cruz<u+2019>s] message seems negative, and i think that<u+2019>s a challenge for him,<u+201d> says henry barbour, republican national committeeman from mississippi, speaking before tuesday<u+2019>s debate. <u+201c>the key is to come across as the guy with the positive agenda <u+2013> the ronald reagan of the group. and everybody wants to be the ronald reagan.<u+201d>

why the ted cruz-marco rubio debate mattered most (+video)

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

10.0

58.0

8.0

5682.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

398.0

1.0

0.0

105.0

0.0

38.0

14.0

13.0

3.0

22.0

12.0

11.0

5.0

19.0

24.0

38.0

400.0

106.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

malone, new york (cnn) after a massive, more-than-three-week manhunt for david sweat, the escaped murderer is back where he started -- in custody. authorities said a new york state police sergeant -- identified as jay cook -- spotted sweat, and after sweat ran, the sergeant gave chase. "at some point, running across a field, he realized that sweat was going to make it to a tree line, and possibly could have disappeared, and he fired two shots," new york state police superintendent joseph a. d'amico told reporters. sweat, who was unarmed, was hit twice in the torso. a photo exclusively obtained by cnn shows sweat in custody moments after his capture. he appears bloodied and was wearing a camouflage outfit, not prison garb. he was taken into custody in the town of constable, in upstate new york, very close to the canadian border. "i can only assume he was going for the border, that he was that close," d'amico said. sweat was captured about 16 miles north of the location where fellow escapee richard matt was killed last week. the officer was alone when he shot sweat. sweat was transported to the alice hyde medical center in malone, an officer at the hospital told cnn. he was later moved to albany medical center, where he was listed in critical condition, according to dennis mckenna, medical director there. emergency, trauma, intensive care, radiology and vascular surgery specialists are involved in his care, mckenna said. no law enforcement officers were injured during sweat's apprehension. "the nightmare is finally over," said new york gov. andrew cuomo. "we wish it didn't happen in the first place. but if you have to have it happen, this is how you want it to end." sweat was imprisoned at the clinton correctional facility for shooting dead an officer who pursued him after a robbery he committed. guards discovered them missing on june 6, during a routine bed check. law enforcement experts stressed sunday that it's crucial sweat survive so that officials can learn exactly how he and matt escaped, and who helped them. "now that we have mr. sweat, it gives us the opportunity to have some more questions and provide more facts on the overall situation," cuomo said. "anyone who we find who was culpable and guilty of cooperating in the escape will be fully prosecuted." d'amico told reporters that investigators haven't yet interviewed sweat, but that they hope to soon. investigators have questioned guards at the clinton correctional facility about what conversations they had with the escapees about life outside the prison, according to a law enforcement official. they believe sweat and matt were gathering information for almost a year about hunting cabins and the fields around the prison to help them navigate the terrain. it's believed their conversations with the guards might have given the escapees some knowledge of how to get around, the official said. earlier sunday, about 1,300 federal, state and local law enforcement officers were searching vehicles at roadblocks and scouring dense woods in upstate new york for sweat. searchers had at times followed two sets of footprints, but when they gunned matt down one day after his 49th birthday, there was no sign of sweat nearby. so, on all-terrain vehicles and in helicopters, they continued looking for the man who eluded them for three weeks, using infrared vision devices to peer through the night. d'amico admitted that authorities had a hard time tracking the fugitives and offered a possible explanation: pepper. "we believe that possibly these two males were using pepper to throw the scent off of the dogs that were tracking them," he said. the search sunday was focused on an area along new york's state route 30 between county route 41 in the town of malone and county route 26 in the town of duane. audra buchanan of constable said she was stunned to hear recently that sweat could be near her home. "we were so nervous," she said. "we've had our housed locked down." when she saw on cnn that sweat had been shot and was in custody, she said she felt "an incredible sigh of relief." when she heard sirens and saw ambulances fly by her home, she thought, "oh my god, thank god!" she told cnn's suzanne malveaux. her 9-year-old daughter has been begging to go outside and play for weeks, and buchanan said she's glad she can now let her. sweat's mother described a similar feeling of relief. pamela sweat spoke to time warner cable news after her son was captured. "we started crying because (he) wasn't killed," she said.

david sweat shot, captured alive after new york manhunt

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

55.0

8.0

4559.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

260.0

0.0

99.0

0.0

34.0

12.0

18.0

6.0

25.0

10.0

15.0

11.0

27.0

31.0

262.0

99.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

toward the end of our meeting with president obama, one of us asked whether the iran nuclear deal might change the future of that country's poisonously anti-american politics, and obama drifted from the technical and political details he'd otherwise focused on into something of a more reflective tone. "i just don<u+2019>t know," he said, leaning back a bit in his chair for the first time since he'd arrived. "when nixon went to china, mao was still in power. he had no idea how that was going to play out. "he didn<u+2019>t know that deng xiaoping would suddenly come in and decide that it doesn<u+2019>t matter what color the cat is as long as it catches mice, and the next thing you know you<u+2019>ve got this state capitalism on the march," obama said, paraphrasing the famous aphorism by mao's successor that capitalistic policies were acceptable if they helped china. "you couldn<u+2019>t anticipate that." it was surprising to hear obama, normally more restrained in how he discusses the iran nuclear deal, refer to it, however cautiously, as a moment when the arc of history might curve. it was one of several interesting moments during an intimate 90-minute meeting obama held with 10 journalists in the roosevelt room at the white house on wednesday. what follows is a description of that conversation and what it reveals about how the president sees the nuclear deal and the larger problems of the middle east, as well as the opposition to the deal, a subject he returned to frequently and at times with a visceral frustration that seemed to verge on disgust. but obama's primary message was one of certainty. that the meeting was on the record <u+2014> such gatherings, a routine event at the white house, are normally off the record <u+2014> spoke to this, as did his easy manner and his eagerness to discuss fine-grained details of the deal, as well as criticisms. "of all the foreign policy issues that i've addressed since i've been president," he said, "i've never been more certain that this is sound policy, that it's the right thing to do for the united states, that it's the right thing to do for our allies." since world powers had reached the agreement on limiting iran's nuclear program, three weeks earlier in vienna, obama has calibrated his remarks on the deal to a narrow political mission: get it enough support to get past congress. that has meant emphasizing only ways in which the deal will serve us (and israeli) security interests to limit iran's nuclear program, and downplaying everything else. to hear him draw a connection between the nuclear deal and china's transformation, then, was striking. it suggested that obama, though he has repeatedly insisted he does not expect the character of iran's regime to change, does see it as a possibility, one potentially significant enough that it evokes, at least in his mind, president nixon's historic trip to china. at the same time, the lesson obama seemed to draw from the comparison was not that he, too, was on the verge of making history, but rather that transformations like china's under deng, opportunities like nixon's trip, can have both causes and consequences that are impossible to foresee. his role, he said, was to find "openings" for such moments. he cited his 2012 trip to myanmar <u+2014> the first ever by a sitting president, and part of his effort to reopen the dictatorship to the world <u+2014> and his detente with cuba. with regards to myanmar, also known as burma, "we still don<u+2019>t know yet how that experiment plays itself out," he said. in listing myanmar's reforms since his trip, he mistakenly referred to dissident aung san suu kyi running for president <u+2014> in fact, the regime has barred her from running <u+2014> before realizing his error and correcting himself. it was an unintentionally revealing comment, hinting at the ways that reforms can reverse and "openings" can close. "we don<u+2019>t know whether it<u+2019>s going to get over the hump and suddenly burma is completely transformed, or whether it retrenches as the generals in that country get scared about losing their privileges and prerogatives," he went on. "but what we<u+2019>ve done is we<u+2019>ve created a possibility for change." his point seemed to be that he could imagine such a possibility for an opening in iran as well, though the results were uncertain. he said of iran's future, echoing his point about myanmar, "we don<u+2019>t know how it<u+2019>s going to play itself out." from there, obama drifted back to discussing what he had brought us to the white house to discuss, which was his case for the iran nuclear deal, which meant reasserting, as he had many times before, that the deal did not assume iran's good behavior on nuclear issues but rather that it was a means for enforcing it. he was careful at all times not to premise the deal on iran's good intentions, much less the country undergoing any sort of transformation. still, in that unguarded moment, he seemed to suggest a hope that the deal could help create "a possibility for change" all the same. several times, obama was asked <u+2014> and resisted answering <u+2014> a simple question: what is his plan if the deal falls apart? congress, for example, could block the deal, something that looked more possible by friday, when democratic sen. chuck schumer<u+00a0>announced he would oppose it. yet while obama was eager to talk about why killing the deal would be bad, all the ways that it would allow iran's nuclear program to proceed and set back us foreign policy, he refused to say what he would do if that happened. at one point, when one of the journalists present began asking about his plan b, obama cut him off, joking that he wanted to save the journalist from wasting his question. politically, it's understandable that he'd refuse to answer: if he says he has no plan b, he would look foolish, but if he says he has a good plan b, he would make it easier for republicans to justify killing the deal. yet it's an important question. the closest he got to providing an answer was when he was challenged on whether the only alternative to the deal was really war, as he's frequently asserted. he did not describe a clear plan b, but he did rule out a number of options. "i do not say that a military option is inevitable just to be provocative, just to win the argument. those are the dictates of cold, hard logic," he said. if congress killed the deal, "doubling down on unilateral sanctions" against iran would not be enough, he said, to get another deal. and he was "quite certain" that it would not be possible to "force our p5+1 partners [the world powers that are party to the nuclear deal] or other countries, like india or south korea or even japan" to go along with congress's demand to set a new, higher bar for what the nuclear deal has to accomplish. if that happens, he said, "we<u+2019>ve sort of run out of options at that point. ... at minimum, what we<u+2019>ve done is we<u+2019>ve put iran in the driver<u+2019>s seat." in one scenario, he said, iran could pull out of the deal and resume its nuclear development immediately: "the scenario that everybody talks about happening 15 years from now happens six, nine, 12 months from now." in another scenario, iran would declare its intention to abide by the deal. sanctions would fall away, russia and china would exploit the opening to hijack the process, and the us would possibly, he said, be excluded from the inspections regime and enforcement systems set up by the deal. in other words, the us would get shut out of the very process of monitoring iran's behavior that it had set up. "in that scenario, then, iran is going to get some of that sanction relief anyway, and our credibility in terms of now being able to exercise any influence on how the security council thinks about this thing has been completely eroded," he said. "i<u+2019>d have to talk to the lawyers as to what standing we would even have, since congress would have rejected this deal, for us to be a party to it, in which case we<u+2019>re not in the room, potentially." any of these, he said, would make it easier for iran to grow its nuclear program and harder for the us to do anything about it: "in almost every scenario, our ability to monitor what<u+2019>s happening in iran, our ability to ensure that they are not breaking out, our ability to inspect their facilities, our ability to force them to abide by the deal has gone out the window." obama would not spell out what he planned to do in such a scenario, but he did say he would try to piece together a new sanctions coalition, though he was not optimistic about it. "maybe it<u+2019>s possible that for a certain period of time we can hang on to the europeans <u+2014> not certain; maybe. maybe we can twist some arms to have some of our asian allies hang on," he said.

obama opens up on iran: what he's learned about war, republicans, and his foreign policy

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

88.0

8.0

8681.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

617.0

2.0

0.0

206.0

0.0

83.0

14.0

22.0

8.0

17.0

13.0

12.0

15.0

31.0

39.0

47.0

622.0

208.0

83.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

of late, bernie sanders has been<u+00a0>under assault from the technocratic wing of the democratic party. the charge? his campaign has circulated economic projections that show stunning <u+2014> and rather implausible <u+2014> benefits from sanders's agenda. sanders's "promises runs against our party's best traditions of evidence-based policy making and undermines our reputation as the party of responsible arithmetic,"<u+00a0>wrote four democratic ex-chairs of the white house's council of economic advisers. "these are numbers we would describe as deep voodoo if they came from a tax-cutting republican,"<u+00a0>agreed paul krugman. amidst this onslaught, steve randy waldman has penned what is, i think, the best defense of sanders.<u+00a0>he admits that the campaign's policy proposals are sketchy and the economic projections it's circulating are fantastical. but he argues that none of that really matters. the president's "role is to define priorities that must later be translated into well-crafted policy details," he says. "in a democratic polity, wonks are the help." waldman has a point. if elected president, sanders could certainly get some top economists to tighten his policies. he would have the vast machinery of the federal government available to sweat the details. the best experts in academia would be honored to advise him. every think tank in town would produce reams of research on how to implement his ideas. and, hell, let's just be honest: all this policy talk is just a way to pass the time between now and the election. it doesn't matter how strong bernie sanders's single-payer health care plan is <u+2014> it's not going to pass, just like donald trump isn't going to get mexico to pay for a wall and hillary clinton isn't going to get universal pre-k past a republican congress and ted cruz isn't going to set up a value-added tax. it's obvious that debating the details of campaign proposals is, on some level, fantasy football for wonks. events will intercede, bureaucracies will weigh in, congress will balk, promises will be broken. remember when barack obama ran for president opposing an individual mandate and then flip-flopped and supported one? so what's the point of paying attention to any of this at all? as someone who pays quite a lot of attention to campaign policy processes, here's my answer: watching a candidate run his campaign's policy processes is one of our best ways of predicting how he would run his white house. the key word there, by the way, is run. some of the most important decisions the president makes are about how to run the processes that translate vision into policy. those decisions include whom to hire, which advisers to listen to, which ideas make sense, which strategies are likely to work. the presidency is one damn decision like that after another. obama, famously, is so exhausted by the decision fatigue of the job that he wears the same color suit every day so he has one less thing to decide in the morning. this is one way in which campaigns give us insight into presidencies. presidential candidates also have to decide whom to hire, which advisers to listen to, which ideas are truly good ones, which strategies are likely to work. to make those decisions well, they need a sound philosophy, yes, but they also need to want to hear good advice, they need to want advisers who will tell them when they're wrong, they need to have good instincts for when something they want to believe is true simply isn't, and they need to be realistic about the strategies that are likely to work and the ones that aren't. my worry about sanders, watching him in this campaign, is that he isn't very interested in learning the weak points in his ideas, that he hasn't surrounded himself with people who police the limits between what they wish were true and what the best evidence says is true, that he doesn't seek out counterarguments to his instincts, that he's attracted to strategies that align with his hopes for american politics rather than what we know about american politics. and these tendencies, if they persist, can turn good values into bad policies and an inspiring candidate into a bad president. the reason i care about the puppies-and-rainbows promises of his single-payer proposal is that i think sanders believes them <u+2014> i don't think he's a cynical politician simply eliding the weaknesses of his plan. the reason i care about his campaign's circulation of fairly outlandish economic projections is that it makes me worry there's no one around sanders with the sense to say that those results don't pass the smell test. the reason i'm frustrated by sanders's promise that a political revolution will overcome all opposition to his plans is i think he believes it, and so i'm not sure he has a real plan b for when the political revolution doesn't happen. the reason sanders's persistently superficial answers on foreign policy matter to me is that they're a test of his ability to learn on the fly about topics he's not terribly interested in. in a democratic polity, wonks are the help. but that only underscores the importance of electing someone good at hiring and managing them. a president sanders could hire excellent technocrats to help him make policy, but would he want to? a president sanders could surround himself with experts who know the shortcomings of his ideas, but would he listen to them? a president sanders could become deeply engaged on foreign policy, but would he decide to? management isn't the sexiest or most inspiring of topics. but, as jimmy carter can tell you, it matters. a good vision can be destroyed by a bad strategy; high ideals can be muddied by weak staffing; a pure heart can be led astray by bad advice. there are plenty of criticisms to be made of obama's presidency, but i think the baseline competence of his administration has begun to dim memories of how important presidential management really is. the bush administration was, from this perspective, a genuine disaster <u+2014> a festival of tax cuts that didn't make sense and wars that were ill-planned, and all of it run by a man who clearly couldn't separate experts from hacks ("heckuva job, brownie!") and good advice from ideological fantasies. i have always thought this story, reported by megan mcardle, showed the mundane ways in which bush's deficiencies diminished his presidency: a senior economic adviser for george w. bush once told me a rather haunting story about the administration<u+2019>s decision to sign the 2002 farm bill ... like virtually all sound economists, bush<u+2019>s advisers disliked the bill, a subsidy-laden monstrosity that was considerably worse than the farm bill that had preceded it in 1996<u+2014>but they reluctantly allowed it to go forward, because they thought passing the farm bill would buy legislative support for something they considered even more important: the authority the president needed to advance the next round of treaty negotiations at the world trade organization. as compromises go, this one didn<u+2019>t seem too bad, so bush<u+2019>s advisers put on their game faces as the president signed it into law on may 13, 2002, with a touching speech about providing a safety net for farmers. all went well until later, when someone cracked a joke about how "we don<u+2019>t need another farm bill." the president, shocked, demanded an explanation. "what<u+2019>s wrong with the farm bill? no one told me to veto the farm bill." the adviser wasn<u+2019>t trying to hide the football, but had just assumed that bush knew. so had everyone else. it was so obvious to economists, no one thought to tell the president. on the other hand, george w. bush's father wasn't the most brilliant policy mind to ever occupy the oval office, but he was an excellent manager who chose good staff, made decisions he didn't like but knew were necessary, and ran a competent and mostly scandal-free bureaucracy. there's a reason esteem for his presidency has grown greatly since he left office. voters are hiring managers, and the presidential campaign is a long, strangely constructed job interview. among the qualities people are looking for are inspiration and decency, and sanders has shown he has both in spades. but the presidency demands more than that, and sanders's success means he needs to show he's up to the more mundane rigors of the job, too.

why bernie sanders's campaign makes me worry about how he<u+2019>ll manage the white house

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

83.0

8.0

8294.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

571.0

2.0

0.0

176.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

22.0

32.0

12.0

24.0

19.0

20.0

8.0

44.0

40.0

63.0

576.0

178.0

61.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama<u+2019>s decision to expand the u.s. war effort in iraq and syria is a reflection of the conflicting pressures on a commander in chief who doubts that military force alone can end the conflicts in those countries, but who also feels compelled to act in the face of a humanitarian catastrophe and a growing threat to the united states. the president on friday said that he was sending about 50 special operations troops to northern syria to work with kurdish and arab fighters battling the islamic state. the deployment, though small, marks the first full-time deployment of u.s. forces to the dangerous and chaotic country. the troops will be accompanied by more u.s. attack planes, based across the border in turkey, and plans for more joint raids <u+2014> led by iraqi counterterrorism forces <u+2014> to capture and kill islamic state leaders. the troops, planes and plans for more raids represent an <u+201c>intensification<u+201d> of the president<u+2019>s existing strategy, said senior administration officials. few of those officials, however, suggested that the moves would be enough to break open the stalemated conflict or produce sudden battlefield gains. <u+201c>this is a very complex battle space, and we<u+2019>re not directly involved in the way we<u+2019>ve been in the past,<u+201d> said a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. without a clear overarching strategy to resolve the conflict, <u+201c>we<u+2019>re looking at things in a granular way,<u+201d> the official said. the goal, for now, is simply to incrementally reinforce those areas that are working and abandon initiatives that are not. obama began his second term having brought one war in iraq to an end and pledging to bring home america<u+2019>s ground troops from a second in afghanistan. to that end he set hard limits on u.s. deployments and firm time frames for the withdrawal of u.s. forces. before deploying forces, obama would regularly demand that his commanders explain the <u+201c>theory of the case<u+201d> behind the moves. the phrase is evocative of the president<u+2019>s legal training and his deep skepticism that u.s. military power can bring lasting change to broken societies. he wanted assurances that the operations would work as intended as well as coherent explanations of how and when they would end. as he nears the end of his presidency, obama faces the prospect that he will leave office with ground forces deployed to three combat zones. last month, the president said he would keep 5,500 ground troops in afghanistan to advise struggling afghan army and to pursue the remnants of al-qaeda. in iraq and syria, the president has incrementally boosted the u.s. force, beginning an initial deployment of several hundred troops to iraq in 2014, after iraqi army forces in mosul were overrun by islamic state fighters. the president sent 450 more american trainers and advisers after iraqi forces were routed at ramadi by a much smaller islamic state force in the spring. those forces were supposed to work with the iraqi army and local tribal fighters to plan an offensive on ramadi that has largely stalled. <u+201c>we have four axes converging on ramadi, and on any given day, none of them makes any movement at all,<u+201d> said a senior u.s. official involved in the war planning. frustrated with the lack of progress, obama in july made a rare visit to the pentagon to push defense secretary ashton b. carter and his top commanders for options to increase the intensity of u.s. military operations without putting u.s. troops in a direct combat role. more ambitious and costly measures such as no-fly zones or buffer zones that would require tens of thousands of ground troops to effectively protect civilians were rejected. democratic presidential front-runner hillary rodham clinton has said that she favors a no-fly zone in syria. other riskier proposals, such as the introduction of apache helicopters or combat advisers who would move closer to the front lines and call in airstrikes or bolster the iraqi attack on ramadi, weren<u+2019>t explicitly rejected but were deemed unnecessary for now. the president<u+2019>s final decision balanced his desire for the united states do more with his determination to keep american forces from being pulled too deeply into conflicts in which u.s. effectiveness was limited or where there were no clear military solutions. the 50 special operations troops and the new attack planes heading to syria and turkey will bolster kurdish and syrian arab forces that were able to make surprising gains over the summer with the backing of u.s. warplanes. <u+201c>the success in northern syria wasn<u+2019>t the result of any strategic planning,<u+201d> said a senior defense official who tracks operations in the region. <u+201c>really, it was an opportunity that fell into our laps.<u+201d> syrian arab and kurdish forces have fought to within 30 miles of raqqa, the islamic state<u+2019>s de facto capital. with additional american help, u.s. officials said the fighters could isolate the city, cutting its supply lines running up to the syrian border. over the longer term, u.s. officials said that a loose coalition of syrian arab, turkmen and kurdish fighters might be able to dislodge the islamic state from a 68-mile stretch of the border, creating a space where refugees can find haven. the hope is that the coalition can also begin to provide some level of governance and take part in diplomatic negotiations to replace syrian president bashar al-assad. but even the most optimistic u.s. officials said such an outcome could take years. in the near term, administration officials expressed cautious optimism that the combination of more u.s. air power, a bigger iraqi push against islamic state forces in ramadi along with kurdish and syrian arab efforts in raqqa and along the border could shift the momentum on the battlefield. <u+201c>if you get all these things in motion, you put a lot of pressure on the islamic state to move and communicate,<u+201d> a senior u.s. official said. <u+201c>as they do, they become targets.<u+201d> so far, it<u+2019>s a strategy that hasn<u+2019>t draw much support in washington. republicans and some democrats, who have been pressing obama to do more, criticized the president<u+2019>s caution. <u+201c>his incremental step-by-step approach is an effort to manage risk and keep tight reins on the mission, but ultimately it could mean that the whole is less than the sum of its parts,<u+201d> said michele flournoy, the chief executive officer of the center for a new american security, who was among obama<u+2019>s top choices to be defense secretary last year before carter was selected. flournoy said the addition of u.s. air controllers to call in airstrikes, a more robust bombing campaign and more support to moderate rebels, combined with the measures the president is already taking, could accelerate gains on the battlefield. <u+201c>if he took these actions all at once, it could have a greater impact,<u+201d> she said. some liberal democrats described the president<u+2019>s moves as a slippery slope to a deeper u.s. commitment. rep. jim mcgovern (d-mass.) called the president<u+2019>s announcement last week the <u+201c>latest in a series of alarming signs that the u.s. war against isis will continue to accelerate in the absence of congressional action.<u+201d> white house officials, meanwhile, described the president<u+2019>s moves as the product of hard lessons learned on a complicated and chaotic battlefield. <u+201c>we always envisioned this as a three-year campaign,<u+201d> the senior u.s. official said. <u+201c>in year one we learned some of our local partners did well and others didn<u+2019>t. so we are doubling down on those who did well.<u+201d>

after vowing to end two wars, obama may leave three behind

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

58.0

8.0

7543.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

530.0

0.0

129.0

0.0

51.0

16.0

24.0

3.0

24.0

7.0

13.0

10.0

26.0

37.0

49.0

532.0

129.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington -- president barack obama joined nearly 100 members of congress in selma, alabama, on saturday for the 50th anniversary of "bloody sunday" -- a watershed moment of the civil rights movement -- where he honored the men and women who stood their ground in a violent confrontation with police at the edmund pettus bridge. "we gather here to honor the courage of ordinary americans willing to endure billy clubs and the chastening rod, tear gas and the trampling hoof; men and women who despite the gush of blood and splintered bone would stay true to their north star and keep marching toward justice," obama said in a soaring speech that addressed race and civil rights. the president hailed selma as a city of extreme importance to america's history -- on par with wartime settings of concord, lexington and gettysburg, and places where innovation took great strides such as kitty hawk and cape canaveral. and he paid deference to the foot soldiers who sparked a movement: rep. john lewis (d-ga.), joseph lowery, hosea williams, amelia boynton, diane nash, ralph abernathy, c.t. vivian, andrew young and fred shuttlesworth, among others. "what they did here will reverberate through the ages," obama said. "not because the change they won was preordained, not because their victory was complete, but because they proved that nonviolent change is possible; that love and hope can conquer hate." in attendance for the event were bernice king, the daughter of martin luther king jr., and lewis, who rallied alongside the civil rights leader and still bears visible scars from his involvement in the marches from selma to montgomery, alabama. joining them at the famed bridge were thousands of citizens, civil rights activists and politicians, including former president george w. bush and his wife, laura. "we don<u+2019>t need the ferguson report to know that<u+2019>s not true," he said. "we just need to open our eyes, and ears, and hearts, to know that this nation<u+2019>s racial history still casts its long shadow upon us. we know the march is not yet over, the race is not yet won, and that reaching that blessed destination where we are judged by the content of our character -- requires admitting as much." but he noted that race relations in the country had come a long way since selma, pointing to major progress in gender and marriage equality. "what happened in ferguson may not be unique, but it<u+2019>s no longer endemic, or sanctioned by law and custom; and before the civil rights movement, it most surely was," he said. obama also took direct aim at congress for failing to reauthorize the voting rights act, one of the major achievements of the civil rights movement that arguably owes its existence to the confrontation in selma. republicans on the hill stand broadly opposed to renewing the law, with no signs of bringing it up for a vote. "how can that be?" obama asked. "the voting rights act was one of the crowning achievements of our democracy, the result of republican and democratic effort. president reagan signed its renewal when he was in office. president bush signed its renewal when he was in office. one hundred members of congress have come here today to honor people who were willing to die for the right it protects. if we want to honor this day, let these hundred go back to washington, and gather four hundred more, and together, pledge to make it their mission to restore the law this year." "what is our excuse today for not voting? how do we so casually discard the right for which so many fought? how do we so fully give away our power, our voice, in shaping america<u+2019>s future?" he asked. "you are america. unconstrained by habits and convention. unencumbered by what is, and ready to seize what ought to be," he said. "for everywhere in this country, there are first steps to be taken, and new ground to cover, and bridges to be crossed. and it is you, the young and fearless at heart, the most diverse and educated generation in our history, who the nation is waiting to follow."

barack obama marks 50th anniversary of 'bloody sunday' with powerful speech in selma

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

84.0

8.0

4015.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

266.0

0.0

84.0

1.0

0.0

30.0

8.0

16.0

8.0

15.0

19.0

7.0

26.0

13.0

50.0

269.0

84.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

all 10 us navy sailors detained by iran after drifting into its territorial waters have been released, the us and iran said wednesday. could the juvenile suspects in the tennessee wildfires be tried as adults? detained american navy sailors shown in an undisclosed location in iran. iranian state television reported that all 10 u.s. sailors detained by iran after entering its territorial waters have been released. iran's revolutionary guard said the sailors were released wednesday after it was determined that their entry was not intentional. all 10 u.s. navy sailors detained by iran after drifting into its territorial waters a day earlier have been freed, the u.s. and iran said wednesday. the navy said the american crew members returned safely and there were no indications they had been harmed while in custody. the nine men and one woman were held at an iranian base on farsi island in the persian gulf after they were detained nearby on tuesday. the tiny outpost has been used as a base for revolutionary guard speedboats as far back as the 1980s. the sailors departed the island at 0843 gmt aboard the boats they were detained with, the navy said. they were picked up by navy aircraft and other sailors took control of their boats for the return voyage to bahrain, where the u.s. 5th fleet is based. the navy added that it "will investigate the circumstances that led to the sailors' presence in iran." the revolutionary guard's official website published images of the detained u.s. sailors before their release, showing them sitting on the floor of a room. they look mostly bored or annoyed, though at least one of the sailors appears to be smiling. the sole woman had her hair covered by a brown cloth. the pictures also showed what appeared to be their two boats. "after determining that their entry into iran's territorial waters was not intentional and their apology, the detained american sailors were released in international waters," a statement posted online by the guard said wednesday. us vice president joe biden says that america did not apologize to iran over u.s. sailors allegedly entering iranian territorial waters. biden made the comments wednesday in an interview with "cbs this morning." the vice president said: "there's nothing to apologize for. when you have a problem with the boat you apologize the boat had a problem? no, and there was no looking for any apology. this was just standard nautical practice." biden said that the iranians realized the u.s. sailors "were there in distress and said they would release them and released them like ordinary nations would do." gen. ali fadavi, the navy chief of iran's powerful revolutionary guard, was quoted earlier wednesday by iranian state tv as saying that an investigation had shown the americans entered iranian territorial waters because of "mechanical problems in their navigation system." u.s. officials also blamed mechanical trouble for the incident. they had said on tuesday that tehran assured them the crew and vessels would be returned safely and promptly. fadavi said the american boats had shown "unprofessional acts" for 40 minutes before being picked up by iranian forces after entering the country's territorial waters. he said tehran did not consider the u.s. navy boats violating iranian territorial waters as an "innocent passage." the sailors were nonetheless allowed to make contact with the u.s. military, based on iran's "responsibilities and islamic mercy" late tuesday, he said. u.s. secretary of state john kerry, who forged a personal relationship with iranian foreign minister mohammed javad zarif during the three years of nuclear negotiations, called his iranian counterpart immediately on learning of the incident, according to a senior u.s. official. kerry "personally engaged" with zarif on the issue, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. kerry said in a statement wednesday: "that this issue was resolved peacefully and efficiently is a testament to the critical role diplomacy plays in keeping our country safe, secure and strong." kerry has a close relationship with iranian foreign minister mohammed javad zarif after the recent nuclear deal between the islamic republic and world powers. kerry learned of the incident around 12:30 p.m. est as he and u.s. defense secretary ash carter were meeting their filipino counterparts at the state department, the official said. fadavi said zarif "had a firm stance" during the telephone conversation with kerry about the sailors' presence in iran's territorial waters and "said they should not have come and should apologize." carter said he was pleased with the sailors' release and he thanked kerry for his diplomatic efforts. "around the world, the u.s. navy routinely provides assistance to foreign sailors in distress, and we appreciate the timely way in which this situation was resolved," carter said. the guard's 200,000-strong force is different from the regular iranian military and is charged with protecting the ruling system. its naval forces are heavily dependent on armed speedboats that can be used in teams to swarm much larger vessels. the incident came amid heightened tensions with iran, and only hours before president barack obama gave his final state of the union address to congress and the public. it set off a dramatic series of calls and meetings as u.s. officials tried to determine the exact status of the crew and reach out to iranian leaders. pentagon spokesman peter cook told the associated press late tuesday u.s. time that the sailors' boats were moving between kuwait and bahrain when the u.s. lost contact with them. the sailors were part of riverine squadron 1 based in san diego and were deployed to the u.s. navy's 5th fleet in bahrain. when the u.s. lost contact with the boats, ships attached to the uss harry s truman aircraft carrier strike group began searching the area, along with aircraft flying off the truman. the riverine boats were not part of the carrier strike group, and were on a training mission, the officials said. the craft are not considered high-tech and don't contain any sensitive equipment, so there were no concerns about the iranians gaining access to them, they added. the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the sensitive incident publicly. in an earlier incident, in late december, iran launched a rocket test near u.s. warships and boats passing through the narrow strait of hormuz, the route for about a fifth of the world's oil. last february, iran sank a replica of a u.s. aircraft carrier near the strait and has said it is testing "suicide drones" that could conduct kamikaze missions on naval ships. it has also challenged foreign cargo ships operating in the gulf, opening fire on at least two in april and may. in one of those incidents, iran temporarily seized a marshall islands-flagged cargo ship over what it said was a commercial dispute before releasing it with its crew more than a week later. meanwhile, iran was expected to satisfy the terms of last summer's nuclear deal in just days. once the u.n. nuclear agency confirms iran's actions to roll back its program, the united states and other western powers are obliged to suspend wide-ranging oil, trade and financial sanctions on tehran. kerry recently said the deal's implementation was "days away." schreck reported from dubai, united arab emirates. associated press writers matthew lee, lolita c. baldor, bradley klapper and richard lardner in washington, jon gambrell in dubai and nasser karimi in tehran contributed to this report.

us sailors freed by iranians. no us apology issued, says joe biden

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

2.0

0.0

8.0

66.0

8.0

7666.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

563.0

0.0

151.0

0.0

79.0

10.0

15.0

6.0

12.0

6.0

8.0

4.0

28.0

22.0

39.0

570.0

151.0

79.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

we still do not know who or what is responsible for the crash of egyptair flight 804, but we know this much for certain: the terrorist danger is growing, and it won<u+2019>t be contained to the mediterranean. responding to criticism of president obama<u+2019>s handling of terrorism, white house press secretary josh earnest boasted thursday of all the setbacks the islamic state has experienced in recent months, noting that in iraq <u+201c>45 percent of the populated area that isil previously controlled has been retaken from them. in syria, that figure is now 20 percent.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s like a patient who ignored a cancer diagnosis bragging that he finally reduced the tumor in his lung <u+2014> glossing over the fact that he let it spread and metastasize to his other organs. if he had attacked the islamic state cancer early, obama could have stopped it from spreading in the first place. but instead, he dismissed the terrorist group as the <u+201c>jv team<u+201d> that was <u+201c>engaged in various local power struggles and disputes<u+201d> and did not have <u+201c>the capacity and reach of a bin laden<u+201d> and did not pose <u+201c>a direct threat to us.<u+201d> he did nothing, while the cancer grew in syria and then spread in iraq. now the cancer has spread and metastasized across the world. according to a recent cnn analysis, since declaring its caliphate in 2014, the islamic state has carried out 90 attacks in 21 countries outside of iraq and syria that have killed 1,390 people and injured more than 2,000 others. the islamic state has a presence in more than a dozen countries and has declared <u+201c>provinces<u+201d> in algeria, libya, egypt, nigeria, saudi arabia, yemen, pakistan and afghanistan. the post reported in 2015 that <u+201c>since the withdrawal of most u.s. and international troops in december, the islamic state has steadily made inroads in afghanistan<u+201d> where it has <u+201c>poured pepper into the wounds of their enemies .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. seared their hands in vats of boiling oil .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. blindfolded, tortured and blown apart [villagers] with explosives buried underneath them.<u+201d> and while the islamic state spreads and grows, al-qaeda is making a comeback. obama is touting the killing of taliban leader akhtar mohammad mansour as <u+201c>an important milestone,<u+201d> but the truth is that the taliban has made major military gains in afghanistan <u+2014> and that has opened the door to al-qaeda. the post reported in october that <u+201c>american airstrikes targeted what was <u+2018>probably the largest<u+2019> al-qaeda training camp found in the 14-year afghan war.<u+201d> sounds good except for one small problem: there were no major al-qaeda camps in afghanistan when obama took office. now it is once again training terrorists in the land where it trained operatives for the attacks of sept. 11, 2001. al-qaeda has also regained lost ground in yemen, the country where it trained and deployed the underwear bomber who nearly blew up a plane bound for detroit in 2009. and as a recent report from the institute for the study of war and the american enterprise institute<u+2019>s critical threats project notes, the <u+201c>syrian al qaeda affiliate jabhat al nusra poses one of the most significant long-term threats of any salafi-jihadi group<u+201d> and <u+201c>is much more dangerous to the u.s. than the isis model in the long run.<u+201d> overall, gen. jack keane recently testified that al-qaeda has <u+201c>grown fourfold in the last five years.<u+201d> we<u+2019>re lying to ourselves if we think that the violence we are witnessing is going to be confined to the middle east .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. or south asia .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. or north africa .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. or europe. it is only a matter of time before the islamic state and al-qaeda bring this violence here to our shores. indeed, in many ways we face a situation far more dangerous and complex than we did before sept. 11, 2001. before 9/11, we largely faced a danger from one terrorist network (al-qaeda) with safe haven in one nation (afghanistan). today, we face danger from multiple terrorist networks with safe havens in a dozen or more countries. moreover, we face something we have never seen before: two terrorist networks <u+2014> the islamic state and al-qaeda <u+2014> competing with each other for the hearts of the jihadi faithful and the backing of jihadi financiers. the way to win that competition is to be the first to carry out a catastrophic attack here in the united states. when it came to terrorist networks, the george w. bush administration had a mantra: we<u+2019>re going to fight them over there so that we do not have to face them here at home. obama abandoned that mantra. and now the danger is getting closer to home with each passing day. read more from marc thiessen<u+2019>s archive, follow him on twitter or subscribe to his updates on facebook.

thanks to obama, the terrorist cancer is growing

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

48.0

8.0

4612.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

302.0

1.0

0.0

87.0

0.0

37.0

14.0

11.0

8.0

23.0

6.0

17.0

5.0

21.0

29.0

23.0

305.0

88.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the volcker rule bars banks operating in the u.s. from speculating in securities markets for their own profit -- a risky activity that can put taxpayers on the hook for big bailouts if the bank bets turn sour. but there are exceptions to the rule. for instance, banks are allowed to hold u.s. government debt in their own accounts. but those same banks aren't allowed to trade in canadian government debt. oliver thinks that's a nafta violation. although he didn't lay out his argument in detail on wednesday, nafta, like the tpp, generally bans countries from discriminating against each other's financial services. nafta prohibits policies that limit cross-border trade in financial services and requires the u.s. to treat canadian companies the same way that it treats u.s. companies. "the volcker rule is clearly not a violation of nafta or any other trade agreement, all of which explicitly safeguard the ability of the united states to protect the integrity and stability of our financial system," a treasury spokesperson said. "the volcker rule is a key prudential financial regulation that prohibits risky proprietary trading while protecting taxpayers and the depth, liquidity, and stability of u.s. capital markets. nafta does not weaken our ability to implement wall street reform now or in the future, and neither would any trade agreement we're negotiating." it's true that nafta contains an exemption for "prudential" regulation, and financial reform watchdogs strongly agree with the treasury department's interpretation. but it's not an airtight case. sorting out whether the volcker rule qualifies for that exemption is the sort of thing that a court would traditionally determine under u.s. law, and u.s. courts typically give significant deference to the views of the executive branch. u.s. courts, however, don't have jurisdiction over nafta or any other free trade pact. international tribunals do. "the administration can say whatever it wants about its interpretation of these trade agreements," said marcus stanley, policy director at americans for financial reform, a wall street watchdog group. "the problem is, under the terms of these agreements, they are not going to be interpreting them. private tribunals of trade lawyers are going to be interpreting them, and there are going to be plenty of openings, as this shows, to make claims that critical prudential regulations conflict with trade agreements. and eventually one of those is going to win out." treasury has known about oliver's objection to the volcker rule for more than a year. as far back as 2011, a lobbying group representing canadian banks claimed that the volcker rule runs afoul of nafta in arguments presented to u.s. regulators. but none of this turmoil prevented obama from flatly rejecting warren's contention that trade agreements, particularly the tpp, can be used to attack financial standards. "the notion that corporate america is going to be able to use this provision to eliminate our financial regulations and our food safety regulations and our consumer regulations -- that's just bunk," obama told reporters in an april conference call. "it's not true." canada may not opt to pursue a nafta case against the u.s. over the volcker rule. if it doesn't, canadian banks won't have the right to sue on their own because nafta bars individual companies from suing sovereign nations over most financial services violations. but the tpp would be different, according to congressional briefings by the u.s. trade representative, which are reflected in a december letter from warren to ambassador michael froman, the top obama trade official. the tpp wouldn't just empower foreign governments to sue the u.s. over bank regulations; it would allow individual companies and investors to bring such cases. under the "investor-state dispute settlement" process, an international tribunal cannot overrule a law or regulation, but it can assess financial penalties to encourage countries to change said law or regulation. in the past, under other trade deals, the mere existence of such cases has sometimes pressured governments into abandoning non-financial services regulations. moreover, the tpp would reportedly allow foreign banks to sue the u.s. government for failing to provide them with a "minimum standard of treatment." the term is vaguely defined, but international tribunals have interpreted it very broadly to make corporations eligible to receive damages for lost profits caused by policy changes that occurred after they invested in a country. rep. maxine waters (d-calif.) raised similar concerns in her own december letter to froman over the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, a pending trade deal with europe.

canada just threw a grenade into elizabeth warren's trade fight with obama

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

15.0

74.0

8.0

4752.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

332.0

0.0

67.0

1.0

0.0

41.0

14.0

9.0

4.0

17.0

5.0

12.0

3.0

31.0

25.0

28.0

337.0

67.0

42.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

boulder, colo. -- it's expected to be another fiery, wild night as the republican presidential candidates get together in boulder, colorado, wednesday for their third debate. so far, this presidential soap opera has clearly been entertaining and surprising. the latest turn is a new cbs/new york times<u+00a0>national poll that shows retired neurosurgeon ben carson overtaking donald trump as the gop frontrunner <u+0096> a development that has the billionaire scratching his head. "trump losing in polls to carson. carson? i don't think carson is going to negotiate really well with china folks in all fairness, okay? i don't think so and i like him. i don't think so," trump remarked at a recent rally. expect some trump jabs wednesday night. as for carson, the doctor told cbn news he's hoping voters will see what he represents. "i hope they will look at my life, look at the entirety of my life and see that it has been dedicated to the uplifting of people by leading a life that's not full of scandal, and adhering to the values and principles of our judeo-christian foundation," he said. carson's not the only candidate who is relying on faith to help his case. sen. ted cruz, r-texas, believes he will eventually move higher in the polls. "i'm the only one on that stage that has a record of standing up to washington over and over again, of defending the constitution, of defending liberty, defending religious liberty, and i think that's why we're seeing such incredible enthusiasm among the grassroots," cruz declared. cruz, carson, trump and others want to strike gold with the key evangelical voting bloc. while this debate could begin to show movement, political strategist ralph reed doesn't expect any tidal waves. "this idea that there's going to be a coalescing behind one candidate, that's a myth. that's not going to happen. the evangelical community is very vibrant. it's not monolithic and it doesn't march to a single drummer and it's not easy to command," reed explained. wednesday night's debate will focus mostly on the economy. that will give candidates like ohio gov. john kasich and former florida gov. jeb bush a chance to tout their economic records. bush will take the opportunity to lay out his recently announced entitlement reform plan, a subject he spoke about at regent university. <u+00a0> "my belief is that once you reach 67, or 66 now, your payroll tax as an employee <u+0096> you should keep it because that's the way you're going to save money more directly and be able to live a life of independence," bush told the crowd. it's just one of the topics on tap for what is expected to be yet another night of presidential must see tv.

gop debate round 3: expect another wild night

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

5.0

45.0

8.0

2661.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

178.0

1.0

0.0

44.0

0.0

20.0

4.0

16.0

1.0

3.0

9.0

4.0

13.0

18.0

10.0

29.0

180.0

45.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the online comment fits closely with his campaign platform.

white house, dems seek to water down iran bill

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

46.0

8.0

59.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

10.0

2.0

3.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the simmering dispute over media access to hillary clinton<u+2019>s presidential campaign erupted again monday when a reporter for dailymail.com was told by the campaign he couldn<u+2019>t attend her events in new hampshire. david martosko, a reporter for dailymail.com, a website affiliated with the daily mail in london, said the clinton camp said his newspaper wasn<u+2019>t part of the official group -- known as the print pool -- that covers the white house on a rotating basis. as a result, he was blocked monday from covering her events in person for the pool. "i got there when i was told to get there," martosko told fox news' megyn kelly monday night. "quarter to eight in the morning, i showed up in the parking lot, told them who i was, and they said 'no, you can't come.' "this happened twice today," martosko told kelly later in the interview. "i just came right over here from an evening event where mrs. clinton was the keynote speaker ... i showed up again and said 'i'm the designated pool reporter' and i was told 'you need to leave.' i find that unacceptable and offensive, and i think most of my journalistic colleagues do as well." the campaign said it is trying to resolve the issue. however, it denied any suggestion that martosko was denied access because of his newspaper<u+2019>s critical coverage of clinton. <u+201c>the daily mail can sensationalize [the incident] as they see fit for their readers, but that's what happened," a clinton aide told fox news. major media organizations in clinton<u+2019>s traveling press pool issued a statement monday night defending martosko and rejecting any attempt by the clinton campaign to <u+201c>dictate<u+201d> who covers the candidate. <u+201c>we haven't yet had a clear explanation about why the pool reporter for today's events was denied access,<u+201d> said the statement signed by the washington post, wall street journal, new york times and tribune publishing, as well as the daily mail and others. <u+201c>but any attempt by the campaign to dictate who is in the pool is unacceptable.<u+201d> "the pool in general is tight-knit organization," martosko told "the kelly file" monday night. "and to a man and woman, they all said, 'no. the clinton campaign does not get to choose who covers them.'" most presidential campaigns essentially follow the procedures outlined by the white house correspondents association. to accommodate the frequent media crush, a newspaper reporter, a photographer and a tv crew, known as the pool, covers an event. then the details are widely shared via email to reporters and others. however, in covering clinton, a group of 14 news organizations, including the new york times and the washington post, have formed to cover events and share the information on a limited basis. group members argue that those who don<u+2019>t share the expenses of covering a campaign shouldn<u+2019>t have immediate access to the information, or <u+201c>pool reports.<u+201d> still, this is not the first time a member affiliated with the foreign press has complained about being excluded from covering clinton up close. <u+201c>my feeling is that some people have established the rules and that we haven<u+2019>t been part of the discussion,<u+201d> a reporter for the french tv network canal plus recently told the post. <u+201c>i went to iowa to cover [clinton<u+2019>s] first event. i only saw her van. <u+2026> i am fighting for equality and access for all.<u+201d> the clinton camp on monday also said: "we have been working to create an equitable system, and have had some concerns expressed by foreign outlets about not being a part of the rotation.<u+201d> a dailymail.com spokesperson on monday afternoon confirmed that martosko was denied access to the clinton event and kept from boarding a van that her campaign is using to transport pool reporters around new hampshire. however, the campaign has yet to provide a full explanation, considering martosko was scheduled to be the designated print pool reporter, the spokesperson also said. martosko tweeted: <u+201c>for those of you asking: what i've seen online re: today is accurate, and i intend to report here whether they want me to or not."

reporter says clinton camp denying him access to events

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

55.0

8.0

4037.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

258.0

1.0

0.0

82.0

0.0

20.0

6.0

12.0

3.0

1.0

7.0

6.0

4.0

21.0

13.0

28.0

261.0

83.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the obama administration says new visa rules passed by congress could undermine the iran nuclear deal. but congress embraces its role as a watchdog. the iran nuclear deal may be signed, sealed, and on the road to implementation, but there are signs that the sparring between the obama administration and congress is merely taking new forms. the newest flashpoint is a new visa-waiver law designed to reduce the risk of terrorists entering the country. the measure appears to force anyone who has traveled to iran since 2011 to get a visa before visiting the united states. some administration officials worry that this kind of provision could be opponents' way of undermining an agreement that they couldn<u+2019>t defeat outright. secretary of state john kerry responded by telling iran that president obama would waive the provisions that might interfere with the nuclear deal. for their part, critics see mr. obama<u+2019>s proposed waiver as another sign that he<u+2019>s going soft on iran in order to preserve a major piece of his foreign policy legacy. the tension points to the deep mutual suspicions that remain on iran. as a result, the path forward could be a narrow one, with congress embracing its role as an iran watchdog while obama pushes for the space to allow the agreement to take hold. for the moment, some officials say the administration is eyeing upcoming parliamentary elections in iran. the hope is that smooth implementation of the nuclear deal will boost moderate candidates in the february voting. but others say this is the wrong time to be placating iran. secretary kerry<u+2019>s promise <u+201c>suggests the administration will bend over backwards to implement the nuclear deal, when actually this is the time when the us should react stronger and show more firmness towards iran,<u+201d> says alireza jafarzadeh, deputy director of the national council of resistance of iran in washington, an opposition group of exiled iranians. <u+201c>otherwise they<u+2019>ll pave the way to further iranian defiance.<u+201d> the new visa law was passed amid heightened concerns over visa-less travel in the wake of the paris and san bernardino, calif., terrorist attacks. it affects the citizens of 38 countries whose citizens do not need visas to enter the united states. under the new law, citizens of those countries will now need to obtain a visa if they are also citizens of iraq, sudan, syria, or iran. moreover, some interpret the law to mean that anyone who has visited those four countries since 2011 will also need a visa. iran officials worry that the new law could hurt the iran economy. business representatives who know they could have a harder time entering the us could be deterred from visiting iran, they say. iranian foreign minister mohammad javad zarif told the new yorker the new visa provisions were <u+201c>absurd,<u+201d> adding no iranian or visitor to iran had attacked the west. <u+201c>whereas many people have been targeted by the nationals of your allies [or] people visiting your allies<u+2026> so you<u+2019>re looking at the wrong address.<u+201d> the comment seemed a thinly veiled reference to saudi arabia and pakistan, whose nationals or recent visitors were involved in the paris and san bernardino attacks. kerry pledged in a letter to mr. zarif that the us would implement the new visa rules <u+201c>so as not to interfere with legitimate business interests in iran<u+201d> and was looking into ways to <u+201c>waive<u+201d> any aspects that violated the nuclear deal. administration officials say they have no intention of going soft on iran. indeed, they recently held a closed-door briefing for members of congress at which they laid out actions undertaken to counter iran<u+2019>s efforts to spread its influence in the middle east. the officials revealed the recent us intercept of a shipment of iranian arms destined for houthi rebels fighting a war against the us-backed government in yemen. nuclear deal critics like mr. jafarzadeh say they cringed at kerry<u+2019>s quick reassurances to iran. <u+201c>it was very troubling to say the least to see secretary kerry rush to send a letter to zarif that gives unwarranted promises of multiple-entry business visas to a government whose economy is run by the iranian revolutionary guard corps, an organization whose agenda includes terrorism, buying influences in international affairs, and exporting islamic fundamentalism.<u+201d> even some congressional supporters of the nuclear deal are warning that strict vigilance of iran must continue. members of congress have expressed particular concern about two iranian ballistic missile tests in recent weeks. at least one of them violated a security council resolution barring iran from testing missiles that could potentially carry nuclear warheads, according to the united nations. on thursday, sen. chris coons (d) of delaware <u+2013> a backer of the deal <u+2013> warned against anything short of <u+201c>relentless implementation<u+201d> of the agreement and <u+201c>aggressive enforcement<u+201d> of separate sanctions aimed at curbing iran<u+2019>s <u+201c>support for terrorism, human rights violations, or their ballistic missile program.<u+201d> <u+201c>if we take our eye off this ball,<u+201d> he said, <u+201c>they will take that as a clear signal that <u+2026> they have carte blanche to continue their actions that are antithetical to our values and interests.<u+201d>

congress's fight over iran deal enters new phase

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

48.0

8.0

5208.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

399.0

0.0

96.0

0.0

42.0

12.0

15.0

6.0

16.0

7.0

4.0

6.0

24.0

23.0

24.0

401.0

96.0

42.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

while ohio has been a presidential bellwether for decades, hillary clinton has largely focused her efforts elsewhere, as polls consistently put the buckeye state in donald trump<u+2019>s column. still, the g.o.p. nominee<u+2019>s lead is narrow, and now a huge new endorsement could put ohio back in play, thanks to one of the state<u+2019>s biggest stars: lebron james. <u+201c>when i think about the kinds of policies and ideas the kids in my foundation need from our government, the choice is clear. that candidate is hillary clinton,<u+201d> the cleveland cavaliers star wrote in an op-ed sunday, published by business insider. james drew on his experiences working with kids in akron, ohio, through his charity<u+2014>the lebron james family foundation<u+2014>as motivation for his support of clinton, who he argues will also build on the legacy of president barack obama. <u+201c>only one person running truly understands the struggles of an akron child born into poverty,<u+201d> he wrote. james<u+2019>s endorsement of clinton comes at a crucial time in the presidential race. unlike clinton, who has multiple potential paths to the white house, a victory for trump in less than six weeks hinges on winning ohio and its 18 electoral votes. right now, the new york billionaire is enjoying a 3.8-point edge on average in the polls in the battleground state, thanks in part to the state <u+201c>growing older, whiter and less educated than the nation at large,<u+201d> as the new york times reports. but to triumph over clinton, trump needs more than just the white vote. and in ohio, james is as close to royalty as you can get. the fact that the star forward is backing clinton could potentially mobilize minority voters and tip the scales toward the democratic nominee. for weeks trump, has struggled to make inroads with the african-american community as he faces charges of running a campaign fueled by bigotry. his tone-deaf appeals to black voters (<u+201c>what do you have to lose?<u+201d>) and advocacy for widespread use of the controversial policing tactic <u+201c>stop and frisk<u+201d> hasn<u+2019>t helped. in the wake of a number of high-profile deaths of black men at the hands of police officers, james argues that clinton is better suited to respond to the heightened racial tensions in the u.s. <u+201c>we must address the violence, of every kind, the african-american community is experiencing in our street and seeing on our tvs,<u+201d> he wrote. <u+201c>we need a president who brings us together and keeps us unified. policies and ideas that divide us are not the solution. we must all stand together<u+2014>no matter where we are from or the color of our skin. and hillary is running on the message of hope and unity that we need.<u+201d> with enthusiasm for her candidacy flagging, clinton needs celebrity endorsements like james<u+2019> to help get out the vote<u+2014>especially among black voters who are a critical democratic constituency but, like other voting blocs, are less excited about clinton than obama. james is far from the only high-profile athlete who has shared his political views during this election. san francisco 49ers quarterback colin kaepernick, who throughout the n.f.l. season has protested police violence by choosing not to stand during the national anthem, said that both clinton and trump <u+201c>are proven liars,<u+201d> and that voters will have to <u+201c>pick the lesser of two evils.<u+201d> last week, two seattle seahawks players commented on the recent police shootings. on conan, marshawn lynch said he hopes <u+201c>people open up their eyes and see that there<u+2019>s really a problem going on.<u+201d> and richard sherman refused to take reporters<u+2019> questions during a news conference last week as a form of protest. even, michael jordan, who is famously said to have quipped, <u+201c>republicans buy sneakers too,<u+201d> wrote a statement earlier this year condemning violence against african-americans and the killing of police officers, and donated $1 million each to the n.a.a.c.p. legal defense fund and the international association of chiefs of police<u+2019>s institute for community-police relations.

why lebron james<u+2019>s endorsement could help clinton retake ohio

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

61.0

8.0

3951.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

275.0

1.0

0.0

72.0

0.0

22.0

10.0

15.0

6.0

9.0

15.0

11.0

8.0

22.0

16.0

37.0

279.0

73.0

22.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"congress has completely abdicated their responsibility," white house press secretary josh earnest told reporters, speaking of its inaction on the obama administration's request for nearly $2 billion to take extensive preventative measures, such as developing vaccines and widespread mosquito control. "i take no joy in suggesting that republicans are going to look back on this time that they've had to act on the zika virus and deeply regret it," earnest added. the white house slammed members of congress over the administration's decision to shift more than half a billion dollars that was designated for fighting ebola to instead be used against zika. the zika virus has been linked to microcephaly -- a condition in which a developing fetus' brain fails to fully grow and babies are born with unusually small heads -- as well as guillain-barre syndrome, which causes the body to attack its own nerves. officials said wednesday there have been 64 confirmed cases of zika in pregnant women in the continental u.s. one baby has been born with microcephaly in hawaii and more cases are being investigated. so far, the u.s. cases appear to have been contracted in other countries where the virus has been circulating. the white house stressed that even with the shift in funds from the ebola coffers, the current amount of money available won't be enough to adequately prepare for what the world health organization has called a global health emergency. "at some point, later this spring or maybe later this summer, all of you and your news organizations are going to be sounding the alarm about the significant threat that is posed by the zika virus," earnest said. "that is going to happen." but as earnest was briefing reporters, the house appropriations committee put out a statement explaining its position. "more than a month ago, we called on the administration to use existing funding and legal authorities to provide the most immediate and effective response to the zika outbreak," the statement said. "we are pleased to hear today that federal agencies are heeding our call." and offering some reassurance in the face of the white house's ominous predictions, the statement said, "as we move forward, the appropriations committee will continue to monitor the changing needs resulting from this unpredictable crisis to assure the resources necessary for the response are available." in the white house's view, though, until congress approves more funding, there's a risk. the office of management and budget devoted a blog post to the problem on wednesday, saying, "without the full amount of requested emergency supplemental funding, many activities that need to start now would have to be delayed, or curtailed or stopped, within months."

white house warns congress: fight zika or live to regret it

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

59.0

8.0

2754.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

207.0

0.0

48.0

2.0

0.0

25.0

6.0

12.0

3.0

8.0

9.0

4.0

5.0

21.0

19.0

25.0

213.0

48.0

27.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the white house counsel's office reportedly was kept in the dark about hillary clinton's exclusive use of personal email while secretary of state, in the latest detail raising questions over how and why she stayed off the government system despite administration guidance to the contrary. clinton used non-official personal email, and also used a server traced to her new york home. an unnamed source told the associated press the white house counsel's office only found out about her heavy personal email use as part of the congressional investigation into the benghazi attack. the person said clinton's exclusive reliance on personal email as the nation's top diplomat was inconsistent with the guidance given to agencies that official business should be conducted on official email accounts. according to the source, the counsel's office asked the state department to ensure that her email records were properly archived, after finding out in the course of the benghazi probe she did not follow the guidance. meanwhile, lawmakers and others were stepping up efforts to get to the bottom of the issue. the house select committee investigating the 2012 attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi subpoenaed her personal emails on wednesday. and the republican national committee's chief counsel formally requested a state department inspector general investigation. amid the pressure, clinton said on twitter late wednesday she has asked the state department to make her emails available to the public, in her first public response to the controversy. "i want the public to see my email," she tweeted. "i asked state to release them. they said they will review them for release as soon as possible." this means the state department will vet the 55,000-plus pages she handed over, leaving the diplomatic agency with the intensely politicized task of determining which can be made public. the state department said it would review the emails as quickly as possible but cautioned it would take some time. the email saga has developed as the first major test for how the white house and president obama's administration will deal with clinton's likely 2016 presidential campaign -- and the inevitable questions that will only get louder as 2016 approaches. in his letter to department inspector general steve linick, rnc chief counsel john phillippe urged an investigation into whether clinton's system posed a cybersecurity risk, what the department email policies were, how clinton was allowed to use the personal system and other issues. "the american public deserves to know whether one of its top-ranking public official's actions violated federal law," he wrote. "with transparency and openness in government being one of president obama's guiding principles, it is incumbent upon your office to determine the facts surrounding this issue." since the revelations surfaced this week, the obama administration has been pummeled by endless questions about clinton, who hasn't formally announced a run. in the absence of an official campaign to defend her, the white house press secretary has been put in the awkward position of being a de facto clinton spokesman and the most public voice speaking on her behalf. while trying to avoid doing political damage to clinton, the white house has put the onus on her aides to explain exactly what happened. white house press secretary josh earnest acknowledged wednesday that clinton would have emailed white house officials on a non-government account. but the source familiar with the matter who spoke to the ap said the white house was not aware that was her sole method of email and that she wasn't keeping a record of her emails at the state department. the person said the white house's concern was that agencies must maintain records for historical and legal purposes in the case of a freedom of information act request or subpoena. if the state department didn't control the records, officials there could not search and ensure they are turning over what is required and that could create a legal issue for the agency. earnest said the guidance given to government officials is that they should forward work emails on a personal address to official accounts or even print them out and turn them over to their agency to ensure they are properly maintained. the associated press also has reported that clinton's account was set up on a computer email server traced to her home in chappaqua, new york. the associated press contributed to this report.

white house counsel reportedly kept in dark on clinton<u+2019>s personal email use

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

75.0

8.0

4516.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

316.0

0.0

109.0

1.0

0.0

37.0

3.0

9.0

2.0

8.0

7.0

8.0

1.0

27.0

17.0

28.0

322.0

109.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

negotiations over iran<u+2019>s nuclear program appeared to take a sour turn wednesday after pushing on past a key deadline, but secretary of state john f. kerry decided to stay in switzerland an extra day in search of a breakthrough. state department spokeswoman marie harf said that progress had been made and that kerry would remain <u+201c>until at least thursday morning.<u+201d> but the short period appeared to reflect the difficulties in the talks between six world powers and iran over a preliminary agreement on restricting the islamic republic<u+2019>s ability to use its civilian nuclear technology to build atomic weapons. <u+201c>we continue to make progress but have not reached a political understanding,<u+201d> harf told reporters. the talks with iran appeared to be on ever-more-shaky ground as the day elapsed. the white house said iran had not made commitments about its nuclear program in wednesday<u+2019>s sessions, and iran<u+2019>s foreign minister described negotiations with the west as <u+201c>always problematic.<u+201d> though the talks continued, germany<u+2019>s foreign minister said it was possible they could collapse. [the big questions any nuclear deal with iran would have to answer] <u+201c>it is clear the negotiations are not going well,<u+201d> two prominent republican senators who have been wary of an agreement <u+2014> john mccain (ariz.) and lindsey o. graham (s.c.) <u+2014> said in a joint statement. <u+201c>at every step, the iranians appear intent on retaining the capacity to achieve a nuclear weapon.<u+201d> the obama administration had sought a broad political framework for an agreement by tuesday, with three additional months to negotiate the technical details. but a deadline that perhaps was intended to pressure iran to make concessions came and went as the country<u+2019>s representatives bargained hard. a temporary nuclear agreement with iran remains in effect until june 30. diplomats and politicians sounded exasperated wednesday, even as they acknowledged they were still exploring proposals to find a way out of their impasse. in washington, white house press secretary josh earnest said that the talks were productive but that there were unresolved details. he said the united states would not arbitrarily end the negotiations if they were making progress, <u+201c>but if we are in a situation where we sense that the talks have stalled, then yes, the united states and the international community is prepared to walk away.<u+201d> in lausanne, german foreign minister frank-walter steinmeier said that new proposals would be considered but that the two sides were still far apart. when asked whether the talks could collapse, steinmeier told german reporters: <u+201c>naturally. whoever negotiates has to accept the risk of collapse. but i say that in light of the convergence [of views] that we have achieved here in switzerland, in lausanne, it would be irresponsible to ignore the possibility of reaching an agreement.<u+201d> steinmeier said he would reassess on thursday morning whether to stay or return home. french foreign minister laurent fabius, who went to paris on wednesday morning, was headed back to the talks in lausanne that night. iran<u+2019>s chief negotiator, mohammed javad zarif, was critical of his counterparts when he was approached by reporters as he strolled along the shores of lake geneva. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve always said that an agreement and pressure do not go together; they are mutually exclusive,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>so our friends need to decide whether they want to be with iran based on respect or whether they want to continue based on pressure. they have tested the other one. it is high time to test this one.<u+201d> earlier, speaking to iranian reporters outside the beau rivage palace, where talks are being conducted, zarif sounded weary with the approach taken by the multiple negotiating teams on the other side of the table. <u+201c>the negotiations<u+2019> progress depends on political will,<u+201d> he said, according to iran<u+2019>s mehr news agency. <u+201c>the other party<u+2019>s political will has always been problematic.<u+201d> with the departure of several foreign ministers who had arrived over the weekend, kerry was joined at the table by the british and german foreign ministers and the european union<u+2019>s foreign policy chief. france, china and russia were represented by their ministers<u+2019> deputies. the obama administration and its negotiating partners are seeking an agreement that will sharply limit iran<u+2019>s ability to build nuclear weapons for at least a decade and maintain lesser restrictions in subsequent years. iran says that its nuclear program is for peaceful, civilian purposes. it is seeking the lifting of international sanctions that have battered its economy. the day<u+2019>s negotiations started amid hopes of a preliminary agreement on at least some issues. iranian deputy foreign minister abbas araghchi said he expected the talks to end late wednesday with a statement <u+201c>announcing progress.<u+201d> that was quickly contradicted by diplomats from other countries. araghchi also offered some insight into iran<u+2019>s position on two central issues <u+2014> the lifting of sanctions and the future of iran<u+2019>s research on centrifuges to enrich uranium. <u+201c>we insist on lifting of financial and oil and banking sanctions immediately,<u+201d> he told iranian state television, adding that the pace for lifting other sanctions was still being negotiated. <u+201c>we insist on keeping research and development with advanced centrifuges,<u+201d> he added, referring to iran<u+2019>s desire to eventually replace its outdated centrifuges with more modern technology that enriches uranium more quickly. the united states and its negotiating partners want to keep restrictions on iran<u+2019>s nuclear research through the final years of a potential 15-year accord. they also want economic sanctions lifted more gradually. for months, the state department avoided the word deadline, a term that was used in congress and the press. officials called it a goal. in recent weeks, though, even u.s. diplomats began using the term. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve said that march 31st is a deadline; it has to mean something, and the decisions don<u+2019>t get easier after march 31st,<u+201d> harf said monday. some say the white house should never have adopted the <u+201c>d<u+201d> word. <u+201c>it was a mistake to set the march 31 deadline in the first place, because we need a positive outcome more than anyone else,<u+201d> said gary samore, a former nuclear arms adviser to president obama. <u+201c>naturally, the iranians are taking advantage and playing hard ball.<u+201d> israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu kept up his unrelenting criticism of an agreement with iran. <u+201c>yesterday, an iranian general brazenly said, and i quote, israel<u+2019>s destruction is nonnegotiable. but evidently giving iran<u+2019>s murderous regime a clear path to a bomb is negotiable,<u+201d> he said in a statement from jerusalem. house speaker john a. boehner (r-ohio), who was visiting israel on wednesday with a congressional delegation, said in an appearance with netanyahu: <u+201c>regardless of where in the middle east we<u+2019>ve been, the message has been the same: you can<u+2019>t continue to turn your eye away from the threats that face all of us.<u+201d> william branigin in washington, william booth in jerusalem and karoun demirjian in moscow contributed to this report. a framework? a deal? the semantics of the talks.

iran talks to be extended another day

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

37.0

8.0

7171.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

521.0

1.0

0.0

118.0

0.0

69.0

5.0

18.0

7.0

8.0

6.0

10.0

5.0

26.0

24.0

42.0

522.0

119.0

69.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

at 7<u+00a0>a.m., the kurdish forces began their assault. backed by a barrage of u.s.-led airstrikes, about 7,500 kurdish peshmerga fighters, including thousands of minority yazidis, launched a three-pronged attack against the <u+00ad>islamic state in the northern iraqi city of sinjar. they had gathered at the base of mount sinjar at dawn thursday. some prayed and others huddled by campfires before moving to their positions. the dirt tracks to the front lines were jammed with vehicles full of fighters. on the western side of the mountain, kurdish special forces tentatively advanced on foot into islamic state-held territory followed by a snaking convoy of armored vehicles. by nightfall they had succeeded in cutting the highway next to the city, which runs from raqqa in syria to mosul in iraq, splitting the islamic state<u+2019>s territory apart. peshmerga forces had entered a former iraqi military base and cleared a string of <u+00ad>villages, kurdish officials said. the drive to retake sinjar is the largest offensive launched by iraqi kurds against the islamic state and a key test of their military capabilities. it comes as the militants face attacks on multiple fronts, from raqqa, the group<u+2019>s de facto capital in syria, to ramadi in western iraq. the loss of sinjar would deal the islamic state a severe setback, cutting its supply lines between iraq and syria. but it is also a particularly emotive fight. the sudden fall of sinjar to islamic state militants in august 2014 devastated the yazidi community. hundreds of thousands fled sinjar and the surrounding area <u+2014> many straight into the hands of the extremists, who <u+00ad>consider yazidis heretics. yazidi men were summarily executed en<u+00a0>masse, and women were rounded up to be bought and sold as sex slaves. tens of thousands of people fled to mount sinjar. as troops gathered thursday at dawn at the base of the mountain to launch their attack, the yazidi fighters pledged vengeance. <u+201c>it was a tragedy, and we carry a great sorrow in each of us,<u+201d> salim shevan, a 28-year-old yazidi fighter, said as he left for the front lines. <u+201c>we will have revenge.<u+201d> [horrifying tales of sexual slavery for yazidis who could not flee] after the kurdish forces began advancing, bulldozers broke through the earthen barrier that previously marked the front line to make way for dozens of armored vehicles, led by a u.s.- supplied mrap, designed to withstand roadside bombs. while the closest villages appeared abandoned, the attackers soon encountered resistance as they turned toward sinjar. in the distance, a vehicle sped toward the convoy from the direction of syria. <u+201c>suicide bomber! suicide bomber!<u+201d> brig. gen. rawan barzani, the special forces commander and son of the kurdish region<u+2019>s president, radioed to his men on the front line. the convoy fired two antitank missiles, but they missed. another finally hit as the car neared the convoy, and a plume of gray smoke rose into the air. [the islamic state<u+2019>s attacks on yazidis constitute genocide, report says] sinjar lies on highway 47, the route used by the islamic state to transport fighters, weapons and commodities such as oil. <u+201c>getting sinjar is crucial because then [the islamic state] has to decide between raqqa and <u+00ad>mosul,<u+201d> the group<u+2019>s stronghold in northern iraq, barzani said. <u+201c>it won<u+2019>t be able to hold both.<u+201d> kurdish commanders said they expected the offensive to last about a week. despite quick progress made thursday, few believed the fighting in the city will be easy. pentagon press secretary peter cook said that advisers from the united states and other countries were taking part in the sinjar operation but declined to provide the number of foreign forces involved. <u+201c>most of those folks .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. are behind the front lines, advising and working directly with peshmerga commanders,<u+201d> cook said. <u+201c>there are some advisers who are on sinjar mountain, assisting in the selection of airstrike targets.<u+201d> british officials said they are also supporting the operation. <u+201c>the royal air force has been playing a full part in coalition reconnaissance and strike missions to provide effective air support to them and other iraqi ground forces,<u+201d> a defense ministry spokesman said. u.s. officials estimate that about 400 to 550 islamic state militants are in the city. lt. col. dilgash zebari, a peshmerga commander, said militants have dug tunnels and hideaways in the city. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve had suicide bombers; we are expecting more when we go inside,<u+201d> he said. if the offensive bogs down, <u+00ad>rivalries between various factions fighting the islamic state will be to blame, zebari said. the long-planned operation had stalled for weeks because of bad weather and political wrangling between factions of kurdish soldiers. fighters affiliated with the turkish-based kurdistan workers<u+2019> party, or pkk, have held positions in the city, but kurdish peshmerga forces launching the offensive said they are not directly coordinating with them. <u+201c>if the liberation takes too long, it will be because of having troops from different parties, each of them flying their own flag,<u+201d> said zebari. the kurdish-led efforts also have significance in the wider <u+00ad>efforts to cripple the islamic state. in syria, kurdish militiamen emerged as a linchpin in pentagon plans after the failure of washington<u+2019>s strategy to arm and train other syrian rebel units to fight the islamic state. syrian kurds have waged a <u+00ad>series of strikes against the islamic state and last year withstood the group<u+2019>s siege of kobane, a town near the turkish border. but the rising profile of kurdish fighters poses potential complications for the u.s.-led alliance. turkey, a nato member that has battled pkk separatists for decades, has deep concerns over growing kurdish political and military influence, fearing it could encourage greater calls for autonomy. the u.s. military said thursday that it dispatched an additional six f-15e fighter jets to the incirlik air base in southern turkey to join the air campaign against the islamic state. bryan murphy, missy ryan and karen deyoung in washington contributed to this report. sinjar was escape route or trap for thousands today's coverage from post correspondents around the world

kurdish forces, backed by u.s. airstrikes, launch offensive in iraq

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

67.0

8.0

6195.0

0.0

2.0

6.0

0.0

463.0

0.0

122.0

0.0

65.0

24.0

18.0

12.0

32.0

10.0

19.0

6.0

21.0

40.0

35.0

469.0

122.0

65.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

amid the hand-wringing over the gutter-level sexual exchanges between trump and cruz, it doesn<u+2019>t hurt to remember that it has been ever thus in american politics. the innuendos flying back and forth between ted cruz and donald trump about the mutual sexual peccadillos of the candidates and their wives has elicited an abundance of hand-wringing over how such mud-slinging has dragged presidential politics into the gutter. actually, it has returned it to the steamy, if seamy, flow of american history that harkens back to the founding fathers. the only surprise is that pundits affect to be surprised by this turn of events. in fact, sexual indiscretion and its consequences are an indelible part of our nation<u+2019>s political tradition the issue is not whether our forbears who attained, or aspired to, the white house were plaster saints but, rather, how the times in which they lived responded to their behavior. the ink had hardly dried on the constitution in 1791 when our first secretary of the treasury, alexander hamilton, entered into a liaison with maria reynolds, whose scoundrel of a husband, james, blackmailed hamilton in return for his silence, further implicating hamilton in corruption charges. it wasn<u+2019>t until six years later that hamilton<u+2019>s political enemies exposed the affair. hamilton responded by coming clean, admitting that he<u+2019>d slept with the lady but denying the corruption charges. his response won him points for candor but the mud never quite came unstuck. ted cruz might not want to follow the path pursued by andrew jackson, who killed charles dickinson in a duel in 1806 for impugning the reputation of jackson<u+2019>s wife, rachel. the duel did nothing to mar jackson<u+2019>s reputation, as evidenced by his being elected president two decades later. the more notorious sexual scandal of jackson<u+2019>s political career occurred during his presidency when he insisted on defending the virtue of peggy eaton, the wife of his war secretary, john eaton. peggy, a local tavern keeper<u+2019>s daughter disparaged in washington society for her allegedly easygoing ways, was shunned by the wives of jackson<u+2019>s cabinet. what started out as a contretemps of social snubs soon grew into a full-blown political schism. eaton eventually resigned, but jackson revenged himself on his recalcitrant cabinet members by dismissing several of them. jackson won the battle but at a cost that contributed to a growing schism in the democratic party. a different set of circumstances entirely arose from two men who entered the white house as bachelors: james buchanan (1857-1861) and grover cleveland, who served two terms in the gilded age. there, their similarities end. buchanan was rumored to have had a homosexual friendship with william rufus king, himself a former vice president, whom jackson disparagingly referred to as <u+201c>miss nancy.<u+201d> the real scandal of buchanan<u+2019>s tenure was his virtual abdication of executive responsibility as the nation unraveled in the months leading up to the civil war. grover cleveland was another story. running as a reforming democrat in 1884, he was vilified by his republican enemies as the father of an out-of-wedlock son whom he<u+2019>d sired during an earlier sojourn in buffalo. the gop, which had run the bribe-receptive sen. james g. blaine against cleveland, sought to detract from their own candidate<u+2019>s turpitude by sullying cleveland<u+2019>s reputation. cleveland was mocked with the chants of <u+201c>ma, ma, where<u+2019>s my pa?<u+201d> accompanied by cartoons lampooning the errant father who<u+2019>d abandoned his illegitimate son. cleveland turned the tables on his tormenters by acknowledging responsibility for the boy and providing for his welfare, although he never fully owned up to admitting paternity. the exposure may have dented his campaign but didn<u+2019>t derail it as he went on to win the white house. then there was warren harding, the first president to be elected with the women<u+2019>s vote, who displayed his fondness for the ladies by maintaining a long-term affair with his best friend<u+2019>s wife, carrie phillips, when he was elected in 1920, and, for good measure, embarking on a second liaison in the white house with the youngish nan britton. their trysts led to the birth of an illegitimate daughter, elizabeth. monthly payments to the parties involved assured their discretion. harding<u+2019>s tenure was ushered in by prohibition and the ensuing jazz age. but his teetotaling supporters came to have greater concerns than rumors of randy hijinks in the executive office when the teapot dome scandal blew the roof off the gop white house. the age of democratic ascendancy, which roughly stretched from the new deal through the great society, provided an era of good feeling where the human lapses of our chief executives were overlooked by a forgiving press. it was only after their tenures that a more prurient, or judgmental, posterity examined their private affairs more closely. thus, the discreet indiscretions of franklin roosevelt with lucy mercer and missy lehand (or, for that matter, eleanor with lorena hickock), jack kennedy<u+2019>s serial philandering, or lbj<u+2019>s randy ways, were all suppressed <u+00a0>by a media that was more concerned with presidential policies than peccadillos. with the sexual abandon of the cultural revolution came a new approach to residents of the oval office or aspirants for the job. those who sought or won the post, for the most part, had the same human frailties as their predecessors. the difference was in the anything goes approach of the media, whetted by the success of exposing the watergate scandal and abetted by a technological revolution that made what was once the province of intimacy the source of prurient interest under the rubric of <u+201c>the public<u+2019>s right to know.<u+201d> watergate, whatever its virtues, made the president fair game and encouraged an <u+201c>investigative<u+201d> journalism that devolved from monitoring public malfeasance to invading what had once been considered private affairs. so by the 1988 campaign, when democratic sen. gary hart<u+2019>s presidential hopes and political career became caught in the maw of tabloid journalism and left to the mercies of reporters on the scent of sexual scandal, the quest for the presidency had become an adjunct of the entertainment industry. the oscars for this spectacle went to the clinton impeachment proceedings. donald trump took it to the next logical step from turning a candidate into a celebrity to simply making a celebrity a candidate. americans love a circus and the circus has now come to town, or rather the electronic town hall of social media, digital dazzle, squawk radio, and cable wrestling that passes for discourse in our political arena. the unrestrained passions of partisan politics and party faction that washington futilely warned against were there from the beginning. they have simply been amplified by technology. the list cited above is a short one.

as always, u.s. adores a good sex scandal

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

41.0

8.0

6875.0

0.0

486.0

0.0

160.0

0.0

70.0

14.0

25.0

11.0

16.0

20.0

9.0

14.0

32.0

35.0

55.0

486.0

160.0

70.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

migrants refuse to leave train at refugee camp in hungary thousands of migrants flooded into a train station in the hungarian capital thursday after police lifted a two-day blockade, but some who boarded a train they thought was going to germany ended up instead at a refugee camp just miles from budapest. the associated press reports that "excited migrants piled into a newly arrived train at the keleti station in hungary's capital despite announcements in hungarian and english that all services from the station to western europe had been canceled. a statement on the main departures board said no more trains to austria or germany would depart 'due to safety reasons until further notice!' "many migrants, who couldn't understand either language and were receiving no advice from hungarian officials, scrambled aboard in a standing-room-only crush and hoped for the best," the ap said. scuffles broke out when police ordered the passengers off the train at bicske, according to the bbc. meanwhile, hungary's prime minister says his country is doing all it can to manage a growing migrant crisis, even as european officials said they will meet this month in brussels to discuss an effort to "strengthen the european response" to the situation. viktor orban said the influx of refugees into his country is really "a german problem" because that is the intended destination for most of them. hungarians, along with other europeans, are "full of fear" he says, because "they see that the european leaders, among them the prime ministers, are not able to control the situation." "if we would create an image ... just come because we are ready to accept everybody, that would be a moral failure, because that is not the case," orban said after a meeting with european parliament president martin schulz, according to the washington post. "the moral human thing is to make clear, please don't come. why do you have to go from turkey to europe? turkey is a safe country. stay there. it's risky to come." meanwhile, voice of america reports that british, french and german officials have called for urgent action and plan to hold talks on sept. 14 in brussels to address the crisis. voa reports: "the three ministers also called for better processing of migrants in italy and greece." as we've reported, the united nations believes that more than 300,000 migrants have set out for europe from north africa and the middle east on the mediterranean sea so far this year, a 40 percent increase on all of last year. as npr's middle east editor larry kaplow writes: "on any given day now, hundreds of people, perhaps thousands, are drifting in ships or clinging to boats that are little more than inflatable rafts. they go in other ways, too. jumping fences in morocco to get to spanish territory. cramming into trucks from turkey. riding trains across europe."

migrants refuse to leave train at refugee camp in hungary

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

57.0

8.0

2864.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

0.0

186.0

0.0

43.0

0.0

25.0

3.0

11.0

1.0

10.0

5.0

11.0

6.0

10.0

13.0

22.0

190.0

43.0

25.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the president refuses to say he<u+2019>d hold to the tradition of avoiding public comment or political attacks on the successor.

biden previews battle against clinton

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

37.0

8.0

121.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

14.0

4.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

michael brown<u+2019>s parents plan to bring a civil lawsuit for the wrongful death of their son against darren wilson and the city of ferguson, missouri. the announcment came a day after the justice department released its report on the abuses of the city<u+2019>s police department and said wilson wouldn<u+2019>t be charged for violating brown<u+2019>s civil rights. brown family lawyers note that the burden of proof is lower in a civil case than the criminal cases that were considered by both the federal government and a st. louis county grand jury.

mike brown family suing ferguson, wilson

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

40.0

8.0

528.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

40.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

5.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

0.0

5.0

2.0

5.0

7.0

3.0

45.0

10.0

5.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

killing obama administration rules, dismantling obamacare and pushing through tax reform are on the early to-do list.

sanders<u+2019> challenge: winning over obama supporters

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

49.0

8.0

117.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

3.0

2.0

12.0

1.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

after 11 hours, a house committee<u+2019>s questioning of hillary rodham clinton provided few new details about the 2012 attacks on american installations in benghazi, libya <u+2013> and no clear victory for republicans seeking to trap clinton in an admission of bad judgment. the marathon hearing of the house select committee on benghazi concluded at 9 p.m. with a whimper. as the hours passed, republican lines of questioning became increasingly opaque and partisan conflict riled members on both sides of the aisle. clinton, maintaining calm throughout the hearing, received ample opportunity to defend her record and describe her commitment to the safety of u.s. personnel while serving as secretary of state. only a handful of times did republicans succeed in putting her on the spot, more often engaging clinton on topics that seemed tangential to understanding the 2012 attacks that killed four americans. chairman trey gowdy (r-s.c.), an ardent defender of the impartiality of his investigation, insisted the time was being put to good use. <u+201c>learning about the four people who died ... is worth whatever amount of political badgering that may come my way. i<u+2019>ve seen the personification of courage and public service. i<u+2019>m a better person for it,<u+201d> he said late in the evening. clinton only obliquely mentioned the conflict surrounding gowdy<u+2019>s panel, which two republican lawmakers have suggested is politically motivated. <u+201c>i recognize that there are many currents at work in this committee, but i can only hope that the statesmanship overcomes the partisanship,<u+201d> she said. republicans on the committee through the day had repeatedly asked clinton about the special access she gave longtime friend sidney blumenthal, who sent reports about libya to the private e-mail address that clinton used for government business while she was secretary of state. they have contrasted that with the treatment of u.s. ambassador to libya j. christopher stevens, whose requests for greater security measures went through official channels and never bubbled up to clinton<u+2019>s desk. <u+201c>help us understand how sidney blumenthal had that kind of access to you, madam secretary, but the ambassador did not,<u+201d> said gowdy. the sharpest questions of the day came from republicans jim jordan (ohio) and mike pompeo (kan.). jordan accused clinton of misleading the public about the 2012 attacks in order to help president obama<u+2019>s reelection prospects. <u+201c>you picked the [account] with no evidence. you did it because libya was supposed to be .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. this great success for the white house,<u+201d> said jordan, who charged that clinton had blamed the attacks on reaction to an anti-muslim video, while knowing that was false. <u+201c>and now you have a terrorist attack. it<u+2019>s a terrorist attack in libya. and it<u+2019>s just 56 days before an election.<u+201d> jordan was the first republican in this hearing to spell out the alternate history of the benghazi episode that many on the right believe is the correct one. he spoke rapidly, interrupting clinton at times, and personally accusing her of falsehoods. <u+201c>where did the false narrative start? it started with you, madam secretary,<u+201d> jordan said. after his questioning period ended, gowdy gave clinton a chance to respond. <u+201c>i wrote a whole chapter about this in my book, <u+2018>hard choices.<u+2019> i<u+2019>d be glad to send it to you,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>i think that the insinuations that you are making do a grave disservice<u+201d> to those in government. clinton said she had not intended to mislead, but instead had sought to make sense of confusing intelligence reports from libya and other places where protesters had overrun american diplomatic installations. after that <u+2014> prompted by a friendly democratic congressman <u+2014> clinton told the committee that she had felt the loss of four americans in benghazi deeply. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a very personally painful accusation<u+201d> that she had misled the public, clinton said. <u+201c>having it continued to be bandied around is deeply distressing to me. i would imagine that i<u+2019>ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together. i<u+2019>ve lost more sleep than all of you put together. i<u+2019>ve been wracking my brain about what could have been done, or should have been done.<u+201d> in the next round, jordan returned to the line of questioning. it became a parsing of a statement clinton had issued about the attack afterward, with clinton and jordan arguing about whether clinton had blamed an anti-islam video as the cause of the benghazi attacks. jordan became animated as he asked the questions, repeating and re-stating his case in fast bursts. clinton, on camera, smiled a small smile that indicated amused tolerance. her answer was slow and utterly forgettable, which was the victory she wanted. [clinton testifies <u+2014> then and now] pompeo pressed clinton about why no one at the state department had been fired in the aftermath of attacks. <u+201c>why don<u+2019>t you fire someone?<u+201d> pompeo said. <u+201c>how come no one has been held accountable to date?<u+201d> clinton responded that she had relied on inquiries into the attacks, which found that state department officials had made mistakes but no misconduct rose to the level of a firing offense. <u+201c>in the absence of finding dereliction or breach of duty, there could not be immediate action taken,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>the folks in kansas don<u+2019>t think that was accountability,<u+201d> pompeo said. pompeo also asked clinton a question related to her unusual e-mail arrangement, in which she used a private e-mail account <u+2014> and a private e-mail server housed at her home in new york <u+2014> to conduct state department business. that meant that people with her e-mail address, including longtime friend blumenthal, could reach her directly. why, pompeo asked, had she not been made aware of requests for greater security at u.s. outposts in libya <u+2014> passed through official state department channels <u+2014> but blumenthal<u+2019>s ideas about libya got to her inbox? <u+201c>he<u+2019>s a friend of mine. he sent me information that he thought might be of interest,<u+201d> clinton said of blumenthal. <u+201c>he had no official position in the government, and he was not at all my adviser on libya.<u+201d> republicans asked relatively few questions about the issue that has dogged clinton<u+2019>s presidential campaign <u+2014> her use of a private e-mail account to conduct public business as secretary of state. they did not delve into clinton<u+2019>s e-mail practices until more than 9<u+00bd> hours of the hearing had passed. at that point, rep. jim jordan (r-ohio) aggressively said that clinton has shifted her story on the topic and questioned whether she has now turned over all her work-related e-mails. clinton merely repeated what she has said on the topic many times before <u+2014> she said using a private account was a mistake but the state department now has all of her work correspondence. [what clinton<u+2019>s e-mails tell us about her management style] pompeo<u+2019>s questions put clinton on the defensive for the first time on thursday, after other republicans misfired with questions that strayed <u+2014> in time or in subject matter <u+2014> from the attacks that were supposed to be the hearing<u+2019>s focus. it was damaging enough that the next democratic questioner, rep. linda sanchez (calif.), played a video clip designed to attack pompeo himself, in which tv journalist andrea mitchell told pompeo that he was wrong to say blumenthal was a major adviser for clinton on libya. but by 5:15 p.m., the hearing seemed to have lost steam. rep. martha roby (r-ala.) was no longer pressing clinton about whether she<u+2019>d fulfilled her duties as secretary of state <u+2013> instead, she asked whether she had owed stevens a personal phone call, because he was her friend. <u+201c>why did it not occur to you to pick up the phone and call your friend?<u+201d> roby asked. <u+201c>i just want to hear from you why, with all this information<u+2026>did it not occur to you to pick up the phone and call your friend, ambassador stevens, and ask him what he needed?<u+201d> clinton replied again that stevens had been given the chance to make those requests through official channels. after an evening break, around 6:30 p.m., rep. peter roskam (r-ill.) sought to bring new vigor to the questioning. in a choreographed gesture, he tore a sheet of paper meant to symbolize stevens<u+2019>s requests for additional security in benghazi. <u+201c>you created an environment, madam secretary, where [requests] didn<u+2019>t get through. they didn<u+2019>t get through to you, they didn<u+2019>t get through to your inner circle ... [the state department] breached [its] fundamental duty to secure his safety,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>i think it<u+2019>s a disservice for you to make that statement,<u+201d> clinton replied. democrats, as expected, have used their time to toss clinton softballs <u+2014> or to attack the existence of the committee itself. <u+201c>the questions are increasingly badgering, i would even say increasingly vicious,<u+201d> rep. adam smith (d-wash.) told clinton late in the evening. <u+201c>it seems to me that really, the majority simply wish to wear you down. it is clear that they are trying to attack you personally.<u+201d> as the second round of questions came toward a close, rep. elijah cummings, the committee<u+2019>s ranking democrat, asked clinton about an allegation that has circulated among conservatives for years: that she or somebody else in the obama administration had told u.s. military personnel to <u+201c>stand down,<u+201d> and not rush to the rescue of those in benghazi. <u+201c>of course not,<u+201d> clinton told the maryland congressman. <u+201c>everybody in the military scrambled to see what they could do .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. logistics and distance made it unlikely that they could be anywhere near benghazi in any kind of reasonable time.<u+201d> republicans <u+2013> including gowdy <u+2013> seemed to hurt their own cause at times. several spent their 10-minute periods on oddball lines of questioning: one pressed clinton repeatedly about an e-mail exchange between two state department staffers that clinton said she did not know. others loudly remarked that clinton was reading notes passed from aides, a common practice at washington hearings. another spent several minutes trying to prod clinton into saying she<u+2019>d done something even more common than hearings: a politician taking credit for something. and, repeatedly, the republicans were baited by democrats into a time-wasting fight over whether this committee was a partisan tool, and if any of them should be there at all. just before lunch break, gowdy and several democrats got into a loud argument about whether to release blumenthal<u+2019>s interview transcripts, while cameras showed clinton shuffling papers. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know what this line of questioning does to help us get to the bottom of deaths of four americans,<u+201d> clinton said to gowdy, before the intra-legislator bickering began. for clinton, her performance at the hearing was the continuation of a remarkable turnabout. as of several weeks ago, a revelation from this very committee <u+2013> the existence of that private e-mail account <u+2013> had put her on the defensive, and threatened to undermine her presidential campaign. but since then, she<u+2019>s gotten help from another democratic candidate: sen. bernie sanders (vt.), who said in the democratic debate that he, like many americans, was tired of hearing about the e-mails. a republican, house majority leader kevin mccarthy (calif.) seemed to validate clinton<u+2019>s longtime contention that the committee was a partisan tool, not a real investigation. [the fix: why. was. hillary. clinton. speaking. so. slowly?] in her opening statement, clinton sought to portray herself as above political questions and to portray the panel as second-guessing the necessary risks taken by u.s. diplomats abroad. she began her testimony by naming the four dead. she said she<u+2019>d known stevens, recommended him for the job, and met his casket when it returned to american soil after the 2012 attacks. <u+201c>nobody knew the dangers of libya better [than stevens]. a weak government. extremist groups. rampant instability,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>but chris chose to go to benghazi because he knew that america had to be represented there at this critical time.<u+201d> in her statement, clinton sought to get in front of the day<u+2019>s questions, which are likely to focus on the security precautions at the two american facilities where the four died. it was a <u+201c>pre-buttal,<u+201d> to use the political term, in which clinton portrayed that kind of question as contrary to the spirit of diplomatic work. <u+201c>retreat from the world is not an option,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>america cannot shrink from our responsibility to lead.<u+201d> clinton ended her opening statement with an admonition to the committee itself, to ask questions that were not intended to undermine her politically. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m here. despite all the previous investigations, and all the talk about partisan agendas, i<u+2019>m here to honor those we lost,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>my challenge to you, members of this committee, is the same challenge i put to myself. let<u+2019>s be worthy of the trust the american people have bestowed upon us.<u+201d> [clinton needs to avoid a <u+201c>what difference does it make<u+201d> moment ] the committee<u+2019>s chairman opened the hearing with a long defense of its right to exist. gowdy began by talking about his own work <u+2014> defending his committee from allegations that it is a partisan effort disguise as a fact-finding panel. that suggestion was made by a top member of the house gop, majority leader kevin mccarthy (calif.), a few weeks earlier. mccarthy, pressed to say what results the republican majority had produced, noted that clinton<u+2019>s presidential poll numbers had declined after the house investigation began its work. <u+201c>there are people <u+2014> frankly in both parties <u+2014> that have suggested that this investigation is about you. it is not,<u+201d> said gowdy, a former prosecutor elected to congress in 2010. <u+201c>it is about what happened before, during and after the attacks that killed them. it is about what this country owes to those who risk their lives to serve it. and it is about the fundamental responsibility of government to tell the truth.<u+201d> gowdy, in his opening statement, listed what he said were flaws in past investigations, saying they were either incomplete or too close to the obama administration. he said that his committee was the first to discover valuable facts, including that clinton had used a private e-mail server to conduct government business at the time of the attacks. he said that clinton had not been interviewed on the hill until now because of clinton<u+2019>s own e-mail arrangement, which meant she took valuable e-mails with her when she left office. <u+201c>you kept the public record to yourself for almost two years,<u+201d> gowdy said. <u+201c>and it was you and your attorneys who decided what to turn in and what to delete.<u+201d> rep. elijah cummings, the top democrat on the committee, followed gowdy with his own opening statement <u+2014> an attack on his own panel<u+2019>s credibility. cummings charged that the committee had passed up chances to interview other government officials, in order to focus on clinton herself. <u+201c>they set up this select committee with no rules, no deadline, and an unlimited budget. and they set them loose, madam secretary, because you<u+2019>re running for president,<u+201d> the maryland congressman said. <u+201c>republicans are squandering millions of taxpayer dollars on this abusive effort to derail secretary clinton<u+2019>s presidential campaign.<u+201d> cummings noted comments from mccarthy and others that he said indicated the partisan nature of the committee<u+2019>s work, under gowdy<u+2019>s leadership. he called the committee <u+201c>this taxpayer-funded fishing expedition.<u+201d>

gop lands no solid punches while sparring with clinton over benghazi

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

2.0

68.0

8.0

15423.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

1080.0

1.0

0.0

314.0

1.0

0.0

120.0

24.0

26.0

16.0

35.0

21.0

10.0

57.0

54.0

90.0

1086.0

315.0

121.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

just as negotiators were completing an agreement on iran<u+2019>s nuclear program on monday, post reporter jason rezaian was summoned to a tehran court for another session of his secret, irregular and blatantly political trial. we find it hard to believe this was a coincidence. mr. rezaian, a 39-year-old california native who was arrested just under a year ago, has been cruelly forced into an auxiliary role in the long negotiations between tehran and a u.s.-led coalition <u+2014> a pawn used by hard-liners to undermine goodwill, or perhaps to demonstrate that any accord iran strikes with the west will not alter its repressive domestic regime or its anti-western policies. the ordeal has inflicted untold physical and psychological suffering on a journalist who moved to iran with the ambition of improving americans<u+2019> understanding of its people and culture. enough. now that the nuclear deal is completed, it is past time for iranian authorities to release mr.<u+2009>rezaian, along with two and possibly three other americans imprisoned in the country, including pastor saeed abedini and retired u.s. marine amir hekmati. president obama and secretary of state john f. kerry have spoken hopefully of charting a new course in relations between the countries. if that is to happen, the release of the prisoners must be the first step. mohammad javad zarif, the iranian foreign minister who also has hinted at a new era of cooperation, ought to understand this imperative. he has called mr. rezaian a <u+201c>friend<u+201d> and <u+201c>a good reporter<u+201d>; he is clearly aware that there is no basis for the espionage charges brought against him. during the negotiations, mr. zarif dodged questions about the post reporter and at one point even suggested, absurdly, that he might have been duped into wrongdoing. now he and president hassan rouhani should be obliged to put a stop to a travesty that is showing them to be powerless to control the domestic hard-liners who seek to sabotage the nuclear agreement. an opportunity for clemency is imminent. according to mr. rezaian<u+2019>s mother, mary breme rezaian, her son should soon be eligible for release on bail. a law sets a detention limit of one year for iranian detainees whose trials have not been completed. mr. rezaian is regarded by iran as a citizen, so the provision should apply to him. he was taken from his home on july 22 along with his iranian wife, yeganeh salehi, who is also on trial but has been released on bail. though u.s. officials have raised mr. rezaian<u+2019>s case and mr. obama publicly called for his release, his case and those of the other americans were not part of the nuclear negotiation. while that may have been appropriate, mr. rezaian<u+2019>s release should be a condition for any further improvement in relations. if the rouhani government wishes to show that it can cooperate with the west on matters beyond its nuclear program, let it start by freeing jason rezaian.

a nuclear deal has been reached, but iran must free jason rezaian

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

65.0

8.0

2909.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

208.0

1.0

0.0

45.0

0.0

22.0

7.0

15.0

7.0

11.0

9.0

6.0

19.0

25.0

211.0

46.0

22.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) with hillary clinton behind in new hampshire and holding on to a narrowing margin over vermont sen. bernie sanders in iowa, new cnn/orc polls in nevada and south carolina suggest clinton holds strong support in the two states that could prove to be a firewall for her. clinton has the support of 50% of those who say they are likely to attend the democratic caucus scheduled for february 20 in nevada -- which plays host to the first debate among the declared democratic candidates on tuesday and is the first state to elect delegates after iowa and new hampshire. sanders follows at 34%, then vice president joe biden at 12%, with the rest of the field garnering less than 1% support. after conceding the presidency to trump in a phone call earlier, clinton addresses supporters and campaign workers in new york on wednesday, november 9. her defeat marked a stunning end to a campaign that appeared poised to make her the first woman elected us president. clinton addresses a campaign rally in cleveland on november 6, two days before election day. she went on to lose ohio -- and the election -- to her republican opponent, donald trump. clinton addresses a campaign rally in cleveland on november 6, two days before election day. she went on to lose ohio -- and the election -- to her republican opponent, donald trump. clinton arrives at a 9/11 commemoration ceremony in new york on september 11. clinton, who was diagnosed with pneumonia two days before, left early after feeling ill. a video appeared to show her stumble as secret service agents helped her into a van. obama hugs clinton after he gave a speech at the democratic national convention in philadelphia. the president said clinton was ready to be commander in chief. "for four years, i had a front-row seat to her intelligence, her judgment and her discipline," he said, referring to her stint as his secretary of state. obama hugs clinton after he gave a speech at the democratic national convention in philadelphia. the president said clinton was ready to be commander in chief. "for four years, i had a front-row seat to her intelligence, her judgment and her discipline," he said, referring to her stint as his secretary of state. after clinton became the democratic party's presumptive nominee, this photo was posted to her official twitter account. "to every little girl who dreams big: yes, you can be anything you want -- even president," clinton said. "tonight is for you." after clinton became the democratic party's presumptive nominee, this photo was posted to her official twitter account. "to every little girl who dreams big: yes, you can be anything you want -- even president," clinton said. "tonight is for you." clinton walks on her stage with her family after winning the new york primary in april. clinton walks on her stage with her family after winning the new york primary in april. clinton is reflected in a teleprompter during a campaign rally in alexandria, virginia, in october 2015. clinton is reflected in a teleprompter during a campaign rally in alexandria, virginia, in october 2015. u.s. sen. bernie sanders shares a lighthearted moment with clinton during a democratic presidential debate in october 2015. it came after sanders gave his take on the clinton email scandal. "the american people are sick and tired of hearing about the damn emails," sanders said. "enough of the emails. let's talk about the real issues facing the united states of america." u.s. sen. bernie sanders shares a lighthearted moment with clinton during a democratic presidential debate in october 2015. it came after sanders gave his take on the clinton email scandal. "the american people are sick and tired of hearing about the damn emails," sanders said. "enough of the emails. let's talk about the real issues facing the united states of america." clinton testifies about the benghazi attack during a house committee meeting in october 2015. "i would imagine i have thought more about what happened than all of you put together," she said during the 11-hour hearing. "i have lost more sleep than all of you put together. i have been wracking my brain about what more could have been done or should have been done." months earlier, clinton had acknowledged a "systemic breakdown" as cited by an accountability review board, and she said that her department was taking additional steps to increase security at u.s. diplomatic facilities. clinton testifies about the benghazi attack during a house committee meeting in october 2015. "i would imagine i have thought more about what happened than all of you put together," she said during the 11-hour hearing. "i have lost more sleep than all of you put together. i have been wracking my brain about what more could have been done or should have been done." months earlier, clinton had acknowledged a "systemic breakdown" as cited by an accountability review board, and she said that her department was taking additional steps to increase security at u.s. diplomatic facilities. clinton, now running for president again, performs with jimmy fallon during a "tonight show" skit in september 2015. clinton, now running for president again, performs with jimmy fallon during a "tonight show" skit in september 2015. clinton ducks after a woman threw a shoe at her while she was delivering remarks at a recycling trade conference in las vegas in 2014. clinton ducks after a woman threw a shoe at her while she was delivering remarks at a recycling trade conference in las vegas in 2014. obama and clinton bow during the transfer-of-remains ceremony marking the return of four americans, including u.s. ambassador christopher stevens, who were killed in benghazi, libya, in september 2012. obama and clinton bow during the transfer-of-remains ceremony marking the return of four americans, including u.s. ambassador christopher stevens, who were killed in benghazi, libya, in september 2012. clinton arrives for a group photo before a forum with the gulf cooperation council in march 2012. the forum was held in riyadh, saudi arabia. clinton arrives for a group photo before a forum with the gulf cooperation council in march 2012. the forum was held in riyadh, saudi arabia. clinton checks her blackberry inside a military plane after leaving malta in october 2011. in 2015, the new york times reported that clinton exclusively used a personal email account during her time as secretary of state. the account, fed through its own server, raises security and preservation concerns. clinton later said she used a private domain out of "convenience," but admits in retrospect "it would have been better" to use multiple emails. clinton checks her blackberry inside a military plane after leaving malta in october 2011. in 2015, the new york times reported that clinton exclusively used a personal email account during her time as secretary of state. the account, fed through its own server, raises security and preservation concerns. clinton later said she used a private domain out of "convenience," but admits in retrospect "it would have been better" to use multiple emails. in this photo provided by the white house, obama, clinton, biden and other members of the national security team receive an update on the mission against osama bin laden in may 2011. in this photo provided by the white house, obama, clinton, biden and other members of the national security team receive an update on the mission against osama bin laden in may 2011. the clintons pose on the day of chelsea's wedding to marc mezvinsky in july 2010. the clintons pose on the day of chelsea's wedding to marc mezvinsky in july 2010. clinton, as secretary of state, greets russian prime minister vladimir putin during a meeting just outside moscow in march 2010. clinton, as secretary of state, greets russian prime minister vladimir putin during a meeting just outside moscow in march 2010. obama is flanked by clinton and vice president-elect joe biden at a news conference in chicago in december 2008. he had designated clinton to be his secretary of state. obama is flanked by clinton and vice president-elect joe biden at a news conference in chicago in december 2008. he had designated clinton to be his secretary of state. obama and clinton talk on the plane on their way to a rally in unity, new hampshire, in june 2008. she had recently ended her presidential campaign and endorsed obama. obama and clinton talk on the plane on their way to a rally in unity, new hampshire, in june 2008. she had recently ended her presidential campaign and endorsed obama. clinton and another presidential hopeful, u.s. sen. barack obama, applaud at the start of a democratic debate in 2007. clinton and another presidential hopeful, u.s. sen. barack obama, applaud at the start of a democratic debate in 2007. sen. clinton comforts maren sarkarat, a woman who lost her husband in the september 11 terrorist attacks, during a ground-zero memorial in october 2001. sen. clinton comforts maren sarkarat, a woman who lost her husband in the september 11 terrorist attacks, during a ground-zero memorial in october 2001. clinton announces in february 2000 that she will seek the u.s. senate seat in new york. she was elected later that year. clinton announces in february 2000 that she will seek the u.s. senate seat in new york. she was elected later that year. president clinton makes a statement at the white house in december 1998, thanking members of congress who voted against his impeachment. the senate trial ended with an acquittal in february 1999. president clinton makes a statement at the white house in december 1998, thanking members of congress who voted against his impeachment. the senate trial ended with an acquittal in february 1999. the first family walks with their dog, buddy, as they leave the white house for a vacation in august 1998. the first family walks with their dog, buddy, as they leave the white house for a vacation in august 1998. clinton looks on as her husband discusses the monica lewinsky scandal in the roosevelt room of the white house on january 26, 1998. clinton declared, "i did not have sexual relations with that woman." in august of that year, clinton testified before a grand jury and admitted to having "inappropriate intimate contact" with lewinsky, but he said it did not constitute sexual relations because they had not had intercourse. he was impeached in december on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. clinton looks on as her husband discusses the monica lewinsky scandal in the roosevelt room of the white house on january 26, 1998. clinton declared, "i did not have sexual relations with that woman." in august of that year, clinton testified before a grand jury and admitted to having "inappropriate intimate contact" with lewinsky, but he said it did not constitute sexual relations because they had not had intercourse. he was impeached in december on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. the clintons dance on a beach in the u.s. virgin islands in january 1998. later that month, bill clinton was accused of having a sexual relationship with former white house intern monica lewinsky. the clintons dance on a beach in the u.s. virgin islands in january 1998. later that month, bill clinton was accused of having a sexual relationship with former white house intern monica lewinsky. the first lady holds up a grammy award, which she won for her audiobook "it takes a village" in 1997. the first lady holds up a grammy award, which she won for her audiobook "it takes a village" in 1997. the clintons hug as bill is sworn in for a second term as president. the clintons hug as bill is sworn in for a second term as president. clinton waves to the media in january 1996 as she arrives for an appearance before a grand jury in washington. the first lady was subpoenaed to testify as a witness in the investigation of the whitewater land deal in arkansas. the clintons' business investment was investigated, but ultimately they were cleared of any wrongdoing. clinton waves to the media in january 1996 as she arrives for an appearance before a grand jury in washington. the first lady was subpoenaed to testify as a witness in the investigation of the whitewater land deal in arkansas. the clintons' business investment was investigated, but ultimately they were cleared of any wrongdoing. clinton accompanies her husband as he takes the oath of office in january 1993. clinton accompanies her husband as he takes the oath of office in january 1993. during the 1992 presidential campaign, clinton jokes with her husband's running mate, al gore, and gore's wife, tipper, aboard a campaign bus. during the 1992 presidential campaign, clinton jokes with her husband's running mate, al gore, and gore's wife, tipper, aboard a campaign bus. in june 1992, clinton uses a sewing machine designed to eliminate back and wrist strain. she had just given a speech at a convention of the international ladies' garment workers union. in june 1992, clinton uses a sewing machine designed to eliminate back and wrist strain. she had just given a speech at a convention of the international ladies' garment workers union. bill clinton comforts his wife on the set of "60 minutes" after a stage light broke loose from the ceiling and knocked her down in january 1992. bill clinton comforts his wife on the set of "60 minutes" after a stage light broke loose from the ceiling and knocked her down in january 1992. the clintons celebrate bill's inauguration in little rock, arkansas, in 1991. he was governor from 1983 to 1992, when he was elected president. the clintons celebrate bill's inauguration in little rock, arkansas, in 1991. he was governor from 1983 to 1992, when he was elected president. arkansas' first lady, now using the name hillary rodham clinton, wears her inaugural ball gown in 1985. arkansas' first lady, now using the name hillary rodham clinton, wears her inaugural ball gown in 1985. in 1975, rodham married bill clinton, whom she met at yale law school. he became the governor of arkansas in 1978. in 1980, the couple had a daughter, chelsea. in 1975, rodham married bill clinton, whom she met at yale law school. he became the governor of arkansas in 1978. in 1980, the couple had a daughter, chelsea. rodham was a lawyer on the house judiciary committee, whose work led to impeachment charges against president richard nixon in 1974. rodham was a lawyer on the house judiciary committee, whose work led to impeachment charges against president richard nixon in 1974. before marrying bill clinton, she was hillary rodham. here she attends wellesley college in massachusetts. her commencement speech at wellesley's graduation ceremony in 1969 attracted national attention. after graduating, she attended yale law school. before marrying bill clinton, she was hillary rodham. here she attends wellesley college in massachusetts. her commencement speech at wellesley's graduation ceremony in 1969 attracted national attention. after graduating, she attended yale law school. hillary clinton accepts the democratic party's nomination for president at the democratic national convention in philadelphia on july 28. the former first lady, u.s. senator and secretary of state was the first woman to lead the presidential ticket of a major political party. hillary clinton accepts the democratic party's nomination for president at the democratic national convention in philadelphia on july 28. the former first lady, u.s. senator and secretary of state was the first woman to lead the presidential ticket of a major political party. among those who say they are likely to vote in south carolina's primary, set for one week after nevada's caucuses, clinton holds a larger edge, 49% to biden's 24%, with sanders at 18% and former maryland governor martin o'malley at 3%. should biden decide to sit out the race for the presidency, clinton's lead grows in both states. in south carolina, a biden-free race currently stands at 70% clinton to 20% sanders with o'malley holding at 3%, and in nevada, clinton gains 8 points to 58%, while sanders picks up just 2 points and would stand at 36%. in south carolina, clinton's advantages stem largely from sanders' unpopularity with black voters, who made up a majority of democratic primary voters in the state in 2008, the last time there was a competitive democratic primary. back then, black voters broke 78% for barack obama to 19% for clinton. in the new poll, 59% of black voters say they back clinton, 27% say biden and just 4% for sanders. among white voters, sanders has the edge, 44% to 31% for clinton and 22% for biden. without biden in the race, it's a near-even split among whites, 48% clinton to 47% sanders, while blacks break 84% to clinton and just 7% would back sanders. these two states, along with iowa and new hampshire, are the only ones permitted by both major parties to hold primaries or caucuses in february, and the outcome of the contests in these early states can make or break a presidential campaign. clinton's stronger support in nevada and south carolina could bolster her campaign heading in to the large batch of "super tuesday" contests set to be held on march 1. in both nevada and south carolina, clinton holds double-digit advantages as the candidate who would do the best job handling the economy, health care, race relations, foreign policy and climate change, and is broadly seen as the candidate with the best chance to win in 2016 (58% say so in south carolina, 59% in nevada). the margins between clinton and sanders narrow when it comes to which candidate is most honest and trustworthy (in south carolina, 35% say clinton, 27% biden, 21% sanders, in nevada, 33% sanders, 32% clinton and 22% biden), and in nevada, on who best represents democratic values (44% say clinton, 37% sanders) and understands the problems facing people like you (42% clinton, 39% sanders). the four other candidates tested in the polls -- former rhode island governor lincoln chafee, harvard professor larry lessig, o'malley and former virginia senator jim webb -- lag well behind clinton, sanders and biden on the issues and attributes tested. none of them top 3% on any of those questions. the economy is the clear top issue in both states, with 45% in nevada and 43% in south carolina calling it the most important issue in determining their vote for presidency next year. health care and social issues follow in both states, though south carolina voters are more apt to say health care is key than nevada caucus-goers (29% health care, 10% social issues in south carolina, 16% for each issue in nevada). clinton's biggest issue advantage comes on foreign policy (she's up 38 points over biden in south carolina and 30 points over him in nevada), while the margins are narrower on the economy (47% clinton, 24% biden, 18% sanders in south carolina, 46% clinton, 31% sanders, 15% biden in nevada) and climate change (44% clinton, 22% sanders and 21% biden in south carolina, 41% clinton, 30% sanders and 16% biden in nevada). while sanders and clinton have been sparring over the economy for quite some time, both foreign policy and energy policy have earned attention from the two campaigns recently. sanders has highlighted his opposition to the iraq war in 2002 as a foreign policy credential, while clinton declared her opposition to the keystone xl pipeline. the cnn/orc polls were conducted by telephone october 3-10. a total of 1,009 south carolina adults were interviewed, including 301 who said they were likely to vote in the democratic presidential primary. in nevada, interviews were conducted with 1,011 adults, including 253 who said they were likely to participate in the democratic presidential caucus. results among likely democratic voters in south carolina have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points, for nevada democratic caucusgoers, it is 6 points.

south carolina, nevada polls find clinton far ahead

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

51.0

8.0

20028.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1381.0

1.0

0.0

337.0

0.0

130.0

17.0

27.0

17.0

24.0

21.0

18.0

17.0

61.0

43.0

72.0

1384.0

338.0

130.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a week ago, the us election looked to be over. hillary clinton was riding so high in the polls after a disastrous series of gaffes by donald trump that few could conceive of a republican path to victory on 8 november. friday<u+2019>s shock intervention by the fbi may not be enough to change that outcome on its own, but it has certainly set political imaginations running wild. the worry for democrats is that fresh inquiries regarding clinton<u+2019>s use of a private email server while secretary of state come at a difficult time. not only is it hard to prove a negative and re-establish her innocence with barely a week to go until the election, but the letter to congressional officials from director james comey capped a tricky run of news that was already making a sizable dent in her polling lead. momentum for trump began to recover first thanks to another set of emails, the contents of which perhaps explain why the clintons risked so much to try to retain control of her electronic communications in the first place. released by wikileaks, a factor that us intelligence agencies have blamed on russian hackers, these emails to and from campaign chairman john podesta have been trickling out for weeks, with mostly embarrassing rather than damaging content. that changed on wednesday with the release of a report that appeared to confirm just how much the clinton family has blurred the boundaries between its business, charitable and political interests. though almost all of the new information related to bill rather than hillary, it gave trump supporters fresh ammunition at a moment when they were desperate to shift attention from their candidate<u+2019>s own scandals over taxes and alleged inappropriate behaviour towards women. in an election that many pollsters describe as an unpopularity contest, it does not take much to swing the mood of independent voters. by friday, the combination of no news from trump and bad news from clinton had halved her average lead in the polls since the last presidential debate. <u+201c>when the attention was on trump, clinton was winning. now, the attention is on clinton,<u+201d> said political consultant frank luntz, who has predicted the winner in 2016 will be the campaign that keeps the focus on its opponent. sunday<u+2019>s average lead for clinton in national polls of 3.4% ought still to be a healthy safety margin. bill clinton<u+2019>s lead over george bush shrank from 11 points to just three in the last two weeks of the 1992 election, yet he won by nearly double that margin. but among democrats, a cause for concern <u+2013> if not yet panic <u+2013> is that very few polls published so far were carried out after news broke about the fbi and the emails. one reputable survey that got close, an abc news-washington post tracking poll released on sunday, showed just a one-point overall lead for clinton. it asked some voters on friday evening what they thought and found the news had mostly hardened existing opinions but could also play a role at the margins. <u+201c>about a third of likely voters say they are less likely to support clinton given fbi director james comey<u+2019>s disclosure,<u+201d> said pollster gary langer. <u+201c>given other considerations, 63% say it makes no difference.<u+201d> only 7% of clinton supporters felt it would make any difference, but this rises <u+201c>much higher among groups already predisposed not to vote for her<u+201d>, the poll found. <u+201c>the potential for a pullback in motivation of clinton supporters, or further resurgence among trump<u+2019>s, may cause concern in the clinton camp <u+2013> especially because this dynamic already was under way,<u+201d> langer added. <u+201c>intention to vote has grown in trump support groups in the past week as the intensity of criticisms about him has ebbed.<u+201d> the notion that the fbi may not change any minds but will bolster opinion, and thus perhaps turnout, was also supported in a poll of voters in 13 battleground states. this cbs poll showed just 5% of democrats said the issue might make them less likely to support clinton, compared with more than a quarter of registered republicans. this risk also helps explain the ferocity of democratic calls for the fbi to urgently exonerate clinton. many loyalists are convinced the latest trove of emails, discovered on equipment shared by clinton aide huma abedin and her estranged husband anthony weiner, are an irrelevance. even if some show more classified information passed its way through the private server, it should not change the fbi<u+2019>s earlier decision that a criminal charge would be unfair without evidence of intent or coverup. but so long as this is not categorically established, there may be a nagging doubt in some minds that the fbi suspects otherwise. not everyone will be prepared to give clinton the benefit of the doubt. some studies have shown just 11% of voters describe clinton as <u+201c>honest and trustworthy<u+201d>, lower even than trump<u+2019>s score of 16%. while it may not be enough to the tip the balance, running for president while facing potential criminal investigation is never a good look.

will hillary clinton lose the election because of the fbi email investigation?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

11.0

78.0

8.0

5004.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

327.0

2.0

0.0

79.0

0.0

33.0

12.0

19.0

10.0

16.0

12.0

15.0

10.0

25.0

27.0

36.0

337.0

81.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump is way ahead in the polls for the republican nomination. bernie sanders will win the new hampshire primary on tuesday, and he<u+2019>s close to hillary clinton in national polls. but neither trump nor sanders is likely to win! in our new fox news tv special, <u+201c>tech revolution<u+201d> at 8 and 11 pm et sunday night, we<u+2019>ll explain why the better way to predict winners is to look at betting odds. they give marco rubio more than a 50 percent chance of winning the nomination, and hillary clinton an 80 percent chance. betting odds have a better track record than polls or pundits. they come from people who put their own money on the line, rather than people who just mouth off. george mason university economist robin hanson puts it this way:<u+00a0> imagine you<u+2019>re in a bar<u+2026> <u+201c>you're pontificating -- and somebody challenges you and says, <u+2018>want to bet?<u+2019> all of us, as soon as somebody says <u+2018>want to bet?<u+2019> -- we pause. and go, <u+2018>do i really believe that?<u+2019><u+201d> you are more careful when you bet.<u+00a0> if you aren<u+2019>t, you lose money.<u+00a0> think the odds above are wrong?<u+00a0> put your money where your mouth is. american politicians banned most political prediction markets, but they<u+2019>ve allowed a few, like predictit.org. preditctit<u+2019>s odds are a little off because bettors may not trade more than $850 per candidate. the odds on bigger unrestricted markets, like england<u+2019>s betfair.com, are more informative. <u+00a0><u+00a0>because betfair posts those odds in confusing gambling formulas, the two of us simplify them for americans here: electionbettingodds.com. these odds update every five minutes. prediction markets like betfair are not run by sketchy bookies.<u+00a0> they are businesses that operate the way stock markets do <u+2013> people buy and sell <u+201c>shares<u+201d> that pay out based on whether a candidate is successful. today, for about 10 cents, you can buy a share of trump. if he becomes president, you win a dollar. these odds have a good track record. in november, ben carson surged to first place in polls, but bettors knew he would fade--betfair had him at just 9 percent. now his odds are below 1 percent. betting odds do sometimes fail: until the evening of the iowa caucus, bettors thought donald trump would win. but they still beat polls and pundits. part of the reason they<u+2019>re good is the <u+201c>wisdom of crowds.<u+201d> some people betting may be fools making bad bets -- but enough of them have good information that the whole group of bets is likely to be accurate.<u+00a0> you see this on the tv show <u+201c>who wants to be a millionaire.<u+201d> contestants can ask the audience, or an expert.<u+00a0> experts do pretty well.<u+00a0> they get the answer right 65 percent of the time, but the audience gets it right 91 percent of the time. bets on a prediction market called intrade accurately predicted <u+201c>american idol<u+201d> winners, oscar winners, and the election results in almost every u.s. state. they even predicted when saddam hussein would be captured. sadly, our government said betting is <u+201c>contrary to the public interest.<u+201d> it sued intrade and put them out of business. <u+00a0><u+00a0>we no longer have access to intrade<u+2019>s interesting and useful predictions. fortunately, a few sites still allow political betting, and the best odds are easily readable at electionbettingodds.com.<u+00a0> and we<u+2019>ll explain this better on tv sunday night! john stossel<u+2019>s special <u+201c>tech revolution<u+201d> airs sunday night on fox news channel at 8 pm et. maxim lott is a fox news supervising producer and is on twitter at<u+00a0>@maximlott. john stossel is the author of "no they can't! why government fails -- but individuals succeed" and host of "stossel" (fridays at 9 pm/et), a weekly program highlighting current consumer issues with a libertarian viewpoint. stossel also appears regularly on fox news channel (fnc) providing signature analysis. click here for more information on john stossel.

stossel: why marco rubio and hillary clinton are 2016's likely nominees

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

71.0

8.0

3794.0

0.0

3.0

5.0

0.0

234.0

0.0

58.0

0.0

30.0

4.0

20.0

5.0

4.0

11.0

5.0

11.0

20.0

12.0

31.0

239.0

58.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

new york<u+00a0> <u+2014> donald trump fired his hard-charging campaign manager, corey lewandowski, on monday in a dramatic shake-up designed to calm panicked republican leaders and reverse one of the most tumultuous stretches of trump's unconventional white house bid. lewandowski, in some ways as brash and unconventional as the candidate himself, had been by trump's side since the beginning of his unlikely rise to presumptivegop nominee. but he clashed with longtime operatives brought in to make the seat-of-the-pants campaign more professional. the former conservative activist played a central role in daily operations, fundraising, and trump's search for a running mate, but lewandowski's aggressive approach also fueled near-constant campaign infighting that complicated trump's shift toward the general election. reached by the ap on monday, lewandowski deflected criticism of his approach, pointing instead to campaign chairman paul manafort. "paul manafort has been in operational control of the campaign since april 7. that's a fact," lewandowski said, declining to elaborate on his dismissal. asked by cnn why he was fired, he said: "i don't know the answer to that." lewandowski also says his relationships with trump's top adviser, paul manafort, and the candidate's daughter, ivanka are good. lewandowski was fired monday after a tumultuous period for the campaign, marked by infighting and rumors. spokeswoman hope hicks said in a statement earlier in the day that she wishes lewandowski the best. he is the chairman of the new hampshire republican party's delegation to the gop national convention. trump spokeswoman hope hicks described lewandowski's departure as a "parting of ways." a person close to trump said lewandowski was forced out largely because of his poor relationship with the republican national committee and gop officials. that person spoke on the condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to discuss internal deliberations. the move came as trump faced continued deep resistance from many quarters of his party concerned by his contentious statements and his reluctance to engage in traditional fundraising. trump was upset that so many republicans <u+2014> house speaker paul ryan and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell among them <u+2014> were reluctant to support him, the person said, and at least partially blamed lewandowski. people close to trump, including adult children ivanka, eric and donald jr., also had long-simmering concerns about lewandowski, who had limited national experience before becoming trump's campaign chief. some of trump's children were among those urging the billionaire businessman to change tactics for the general election. "firing your campaign manager in june is never a good thing," said veteran republican operative kevin madden. "the campaign will have to show dramatic changes immediately on everything from fundraising and organizing to candidate performance and discipline in order to demonstrate there's been a course correction. otherwise it's just cosmetics." lewandowski has long been a controversial figure in trump's campaign, but benefited from his proximity to the presumptive republican nominee. often mistaken for a member of the candidate's security team, he traveled with trump on his private plane to nearly every campaign stop, giving him more direct access to the businessman than nearly any other campaign staffer. he was a chief promoter of the idea that the best campaign strategy was to "let trump be trump." lewandowski frequently dismissed the notion that trump needed to hire more experienced political hands, spend on polling and sophisticated data operations, and moderate his rhetoric as he moved toward the general election. that approach clashed with seasoned operatives hired in recent months. minutes after news of lewandowski's departure was announced, trump aide michael caputo tweeted, "ding dong the witch is dead!" and included a link to the song from the film, "the wizard of oz." lewandowski was charged with misdemeanor battery in the spring for an altercation involving a female reporter during a rally. the charges were later dropped. trump defended lewandowski throughout the episode and repeatedly framed his own actions as a sign of loyalty and a demonstration that he would not give in to outside pressure. "folks, look, i'm a loyal person," trump told voters at the time. "it's so important," he said of loyalty in a subsequent interview. "and it's one of the traits that i most respect in people. you don't see it enough." lewandowski's consulting firm, green monster, was paid more than $360,000 by the trump campaign through the end of april, and reimbursed an additional $15,000 for travel expenses, according to fundraising reports. yet his approach within the campaign sparked intense criticism from experienced republican operatives inside and outside of the campaign. the move comes a day before trump is to attend a major new york city fundraiser, organized by longtime gop financier woody johnson, the nfl jets owner. trump will spend part of tuesday and wednesday at finance events in his home city. many of the top republican fundraisers had encountered turbulence between worried donors and a campaign manager who did not seem fully onboard with the idea that trump and the party needed to buckle down and raise the money needed to build a robust general election operation. republican strategist ryan williams, a frequent trump critic, said lewandowski's dismissal "is the first major public admission from donald trump that his campaign is not going well." "this shows donors, activists and party officials that he is willing to make significant changes, even if it means parting ways with a trusted political aide," williams said. "now trump needs to demonstrate that he is willing to change his own approach by toning down his rhetoric and becoming a more disciplined general election candidate."

donald trump campaign manager is out

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

36.0

8.0

5956.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

424.0

0.0

98.0

0.0

36.0

16.0

15.0

4.0

18.0

11.0

8.0

9.0

34.0

30.0

48.0

426.0

98.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a times story headlined <u+201c>obama privately tells donors time is coming to unite behind hillary<u+201d> had obama telling dnc high rollers to <u+201c>come together.<u+201d> in it obama <u+201c>didn<u+2019>t explicitly call on sanders to quit<u+201d> but a <u+201c>white house official<u+201d> confirmed his <u+201c>unusually candid<u+201d> words. it was a plant dressed up as a scoop. obama spoke not privately but on background, and not to his donors but through them (and the paper) to his base. it was a different portrait of obama as unifier: political, financial and media elites, all working as one to put down a revolt. obama<u+2019>s neutrality is a polite scam. his <u+201c>private<u+201d> chat came before voters in 29 states even had their say. presidents never let appointees make<u+00a0>endorsements, but three obama cabinet secretaries <u+2014> agriculture<u+2019>s tom vilsack, hud<u+2019>s julian castro and labor<u+2019>s thomas perez <u+2014> backed clinton early, thus shepherding whole economic sectors into her camp. at obama<u+2019>s dnc, ethically challenged debbie wasserman schultz brazenly violates party rules by daily rigging the game for clinton. sanders often says he took on <u+201c>the most powerful political machine in america,<u+201d> by which he means the clintons. he<u+2019>s really fighting the whole democratic party: white house, congress, dnc, elite media and, sad to say, national progressive groups. that includes organized labor but also<u+00a0>nearly every liberal lobby in town. he<u+2019>s been a more constant friend than hillary clinton to almost all of them <u+2014> but he must face and defeat them all. that he<u+2019>s done so in 14 states <u+2014> 15 counting iowa-and fought four more to a draw is a miracle <u+2014> and a sign their days are truly numbered. donald trump has accomplished little by comparison. everything was easier for him. when he hit party elites, no one hit back. democratic elites had a flawed but still formidable clinton to carry their water. republicans had jeb bush, and now ted cruz. trump took the low road and then lowered it some more, yet could help himself to issues of broad populist appeal without an establishment type feigning agreement. the media that ignored or dismissed sanders coddled and appeased trump. eight years of open gop warfare prepared trump<u+2019>s way. bernie<u+2019>s in the first wave to hit the democratic beach. with each call to surrender, sanders just gets stronger. the day the politico story ran, he swept democrats abroad 69 percent to 30 percent. the next day hillary took arizona with 58 percent of the vote but sanders<u+00a0>blew her out in idaho and utah, polling an unheard-of 79 percent in caucuses that shattered turnout records. on saturday he<u+2019>d chalked up three more wins in alaska, hawaii and washington with average margins of 76 perfent. in a times/cbs poll out this week the man who started the race 60 points down closed the gap to five. in a bloomberg poll released saturday he took a 1 point lead. it raises a question that the elites who rig rules, stifle debate and call on sanders to withdraw must answer: who do you think you are? it also raises a question for washington-based organizations allegedly safeguarding progressive values: what have you done? with all her money, contacts and celebrity and full, albeit covert support of her president and party, clinton needed every last liberal endorsement to survive iowa, nevada, missouri, illinois and massachusetts. how did she get them? if those endorsements don<u+2019>t strike you as at least counterintuitive, ponder the record: clinton backed nafta and the tpp, dithered on the minimum wage and still doesn<u+2019>t support a living wage. why would labor help her defeat a man who never once left its side on these and countless other vital issues? she backed the defense of marriage act<u+00a0>in the <u+2019>90s, opposed same-sex marriage till 2013 and recently recalled nancy reagan as a hero of the aids crisis. the human rights campaign may be the bravest and most loyal of all liberal lobbies. why abandon a stalwart ally like sanders for one who dithered and dodged on every tough issue? from sister souljah in 1992 to barack obama in 2008, the clinton record on racial politics is highly mixed. she backed the clinton/gingrich welfare bill that left millions of african americans in poverty and the clinton crime bill that landed millions more in jail. why did a pac run in the name of the congressional black caucus pick her over a guy who went to jail to protest segregated housing? the answers are many and complicated. one is that some once great, grass roots movements pledged their troth to a political party and lost touch with their values and their members. led by hired technicians and assorted other washington lifers, many froze members out of their decisions. it<u+2019>s a big part of the story but not the whole story. another part pertains to ideology and the tyranny of tactical thinking. ideology is easy to spot in those we deem extremist; it<u+2019>s harder to see in those we deem <u+201c>centrist.<u+201d> <u+00a0>all ideologues think their ideology is empirical <u+2014> engels called his <u+201c>scientific socialism<u+201d> <u+2014> but centrists get away with it. we call their shared ideology <u+201c>neoliberalism.<u+201d> its adherents include deficit hawks, military interventionists, market deregulators, free traders and, the key to it all, pay-to-play politicians. this ideology is bipartisan. without the full support of democratic elites, nafta, the tpp, the iraq war, wall street deregulation, every revolving door and no bid contract, every cut ever made to social security or medicare, would be impossible. the culture wars we so loudly deplore are mostly a sideshow staged by political elites to hold onto their base while conducting their business. this election exposes the real divide in american politics, the one separating us from them. neoliberal politics is entirely tactical and tactical thinking is static. most people oppose wall street crooks, mideast ground wars and cuts to social security so they talk endlessly about what the congress they<u+2019>ve corrupted won<u+2019>t pass and what other voters allegedly won<u+2019>t support. neoliberals love horse-race politics because it never favors reform. polls favor known quantities. endorsements go to people in power; money to those willing to reward the investment. tacticians rely on marketing tools made to manipulate, not illuminate. since global finance capitalism runs on pay to play politics, neoliberals promise <u+201c>change<u+201d> but can never deliver reform. they can<u+2019>t talk us out of wanting a living wage or universal health care so they argue tactics: change is impossible because someone else doesn<u+2019>t want it; we can<u+2019>t afford it, even though it saves us money. the tyranny of tactical thinking surely led some progressives to clinton despite knowing she<u+2019>d likely let them down again. it even infects the minds of voters. in hopes of catching a democratic ear or two, i<u+2019>ll illustrate the point using polls. eight month ago bernie was a stranger to democrats. in a recent cnn poll his popularity among them surpassed clinton<u+2019>s. (85 percent /10 percent versus 76/19). the times poll shows the gap widening. in it, 56 percent of dems say if he<u+2019>s the nominee they<u+2019>ll support him <u+201c>enthusiastically.<u+201d> just 40 percent say the same of her. on issues his lead is far greater; that<u+2019>s<u+00a0>why she mimics him rather than the other way around. yet this is the same poll in which she beats him by 5 percent. some democrats who prefer him vote for her. i put it down to tactical thinking. in that same poll 72 percent of democrats say regardless of how they feel she<u+2019>ll be the nominee. seventy-eight percent<u+00a0>say her ideas are <u+201c>realistic<u+201d>; 56 percnt say his are. the case she makes is purely tactical; she can win; she can pass her program; she has more delegates. they<u+2019>d be reasonable arguments if they were true, but all evidence says they aren<u+2019>t. that so many smart people buy into them only proves my point: ideology makes you stupid. like all ideologues, neoliberals see themselves as fact driven free thinkers. last fall polls started showing bernie beating republicans who beat hillary. clintonites said early polls mean nothing. in their best <u+2018>pay no attention to the man behind the curtain<u+2019> voices, neoliberal pundits treated this baseless assertion like a law of physics. it<u+2019>s not. we take early polls with big grains of salt but clinton and trump were very well known with high, hard negatives. that<u+2019>s different. six months later he still beats her in every general election poll; her people still dismisses the polls. she says republicans haven<u+2019>t attacked him yet, but she sure has. the result: people like her less and him more. she says wait till voters find out he<u+2019>s a socialist. they did and guess what: socialism got more popular. if they find out how honest and frugal his brand of socialism is they<u+2019>ll like it even more. pundits tout clinton<u+2019>s foreign policy cred. as secretary of state she no doubt took copious notes but she<u+2019>s wrong on every issue she and sanders dispute. she says her iraq war vote was a long time ago and anyway she apologized but her theory of the case resembles jeb bush<u+2019>s. (she blames w. jeb blames the staff) as secretary she applied her iraq war logic to libya and syria. she promoted fracking, bugged the office of the u.n. secretary general and meddled illegally in a honduran coup. at what point is her experience cancelled out by her inability to learn from it?<u+00a0> and does bernie ever get credit for being right? she has vast political experience but may be the most gaffe-prone major candidate ever to run for president. bernie on the other hand rarely misspeaks. pundits who prize <u+201c>message discipline<u+201d> seem not to notice. they used to say independent voters decide elections, but independents abhor hillary and adore bernie so they say it less now. hillary ranks worst of all the candidates on honesty and bernie best.<u+00a0> he has the highest favorability rating of any candidate in the race. save for trump, she has the lowest of any major candidate in the history of polling. to fact driven, free thinking neoliberals none of it matters. facts that contradict ideology never do. clintonites say bernie should quit so she can focus on trump. but trump<u+2019>s no more inevitable than clinton. if he gets croaked in cleveland, does anyone believe she has a better shot than bernie of bringing some of his followers back into the democratic fold? in any case it<u+2019>s not bernie but her response to him that kills her. coming out against the tpp or the banks would help if she seemed at all sincere. her clumsy smears<u+2014>bernie wants to repeal medicare, bernie opposed the auto bailout, bernie loves the minutemen etc., etc.<u+2014>serve only to fuel doubts about her character. her shameless surrogates accuse him of partisan disloyalty.<u+00a0> could voters care less? bernie won<u+2019>t quit but even if he did it wouldn<u+2019>t fix what ails her. both clinton and trump argue their inevitability. it<u+2019>s an illusion propped up by rules meant to stifle dissent. (superdelegates in her case, winner-take-all in his) she<u+2019>d be the weakest candidate democrats have nominated in half a century or more. he<u+2019>d be the worst ever nominated by either party. neither will finish strong. both may crumble. each will then say early wins in a rigged system entitle them to nominations. will either party have the wisdom to say no? current rules of both parties are undemocratic all conventions are free to adopt their own rules. victory may well go to whichever one has the courage to change. hillary clinton<u+2019>s closing argument, other than her inevitability, is the impossibility of the middle class getting what it wants: a living wage, single payer health care, an end to pay-to-play politics. one thing<u+2019>s for sure; we<u+2019>ll never get them without new leader and new rules. the range of possible outcomes includes a clinton/trump race but also a paul ryan, ted cruz or john kasich-led ticket coming out of cleveland 10 points ahead of hillary clinton or 5 points behind bernie sanders. it also includes a sanders/trump race in which bernie beats trump by more than fdr beat alf landon. it only sounds crazy if you<u+2019>re wearing neoliberal blinders. two polls in the last five days (bloomberg and cnn) say that<u+2019>s exactly what would happen. for this to happen, lots of other stuff has to happen first. republicans have to flinch and nominate trump. bernie has to pick all the low hanging fruit that<u+2019>s left and win a couple of tougher races. the democrats have to unstack the deck. i have a suggestion. start with the superdelegates. for a solid year the democratic national committee has broken its own rules. as hawaii rep. tulsi gabbard noted in resigning as a dnc vice chair to back bernie, officers may not back candidates until a nominee emerges. schultz and other clintonites mock the rule. in slashing debates from 26 in 2008 to six in 2016 and repealing a ban on federal contractor donations, schultz, a payday loan industry ally, acted with zero due process; no notice, minutes, meeting or vote. dnc members said not a word. 435 of them, all unelected, are superdelegates. they had no business voting to begin with. all their votes should be allotted to candidates in proportion to their performance in each state. bernie sanders must stay in the race not only till the convention but till the end of whatever ballot nominates him or hillary clinton. he must do so because he and not she would make the stronger candidate and the better president. regardless of how the next primaries, he should do it because his campaign isn<u+2019>t just a revolution, it<u+2019>s a movement that must outlast this election and many more to come. blinded by ideology and self-interest, party elites say everything we want is impossible. the people in the movement know if we keep eyes on the prize we can do great things, even a thing as great as electing bernie sanders president.

we must smash the clinton machine: democratic elites and the media sold out to hillary this time, but change is coming

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

18.0

118.0

8.0

13702.0

0.0

13.0

0.0

911.0

3.0

0.0

283.0

1.0

0.0

162.0

34.0

36.0

14.0

35.0

28.0

30.0

20.0

63.0

75.0

88.0

924.0

286.0

163.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

there were a couple of not-so-very-subtle signals here inside of hofstra university that donald trump lost monday night<u+2019>s highly-anticipated debate against hillary clinton, and badly. the first was the audible sound of groaning by some of his supporters (picked up by my attentive colleague steve shepard) inside the debate hall as trump meandered self-defensively through a succession of answers against a very focused, very energized and very well-rehearsed hillary clinton. another tell: after the 90-minute sparring match finished, clinton<u+2019>s team practically bounded into the spin room <u+2013> more in glassy-eyed disbelief than visible elation that things had gone so much better than expected. the gop nominee<u+2019>s people, by contrast, dribbled into the media pen like surly seventh-graders headed for homeroom the day before summer vacation. <u+201c>f<u+2014>k, let<u+2019>s do this,<u+201d> a prominent trump surrogate said before diving into a scrum. trump and his new-ish messaging team have labored mightily to turn the avatar of populist rage into a reasonable facsimile of someone who you could see sitting in the oval office. but this best-laid plan unraveled on monday <u+2013> amid clinton<u+2019>s steely assault and the dignified interrogation of nbc<u+2019>s lester holt, who struck a deft balance between facilitator, bs detector and lion tamer. within minutes of the opening bell, clinton<u+2019>s attacks forced domesticated donald to go feral <u+2013> he bellowed, interrupted her repeatedly, grunted, and toward the bedraggled end, became muted and pouty. <u+201c>it was bizarre,<u+201d> said barack obama<u+2019>s campaign manager david plouffe, who, like many clinton allies, seemed visibly relieved. <u+201c>he was clearly rattled, and clearly focused on defending himself, which i<u+2019>m told narcissists are prone to do, and he clearly faded at the end. it<u+2019>s not like she<u+2019>s going to jump out to a 10-point lead, but this was good.<u+201d> whether or not this reverses trump<u+2019>s momentum, or reestablishes clinton's control of the race is an open question. who won is not. here are five takeaways. trump was wimpy when defensive. he is supposed to be the big meanie but it was clinton who hit him where it hurt most. it doesn<u+2019>t take a jung (or even dr. phil after a couple of bud lights) to figure out that the gop nominee <u+2013> who boasts like a barfly <u+2013> just might be over-compensating. hence, clinton, who started the debate a little tentatively, quickly launched into a carefully planned program of freudian mind-games, contrasting her own middle-class businessman dad (who had his own issues) with trump<u+2019>s imperious, larger-than-life father fred who launched his son<u+2019>s business career but also was said to be extremely tough on him. first she started in with a paean to her father<u+2019>s running a small printing business in chicago (this might be the first time a candidate has described, in detail, the silk-screen squeegee process on a debate stage) <u+2013> then she pivoted to mocking supposedly self-made trump<u+2019>s start in the real estate business. <u+201c>you know, donald was very fortunate in his life and that's all to his benefit. he started his business with $14 million, borrowed from his father,<u+201d> she said icily. <u+201c>my father gave me a very small loan in 1975 and i built it into a company that's worth many, many billions of dollars,<u+201d> he responded weakly <u+2013> and so it went on a range of topics. whether it was because clinton was so well prepped, and trump was so breezily unprepared <u+2013> or had a simple case of opening night jitters <u+2013> the bully-boy nominee abandoned his most effective mode of debate combat, answering an attack with a harsher one. she went right for trump<u+2019>s ego <u+2013> questioning his questionable $11 billion net worth, his boastful record on job creation and picking apart his tough talk on fighting isis. in 2007, preparing for a primary race she<u+2019>d eventually lose, clinton told me that the key to presidential political campaigns was understanding that the most effective attacks weren<u+2019>t about exploiting someone<u+2019>s weaknesses but challenging an opponent<u+2019>s perceived strengths. when confronted with that assault, trump wilted and offered a series of meandering answers that had his republicans wincing. <u+201c>it was a draw,<u+201d> former massachusetts sen. scott brown said. <u+201c>but he was on the defensive far too much. that<u+2019>s a direct result of his inexperience.<u+201d> what about the clinton foundation? the former secretary<u+2019>s debate team (including longtime aide phillippe reines, who snapped a pre-debate photo in a trump circled-finger pose) expected him to savage her on the various questions raised about her family<u+2019>s foundation. they were worried about it. while he hammered her ever-so-briefly on emails, he was so engaged in self-justification, he flat-out forgot to pursue an attack that could have made the night a lot less lousy. his <u+201c>30 years<u+201d> attack worked <u+2013> and he<u+2019>ll use it again. trump may have lost the first debate, but he<u+2019>s proven to be a fast learner, and is likely to come back stronger in early october for the second debate, a town hall style affair, in st. louis. and there were a few gold nuggets strewn in the wreckage of hofstra <u+2013> the most valuable an assault (demonstrable and fact-checker-friendly) on clinton<u+2019>s effectiveness in 25-plus years of public life. the been-there-not-done-that argument was particularly useful when coupled with his usual slams on bill clinton<u+2019>s passage of the increasingly unpopular nafta agreement from the 1990s and hillary clinton<u+2019>s election-year flip-flop from tpp booster to opponent. <u+201c>when she started talking about this, it was really very recently,<u+201d> trump said of her opposition to the trade deal. <u+201c>she's been doing this for 30 years. and why hasn't she made the agreements better? the nafta agreement is defective. just because of the tax and many other reasons, but just because of the fact.<u+201d> when clinton claimed that she planned to <u+201c>really work to get new jobs and to get exports that helped to create more new jobs.<u+201d> he scoffed, and shot back, <u+201c>but you haven't done it in 30 years or 26 years.<u+201d> clinton effectively attacked his business career. trump<u+2019>s attempt to head off debate-night questions about his five-year campaign promoting the birther slander against barack obama was a humbling face-plant. his attempt to pin the origin of the charge against clinton associate sid blumenthal was semi-effective with the political press, but it withered under the insistent interrogation of an african-american moderator determined to extract an apology or reasonable explanation. trump offered neither <u+2013> and suggested obama should actually be grateful he pursued the canard because it<u+2019>s now been resoundingly put to rest. politically, his tortured explanation helps energize black voters <u+2013> who already oppose him in historic numbers. but later in the debate, clinton plucked the strains of what could be a genuine crossover hit this fall among ever-elusive white working-class voters and independents: trump<u+2019>s failure to turn over his tax returns. clinton went there with a vengeance <u+2013> engaging in a little trump-esque fact-free speculation about the motives of the billionaire developer-turned-reality tv star. <u+201c>so you've got to ask yourself, why won't he release his tax returns?<u+201d> clinton mused, with relish. <u+201c>and i think there may be a couple of reasons. first, maybe he's not as rich as he says he is. second, maybe he's not as charitable as he claims to be. third, we don't know all of his business dealings... or maybe he doesn't want the american people, all of you watching tonight, to know that he's paid nothing in federal taxes, because the only years that anybody's ever seen were a couple of years when he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license, and they showed he didn't pay any federal income tax.<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s answer did more harm than good: <u+201c>that makes me smart,<u+201d> he said <u+2013> referring to his business, not his political, acumen. her most effective attack <u+2013> and his worst answer. if the gop nominee needed any more proof that preparation trumps bombast in a general election debate, he got it when clinton launched a merciless attack on his habit of stiffing contractors who have labored on his construction projects over the years. again, clinton brought it back to her father, describing how bad he would have felt if one of his clients had accepted his work without paying his bill. "i<u+2019>ve met dishwashers, painters, architects, marble installers, drapery installers, who you refused to pay when they finished the work you asked them to do,<u+201d> clinton said, delivering a carefully scripted attack. <u+201c>we have an architect in the audience who designed one of your clubhouses at one of your golf courses. it's a beautiful facility. it immediately was put to use. and you wouldn't pay what the man needed to be paid, what he was charging you to do.<u+201d> this is a particular dangerous issue for a candidate whose entire campaign is rooted in fighting for the working class -- and his flippant response, yet again, gave comfort to his enemies. <u+201c>maybe he didn't do a good job and i was unsatisfied with his work,<u+201d> trump quipped.

5 takeaways from the first presidential debate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

10.0

46.0

8.0

9071.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

589.0

1.0

0.0

210.0

0.0

61.0

21.0

25.0

16.0

22.0

15.0

25.0

8.0

32.0

56.0

62.0

592.0

211.0

61.0

na