ComplexDataLab/Misinfo_Datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a leading republican critic of the iranian nuclear talks is calling on the u.s. to "walk away" from the table after negotiators missed a key deadline, while other lawmakers joined in voicing concern that iran could extract critical final-hour concessions in the scramble to salvage an agreement. negotiations resumed in switzerland on wednesday but were almost immediately beset by competing claims, just hours after diplomats abandoned a march 31 deadline to reach the outline of a deal and agreed to press on. and as the latest round hit the week mark, three of the six foreign ministers involved left the talks with prospects for agreement remaining uncertain. amid the confusion, sen. tom cotton, r-ark., told fox news he's concerned the framework of a deal could allow iran keep its uranium stockpiles and continue to enrich uranium in an underground bunker. "you have to be willing to walk away from the table and to reapply leverage to iran," cotton said. "and the fact that they're not willing to do that, that we're still sitting in switzerland negotiating when three of our negotiating partners have already left just demonstrates to iran that they can continue to demand dangerous concessions from the west." speaking on msnbc, former democratic presidential candidate howard dean seemed to agree. he said that while president obama is "right" to seek a deal, it might be time to "step away" from the table and make clear that the u.s. is not backing off key positions -- including on iran's uranium stockpile and the pace of sanctions relief. "i am worried about this," dean said. rep. martha mcsally, r-ariz., also told fox news "we're potentially [legitimizing] them having a nuclear infrastructure."<u+00a0>she added: "we don't know exactly what's behind closed doors." despite all sides agreeing to blow by their deadline in pursuit of a rough agreement, even the white house threatened to abandon the talks if iran wouldn't budge. "if they're unwilling to make those kinds of commitments that give us that assurance -- and by us i mean not just the united states, i mean the international community -- then we'll have to walk away from the negotiating table and consider what other options may be available to us, and there is certainly the possibility that that could happen," white house press secretary josh earnest said tuesday. earnest indicated wednesday that's still an option but called the scenario "hypothetical" as talks are "making some progress." he said talks continue to be "productive" but that "we have not yet received the specific, tangible commitments we and the international community require." on tuesday, negotiators had been trying to agree to simply a joint statement that could justify talks continuing until a final june deadline. iran's deputy foreign minister, abbas araghchi, told reporters that if the sides make progress on the text of a joint statement, then that could be issued by the end of the day. but he suggested the statement would contain no specifics. a senior western official quickly pushed back, saying that nothing about a statement had been decided and that iran's negotiating partners would not accept a document that contained no details. the german foreign ministry tweeted that "nothing is agreed," although "progress is visible." araghchi named differences on sanctions relief on his country as one dispute, along with disputes on iran's uranium enrichment-related research and development. "definitely our research and development program on high-end centrifuges should continue," he told iranian television. the u.s. and its negotiating partners want to crimp iranian efforts to improve the performance of centrifuges that enrich uranium because advancing the technology could let iran produce material that could be used to arm a nuclear weapon much more quickly than at present. the exchanges reflected significant gaps between the sides, and came shortly after the end of the first post-deadline meeting between u.s. secretary of state john kerry, his british and german counterparts and iranian foreign minister mohammed javad zarif in the swiss town of lausanne. they and their teams were continuing a marathon effort to bridge still significant gaps and hammer out a framework accord that would serve as the basis for a final agreement by the end of june. eager to avoid a collapse in the discussions, the united states and others claimed late tuesday that enough progress had been made to warrant an extension after six days of intense bartering. but the foreign ministers of china, france and russia all departed lausanne overnight, although the significance of their absence was not clear. kerry postponed his planned tuesday departure to stay in lausanne, and an iranian negotiator said his team would stay "as long as necessary" to clear the remaining hurdles. officials say their intention is to produce a joint statement outlining general political commitments to resolving concerns about iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. in addition, they are trying to fashion other documents that would lay out in more detail the steps they must take by june 30 to meet those goals. the additional documents would allow the sides to make the case that the next round of talks will not simply be a continuation of negotiations that have already been twice extended since an interim agreement between iran, the united states, russia, china, britain, france and germany was concluded in november 2013. obama and other leaders, including iran's, have said they are not interested in a third extension. but if the parties agree only to a broad framework that leaves key details unresolved, obama can expect stiff opposition at home from members of congress who want to move forward with new, stiffer iran sanctions. lawmakers had agreed to hold off on such a measure through march while the parties negotiated. the white house says new sanctions would scuttle further diplomatic efforts to contain iran's nuclear work and possibly lead israel to act on threats to use military force to accomplish that goal. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu continued to question the course of talks on wednesday. he said iran views israel's destruction as non-negotiable, "but evidently giving iran's murderous regime a clear path to the bomb is negotiable. this is unconscionable," he said. "at the same time, iran is accelerating its campaign of terror, subjugation and conquest throughout the region, most recently in yemen." netanyahu said a better deal would "significantly roll back iran's nuclear infrastructure" and link a lifting of restrictions on its nuclear program to "a change in iran's behavior." the associated press contributed to this report.

us faces calls to <u+2018>walk away<u+2019> from iran talks

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

1.0

45.0

8.0

6763.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

496.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

50.0

14.0

19.0

9.0

20.0

9.0

14.0

8.0

31.0

33.0

45.0

498.0

100.0

50.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

americans tend to assume that polarization is bad for democracy. it is supposed to undermine compromise and contribute to gridlock. it<u+2019>s furthermore thought to be linked to growing inequality. but when we talk about polarization, we are usually talking about congress<u+00a0>and political elites. ordinary citizens<u+00a0>show very<u+00a0>little polarization. in a new article, we argue that this lack of polarization among the public isn<u+2019>t necessarily a good thing. indeed, it might be a sign of serious democratic failure. why does polarization decrease when there<u+2019>s more economic inequality? first, take a look at this puzzling graph. if we look at advanced democracies, we find that income inequality has a negative relationship with polarization (which we measure as the share of the population who think of themselves as being non-centrist on a scale of left to right). in general, as inequality increases, polarization decreases (and vice-versa). this is surprising. when income inequality is higher, we would expect people to disagree more about issues such as government spending and redistribution (which we know are closely associated with whether people view themselves as being on the left or on the right). looking at the data more closely shows that the median member of the public tends to be further to the right when income is more unequal. again, this is unexpected. because the distribution of income favors the rich everywhere, the mean income is higher than the median (it is pulled up by those with very high incomes). if the majority are<u+00a0>well-informed and self-interested, you would expect them to<u+00a0>want more redistribution when inequality rises. just the opposite is true. why? we think it<u+2019>s because most people don<u+2019>t<u+00a0>examine public policies closely <u+2014> and so drift to the center by default we argue that the answer to these puzzles involves information. people are often not well-informed about politics, and they few have reason to be. public policies affect large numbers of people, but as individuals we don<u+2019>t have much power to change these policies, so why spend valuable time acquiring information about them? as it turns out, this simple fact (sometimes called <u+201c>rational ignorance<u+201d>) has implications for polarization. the reason is that uninformed voters tend to place themselves in the center of the political space, which they see as <u+201c>safe<u+201d> compared to more extreme options. imagine that a voter can pick a left, center or right party, but doesn<u+2019>t have enough information to know which has the best economic policy given her interests. she just assumes that there<u+2019>s an equal chance that each of these parties has the best policy. the best strategy (if she doesn<u+2019>t have much information) is to pick the center party, since it may actually have the best policy, and even it doesn<u+2019>t, its policy is more likely to be closer to the best policy than either of the other two, because it<u+2019>s located between them (for a step-by-step derivation see the original paper). this logic also applies to ideological self-placement, and we refer to it as the centrist bias. the more people know, the less centrist they become the centrist bias dissipates as people acquire information. those whose interests would dispose them to identify with the center will still do so, but those who we might expect to identify with the left or the right will move away from the center. information breeds polarization. so one way to think about why some countries have more non-centrist voters is to ask how and why voters acquire political information. most people get information through groups and networks <u+2014> like unions, families or co-workers we argue that most people get information through the groups and networks they belong to. one such group is unions, although unions, like other formal groups, have declined in importance in most societies. unions often expose their members to political messages, and they also sometimes engage their members in political discussion. when discussion is involved <u+2013> say, when a union official brings up political issues around the workplace lunch table <u+2013> it pushes<u+00a0>people to look for<u+00a0>information from papers, tv, the internet and so on. this logic also applies to political discussion in social networks of family, friends, neighbors and co-workers. people are more likely to acquire political information when others around them care about such information and are evaluating them in part based on whether they seem well informed. needless to say, it is easier for well-educated people to acquire political information, so educated people tend to respond more effectively to such social incentives. so who tends to be well-informed? this has partisan implications. those with higher incomes tend to have better education and be better integrated into social networks with a lot of political discussion. these people are the natural constituents of center-right parties, which means that the centrist bias is less pronounced for the right. yet the extent to which this is true varies across time and space. many different factors <u+2014> union membership, membership in social networks with political discussion, and education <u+2014> are associated with higher levels of information and therefore also with ideological polarization. in countries with strong unions, the centrist and right biases are less pronounced. the same is true in countries with good public education systems and more pervasive informal discussion networks. the figure below<u+00a0>shows the relationship between the frequency of political discussion in social networks and ideological polarization. the political discussion taking place at parisian street cafes really does matter, and so does a blog like this! we should not be surprised. some public policies can lead to more or less general knowledge and public discussion <u+2014> and therefore, whether there<u+2019>s an informed left this implies that countries with certain institutions and policies <u+2014> strong unions, heavy investment in public education, and extensive social networks <u+2014> end up with more politically informed electorates which are also more ideologically polarized and left-leaning than countries where these institutions are less well developed. at the same time, unions, public education and network integration promote income equality for reasons that are well understood in economics. together this provides a plausible explanation for the pattern showed in our first graph, where there is a negative relationship between inequality and polarization. because governments of the left and right affect the income distribution though public policies <u+2014> most obviously through redistribution and public education <u+2014> these relationships may be self-reinforcing, producing distinct <u+201c>varieties<u+201d> of democracies. from this perspective, polarization may in fact be a sign of a well-functioning democracy <u+2014> one that has well-informed electorates and governments that support the majority<u+2019>s interests in pushing back against rising inequality. torben iversen is the<u+00a0>harold hitchings burbank professor of political economy in the department of government at harvard university<u+2019>. david soskice is a professor in the department of government at the<u+00a0>london school of economics.

pundits and presidents complain about polarization. but it may be the sign of a healthy democracy.

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

98.0

8.0

7231.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

617.0

2.0

0.0

133.0

2.0

0.0

81.0

8.0

14.0

7.0

9.0

6.0

22.0

19.0

39.0

624.0

135.0

83.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) president barack obama announced thursday that u.s. forces will remain in afghanistan at their current levels throughout much of 2016, yet another delay in their scheduled withdrawal and an acknowledgment that america's longest war won't be concluded on his watch. obama campaigned as the president who would end two wars, and thursday's decision was a major political reversal that jeopardizes a cornerstone of his legacy. taliban gains in afghanistan and appeals from kabul for ongoing u.s. assistance contributed to postponing the troop withdrawal and underscored obama's continuing difficulty in fulfilling his intention to remove all american forces by the time he leaves office. on thursday, however, he told reporters at the white house that he wasn't disappointed at having to make the announcement that plans for the withdrawal had been put on hold. instead, he said, his job was to make necessary adjustments given events on the ground. he also stressed that the formal combat mission there has ended, and that he is a president who does "not support the idea of endless war." he ended the iraq war and removed american troops there in 2011. the plan announced thursday keeps 9,800 u.s. troops in afghanistan before an anticipated drawdown to around 5,500 by the time obama leaves office. the troop's mission will remain the same, obama emphasized -- to train and support afghan security forces and carry out counterterrorism operations. obama began his announcement by highlighting u.s. gains in afghanistan and noted that the afghan government and its security forces are now "fully responsible for securing their country." but he also said that the u.s. still needs to bolster those forces to maintain the progress achieved and because "it's the right thing to do." "while america's combat mission in afghanistan may be over, our commitment to afghanistan and and its people endures," obama said from the roosevelt room. "as commander in chief, i will not allow afghanistan to be used as a safe haven for terrorists to attack our nation again." obama stressed that the decision to maintain 9,800 troops in afghanistan until late 2016 came after months of discussions with afghanistan's president, ashraf ghani, and the nation's chief executive officer, abdullah abdullah -- a nod to the fact that the u.s. is maintaining a presence in the country with the support of its leaders, unlike in iraq, where the obama administration could not reach an agreement with the iraqi government on leaving a residual military force. "the decision to maintain the current level of the united states' forces in afghanistan once again shows renewal of the partnership and strengthening of relations of the united states with afghanistan on the basis of common interests and risks," he said. nato also welcomed the move, saying in a statement that it "paves the way for a sustained presence" in afghanistan for the organization and its allies. obama also noted that he had consulted with u.s. military commanders on the ground in afghanistan as well as his entire national security team before deciding to maintain the current troop level. white house press secretary josh earnest later told reporters that obama chose to go with the pentagon's greatest suggested number of troops. "the highest recommendation that came into the president was the level that the president announced today," he said. defense secretary ashton carter said in a news conference thursday that while the fight in afghanistan "remains a difficult fight," the adjusted force numbers will ensure that the u.s. can carry out its mission and help afghans confront the continued challenge posed by the taliban. "today's decision from the president to adjust our troop presence in afghanistan honors that sacrifice (of u.s. troops) and gives us a chance to finish what we started," carter said at the pentagon. the decision comes on the heels of recent taliban gains in afghanistan, notably the militant group's takeover of kunduz, the first major city to fall to taliban hands since 2001. two weeks later, the taliban pulled out of the city -- but the incident sent ripples through afghanistan and shook washington. obama noted as much when he said that while afghan forces are "taking the lead" and fighting "bravely and tenaciously," those forces "are still not as strong as they need to be." the u.s. plan is to now maintain 5,500 u.s. military personnel in afghanistan after a drawdown set to take place in late 2016 or early 2017, more than five times the number of troops previously set to remain in the country at the start of 2017. only about 1,000 troops had previously been set to remain in afghanistan at the u.s. embassy in kabul. obama said the 5,500 troops post-drawdown would be based at the u.s. embassy and at military bases in baghram, jalalabad and kandahar. carter said the pentagon viewed that figure as "enough" to sustain the u.s. mission and accomplish the two-pronged goal of assisting the afghan security forces and carrying out counterterror missions. though the decision clearly was a break from the game plan he had laid out and pitched to the american public, on thursday he downplayed any suggestion that the delay in the withdrawal was a major setback. obama said the decision was not "disappointing" and said his mission has consistently been to "assess the situation on the ground" and make adjustments as necessary. "this is not the first time those adjustments have been made," obama said. "this won't probably be the last." while obama highlighted the sacrifices of the afghan people and american forces who have circulated in and out of the war-torn country for more than 14 years of u.s. operations, obama stressed that casualties are down overall and that u.s. troops will not be heading back into combat. "the nature of the mission has not changed and the cessation of our combat role has not changed," obama said. still, speaking to the american service members who will need to deploy to afghanistan, he said: "i do not send you into harm's way lightly." this is the second draw-down delay announced by obama this year. in march, obama said he planned to reduce u.s. forces in afghanistan 5,500 u.s. military personnel by the end of this year, and then to an "embassy-only" presence by the end of 2016. "the timeline for a withdrawal down to a embassy center presence, a normalization of our presence in afghanistan, remains the end of 2016," obama said in a joint press conference with ghani last march. administration officials stressed u.s. military personnel in afghanistan would continue to serve under two missions -- to root out remnants of al qaeda as well as train and equip afghan security forces. u.s. forces could also conduct counterterrorism operations against elements of isis in afghanistan, should the group present a threat to the u.s. homeland, senior administration officials added. the original white house goal was to hand over the counterterrorism side of the u.s. mission to afghan security forces this year. "it's in our interest to build up the afghan security forces," said a senior administration official. the estimated annual cost of maintaining current u.s. force levels in afghanistan is $14.6 billion, a separate senior administration official said. obama had previously vowed to conclude the u.s. commitment in afghanistan before he leaving office. "we will bring america's longest war to a responsible end," obama said at a rose garden ceremony in may 2014. retired lt. col. rick francona, a cnn military analyst and former intelligence officer, said obama's decision is simply "kicking this can down the road" for the next president. obama will be out of office by the time troops are set to be drawn down again. "this is this administration pushing this off to the next administration because the next time they have to make this decision, it will be a different president in the white house," francona said. republicans who have been seeking higher u.s. troop commitments gave a lukewarm response to obama's announcement thursday. "while this new plan avoids a disaster, it is certainly not a plan for success," house armed services committee chairman mac thornberry said in a statement. "given the troubling conditions on the ground in afghanistan and the other security problems in the region, keeping 9,800 troops there through at least 2016 is necessary to our security interests."

obama again delays afghanistan troop drawdown

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

45.0

8.0

8487.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

583.0

0.0

166.0

0.0

60.0

18.0

16.0

6.0

22.0

14.0

11.0

9.0

29.0

27.0

46.0

585.0

166.0

60.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

jeb bush may have cooler things to do than mix it up in tonight<u+2019>s boulder bash, but he<u+2019>d better come to play anyway. the former governor is riding a huge wave of bad press after slashing campaign spending and sounding petulant about the campaign ordeal, telling an audience he could be doing better stuff and to <u+201c>elect trump<u+201d> if they want entertainment and gridlock. it was the opposite of the joyful run he had promised, and there are even dumb, unfounded rumors that he might drop out. so bush not only needs a strong performance at the cnbc debate in colorado, he needs to do well in the spin cycle that follows these faceoffs. the republican debates have assumed an outsize importance this year. first, there are so many candidates that they are having an unusually strong winnowing effect (remember scott walker?). second, they are drawing massive audiences, 24 million and 23 million for the fox and cnn debates. and third, there are so few of them that each one has a super bowl quality. the once-a-month schedule is the brainchild of the rnc, which thought fewer debates would help the party consolidate around a front-runner. but in a cycle dominated so far by donald trump and ben carson, it<u+2019>s having the opposite effect. jeb just hasn<u+2019>t looked comfortable on stage in either debate, and now that he<u+2019>s sunk to single-digit status, he<u+2019>s under enormous pressure to punch his way back into contention. he knows policy inside out but his message is diffused by a diffident manner. trump, who no one would accuse of being low energy, will need to deal with his emboldened rivals as well as the cnbc moderators. he can<u+2019>t just be seen as reciting his greatest hits on mexico, china and our incompetent leaders. the debate<u+2019>s focus, jobs and the economy, should play to his strength. but he is trailing carson for the first time, 26 to 22 percent in yesterday<u+2019>s new york times/cbs poll, which has a symbolic value even though it's within the margin of error. (even more noteworthy is that 55 percent of trump supporters in the survey said they are firmly behind their man, while 80 percent of carson backers said it<u+2019>s early and they could change their minds.) trump will be standing next to carson, but attacking the doctor will call for surgical precision, and the donald tends to favor blunt instruments. carson is generally overshadowed on a debate stage. he is soft-spoken, low-key, occasionally witty, but doesn<u+2019>t interrupt or deliver zingers. he avoids what he calls the <u+201c>mud pit.<u+201d> and yet, that doesn<u+2019>t seem to hurt him at all. in fact, carson<u+2019>s quiet dignity may be precisely what his fans like. marco rubio has had two solid debates, but they haven<u+2019>t given him much of a bump. he is drawing more attention now<u+2014>rubio is third in that cbs poll, with 8 percent<u+2014>and is a better communicator than bush in front of an audience. but with that poll rise may come tougher debate questions, perhaps including the washington post report that he can<u+2019>t stand the senate and so wants a promotion. carly fiorina may be the best debater in the bunch, having fought her way into the cnn debate, won it hands down and then catapulted herself into the top tier. but the former ceo<u+2019>s surge didn<u+2019>t last, and she seemed to fade from the political conversation since the reagan library event. she will surely try to elbow her way back into the spotlight. as will the others. ted cruz, chris christie, john kasich, rand paul and mike huckabee haven<u+2019>t gotten much time in the earlier debates, and they will be looking to seize a breakout moment. in a trumpian media environment, there just aren<u+2019>t many opportunities to reach the whole country. a couple of the candidates who don<u+2019>t score well in boulder<u+2014>or at the fox business network event in milwaukee on nov. 10<u+2014>may not be with us much longer. that<u+2019>s why the stakes are unusually high in this third presidential debate. 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.

boulder bash: trump may rip carson, but the pressure is on jeb

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

62.0

8.0

4102.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

248.0

1.0

0.0

94.0

0.0

33.0

8.0

11.0

4.0

7.0

5.0

9.0

10.0

20.0

18.0

28.0

250.0

95.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

texas police killed two gunmen on sunday after they opened fired outside the exhibit, which was hosted by a prominent anti-islam group in a dallas suburb. security officials walk around the perimeter of the curtis culwell center on sunday in garland, texas. a contest for cartoons of the prophet muhammad in the dallas suburb is on lockdown sunday after authorities reported a shooting outside the building. two gunmen were killed in an attack on a cartoon contest to draw the prophet muhammad in garland, texas, sunday night <u+2013> an incident and event that has invoked both january's charlie hebdo attacks and the anti-muslim cartoons from europe that sparked the controversy over hebdo. the gunmen reportedly drove up to the event, a "muhammad art exhibit and cartoon contest," some time before 7 p.m.<u+00a0> at the curtis culwell center, a public event space run by the local school district. the two men opened fire on the event, wounding an unarmed security guard in the ankle, before being shot and killed by police, who were already nearby providing security. the associated press reports that the bomb squad was called in to search the gunmen's bodies and their car for explosives. "because of the situation of what was going on today and the history of what we've been told has happened at other events like this, we are considering their car [is] possibly containing a bomb," officer joe harn, a spokesman for the garland police department, said at a news conference. the gunmen have not yet been identified, and police say there were no credible threats made ahead of the event. but the attack has already stirred comparisons to the deadly attack in paris on the offices of satirical magazine charlie hebdo, in which brothers said and cherif kouachi killed 12 people, including several of the magazine's cartoonists, over its frequent depictions of the prophet muhammad. indeed, yesterday's event was a direct response to one held on the same site in late january called "stand with the prophet." the dallas morning news reports that that january event spurred the american freedom defense initiative (afdi), a group led by prominent anti-islam activist pam geller, to organize the cartoon contest at the same location. the afdi is considered an extremist group by the southern poverty law center, which tracks extremist and hate organizations. the event was attended ms. geller, who described it as an exercise of free speech, as well as prominent far-right politician geert wilders, head of the dutch freedom party. mr. wilders reportedly gave the keynote speech, in which he similarly depicted anti-muhammad imagery as a matter of free speech. "muhammad fought and terrorized people with the swords. today, here in garland, we fight muhammad and his followers with the pen. and the pen, the drawings, will prove mightier than the sword," he said. but as the christian science monitor reported during the aftermath of the hebdo attacks, the muhammad cartoon controversies over the past decade or so were not simply exercises of free speech, but were also deeply rooted in anti-islamic sentiments. they first peaked in denmark, and were given loudest voice by danish newspaper jyllands-posten (jp), which routinely railed against islam and its adherents. it was jp that organized the first muhammad cartoons, as "part of the provocative local anti-muslim campaign sweeping denmark, not a statement about free speech." the muhammad cartoon crisis actually began with kare bluitgen, a danish marxist author who is avowedly secular and anti-islam. mr. bluitgen wanted to illustrate a children<u+2019>s book on islam that would depict the face of muhammad, something that is offensive to orthodox muslims. according to a 2005 danish wire story, bluitgen commented at a dinner party that danish artists were afraid to draw the prophet. the story was an overnight sensation. in fact, after the dust settled, only one illustrator was ever found who refused to take on bluitgen<u+2019>s book project. yet based on the wire story, the jp cultural editor, mr. rose, decided to test danes' self-censorship. on a wednesday, he issued an invitation to danish cartoonists (not illustrators, about whom bluitgen complained) to draw muhammad <u+201c>as you see him.<u+201d> by friday, 12 of denmark's 25 working cartoonists responded with images. they were published in the paper on sept. 30, 2005, next to an editorial titled <u+201c>the threat of darkness.<u+201d> the cartoons were not uniformly anti-muslim. because of jp's reputation for islam-bashing, several of the 12 cartoons actually made fun of the campaign, one calling it a "pr stunt." another showed a muslim migrant schoolboy in denmark called <u+201c>muhammad<u+201d> pointing to a blackboard with the words, <u+201c>the editorial team of jyllands-posten is a bunch of reactionary provocateurs.<u+201d><u+00a0> in retrospect, hervik argues, the danish cartoons picked up by charlie hebdo were always intended to be part of the provocative local anti-muslim campaign sweeping denmark, not a statement about free speech.

echoes of charlie hebdo in attack on texas muhammad cartoon event (+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

7.0

74.0

8.0

5005.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

304.0

1.0

0.0

103.0

0.0

37.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

17.0

5.0

10.0

4.0

17.0

21.0

30.0

307.0

104.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in some states, two-thirds of voters have turned in their ballots. the surge suggests americans particularly value their role in the electoral process when stakes are high. voters wait to cast their ballot at a satellite polling station in las vegas on nov. 2. early voter turnout is set to hit record highs this year as more americans than ever head to the polls ahead of election day, experts say. every election day for as long as he can remember, angel del carpio would head to the polls and cast his vote. he did it when he lived in california and new york. now a resident of nevada <u+2013> a closely watched swing state <u+2013> mr. del carpio decided to make an early appearance this year. the wednesday before the election, the retired hairdresser drove to the boulevard mall, about three miles east of the strip, to vote at a polling station set up inside. he walked away proud, having done his civic duty. <u+201c>i did my part,<u+201d> says del carpio, holding up his <u+201c>i voted<u+201d> sticker. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s very important because our vote is what<u+2019>s going to save this country.<u+201d> <u+201c>and it<u+2019>s very convenient,<u+201d> he says about voting early. del carpio's ballot is one of more than<u+00a0>34 million<u+00a0>already cast ahead of the election this year via in-person, mail-in, or absentee ballots. the figure<u+00a0>is on its way to topping 50 million and setting a record for votes cast before election day, according to the pew research center. early voter turnout remains<u+00a0>a questionable indicator<u+00a0>of victory. but the surge in early voting may suggest that americans continue to value their role in the electoral process, particularly when they perceive that the stakes are high, political analysts say. and voters are eager to take advantage of ways that make it easier for them to play their part, they add. <u+201c>people want to choose the most convenient thing, especially if they<u+2019>re anticipating long lines<u+201d> on election day, says david damore, professor of political science at the university of nevada, las vegas. in this election in particular, he says, democrats and republicans alike tend to see a win for the other side as an existential threat. <u+201c>the importance of the outcome looms over most people,<u+201d> dr. damore says. <u+201c>that may not fire enthusiasm, but it becomes important to people to participate.<u+201d> as voting options expand, the percentage of voters nationwide casting their ballots early have soared from about 11 percent in 1996 to 33 percent in 2012, pew reports. data for 2016 suggests the trend will hold. in states such as nevada and colorado, nearly half the total electorate had already cast their votes five days before the election, says paul gronke, founder and director of the<u+00a0>early voting information center<u+00a0>at reed college in portland, ore. in tennessee and arizona, nearly two thirds have turned in their ballots. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s<u+00a0>the biggest story, the earliness,<u+201d><u+00a0>professor gronke says. his theory as to why is somewhat less optimistic: <u+201c>people are very unhappy with this campaign. they want to get it over with.<u+201d> the notion of casting ballots ahead of election day has been around since the civil war, when republicans <u+2013> in an effort to secure the soldier vote for abraham lincoln <u+2013> pushed for legislation to allow servicemen to cast their vote while away from their home states. early voting for convenience, however, took shape only in the 1970s: first when congress passed a law allowing overseas voters without legal homes in the us to mail in their ballots, and then when california introduced a <u+201c>no-excuses<u+201d> law that let any registered voter cast an absentee ballot. by the 1980s, oregon had adopted the country<u+2019>s first vote-by-mail election system, sending registered voters ballots that they could either mail in or drop off in person. today, 37 states and the district of columbia allow some form of early voting. the shift makes sense, says dan schnur, director of the jesse m. unruh institute of politics at the university of southern california. the democratic ideal is to make it as easy as possible for people to participate, he says. in an earlier era, that meant face-to-face communication at an appointed time and place. <u+201c>you don<u+2019>t have to go to your bank to withdraw money. you don<u+2019>t have to harvest your food before dinner,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>even without crossing the divide into online voting <u+2013> which is an idea of debatable value <u+2013> there<u+2019>s no reason in the world that a voter should be required to cast their ballot at a single precinct location.<u+201d> for some las vegas voters, the expansion of early voting <u+2013> and laws that require employers to give workers time to vote <u+2013> provides a chance to reaffirm their role in the democratic process. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re fortunate to get to do it on the clock,<u+201d> says belinda, a hotel employee who declined to give her last name. she and two of her coworkers had arrived at a polling station about a mile off the strip on a charter bus that takes hotel workers to and from the site. <u+201c>it makes a big difference,<u+201d> she says. <u+201c>our voices are being heard.<u+201d> some say the main draw is the luxury of getting in their ballots minus the hassle of election day crowds <u+2013> particularly in a race as volatile as this one. <u+201c>with everybody split up the way they are, the country<u+2019>s going to be crazy<u+201d> come nov. 8, says timothy salmon, a father and video producer, as he left a satellite polling station in the parking lot of a local shopping center. except for work, he says, <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t want to go out that day.<u+201d> for others, the chance to vote early simply means an easy way to fulfill a sense of obligation. after all, voters had only to go online to find the site closest to their home or workplace. <u+201c>it was very fast. i thought it was going to be more difficult,<u+201d> says raul sanchez, who plays in a mariachi band. though in his 50s, mr. sanchez is a first-time voter, spurred to the polls by a desire to see someone who isn<u+2019>t donald trump win the white house. sanchez says the experience left him encouraged <u+2013> and inspired him to take part in future elections. that nevada is a swing state has also led residents here to feel more keenly the weight of each individual vote. <u+201c>we have to make the election count,<u+201d> says del carpio, the retired hairdresser. <u+201c>this is a state where your vote actually matters,<u+201d> adds alex zachary, who works at the marquee, a popular nightclub, as he inched forward in line. <u+201c>i want to make sure i have my say.<u+201d>

one of this election's bright spots: early voting

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

49.0

8.0

6342.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

392.0

1.0

0.0

141.0

0.0

55.0

8.0

22.0

5.0

8.0

16.0

8.0

11.0

33.0

15.0

50.0

396.0

142.0

55.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the battle among capitol hill republicans to replace house speaker john boehner will likely unfold like the one that led to boehner's resignation: gop leadership vs. the party's most conservative caucus. "before we rush headlong into leadership elections, we need to take time to reflect on what has happened and have a serious discussion about <u+2026> what we expect of our leaders, and how we plan to accomplish our goals," illinois rep. peter roskam said saturday in a letter to fellow gop house members. members of boehner's leadership team already appear to be positioning themselves for the job of running the republican-controlled chamber. among them is second-in-command house majority leader kevin mccarthy. the california republican has made no official statement, but sources tell fox news that he is seeking the position. and boehner said in his resignation announcement friday that "mccarthy would be an excellent speaker." in addition, the chamber's no. 3 republican, house majority whip louisiana rep. steve scalise and washington rep. cathy mcmorris rodgers are also interested in the job, according to sources. mcmorris is chairwoman of the house republican conference and the fourth highest-ranking republican in the house. however, ascending to the speakership will be difficult for any of them, considering the existence of the small-but-powerful number of house republicans who repeatedly suggested boehner and his leadership team wasn't conservative enough and tried to derail several legislative initiatives. they most recently tried to make defunding planned parenthood part of a spending bill that must be passed by wednesday to avoid a partial government shutdown. and the seemingly endless struggle between the sides appears to be a major reason why boehner resigned. gop reps. jeb hensarling, texas; pete roskam, illinois; and tom price, georgia, are among the chamber<u+2019>s most conservative members and among those mentioned as possible boehner replacements. roskam lost a spot on the leadership team last year when then-house majority leader eric canton lost re-election. he was the chief deputy whip to mccarthy but lost the big whip race to scalise, who replaced roskam with his own chief deputy. "this is about understanding the importance of this historic moment -- the resignation of a speaker due to internal party divisions," roskam also wrote in the letter, while downplaying any immediate ambition to become the next speaker. "this is not about me," he continued. "i am not announcing a run for any leadership position because i currently don<u+2019>t believe our conference or our leadership can be successful until we confront the underlying issues that have led to this moment." also on saturday, texas rep. louie gohmert, one the chamber<u+2019>s most conservative republicans, told fox new: <u+201c>no matter who it is, i know (the new house leaders) will be more conservative because they will let the majority rule. and that<u+2019>s the way it<u+2019>s supposed to work.<u+201d> new jersey gov. chris christie also didn<u+2019>t endorse a replacement but suggested voters are unhappy with how congress is being run and called for a <u+201c>reset.<u+201d> <u+201c>the american people are disappointed,<u+201d> christie said on fox. <u+201c>they gave our party the majority in both houses, and we have not delivered some of the things we need to deliver.<u+201d> once boehner officially resigns his post and leaves congress next month, the total number of house members will be 434, including 246 republicans. an absolute majority is required to elect a new speaker, meaning the magic number of votes that a candidate must get is 218. an aide to hensarling told fox news that the lawmaker was considering his options and would expect to have a decision next week. among the other most-conservative members also being mentioned for the job are gop reps. jim jordan, ohio, and ted yoho, florida. the chamber's most conservative group is the house freedom caucus, which unofficially has about 35 to 38 members -- including about 15 of the 25 who voted against boehner in the speaker<u+2019>s election in january, according to roll call and the new york times.

race to replace boehner expected to be another leadership vs. conservative caucus showdown

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

90.0

8.0

4111.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

279.0

1.0

0.0

69.0

0.0

23.0

8.0

12.0

6.0

8.0

9.0

8.0

3.0

20.0

14.0

28.0

282.0

70.0

23.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump<u+2019>s sweeping victories<u+00a0>tuesday night<u+00a0>move the manhattan billionaire a step closer to winning the republican nomination for president and to pulling off the most improbable political feat in modern american history. but trump<u+2019>s story is about more than a first-time candidate<u+2019>s stunning rise. it is also about the humiliating defeat suffered by an increasingly isolated political and media class who still do not understand the causes and scope of trump<u+2019>s populist revolt. in his book <u+201c>coming apart: the state of white america, 1960-2010,<u+201d> charles murray wrote about the rise of a new american upper class and the <u+201c>narrow elites<u+201d> who shape america<u+2019>s economy, culture and government. the number of players who dominate the direction of media, politics and finance is surprisingly concentrated for a country as sprawling and diverse as the united states. and yet almost all of these <u+201c>influencers<u+201d> across manhattan and washington were incapable of blunting trump<u+2019>s meteoric rise. time and again over the past year, washington insiders and media moguls misread the mood of working-class voters and their attraction to the populist message championed by trump. on tuesday, that message which undermines republican orthodoxy on trade, taxes and immigration resonated with gop primary voters so strongly that trump cruised to lopsided victories in pennsylvania, connecticut, rhode island, delaware and maryland. so why did these <u+201c>narrow elites<u+201d><u+00a0>miss the mark so badly when the topic turned to trump? because most of them<u+00a0>are hopelessly isolated from the other 300 million or so americans who inconveniently share their country. murray writes that most members of the narrow elite don<u+2019>t watch much television. if they watch any news programs, it is probably the pbs newshour (or morning joe!). powerful influencers have also watched other television shows over the past decade like <u+201c>mad men,<u+201d> <u+201c>house of cards,<u+201d> <u+201c>breaking bad,<u+201d> <u+201c>game of thrones<u+201d> and <u+201c>curb your enthusiasm.<u+201d> while such critically acclaimed shows are often consumed by narrow elites in frantic fits of binge watching, the other 300 million americans view television a bit differently. murray reports that the average american watches about 35 hours of television a week. since 2004, trump has starred in 14 seasons of <u+201c>the apprentice.<u+201d> and if you<u+2019>re a member of the narrow elite that holds sway over media coverage or government policy, chances are good that you saw few episodes of <u+201c>the apprentice<u+201d> or <u+201c>survivor.<u+201d> but millions of americans did, and perhaps that kind of mass consumption is why trump will beat don draper at the polls every time. history may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme when the topic turns to tv careers and republican politicians. from 1956 to 1962, ronald reagan hosted general electric theater and had his image beamed into more than<u+00a0>20 million homes every week. the successful run on tv gave reagan a connection with american voters that his movie career never could. by the time reagan ran for governor of california in 1966, the ge host was a household name. reagan<u+2019>s landslide victory shocked elites in and out of the political class and launched a conservative revolution that would last a generation. 50 years later, that revolution is being undone by another tv star who has been underestimated by elites while being elevated by working-class voters. the question now is whether trump can prove his critics wrong again by winning the nomination and then defeating hillary clinton in the fall. the odds may be long for the new york developer and reality star, but no longer than the ones he faced last june when he first sought the gop nomination.

trump<u+2019>s sweep is another humiliating defeat for media and political elites

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

74.0

8.0

3657.0

0.0

1.0

9.0

0.0

259.0

1.0

0.0

66.0

2.0

0.0

30.0

8.0

19.0

7.0

10.0

13.0

8.0

12.0

20.0

18.0

32.0

268.0

67.0

32.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) white house hopefuls on both sides of the political aisle on saturday hailed the prisoner swap between the u.s. and iran, though republicans said the exchange took too long and served as a reminder that the longtime u.s. foe isn't trustworthy. washington post reporter jason rezaian, former marine amir hekmati, pastor saeed abedini and nosratollah khosravi-roodsari were released from iranian custody in exchange for seven iranians who were not convicted of violent crimes but of violating the sanctions ban against iran, senior administration officials told cnn. a fifth american, matthew trevithick, is also being released by iran, u.s. officials said, but they said his release was not part of the negotiated prisoner swap. gop front-runner donald trump, speaking at a campaign event in portsmouth, new hampshire, criticized the iranian nuclear deal, which he claimed will send $150 billion to iran. "now i have to see what the deal is for the four people, because someone said they were getting seven back. so essentially, they get 150 billion plus seven, and we get four. doesn't sound too good. doesn't sound too good," he said. "i am happy they are coming back, but it is a disgrace they have been there this long, a total disgrace." speaking at the south carolina tea party coalition convention in myrtle beach, south carolina, later saturday, trump said he "had something to do with" the prisoners' release. "i have been hitting (the obama administration) very hard. and i think i might have had something to do with it. you want to know the truth -- it's part of my staple thing -- i go crazy when i hear about this," he said. trump's top rival, texas sen. ted cruz, said he's glad the prisoners were released but is worried about the details of the exchange. "we don't know the details of the deal that is bringing them home, and it may well be there are some very problematic aspects to this deal," cruz told reporters in fort mill, south carolina. "but at least this morning, i am giving thanks that pastor saeed is coming home. it is far later than it should have been, but we will be glad to welcome him home with open arms." florida sen. marco rubio -- who last spring joined 20 other senators in penning a letter to secretary of state john kerry saying that the obama administration should push for the prisoners' release as part of the iran nuclear deal's negotiations -- said at a town hall in johnston, iowa, that situation "tells us all we need to know about the iranian regime." "if these reports are true, of course we are happy for them and their families, but they should never have been there," he said, adding that iran takes "people hostage in order to take concessions. and the fact that they can get away with it in this administration is one of the reasons -- has created an incentive for more governments to do this around the world." in an interview with cnn, kentucky sen. rand paul called abedini an "incredibly brave man." "for years, we have advocated for the release of saeed abedini. i've sent repeated letters to the administration encouraging them to advocate for his release hoping we'd pressure iran for his release," he said. "we're excited he's coming home. i think he's an incredibly brave man to advocate for christianity and to risk his life in the process." former florida gov. jeb bush said in amherst, new hampshire, that if he were president, he would have threatened iran with military action over the prisoners. "i would say ... if you do not release them, that there's going to be military action, that that's an act of provocation, an act of war. what i would do in january is recognize that iran is not an ally. that's how the obama administration views this," bush said. retired neurosurgeon ben carson said he was "overjoyed" for the prisoners' families, but said "the fact remains that president obama's nuclear agreement with iran is fatally flawed and gravely jeopardizes the national security interests of the american people, our ally israel and other peaceful nations in the middle east and around the world." former pennsylvania sen. rick santorum said the deal "should give each of us pause." "first, we are returning criminals back to iran in return for freeing innocent americans. under no rational analysis is that a fair deal," santorum said in a statement. "second, this exchange proves that iran is no friend and continues to get the upper hand in negotiations with the obama administration. as i said in thursday's debate, barack obama's deal with iran must be shredded and i intend to do that on day one of my presidency." and former arkansas gov. mike huckabee, while praising the release of abedini, asked why it took the obama administration so long to negotiate his release. "he never should have been jailed and it's embarrassing that john kerry and obama negotiate with iran as innocent americans remained locked-up in prison," huckabee said in a statement. "president obama is a complete fool for trusting a country that's been lying, cheating, murdering and sponsoring terrorism around the globe for 37 years. empowering iran with sanctions relief is like neville chamberlain writing a $150 billion check to adolf hitler hoping he'll play nice and behave. this iran deal is an insane disaster and this white house has lost its mind." but democrats, including hillary clinton, lauded the announcement, with the front-runner saying she is "greatly relieved" that iran released the american prisoners. "their families and our country have waited and prayed for this day to come," she said in a statement. "but we shouldn't thank iran for the prisoners or for following through on its obligations. these prisoners were held unjustly by a regime that continues to threaten the peace and security of the middle east." vermont sen. bernie sanders and former maryland gov. martin o'malley, meanwhile, said the exchange represented progress in relations between washington and tehran. "this good news shows that diplomacy can work, even in this volatile region of the world," sanders said.

2016ers hail release of u.s. prisoners held by iran as republicans slam obama 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

4.0

84.0

8.0

6103.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

467.0

1.0

0.0

115.0

0.0

53.0

14.0

18.0

9.0

15.0

14.0

8.0

31.0

25.0

37.0

472.0

116.0

53.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

bernie sanders, for all his talk of revolution, never wanted to be ralph nader. he has a long history of keeping the democratic party at arm<u+2019>s length, but he also has a long history of rejecting spoiler bids. since 1992, he has always endorsed the democratic presidential nominee, snubbing nader<u+2019>s four left-wing third-party campaigns. he became a democrat to run for president instead of keeping his <u+201c>(i)<u+201d> and following in nader<u+2019>s footsteps. he has pledged to support hillary clinton if she wins the democratic nomination and has ripped donald trump at every opportunity. but even if sanders isn<u+2019>t deliberately trying to replicate the electoral trauma inflicted by nader in 2000<u+2014>when he probably cost al gore the presidency<u+2014>bernie<u+2019>s lingering presence in the democratic primary threatens to produce a similar result in november: delegitimizing the eventual democratic nominee in the eyes of the left and sending many critics, if not to trump, then to the green party<u+2019>s jill stein or the libertarian party<u+2019>s gary johnson. in the first poll to assess the impact of third-party candidates, public policy polling found last week that the inclusion of stein and johnson shaves 2 percentage points off clinton<u+2019>s lead over trump. conversely, the minor party duo loses a combined 2 points when sanders is tested as the democratic nominee, indicating that sanders<u+2019> voters account for clinton<u+2019>s reduced standing. a couple points, a couple million voters, is no big deal to clinton if she<u+2019>s trouncing trump. but if he makes it a race, democrats may find their political post-traumatic stress disorder from 2000 flaring up. and while clinton would be the most enraged if she suffers gore<u+2019>s fate, it is not in sanders<u+2019> interest to join nader on the democratic party<u+2019>s unofficial wall of shame. his ultimate goal is to remake the party in his progressive populist image. he can<u+2019>t do that if his name is uttered by rank-and-file democrats only when seething. that means sanders has to strategize very carefully as he prepares to leave his mark at the convention. how can he bend the party to his will without breaking it? one way would be to follow the lead of jesse jackson in 1988, who remained in the race for the entire primary. but when he came to the democratic convention with 38 percent of the pledged delegates, he went to great lengths to keep his team focused on changing the party over the long haul rather than disrupting the election (though michael dukakis still lost). <u+201c>i<u+2019>m going to ask you to do a hard thing,<u+201d> jackson said to his delegates, <u+201c>put your focus on why we're here. if you're following my lead, then reflect my spirit, attitude and discipline. we don't have the time to fill up the media airwaves with pollution.<u+201d> a runner-up staying in until the last presidential primary vote is counted, by itself, has never been tantamount to a fatal party schism. clinton<u+2019>s reluctance in the spring of 2008 to accept the delegate math did not prevent barack obama from becoming the first democrat to break 51 percent of the popular vote since lyndon b. johnson. jerry brown<u+2019>s refusal to endorse his 1992 rival bill clinton proved to be about as damaging as a spitball. in the spring of 1976, brown and sen. frank church entered the presidential race<u+2014>and won several late contests<u+2014>in a futile attempt to stop jimmy carter from winning the white house. jackson didn<u+2019>t quit before it was officially over for the same reason sanders won<u+2019>t: more delegates means more influence at the convention. but that<u+2019>s where sanders faces a paradox. the potential of using his delegates to make her convention disorderly<u+2014>forcing floor fights over platform language, nominating himself on the floor, withholding his endorsement<u+2014>is what gives him leverage. but to unleash convention chaos risks a repeat of 1968, when efforts by eugene mccarthy<u+2019>s delegates to wrest the nomination from hubert humphrey and include an anti-vietnam war plank to the platform failed on the convention floor, prompting a livid mccarthy to leave the convention without endorsing the ticket. he gave an extremely reluctant endorsement in the campaign<u+2019>s final days, and his unwillingness to rally his supporters possibly tipped five states to the republican winner richard nixon. it seems unlikely that sanders would renege on his pledge to back the eventual nominee, but a passive-aggressive <u+201c>nondorsement<u+201d><u+2014>just keeping quiet<u+2014>or a feeble campaign trail schedule could still stir hostile feelings among his supporters that the party establishment treated their campaign unfairly and views their revolution with disdain. how might sanders walk the fine line he needs to<u+2014>pushing hard for his ideal platform without poisoning the party well? perhaps the most potent move he could make without sacrificing his policy agenda would be to declare, after the last ballot is cast in the district of columbia on june 14, that hillary clinton won the majority of the pledged delegates <u+201c>fair and square.<u+201d> a faction of sanders supporters continues to circulate notions that the game has been rigged, either by the rules<u+2014> unelected superdelegates and primaries closed to independents<u+2014>or by outright cheating, with the long lines to vote in arizona and bernie-friendly early exit poll data looming large in online conspiracy theories. sanders has not done much to promulgate the conspiracies, but neither has he tried hard to shut them down. he does regularly complain about superdelegates and closed primaries, despite the fact that he lost 13 of the 21 primaries so far in which independents could vote, and that the distribution of superdelegates on the basis of the popular vote would not give him the overall delegate lead. in other words, he didn<u+2019>t lose because of the rules. but if his supporters are left with the impression that rules were designed by the party to thwart their ambitions, then they will have little hesitation to bolt the party. sanders could ditch his strident anti-establishment tone and help disabuse his supporters of their suspicions, closing the electoral chapter of the campaign with a speech along the lines of: <u+201c>our campaign performed exponentially better than anyone predicted. we worked together to raise enough money to be heard, and our message was heard. we fought for more debates, we got them and we engaged in a substantive dialogue of ideas. we should take enormous pride in winning [probably by then] more than 20 states and 45 percent of the pledged delegates, while we also tip our hat to hillary clinton for winning a little more. our party<u+2019>s commitment to democracy gave us a fair shot, and the proof is in how well we did in the face of the long odds.<u+201d> declaring the process to be on the level would effectively table a floor fight over the primary process rules that some sanders allies have been hankering for, and keep the convention spotlight on what sanders ran to accomplish in the first place: to popularize policy proposals that would break up the banks, provide free college, extend medicare for all and eliminate corporate campaign cash. an additional subtext of such a message would be to assure his supporters, <u+201c>the democratic party is our home,<u+201d> countering the message being sold by the third-party candidates that it is impossible for sandernistas to advance their revolution within the confines of the democratic party. in 1988, jesse jackson faced a similar challenge in keeping his restless supporters in the party fold, while also pressing the dukakis camp for substantive concessions. so he took a highly calibrated approach to the party. he negotiated with dukakis<u+2019> aides a platform that reflected much of his liberal agenda, though scrubbed of elements deemed too controversial. three planks left out were brought to the floor for debate, but jackson did not force a floor vote on the most divisive of the three: <u+201c>self-determination<u+201d> for palestinians. the moral victory of exercising influence over the platform may have looked ephemeral in the years that followed: the defeat of dukakis was blamed on excessive liberalism, leading to the 1992 nomination of bill clinton who took the party in a moderate direction. but jackson in 2000 enthused at how much he was able to influence the white house in the clinton years as well as catapult his top staffers into the democratic party apparatus. and had he not kept his supporters inside the democratic tent, neither clinton<u+2019>s presidency nor obama<u+2019>s more liberal administration would have been possible. sanders never endorsed nader, but he did endorse jackson in 1988. if he wants his 2016 campaign to leave a lasting legacy on the democratic party, he<u+2019>ll walk jackson<u+2019>s path at the convention, and do everything he can to prevent his supporters from walking nader<u+2019>s.

is sanders 2016 becoming nader 2000?

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

8749.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

575.0

0.0

208.0

0.0

52.0

22.0

25.0

9.0

23.0

18.0

20.0

13.0

34.0

46.0

58.0

577.0

208.0

52.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the perfect state index: if iowa, n.h. are too white to go first, then who? every four years when the iowa caucuses and new hampshire primary roll around, the critics and cynics question why such unrepresentative patches of america get to vote first in presidential nominating contests. why is so much political power, they complain, given to states that are more white and more rural than the rest of the country? so, we attempted to quantitatively evaluate the critique <u+2014> and try to come up with which states actually were the most representative of the average of the entire country, in what we're calling the perfect state index. in creating the psi, we looked at five categories race, education, age, income and religion. (we explain the methodology, how we arrived there and analyze each category in detail further down.) below is an interactive table, which you can sort the results by category. so, which states came out on top? methodology <u+2014> why we chose these five factors? it's complicated, and, true, our metrics, are somewhat arbitrary. there are a dozen ways (or more) you could slice and dice census data to decide which demographic factors are most important. but, we felt that in terms of understanding political behavior <u+2014> these five indicators were the most important. we ran the data by bill frey, a demographer with the brookings institution, and he insisted that of all the factors we were considering, race was by far the most important indicator of political behavior. "race is one where there's a sharp divide between how whites vote and how most minorities vote," frey said. "the race classification ... is a really good indicator to understand something about how elections are going to turn out." and, frey encouraged us to place a higher priority on race, because it often correlates with income, education, and, perhaps even religion. "by that i mean <u+2014> in a state like mississippi, which has a relatively high black population, that may also have some bearing on mississippi's income rank, and on its education rank," frey explained. (mississippi has the lowest median household income in the country, as you can see from our table.) so, with frey's guidance, we decided to give a little more power to the "race" category. (all the other categories are not weighted). for each of our five indicators, we compared every state in the country to either the u.s. median value or the percentage of the national population. that allowed us to see how far each state diverged from the quintessential american "middle." so, for example, in the map below you'll notice that both california (38.5 percent white) and maine (93.8 percent white) fared poorly on the race index, but for obviously different reasons. our index looks at the absolute value <u+2014> it doesn't matter whether a state is better or worse than the u.s. average; it matters how much a state differs from "mainstream" america. for each category, every state received a ranking from 1 to 50. we then added the individual rankings together to give each state a final score. below, you'll see which state ranked the highest in the five individual categories. we analyzed 2014 u.s. census data to compare the racial make-up of each state to the country as a whole. we included all the categories the census uses: black or african-american; american indian or alaska native; asian/native hawaiian and other pacific islander; two or more races; hispanic or latino; and white alone not hispanic or latino. and, the reason we used the census subcategories is that it gives us a more accurate racial portrait of each state. if we had only looked at "minorities" compared to "whites," we would have gotten a skewed picture. for example, had we ranked solely based on "minority" population, combining all the racial subgroups, alaska would have ranked near the top. but it has a disproportionately large native american population, a group which has a relatively minor voting effect on american politics at a national level. we wanted to find a state that more closely mirrors the country's racial portrait <u+2014> and illinois does that, almost perfectly. if you look at every group: latinos, asians, blacks <u+2014> illinois' respective populations are nearly identical to the country's at large. that doesn't surprise frey from brookings. he points out that illinois has mirrored the country's historical mass migrations. first, white ethnic immigrant groups, such as those from polish and italian ancestry moved to the state. then, during the great migration of the early 20th century, african-americans from the south settled in chicago. and, then, in the last 30 to 40 years, thousands of hispanics, particularly mexicans, moved to the city. "and, all of that is due to that fact that chicago has been this kind of central place that has been emblematic of these different kinds of movements," frey explained. "i don't think there's any other metropolitan area, or any other state really, that has all of these elements. ... different parts of the country have had pieces of these things. but, chicago has had them all in different sequences. and, so right now, we have a snapshot of a metropolitan area that's a lot like the u.s. population." and, as blacks, latinos and asians diversified the city, frey said, old urban white ethnics moved to the suburbs and the rural farmlands. he added that the mix of urban and rural coupled with white suburbanization makes illinois a good bellwether of what's gone on in the united states as a whole in recent decades. we looked at the percent of the population that was older than 25 in each state with a bachelor's degree or higher, as tracked by census data between 2010 and 2014. minorities of all educational levels tend to vote democratic, but, as we've written elsewhere, there seems to be a growing political educational divide within the white population. in delaware, 29.4 percent of the total population has graduated with bachelor's degree or higher. (in the u.s. as a whole, 29.3 percent has at least a bachelor's degree). frey said delaware's mainstream-level of education may be due to its geography. "it's an important state, but it is considered to be kind of a suburb of philadelphia writ large," he said, "and increasingly college graduates have been living and moving to the suburbs, and that's part of what delaware is as well." he was, perhaps, more intrigued by the next few highly ranked states. "you also see in this list states you might not have expected to see there <u+2014> montana, nebraska, oregon," frey said. "it shows this median level of education is pretty pervasive in all different parts of the country, not just concentrated in a few places." we used 2014 census data to compare the median age in each state to the u.s. median age of 37.7. "it's good to know that virginia is in the middle," said frey, but he's skeptical that it means much, because there are a clump of states that roughly reflect the u.s. median age. what's more important are the states toward the bottom of the list. "what you want to look at <u+2014> is states that are kind of on the extremes," frey added. "and, when you're thinking of the extremes, you're thinking of some of the new england states, pennsylvania, west virginia <u+2013> those are states that a lot of the young people have left over the years." and that brings us to new hampshire. the early voting state is one of the oldest in the country (tied with vermont for 47th on the age index). in fact, the aging population has even become a concern for voters in the state. at a recent campaign event, one woman described new hampshire as going through a "silver tsunami." for election purposes, frey says the 65 and older population is key. "those are the kinds of populations," he noted, "at least in recent elections [that] have tended to veer more toward republican candidates in presidential elections." frey added that a state's median age is often indicative of recent regional migration patterns. "a lot of immigrants have come to parts of the country and made their populations younger," he said, "a lot of it is in the south and the west." and, indeed, immigration may help explain why virginia did so well in the age category when its neighbor west virginia did so poorly. there are lots of different economic indicators we could have used to measure the "wealth" of a state: the unemployment rate, the percent of people who own houses, or median household income. with the advice of our economics editor marilyn geewax, we opted to go with the 2010 to 2014 median household income (in 2014 dollars). for the country at large, that is $53,482. income is a tough measure, because the cost of living differs wildly from mississippi to manhattan. but, it's also an important metric, because the economy is so often the most important issue for voters. pennsylvania's income levels are so incredibly average that it differed from the u.s. median by less than a percent. frey points to pennsylvania's geography and mix of urban, suburban, rural communities as a possible explanation for economic diversity. "pennsylvania ... has the average of those urban areas like philadelphia and pittsburgh," frey said. "and then [in] the inner part of the state, it's a little more rural." interestingly, the first nominating state of iowa also ranked high on the average-income calculator, coming in third. but frey thinks iowa fared well for different reasons <u+2014> partly because it's an overwhelmingly white state and partly because it's in the middle of the country with an average cost of living. the states that did poorly also tell us something important. new jersey and maryland were 49th and 50th, respectively. both states are wealthier and largely overgrown suburbs of new york and philadelphia (in new jersey's case) and washington, d.c., when it comes to the population center of south-central maryland. "it's suburban new york and suburban d.c., and some pretty rich suburbs," frey said. "some of the richest suburban counties in the country are in new jersey and maryland." and so, even though new jersey and maryland did well on other metrics, such as race or age, they didn't do well in the overall psi because of income. there was a four-way tie for first place in the religion index. and, that's partly because the data isn't as nuanced. statistics for all the other categories were collected and compiled through the census bureau. but, the census doesn't ask americans about religion. given the central role of religion in campaign politics, and the degree to which religiosity predicts political behavior, we thought it was an important metric to include. to assess "religiosity," which can often be an amorphous attitude in itself, we used data from the 2014 religious landscape study, a comprehensive survey conducted by the pew research center, which interviewed more than 35,000 americans from all 50 states. we looked at a one specific aspect of this study: the percent of adults in each state who said religion was "very important" in their lives. in the u.s. as a whole, and in iowa in particular, 53 percent of adults said religion was "very important" in their lives. as iowa prays, so prays the country ... apparently. iowa's mainstream status on the religious index might seem surprising given the extent to which the white, christian conservative vote is courted by gop presidential candidates there. but, there two things to keep in mind: so while people might think of iowa as a religious state, it's only actually, as a whole, as religious as the country. in fact, there are many other states that are far more religious. think: alabama, where 77 percent of people said religion was "very important" in their lives. new hampshire, on the other hand, is far more secular. new hampshire came in 46th in the category of people saying that religion was "very important" to them. just 33 percent of adults in new hampshire said religion was "very important" to them. and, 36 percent described themselves as "religiously unaffiliated," which means they don't identify with any organized religion. it's one of the least religious states in the country, second only to sen. bernie sanders' home state of vermont. illinois borders a traditional east-west divide in the country <u+2014> the mississippi river. it snakes across the state's western edge, separating it from iowa. and it's a microcosm of the country in nearly ever category. specifically, it ranked in the top 10 for race, age, and religion. it's almost comical that the most perfectly average state neighbors iowa, the state that gets to go first in presidential nominating contests. in many ways, illinois is geographically and demographically similar to iowa, particularly in the southern and western regions of the state. the major difference is chicago <u+2014> an urban core the kind iowa just doesn't have. "it's as diverse as the country, but not overly diverse," frey said. "it's probably a little more urban than the country as a whole because of the greater chicago metropolitan area, but a lot of that is the suburbs and the suburbs are representative of much of america." plus, he added, illinois also has a "rural component, which is important." "[illinois] ... may not be a swing state," frey said, "but in terms of its demographics, i think people would do well to look at how the voting goes there to get a better understanding of what's going on in the country as a whole." and, while people might think of illinois as a blue state, it currently has a republican governor and a republican senator, albeit one who will be in a tough re-election fight in a presidential year. also, it's only fairly recently, since 1992, that the state started voting reliably for democrats in presidential years. from 1968 to 1988, illinois voted consistently republican. in fact, illinois' record is more accurate, than partisan. throughout the 20th century, illinois voted for the winner in every presidential election, with the exception of two: woodrow wilson in 1916 and jimmy carter in 1976. if anything, frey, says perhaps illinois is a racial bellwether. in 2014, the country's under-age-5 population became majority-minority, and so, in years to come, frey said the racial makeup of the rest of the country is likely going to look more similar to illinois. a reality check on iowa and new hampshire? iowa, the state that goes first in our current political system, according to the psi, came in 16th place overall. that's not too bad, considering it could have been worse. new hampshire, for example, was 49th, nearly dead last. to be fair, iowa is representative of the country on most of our metrics, with the exception of race. a number of states east coasters derisively refer to as "flyover states" <u+2014> nebraska, kansas, iowa and missouri <u+2014> actually all fared quite well on the psi, especially if race was excluded. so, in some ways, it seems the heartland is a fairly accurate portrait of average america, if it was more racially diverse. but, race is such an important factor that frey thinks it outweighs iowa's advantages. in the race category, iowa was in the bottom 10, finishing 40th, with just a 3.4 percent black population and a 5.6 percent hispanic population. new hampshire, though, is even more of an outlier. the only state that fared worse overall was west virginia. by every measure, new hampshire is horribly unrepresentative of the country <u+2014> people make too much money, they're graying, over-educated, overwhelmingly white and not nearly religious enough. the question, of course, is whether these two states should continue to serve as litmus tests for candidates. "it's for the parties to decide," frey said, "but i have to say as a demographer, the more stock you put into these two states, as we become more diverse as a country, the more we'll be out of touch with what the rest of the country's going to be voting like."

the perfect state index: if iowa, n.h. are too white to go first, then who?

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

75.0

8.0

15958.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

1128.0

2.0

0.0

272.0

1.0

0.0

132.0

7.0

21.0

2.0

8.0

18.0

13.0

10.0

35.0

24.0

61.0

1133.0

274.0

133.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a new set of super pac advertisements released tuesday are intensifying the gop primary battle ahead of the feb. 1 iowa caucus, while allies of democratic front-runner hillary clinton are fighting<u+00a0>back against recent republican attacks.

super pacs escalate air war ahead of iowa caucuses

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

50.0

8.0

236.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

17.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

4.0

3.0

20.0

4.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the clinton campaign reacted with yet another ad featuring trump<u+2019>s own words<u+00a0>this time disparaging veterans and their families. the anti-trump priorities usa superpac went even further with<u+00a0>a new spot that shows trump saying, <u+201c>i love war.<u+201d><u+00a0>trump<u+2019>s campaign manager kellyanne conway<u+00a0>responded<u+00a0>by saying the bizarre comment was taken out of context but the full quote, which he gave last november at<u+00a0>a wild fort dodge, iowa, rally<u+00a0>(the same one where he called ben carson a child molester), is even worse than what it sounds like in the ad: trump has never been in the service, although<u+00a0>he has said,<u+201d>i always felt i was in the military<u+201d> because of his education at a military-themed boarding school and he believes he has <u+201c>more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.<u+201d> that comment <u+201c>i<u+2019>m good at war<u+201d> says everything about trump as he demonstrated last night at the town hall forum that he is indeed unfit to be president of the united states. there were many aspects of his performance that had people gasping at the mere idea of this man in a position of real power, not the least of which was his comment that president barack obama compares unfavorably to russian president vladimir putin who <u+201c>has an 85 percent approval rating<u+201d> and is <u+201c>very much a leader<u+201d> because he has <u+201c>strong control over his country.<u+201d> but it was around the question of isis and the middle east where he really showed his true colors. he was upset that hillary clinton had earlier claimed that he had lied when he said he had been against the iraq war and defended himself by pointing to an esquire magazine article from 2004 <u+2014> which doesn<u+2019>t really help since the war began in the spring of 2003. the fact-checkers have declared his<u+00a0>pants are on fire numerous times<u+00a0>on this but he just keeps saying it. last night he also made a passing reference to someone <u+201c>asking him about iraq<u+201d> 14 years ago, and you may be surprised to learn that at<u+00a0>that same crazy iowa rally he told the crowd that a delegation from<u+00a0>the white house<u+00a0>came to him to ask his opinion and he advised not to go in<u+00a0>because it would destabilize the region. to the best of my knowledge this claim has never been validated. it<u+2019>s possible, of course, this was the bush administration. but let<u+2019>s just say that it<u+2019>s as likely as trump<u+2019>s witnessing thousands of new jersey muslims cheering after 9/11. you<u+2019>ll knock the hell out of one and the other one is going to come and take over the other. you don<u+2019>t have to be a genius to figure this out even though i am a genius. and by the way, i<u+2019>m more militaristic than anybody in this room. i<u+2019>m going to make our military so strong, so powerful. everyone seems to think that trump has <u+201c>pivoted<u+201d> from his position that he could not reveal his plan to defeat isis to his announcement today that he would give the generals 30 days from the inauguration to come up with one. but that<u+2019>s wrong. trump<u+2019>s secret plan is not so secret. at that same rally last fall, trump spoke about it plainly: <u+201c>i know more about isis than the generals do. believe me. . . .<u+00a0>i would bomb the<u+00a0>shit<u+00a0>out of <u+2019>em. . . .<u+00a0>i<u+2019>d blow up the pipes. i<u+2019>d blow up the <u+2014> i<u+2019>d blow up every single inch. there would be nothing left. and you know what, you get exxon to come in there and in two months <u+2014> you ever see these guys how good they are? the great oil companies? they<u+2019>ll rebuild that sucker brand-new. it<u+2019>ll be beautiful. and i<u+2019>d bring it, and i<u+2019>d take the oil.<u+201d> at the forum, he reiterated this belief that america should <u+201c>take the oil<u+201d> because he thinks this will make isis surrender and has taken to saying <u+201c>to the victor goes the spoils<u+201d> apparently unaware that this is a considered a war crime. he has said in the past it would require a permanent force to protect the oil but that it wouldn<u+2019>t take much. trump said that under obama and clinton<u+2019>s leadership <u+201c>the generals have been reduced to rubble<u+201d> and <u+201c>reduced to a point where it<u+2019>s embarrassing for our country.<u+201d> he sounded as if he planned to fire some of them, which isn<u+2019>t actually something the president can do. as he is wont to do he brought up his favorite, <u+00a0>general<u+00a0>george patton, saying that he<u+2019>s <u+201c>spinning in his grave<u+201d> over the state of affairs in the military. the good news is that he didn<u+2019>t bring up general black jack pershing and endorse mass executions with bullets dipped in pigs<u+2019> blood as he often does on the trail. he maintained that he still believes in his own plan for iraq and says he won<u+2019>t necessarily follow the generals<u+2019> advice. so, the gop nominee for commander in chief tells people that he<u+2019>s <u+201c>good at war,<u+201d> <u+201c>has had a lot of wars of his own<u+201d> and <u+201c>loves war in a certain way<u+201d> despite never having been in the military. he also believes he<u+2019>s a <u+201c>genius<u+201d> who is <u+201c>more militaristic<u+201d> than anyone in the room. his plan to defeat isis is to blow up the iraqi oil wells and have exxon come in and rebuild them. and he believes that half the military leadership are fools and thinks he can just fire the ones he doesn<u+2019>t like. but there<u+2019>s nothing delusional about any of that so there<u+2019>s no need to concern yourselves that the poll<u+00a0>numbers<u+00a0>are tightening.<u+00a0> if he happens to pull this off, what could go wrong?

self-proclaimed <u+201c>genius<u+201d> reaches new highs in stupidity: trump puts his incompetence on full display

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

100.0

8.0

5164.0

0.0

11.0

0.0

354.0

2.0

0.0

149.0

1.0

0.0

43.0

13.0

10.0

4.0

15.0

11.0

12.0

8.0

20.0

30.0

365.0

151.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

if donald trump is nothing else, he<u+2019>s an american brand. the trump name adorns luxury condominiums, hotels and golf courses around the world; it has sold a tv show, millions of books, a line of cologne and even, briefly, an airline. and that brand, according to new data published here in politico magazine for the first time, is taking a major hit in the wake of his presidential campaign. trump has built his distinctive trademark over the course of decades in public life, turning his own wealth, glamorous lifestyle and personality into emblems of his multi-billion dollar company through endless self-promotion. trump considers this reputation alone a hugely significant part of his business: financial documents the candidate released earlier this year set the value of his company<u+2019>s <u+201c>deals, brand and branded developments<u+201d> at $3 billion, which makes his name the single most significant item in his portfolio. trump<u+2019>s brand was also his first great advantage as a presidential candidate, giving him name recognition and the gloss of success that even a bush might envy. but as trump the candidate has ascended, hitting the top of the polls and staying there thanks to a series of controversial statements and a groundswell of republican populist support, the opposite has happened to trump the brand: among the people trump<u+2019>s business depends on<u+2014>the consumer making over $100,000 a year<u+2014>the value of the trump name is collapsing. a december survey of american consumer opinion, fielded by the bav consulting division of advertising and marketing giant young & rubicam (and the largest and longest running study of brands in the world), found that since donald trump<u+2019>s run for president, the trump brand has lost the confidence of the people who can afford to stay at one of his hotels, play at one of his country clubs or purchase a home in one of his developments. it is also rapidly losing its association with the gilded traits trump has long promoted as the essence of his business. in categories such as <u+201c>prestigious,<u+201d> <u+201c>upper class<u+201d> and <u+201c>glamorous<u+201d> the trump name has plummeted among high-income consumers. within the same group, it is also losing its connection with the terms <u+201c>leader,<u+201d> <u+201c>dynamic<u+201d> and <u+201c>innovative<u+201d><u+2014>quite a blow for a man who criticizes others for being <u+201c>low energy<u+201d> and considers himself an industry trailblazer. the brand has been a survey subject for bav consulting<u+2019>s regular surveys for over a decade and has never before experienced such a precipitous drop in reputation. it<u+2019>s the kind of change that usually follows a big corporate scandal, like a product recall or financial misconduct. but in trump<u+2019>s case it<u+2019>s a man<u+2019>s personality that is in play. the billionaire trump might brush off complaints about his politics; he might even shrug off short-term commercial losses. but this plunge in brand status would be seen as a crisis in the offices of any major consumer-oriented company. public companies often claim losses in net worth when customers turn against them because of a public relations disaster; they call it a decline in <u+201c>goodwill.<u+201d> as a private corporation, the trump organization is not obligated to report any such a decline<u+2014>or to report it accurately<u+2014>but any ceo will tell you that a brand deterioration like this is likely to have a significant financial impact, affecting sales, borrowing and even efforts to attract high quality employees. the first visible signs of the commercial cost associated with trump<u+2019>s extreme politics came after his inflammatory comments about undocumented mexican immigrants, which he made as he announced his candidacy last june. nbc quickly dumped him as host of celebrity apprentice, a gig that netted him millions of dollars per year. univision, macy<u+2019>s, serta and others began unwinding marketing relationships with him. more recently, real estate partners have talked of taking his name off developments, and a home furnishings retailer in the middle east took trump products off display. in vancouver, 50,000 people have petitioned to prevent the brand name from decorating a skyscraper under construction. less visible, but no less important, are hits trump has taken among his target consumer base: the luxury, or <u+201c>aspirational<u+201d> market of those making over $100,000 a year. the wealthiest respondents in the bav survey<u+2014>those with incomes over $150,000<u+2014>judge trump the harshest of any income bracket. in this group, as measured by bav<u+2019>s consumer opinion index, trump<u+2019>s reputation for being <u+201c>obliging<u+201d> and <u+201c>upper class<u+201d> has declined by more than 50 percent since the outset of the campaign, followed by <u+201c>leader<u+201d> (with a 41 percent decline) and <u+201c>prestigious<u+201d> (down by 39 percent). the next lower income level<u+2014>households making between $100,000 and $150,000<u+2014>wasn<u+2019>t much kinder, with a 56 percent decline for <u+201c>obliging,<u+201d> a 45 percent decline in <u+201c>prestigious<u+201d> and a 38 percent drop for <u+201c>upper class.<u+201d> even the one notable upward spike in trump traits<u+2014>the wealthiest view the trump brand as 65 percent more <u+201c>traditional<u+201d> than they did when the trait was measured before the campaign<u+2014>points to commercial trouble. although trump<u+2019>s political loyalists might cheer his standing as a traditional figure, this quality is not a good thing for a business seeking to sell glamour and luxury. in commercial terms, other products that are deemed <u+201c>traditional<u+201d> are the canned meat product spam and idaho potatoes. in interviews we conducted before the campaign, trump<u+2019>s children, who work in his companies, acknowledged that their father is the brand and that he will dominate its marketing for the rest of his days. <u+201c>he became synonymous with success and aspiration,<u+201d> noted daughter ivanka. <u+201c>that is still at the core of what the brand is today.<u+201d> but the challenge of a brand future clouded by his father<u+2019>s polarizing views was on donald trump. jr.<u+2019>s mind in 2014, long before his father declared his run for president. <u+201c>if you<u+2019>re asking, <u+2018>do i think that he knows he<u+2019>s a polarizing guy?<u+2019> yes. the answer is 100-percent,<u+201d> donald jr. said. <u+201c>he will be out there, and he will question these things in a way that you don<u+2019>t see anyone doing today<u+2014>or certainly not anyone that has a brand. <u+2026> there could be potentially ramifications to his business for taking these stances.<u+201d> how serious will these ramifications be? we might never know: as head of a privately held company, free of financial obligations to shareholders, donald trump has no reason to disclose the financial hit he takes due to his controversial campaign. still, it<u+2019>s worth noting that these kinds of blows can be massive: during the dot-com crash, firms that fell from grace took multi-billion dollar <u+201c>goodwill<u+201d> write-offs. aol noted a $99 billion loss in goodwill. worldcom<u+2019>s was $45 billion. donald trump, as a 69-year-old whose fortune is counted in the billions, will very likely remain wealthy and comfortable<u+2014>a success as he defines it<u+2014>for the rest of his days. but those like his children who may have counted on the brand to sustain them further into the future cannot be so certain. then again, they could move into the part of the consumer market where no real damage has been done. perhaps a trump brand of smokes, or maybe canned meat?

trump<u+2019>s campaign is damaging his brand

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

38.0

8.0

7197.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

527.0

1.0

0.0

147.0

0.0

54.0

13.0

14.0

6.0

17.0

18.0

13.0

31.0

25.0

50.0

531.0

148.0

54.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

isis extremist who beheaded prisoners is identified as man from london the man who has been recorded in videos threatening and killing several western hostages in the name of the self-proclaimed islamic state is mohammed emwazi. he is from london and is a british citizen of kuwaiti descent. british security services have been aware of the identity of the militant many have dubbed "jihadi john," the bbc says, adding that "they chose not to disclose his name earlier for operational reasons." emwazi's name was reported by the washington post early thursday, citing interviews with his friends and associates. the newspaper says he is "from a well-to-do family ... and graduated from college with a degree in computer programming." we'll update this post as more details come in. update at 8:35 a.m. et: confirmation of details intelligence sources tell npr that they can confirm the isis figure's name is mohammed emwazi and that he is from london, is college-educated and has been in syria since 2012. update at 7:35 a.m. et: no comment from prime minister saying "we do not confirm or deny matters relating to the intelligence services," a spokeswoman for british prime minister david cameron is refusing to comment on the identity of "jihadi john," other than to say police and security services are working to bring the hostages' killers to justice. the bbc reports, "emwazi is believed to be an associate of a former uk control order suspect, who travelled to somalia in 2006 and is allegedly linked to a facilitation and funding network for somali militant group al-shabab." emwazi has been a central figure in the grisly isis videos in which prisoners have been beheaded and threats have been delivered against the u.s. and other countries. dressed all in black with only his eyes and hands exposed, the isis figure first attracted notice last august, when he addressed the camera in fluent english before hostage james foley, a u.s. journalist, was beheaded. shortly after foley's death, british ambassador peter westmacott said that "we are close" to identifying the central figure in the video. since then, the man named today as emwazi has appeared in more videos in which hostages were killed, including the britons david haines and alan henning as well as the americans steven sotloff and peter kassig (who changed his first name to abdul-rahman during his captivity). the same man is also believed to be in more recent videos in which two japanese hostages, kenji goto and haruna yukawa, were beheaded.

isis extremist who beheaded prisoners is identified as man from london

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

10.0

70.0

8.0

2533.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

206.0

1.0

0.0

44.0

0.0

21.0

5.0

3.0

4.0

9.0

1.0

5.0

1.0

7.0

11.0

13.0

214.0

45.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

dubai, march 12 (reuters) - iran's supreme leader hit out on thursday at a letter by u.s. republican senators threatening to undo any nuclear deal between washington and tehran, saying he was worried because the united states was known for "backstabbing," mehr news agency reported. ayatollah ali khamenei added at a meeting with president hassan rouhani and senior clerics that whenever negotiators made progress, the americans became "harsher, tougher and coarser," mehr reported. the letter signed by 47 republican senators warned iran that any nuclear deal made with u.s. president barack obama could last only as long as he remained in office, in an unusual intervention into u.s. foreign policy-making. mehr quoted khamenei as saying: "of course i am worried, because the other side is known for opacity, deceit and backstabbing." "every time we reach a stage where the end of the negotiations is in sight, the tone of the other side, specifically the americans, becomes harsher, coarser and tougher. this is the nature of their tricks and deceptions." the negotiations, which resume in lausanne, switzerland, next week, are at a critical juncture as the sides try to meet an end of march target for an interim deal, with a final deal in june. khamenei added that u.s. accusations of iranian involvement in terrorism were risible. khamenei also criticized a speech to congress by israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu this month that warned the united states it was negotiating a bad deal with iran that could spark a "nuclear nightmare."

iran's supreme leader slams republican letter on nuke 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

1.0

58.0

8.0

1554.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

123.0

0.0

26.0

0.0

14.0

6.0

9.0

5.0

6.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

8.0

10.0

13.0

126.0

26.0

14.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican vice-presidential nominee mike pence followed running-mate donald trump on saturday in denounced democratic presidential rival hillary clinton for calling their supporters <u+201c>deplorables,<u+201d> saying they are <u+201c>americans, and they deserve your respect.<u+201d> clinton, the democratic presidential nominee, said at a new york fundraiser friday night that half of trump-pence supporters could be put into a "basket of deplorables." <u+201c>racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamaphobic, you name it,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>there are people like that and he has lifted them up.<u+201d> clinton attempted at the fundraiser to qualify her remarks by saying they were "grossly general-istic" and that the other 50 percent of trump supporters are frustrated by hard times and merit sympathy. however, trump, the republican presidential nominee, then pence seized on her remarks throughout the day. <u+201c>the men and women who support donald trump's campaign are hard-working americans, farmers, coal miners, teachers, veterans, members of our law enforcement community, members of every class of this country,<u+201d> pence said at the annual gathering of conservatives in washington, d.c., known as the value voters summit. <u+201c>they are not a basket of anything, they are americans, and they deserve your respect. <u+2026> no one with that low opinion of the american people should ever be elected president of the united states of america.<u+201d> earlier in the day trump tweeted: <u+201c>wow, hillary clinton was so insulting to my supporters, millions of amazing, hard-working people<u+201d> tweeted trump, after clinton<u+2019>s comments at a friday night new york fundraiser. <u+201c>i think it will cost her at the polls!<u+201d> clinton was speaking at an lgbt fundraiser in new york city, where she encouraged supporters to "stage an intervention"<u+00a0>if they have friends considering voting for trump. "that may be one conversion therapy i'd endorse," said clinton, referring to a type of counseling designed to urge gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender children to change their sexual orientation. she later clarified that she wants to end the practice. singer barbra streisand, who performed at the fundraiser, altered the lyrics of the stephen sondheim song "send in the clowns" to mock trump, referring to the real estate mogul as a "sad, vulgar clown." trump spokesman jason miller said in a statement that clinton had "revealed her true contempt for everyday americans" and called the remarks an "inexcusable mistake." clinton campaign spokesman nick merrill defended the candidate in tweets of his own. "obviously not everyone supporting trump is part of the alt-right, but alt-right leaders are with trump," he said. "and their supporters appear to make up half his crowd when you observe the tone of his events.<u+201d> the fundraiser capped a day in which trump again attacked clinton's credibility. he said clinton was being "protected" during the justice department's investigation into her use of a private email server while secretary of state. "she could walk right into this arena right now and shoot somebody with 20,000 people watching, right smack in the middle of the heart, and she wouldn't be prosecuted," trump said at a rally in pensacola, fla. trump also faced criticism from within his own party for refusing to outline his plans for combating foreign policy challenges, including threats posed by isis. trump said this week that he does indeed have a plan, but would convene military leaders in his first 30 days in office to craft another plan. trump has also faced criticism for praising russian president vladimir putin during a high-profile national security forum earlier in the week, and appearing on a russian-backed television network thursday evening. on friday, clinton said she was "disappointed" by trump's decision to appear on rt america, saying that "every day that goes by this just becomes more and more of a reality television show. it's not a serious presidential campaign." with several prominent republican national security officials already concerned about trump's national security acumen, clinton has tried to cast herself as the better potential commander in chief. she has aggressively promoted her growing list of military endorsements from both parties. on friday, her campaign said the number of retired generals and admirals endorsing clinton for president has grown to 110. trump quickly countered by saying his list had ballooned to 120 former u.s. generals and admirals earlier in the week. pence received his first intelligence briefing friday. he declined to offer any specifics since the information was classified. the associated press contributed to this report.

pence, after trump, denounces clinton calling supporters <u+2018>deplorables,<u+2019> says disrespectful

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

90.0

8.0

4664.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

0.0

342.0

0.0

88.0

0.0

33.0

10.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

4.0

10.0

3.0

20.0

16.0

28.0

345.0

88.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

marco rubio has been forced to speed up plans for an all-out assault on the billionaire businessman's character. how snl's 'the bubble' sketch about polarization is all too true a flood of mainstream republican officials and donors have lined up behind marco rubio in the week since former florida gov. jeb bush suspended his campaign for president. and yet rubio's team concedes that neither the influx of support, nor the conversion of many of bush's wealthy donors, is enough to stop donald trump. instead of riding the wave of new support alone, rubio has been forced to speed up plans for an all-out assault on the billionaire businessman's character. rubio had hoped to wait until the chaotic republican nominating campaign had shrunk to a two-man race. but with a growing sense of urgency among gop stalwarts to settle on a trump alternative, the young florida senator is trying to simultaneously slow trump and cast himself the savior of the party's future. "i will never quit. i will never stop until we keep a con man from taking over the party of reagan and the conservative movement," rubio thundered at a rally with 2,000 people in oklahoma city on friday. rubio, a 44-year-old first-term u.s. senator, is trying to project leadership in the party while also going after trump using his own game, marked by mockery and uncanny aim for his opponent's vulnerabilities. but the hard-nosed strategy is necessary, says tennessee gov. bill haslam, rubio's latest big endorsement. "rubio looked around and thought, 'well, i might not like it, but that's what the media is covering and that's what people are responding to.'" but rubio is quickly getting a feel for what he began during thursday's debate, launching a direct challenge to trump's appeal to working class voters. in recent days, rubio has dished about trump's on-stage perspiration and alluded, jokingly, that trump may have wet his pants. he's also taken to referring to the billionaire businessman as a "con artist" dozens of times a day while campaigning. "it's amazing to me. a guy with the worst spray tan in america is attacking me for putting on makeup," rubio charged as he campaigned in georgia on saturday. "donald trump likes to sue people. he should sue whoever did that to his face." over the weekend, rubio and cruz attacked trump for refusing to c ondemn the endorsement from david duke, a former ku klux klan leader. rubio went further in a message to thousands of supporters in leesburg, virginia: "we cannot be a party who refuses to condemn white supremacists and the ku klux klan," rubio said. "not only is that wrong, it makes him unelectable. how are we going to grow the party if we nominate someone who doesn't repudiate the ku klux klan?" but make no mistake: rubio's new tack is a fight for survival. he trails trump in virtually all of the 11 states holding nominating contests on march 1, known as super tuesday. the florida senator has finished in no better than second place in the first four primary contests. trump has won three out of four. and texas sen. ted cruz remains a top-tier contender, even after finishing in third place in the last three contests. given trump's momentum, rubio's team says publicly the senator's best chance for the nomination might be a contested national convention in july. that could happen only if rubio prevents trump from accumulating the majority of delegates in the months-long primary season that extends through june. some florida-based donors, as well as top donors and fundraisers in washington, d.c., chicago and elsewhere were ready to join rubio's team immediately after bush left the race. "there are a number of us, now that gov. bush is out of the race, who were very impressed with his debate thursday, and see him as the one to take down trump," said chicago investor craig duchossois, who shifted from bush to rubio. "he showed he's not going to take any crap from him." in the past two weeks, rubio has also won the backing of four governors and 20 members of congress, more than all of his republican rivals combined. rubio had hoped to forestall a one-on-one brawl with trump until there were only two. cruz, ohio gov. john kasich and retired neurosurgeon ben carson remain in the race, although none have the level of support from as many governors and members of congress as rubio. in a year of the outsider, however, it's unclear how much that will boost his momentum. and in the meantime, rubio's assault on trump's character continues. audiences in super tuesday states oklahoma, georgia and alabama ate up the tough talk as he whipped through southern states. "it's about time he take his gloves off and start fighting," said gary baker from okmulgee, oklahoma. "i think he should have started punching sooner." better late than never, said greg strimple, a republican pollster and former adviser to the national republican senatorial committee. "the rubio campaign needs to set-up a contrast on trump, equate trump to the culture of corruption americans hate <u+2014> where the rich get richer and middle class pays the price," strimple said. rubio says there's time, but none to waste. "if you sense a sense of urgency, it's not just about winning," rubio said. "it's about the idea that the party of reagan and the conservative movement could fall into the hands of a con man, who's pulling the ultimate con job on the american people."

what's marco rubio's strategy against donald trump?

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

51.0

8.0

5423.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

333.0

0.0

86.0

0.0

20.0

11.0

17.0

12.0

13.0

6.0

9.0

8.0

14.0

28.0

27.0

335.0

86.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican presidential candidate carly fiorina said sunday that her breakout performance during the last week<u+2019>s debates has created a surge in support and that she can ascend to win the party nomination. <u+201c>the truth is the race has just started,<u+201d> fiorina, a former hewlett-packard chief executive, told <u+201c>fox news sunday.<u+201d> <u+201c>it<u+2019>s game on.<u+201d> fiorina failed to qualify for the prime-time fox news channel debate thursday night for the top-10 ranked gop candidates. so she competed with the seven others in a forum before the main event. still, just the exposure was key to her campaign because as a first-time presidential candidate she lacked name recognition, fiorina said. <u+201c>it was a big night for me,<u+201d> she told fox. <u+201c>only 40 percent of republicans had heard my name. <u+2026> there<u+2019>s been an uptick in financial support, in support generally.<u+201d> nevertheless, fiorina, the only major female candidate in the 2016 republican field, will have a tough time breaking into the top tier or winning the nomination, considering she has consistently ranked among the last in most major polls. and she is ranked 13th among 15 candidates with 1.3 percent of the vote, according to the most recent averaging of polls by the nonpartisan website realclearpolitics.com beyond the problem of name recognition, fiorina will continue to have to defend her tenure at hewlett-packard where she laid off 30,000 employees and was eventually fired. on sunday, fiorina argued, as she has since the start of the campaign, that she kept the company alive in the post-9/11 and dotcom bubbles. <u+201c>sometimes, in tough times tough calls are necessary,<u+201d> she said, adding she was fired in a <u+201c>board room brawl.<u+201d> fiorina said she will continue to do what she has since the start of the race, attack the top candidates, republican donald trump and democrat hillary clinton, and work hard on the campaign trail. she said trump has "no excuse" for attacking fox new anchor megyn kelly for her tough questions to him during the debate. "there<u+2019>s no excuse for this," she said. "it<u+2019>s her job to ask tough questions." fiorina, whose platform includes cutting the size of government and economic growth through the support of small business, also said: "i<u+2019>m throwing every punch. ... i<u+2019>m going to keep working hard, keep doing what i<u+2019>ve been doing since day one -- keep talking to people and answering their questions.<u+201d>

fiorina: breakout debate performance has sparked 'uptick' in financial support

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

78.0

8.0

2377.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

163.0

0.0

60.0

0.0

10.0

6.0

9.0

4.0

8.0

3.0

7.0

6.0

7.0

12.0

19.0

169.0

60.0

10.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

waco, texas (cnn) a memo has gone out to law enforcement in the wake of sunday's shooting, warning officers that members of the bandidos and cossacks motorcycle gangs reportedly had been instructed to arm themselves and travel to north texas. "obviously it's something we're concerned about. we would encourage biker groups to stand down. there's been enough bloodshed. there's been enough death here," waco police sgt. w. patrick swanton told cnn's "anderson cooper 360" on monday night. by the time the sunday melee was over, at least nine people were dead, 18 were hospitalized and at least 170 were arrested and charged. the biker gang members who began beating, stabbing and shooting each other in a texas twin peaks restaurant knew the police were outside; they just didn't care, swanton said. for two months, police concerned with the bikers' presence at twin peaks, which hosted special events for its leather-clad clientele, had patrolled outside -- and not in plain clothes and unmarked cars, either. "we wanted our presence to be known," swanton told reporters. "they knew we were seconds away and going to respond. that mattered not to them." the united clubs of waco billed sunday's event as the texas region 1 confederation of clubs and independents meeting. before the restaurant and surrounding parking lots became a bloody battleground, the waco police department had 18 officers on the scene, including an assistant chief and tactical officers, along with four officers with the texas department of public safety, swanton said. an altercation in the bathroom seems to have sparked the violence. shots were fired inside the eatery and a brawl spilled onto the patio area, before scores of men flooded the parking lot in broad daylight. some bikers were beaten with brass knuckles, clubs and chains, while others were stabbed or shot, swanton said. when police responded -- within 30 to 45 seconds because of their proximity -- the bikers turned their weapons on law enforcement, he said. "our officers took fire and responded appropriately, returning fire," the sergeant said. as police rounded up suspects and paramedics tended to the injured, investigators found eight bodies -- three in the parking lot behind twin peaks, four near the front of the restaurant and one that had been dragged behind a nearby establishment, swanton said. more than 100 weapons were confiscated as well, he said. another victim died at a hospital, where doctors treated patients for gunshots, stab wounds, blunt-force trauma or some combination of the three. according to a law enforcement source, preliminary information indicates that four of the bikers killed were killed by police gunfire. the investigation continues and the ballistics will be analyzed to determine for certain who was responsible for each shooting. swanton called it "the most violent and gruesome scene that i have dealt with" in three and a half decades of law enforcement. the scores of suspects, who hail from five different biker gangs, remained locked up in the mclennan county jail on monday facing charges of engaging in organized crime, swanton said. prosecutors and investigators could level other charges -- and capital murder charges are expected to be among them, given the body count -- but the organized crime charge is "pretty serious," he said. "it doesn't get much more significant than that," he said. mclennan county sheriff parnell mcnamara said that bond was being set at $1 million for each of the 170 people in custody. swanton would not release the names of the gangs involved. photos from the scene showed bikers wearing the insignias of the cossacks, bandidos, scimitars and vaqueros, but it was not clear if the photographed gang members were involved in the fighting. as swanton briefed reporters at the crime scene monday afternoon, 24 hours after the brawl, he said tactical units remained on the scene to protect journalists and investigators. police hoped to finish processing the scene by sundown, he said. the texas alcoholic beverage commission shut down the twin peaks location, known for "bike nights" and its risque dress code for servers, for the next week. it wasn't a punitive measure, swanton said; rather, it was closed because there's "enough of a reason to believe that more violence would occur there, had they been allowed to remain open for the next seven-day period," he said. later monday morning, the commission said it was suspending the restaurant's liquor license for those seven days while its agents investigate what happened. the investigation could yield anything from a fine to the permanent revocation of twin peaks' liquor license, commission spokesman chris porter said. there have been no previous complaints or actions taken against the eatery, he added. "we are in the people business and the safety of the employees and guests in our restaurants is priority one," the restaurant chain's statement read. "unfortunately the management team of the franchised restaurant in waco chose to ignore the warnings and advice from both the police and our company, and did not uphold the high security standards we have in place to ensure everyone is safe at our restaurants." it further said the corporate office would be "revoking their franchise agreement immediately. our sympathies continue to be with the families of those who died and are very thankful no employees, guests, police officers or bystanders were hurt or injured.<u+200b>" the waco restaurant's facebook account, which had been a landing page for harsh criticism of the franchise, was deleted shortly thereafter. swanton slammed twin peaks after the bloodshed sunday, saying the franchise failed to help avoid trouble and ignored the police department's advice to try to keep biker gangs away from the restaurant. "are we frustrated? sure, because we feel like there may have been more that could have been done by a business to prevent this," swanton said. he said twin peaks has a right to deny entry to known biker gangs. before word came of the franchise being revoked, jay patel, operating partner at the waco twin peaks, said his staff was cooperating with police. "we are horrified by the criminal, violent acts that occurred outside of our waco restaurant today," patel said sunday night on facebook. "we share in the community's trauma." the franchise released a statement monday, saying it was working hard to learn the facts about the shooting. "it is important to clarify that, to the best of our knowledge, law enforcement officials did not ask either the waco restaurant operator (with whom they spoke several times) or the twin peaks franchisor to cancel the patio reservation that was made on sunday. "based on the information to date, we also believe that the violence began outside in the area of the parking lot, and not inside our restaurant or on our patio, as has been widely reported," it read. even after the chaos subsided, waco police continued arresting people arriving at the scene with weapons. swanton warned other biker gang members against coming to waco to reignite the violence. "we have been getting reports throughout the day that bikers from out of state are headed this way," he told ktvt on sunday. "we would encourage them not to, because we have plenty of space in our county jail to put them there."

waco biker gang shootout kills 9 outside twin peaks

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

51.0

8.0

7367.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

451.0

0.0

150.0

0.0

51.0

26.0

13.0

8.0

31.0

9.0

19.0

7.0

31.0

39.0

455.0

150.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the 2016 presidential contenders are begging their iowa supporters to get to the caucuses monday and donald trump, true to form, is in-your-face about it. "you're from iowa," trump told a dubuque crowd saturday. "are you afraid of snow?" a snowfall forecast to start monday night appeared more likely to hinder the hopefuls in their rush out of iowa than the voters who will be flocking to the caucuses in the first contest of the presidential campaign. still, there was every reason for candidates to be urgent about turnout in tight races on both sides. democrat bernie sanders called it a tossup with hillary clinton and said every caucus-goer counts. republican ted cruz directed much of his final advertising against marco rubio as the senators' feud grows even more bitter in the final days. texan cruz, considered trump's chief rival in iowa, took to the airwaves to challenge the conservative credentials of rubio, the floridian who's running third in iowa, according to the polls. one ad said of rubio: "tax hikes. amnesty. the republican obama." "the desperation kicks in," rubio said in response. "from my experience, when people start attacking you it's because you're doing something right." iowa offers only a small contingent of the delegates who will determine the nominees, but the game of expectations counts for far more than the electoral math in the state. campaigns worked aggressively to set those expectations in their favor (meaning, lower them) for iowa, next-up new hampshire and beyond. rubio strategist todd harris said the iowa goal is to end up behind the flamboyant trump and the highly organized cruz. "there's no question we are feeling some wind at our back," harris told the associated press. but, he added, "it's very hard to compete with the greatest show on earth and the greatest ground game in iowa history." in the last major preference poll before the caucuses, trump had the support of 28 percent of likely republican caucus-goers, with cruz at 23 percent and rubio at 15 percent. the iowa poll, published by the des moines register and bloomberg, also found clinton with 45 percent support to sanders' 42 percent in the democratic race. the poll was taken tuesday to friday and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. "i don't have to win it," trump told cbs' "face the nation," before adding that he believes he has "a good chance" of victory. he said he was confident of taking the new hampshire primary on feb. 9, and many others down the road. "one of the reasons that i'll win and, i think, none of the other guys will win is because i'm going to get states that they'll never get." trump cited pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, florida, along with strong hopes for new york and virginia. cruz's campaign was challenged by iowa secretary of state paul pate over a mailer sent to potential voters that seemed designed to look like an official notice warning recipients about "low expected voter turnout in your area." the mailer refers to a "voting violation" and grades the recipient's voting history and that of several neighbors, citing public records. pate said cruz's campaign "misrepresents iowa election law." there's "no such thing as an election violation related to frequency of voting," he said, and insinuating otherwise is "not in keeping in the spirit of the iowa caucuses." cruz brushed off the fuss. "i will apologize to nobody for using every tool we can to encourage iowa voters to come out and vote," he said.

turnout is name of the game in iowa caucuses

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

44.0

8.0

3510.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

238.0

1.0

0.0

67.0

0.0

19.0

7.0

11.0

2.0

7.0

9.0

10.0

8.0

18.0

15.0

18.0

244.0

68.0

19.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

establishment republicans like the former governor of florida rarely do so at an event dominated by a young, libertarian wing of the party. bush's task, on the other hand, is to pay his respects and avoid any costly errors, such as mitt romney<u+2019>s <u+201c>severely conservative<u+201d> outing at the same conference in 2012. the format of the event -- a 20-minute question-and-answer session with fox news host sean hannity -- plays to bush's strengths, but also carries risk, as it will likely cover hostile territory. bush's attendance also gives conservatives an opportunity to shape the debate in their favor, as well as a chance to protest moderate elements of the party that failed to sweep a republican into the white house in the last two presidential elections. the main sticking point regarding another bush presidential campaign, at least according to some conservatives at the conference, is his support for the common core academic standards. bush has said he would remain committed to the standards if he runs for president, a politically fraught move given their unpopularity in the republican party. new jersey gov. chris christie and louisiana gov. bobby jindal, bush<u+2019>s likely rivals in the 2016 race who once supported the standards, have since renounced them. dorothy marsh, a retired teacher of 40 years from jacksonville, florida, said her son shared a class with <u+201c>little jeb<u+201d> in high school. despite her familiarity with the man, marsh took issue with his enthusiastic embrace of common core, which she described as overly restrictive. <u+201c>teachers need to have creativity in their classroom,<u+201d> marsh told the huffington post on thursday. <u+201c>the last few years, i felt like i got up and put on clothes that didn<u+2019>t fit. i was wearing someone else<u+2019>s clothes. this is not the way i reach children and i wasn<u+2019>t being an effective teacher because i wasn<u+2019>t comfortable in what i was doing.<u+201d> emmett mcgroarty of the american principles project, a republican group that advocates for immigration reform and opposes common core, said he was concerned the issue may cause long-term damage. he sketched out a worst-case scenario should the party ultimately nominate a candidate like bush. <u+201c>i think almost all the candidates on the republican side will be against the common core. that could fracture the vote and you could end up with a pro-common core nominee,<u+201d> mcgroarty said. <u+201c>in the general [election], that pro-common core nominee will run against likely hillary clinton, who has no common core baggage. and that is going to make the republican candidate, i think, unelectable. because the conservative voters will be disappointed, their turnout will be suppressed and low.<u+201d> the absence of visible support for bush was conspicuous throughout the sprawling gaylord national resort and conference center on thursday, where backers of other gop candidates flaunted t-shirts and banners, and handed out stickers. some attendees said that they were willing to hear bush out, but he wasn<u+2019>t the first choice in their hearts or in their cpac straw poll selections -- the results of which will be announced on saturday. "he's too moderate, like his brother,<u+201d> bill bergmeier said of bush. <u+201c>they both move too much towards the democrat side." an iowa native, bergmeier said he is looking forward to voting in his state's first-in-the-nation republican caucus next year, but has no plans to vote for bush. "i like ted cruz, scott walker, and sarah palin," he said. jeffrey capella, a self-identified "staunch neo-conservative," said he doesn't have "any real hesitations" about bush's candidacy. nonetheless, bush was not capella's first choice in the cpac straw poll. "i chose [florida sen.] marco rubio as my first pick," he said. "but jeb bush was number two." other conference-goers voiced concerns about bush's family name and the difficulties it could give the candidate in the general election. bush recently declared himself <u+201c>my own man<u+201d> in an attempt to distance himself from his brother<u+2019>s legacy of costly wars and economic catastrophe. but questions remain as to whether he can withstand direct attacks from his fellow republicans once the campaign is truly underway. "i see a strong candidate, but i just wonder what his strategy is going to be," said austin von henner, a student at southern adventist university in tennessee. von henner said he appreciated that bush has "a firm position" on issues like education and immigration policy, but acknowledged they could "use some fine-tuning" before 2016. "for a conservative mind, he is, all-in-all, a good candidate." still, there was a sense that, if push comes to shove, and bush is the only option on the table, some conservatives could hold their nose and vote the party line like they did for romney in 2012.

cpac conservatives skeptical of another bush

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

3.0

44.0

8.0

4769.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

335.0

1.0

0.0

108.0

0.0

36.0

6.0

15.0

5.0

9.0

7.0

9.0

6.0

23.0

15.0

38.0

338.0

109.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"one should not insist on nailing [trump] into positions that he had taken in the campaign," he said.

sanders signals the end is near

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

31.0

8.0

101.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

10.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

12.0

4.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"i could stand in the middle of 5th avenue and shoot somebody and i wouldn't lose voters," trump said at a campaign rally here. after the event, trump declined to answer when asked by cnn to clarify his comments. the gop front-runner has repeatedly pointed to the loyalty of his supporters, many of whom tell reporters and pollsters that almost nothing could make them change their mind about voting for trump in the presidential race. trump's comments come as the debate about gun violence in america has taken center stage in american political discourse amid several highly publicized mass shootings.

donald trump could 'shoot somebody and not lose voters'

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

606.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

38.0

0.0

12.0

0.0

3.0

5.0

0.0

2.0

6.0

0.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

5.0

4.0

39.0

12.0

3.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hillary clinton celebrated her status as the first woman to win a major party<u+2019>s presidential nomination on tuesday evening in brooklyn <u+2013> and then turned quickly from history to politics, attacking gop rival donald trump as a bully who wanted to <u+201c>take america backwards.<u+201d> <u+201c>to be great, we can<u+2019>t be small,<u+201d> clinton told a cheering crowd in brooklyn, previewing a general-election campaign in which she will attack trump as vulgar, erratic and divisive. clinton cast the election as a test of national identity: <u+201c>this election is different. it really is about who we are as a nation<u+2026>we are better than this. we won<u+2019>t let this happen in america. and if you agree, whether you<u+2019>re a democrat, republican or independent, i hope you will join us.<u+201d> clinton<u+2019>s speech came on a night when she won primaries in new jersey and new mexico, and lost the caucuses in north dakota to rival sen. bernie sanders (vt.). races in two other states <u+2013> south dakota and montana <u+2013> remain too close to call, with clinton narrowly in the lead in both. polls in california, the biggest prize of the night, closed at 11 p.m. eastern time. clinton<u+2019>s speech had been robbed of some of its drama, after the associated press declared monday night that she had gathered enough delegates to win the nomination. but clinton sought to re-create it, entering to a song with the refrain <u+201c>i want to see you be brave,<u+201d> and citing the work of early suffragettes in fighting for women<u+2019>s right to vote. she noted that the room she was speaking in was a giant greenhouse. <u+201c>it may be hard to see tonight, but we are all standing under a glass ceiling right now. but don<u+2019>t worry, we<u+2019>re not smashing this one,<u+201d> clinton said, in a reference to her concession speech from the 2008 election, when she said that the <u+201c>glass ceiling<u+201d> had about 18 million cracks in it, a reference to the votes she<u+2019>d received in a losing primary campaign against then-sen. barack obama (ill.). <u+201c>thanks to you, we<u+2019>ve reached a milestone. the first time in our nation<u+2019>s history that a woman will be a major party<u+2019>s nominee.<u+201d> clinton also used the speech to reach out to sanders, who had threatened to push their primary contest all the way to the party<u+2019>s convention in philadelphia. <u+201c>now i know it never feels good to put your heart into a cause or a candidate, that you believe in, and to come up short. i know that feeling well,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>but as we look ahead, to the battle that awaits, let<u+2019>s remember all that unites us.<u+201d> she then recited a series of attacks on trump, hoping that sanders supporters <u+2013> and sanders himself <u+2013> might see the republican as an enemy they held in common with clinton. sanders himself has not indicated what he will do after tuesday. he is reportedly going to speak late at night, after the results from california begin to come in. sanders, a self-described <u+201c>democratic socialist<u+201d> from vermont, rocketed out of obscurity with an urgent call to fight income inequality and big money in politics. he gave clinton an unexpectedly close race, but now trails her in votes, <u+201c>pledged<u+201d> delegates and un-pledged superdelegates. and, after tuesday night, there will be no more states to fight over. only the d.c. primary remains. sanders<u+2019>s showing in tuesday<u+2019>s races <u+2014> especially in california, where the race could be close <u+2014> may determine whether he tries to fight on to the party convention, seeking to <u+201c>flip<u+201d> super-delegates committed to clinton. in a news conference at one of his golf clubs on tuesday night, trump attacked clinton for her use of a private email server, and called her a symbol of a <u+201c>corrupt system.<u+201d> <u+201c>there<u+2019>s one thing we all have learn. we can<u+2019>t fix the rigged system by relying on very <u+2013> and i mean this so, so strongly <u+2013> on the very people who rigged it. and they rigged it. we can<u+2019>t solve our problems by relying on the politicians who created our problems,<u+201d> trump said. he promised a speech next week that would delve into the problems of the clintons. trump <u+2013> reading, uncharacteristically, from a prepared text <u+2013> made a pitch for voters supporting sanders. <u+201c>to all of those bernie sanders voters, who have been left out in the cold<u+2026>we welcome you with open arms,<u+201d> he said. at the same time, trump seemed to speak to his fellow republicans, trying to reassure them after an awful week in which the presumptive gop nominee attacked a federal judge, saying he was biased against trump in an ongoing fraud cause because the judge is <u+201c>mexican.<u+201d> the judge is american, born in indiana to parents who were mexican immigrants. it seemed to be a simultaneous rejection by trump of both the american melting pot, and public trust in the judicial branch. trump did not mention the case, or the judge. but he told republicans, <u+201c>i will never, ever let you down.<u+201d> as a sign of the democratic party<u+2019>s effort to close ranks around clinton, house minority leader nancy pelosi announced her support tuesday just before polls opened in her home state, california. speaking in an interview with george stephanopolous on abc<u+2019>s <u+201c>good morning america,<u+201d> pelosi emphasized the need for her party to coalesce soon for the general election. <u+201c>bernie knows better than anyone what<u+2019>s on the line in the election and that we at some point have to unify as we go forward,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>he wants to influence the platform. i think that<u+2019>s fine.<u+201d> sen. jeff merkley (d-ore.), the one sitting senator who has endorsed sanders, said in an interview tuesday that it is important to allow the remaining six states and the district of columbia to vote before declaring a presumptive democratic nominee. but he added that just as obama and clinton saw <u+201c>the lay of the land<u+201d> in 2008 after all the primary voters cast their ballots, <u+201c>we<u+2019>ll soon be able to see the parts of the party work together to unite.<u+201d> [sanders<u+2019>s supporters lash out as chances slip away] <u+201c>i think we<u+2019>ll be absolutely united in making sure the self-promoting huckster named donald trump never becomes president of the united states,<u+201d> he said, adding that clinton should learn from sanders<u+2019>s connection with voters. <u+201c>if secretary clinton is the nominee, she will not win in november without a deep and profound and passionate understanding of the issues that have so moved the grass roots in america.<u+201d> clinton<u+2019>s pivot to the race against trump unofficially began last week with a withering speech on foreign policy in which she shredded the real estate mogul<u+2019>s qualifications and temperament. those attacks have continued this past weekend at appearances up and down california and have been received with unprecedented enthusiasm by her supporters. <u+201c>donald trump is not qualified to be president of the united states of america, but we can<u+2019>t just say that assume everybody understands it,<u+201d> she said at a star-studded <u+201c>she<u+2019>s with us<u+201d> concert at the los angeles greek theatre on monday night. <u+201c>we have to make the case and organize and mobilize.<u+201d> clinton has faced an unexpectedly strong and increasingly contentious challenge from sanders, and there is the possibility that the senator will keep battling her even now that she has effectively sewn up the nomination. sanders has said it made no sense to declare the race over until the votes of the superdelegates are counted next month at the convention. after finishing breakfast with his family in san francisco, the senator sounded upbeat about the remaining primaries. <u+201c>i think we<u+2019>ve got a shot,<u+201d> he said outside the butler & the chef bistro as he greeted a throng of cheering supporters. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m feeling great.<u+201d> before the polls opened tuesday, sanders<u+2019>s campaign manager sent an email to supporters acknowledging that the reported delegate count for clinton could suppress voter turnout. but the message asked for help in phoning california voters so that sanders could <u+201c>defy the pundits once more<u+201d> and <u+201c>shock the establishment.<u+201d> [how bernie sanders missed his chance to beat hillary clinton] <u+201c>we know that this race is going to carry on until the delegates cast ballots at the convention in philadelphia,<u+201d> said campaign manager jeff weaver. <u+201c>we should let the voters decide who they want the democratic nominee to be rather than having the media decide for them. i am asking you to continue to stand with bernie in pushing for the political revolution.<u+201d> sanders met with some voters in the bay area later tuesday morning and then flew to the los angeles area, where he was to tape an interview with lester holt of <u+201c>nbc nightly news<u+201d> in burbank and then hold an election night rally in santa monica. outside the coffee shop where sanders ate, voters appeared split about what path sanders should pursue. kyle sorrels, a 25-year-old engineer and self-described progressive, described clinton <u+201c>as unacceptable as donald trump to be the president<u+201d> and said that he had informed his employer he would move to berlin if either candidate won in november. <u+201c>my hope is that hillary gets indicted in the next few weeks and bernie gets it,<u+201d> he said. as he walked away he said to no one in particular, <u+201c>feel the bern! hillary for prison!<u+201d> bobby schultz, 38, an independent voter and a software developer from san bruno, calif., who was sipping coffee with friends nearby, said he was <u+201c>surprised<u+201d> sanders was still running. <u+201c>i really like bernie, but as this point the race is pretty much over,<u+201d> he said. tuesday marks the exact anniversary of the day eight years ago when clinton conceded the democratic nomination to then-sen. obama. the president could endorse clinton as soon as this week, not waiting for the democratic convention in july, according to white house press secretary josh earnest. speaking to reporters tuesday, earnest said that out of respect for the ongoing voting, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not going to declare a winner from here.<u+201d> but he emphasized that obama intends <u+201c>to make his voice heard in coming together<u+201d> behind the presumptive nominee and planned to play a role in brokering a rapprochment between the two candidates. he added that obama<u+2019>s endorsement could influence republicans, not just democrats, given his seven and-a-half years in the job. <u+201c>the president is an important validator.<u+201d> an obama endorsement would be a significant boost to clinton as she seeks to unify democrats after the difficult primaries. it would send a strong message to sanders and his supporters that they should coalesce around clinton, something sanders has indicated he is far from ready to do. <u+201c>obviously, i<u+2019>m excited about having the president<u+2019>s support, because i have said throughout this campaign i was honored to serve in the president<u+2019>s cabinet,<u+201d> clinton said. phillip reported from los angeles. juliet eilperin and john wagner in washington and robert costa in san francisco contributed to this report.

democratic primaries: clinton claims nomination victory

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

55.0

8.0

10694.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

0.0

692.0

0.0

221.0

0.0

65.0

27.0

29.0

12.0

26.0

18.0

20.0

21.0

42.0

48.0

70.0

700.0

221.0

65.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the jobs report met expectations for once, and that's good news for stock and bond investors. the u.s. economy added 223,000 jobs in april, according to the bureau of labor statistics. economists missed by just a whisker: the consensus from action economics was 225,000 new jobs. the unemployment rate, at 5.4%, would be the lowest since may 2008. for once, there wasn't much to hate about the jobs report. stock investors liked the signs of a growing economy. for example, construction added 45,000 jobs, and those are good jobs that pay well. "that's a very good sign for things to come," says joanie courtney, senior vice president, market development at monster.com. and the bond market, which is usually only happy when it rains, rallied on the report as well. the bellwether 10-year treasury note yield fell to 2.19% in early trading. it wasn't all puppies and unicorns.the march report was revised down strongly, to 85,000 jobs from 126,000. manufacturing added just 1,000 jobs, and the oil sector lost 3,000 jobs. because all investment questions these days seem to revolve around when the federal reserve will raise interest rates, the april report didn't add much pressure to the fed to nudge its key fed funds rate higher. you need strong wage increases to create a wage/price spiral, and the 0.1% increase in hourly wages wasn't strong. "i'm surprised we're not seeing more movement in wages," courtney says. "usually in a recovery, you start to see more movement." but the april report looks only at hourly wages, and not the wages of salaried workers. for investors, then, the april jobs report was the best of all possible worlds. it showed decent hiring, but nothing so exuberant that would push the fed to tap the brakes.

first take: a great jobs report for investors

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

1746.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

86.0

0.0

31.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

5.0

1.0

2.0

6.0

4.0

3.0

6.0

7.0

15.0

88.0

31.0

4.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

super pacs backing donald trump are off to a slow and rather rocky start as they try to raise funds because the candidate<u+2019>s rhetoric and policy pronouncements are still so incendiary and he has sent mixed signals about how much financial help he wants from outside groups. trump<u+2019>s campaign war chest is dwarfed by hillary clinton<u+2019>s, who had $42.5m in the bank at the start of june compared with her republican rival<u+2019>s $1.3m, according to the federal election commission. trump has taunted big donors repeatedly, and bragged for months that his campaign was not going to rely on them or super pacs, before appearing to change his tune more recently. several donors backing trump told the guardian that the candidate<u+2019>s errors are piling up. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s got to learn not to put his foot in his mouth,<u+201d> said stan hubbard, a billionaire broadcaster who has donated $100,000 to the pro-trump great america pac. <u+201c>he needs a clearer message without name-calling.<u+201d> hubbard also called trump<u+2019>s recent trip to scotland <u+2013> where he was criticized for hailing the plunge in the pound post-brexit as good for his golf course there <u+2013> a mistake. <u+201c>he should have let his kids do it.<u+201d> likewise, potential super pac donors say trump badly needs to curb his bombastic rhetoric and craft a better message. michael epstein, who raised big money for wisconsin governor scott walker and plans to vote for trump but also <u+201c>hold my nose and pray<u+201d>, said that he might back a super pac if trump has a strong gop convention next month and really <u+201c>turns it around<u+201d>. but epstein added: <u+201c>i<u+2019>m less and less hopeful. he can<u+2019>t get out of his own way. he<u+2019>s going to have to demonstrate more presidential behavior. they<u+2019>re behind the eight ball and they<u+2019>ve got to move fast.<u+201d> four key pro-trump super pacs have been formally launched, but between them they have run only about $5m in ads. by contrast, the leading pro-clinton super pac, priorities usa action, in mid-may began a massive television and digital ad blitz in key states reportedly slated to cost almost $130m. signs of turmoil and slow growth among the trump super pacs, which unlike campaigns can accept unlimited donations, are palpable. texas mega-donor doug deason, who in tandem with his billionaire father darwin deason recently met with trump, said that the candidate<u+2019>s top fundraiser had signaled to them that a new super pac, make america number one, backed by hedge fund billionaire robert mercer, was deemed the <u+201c>official<u+201d> one. in a twist, make america number one will seek big checks from gop donors who are not ready to back trump but want to stop clinton, according to bloomberg. deason said that he and his father would probably write a check to a super pac but stressed that <u+201c>we<u+2019>re waiting to see what sheldon adelson does<u+201d>, a reference to billionaire adelson, who has pledged some $100m to help trump <u+2013> which deason thinks is the amount needed for a super pac to really have an impact. adelson has been considering setting up his own super pac and talking to key republican operatives about cobbling one together to help trump, fundraising sources told the guardian. but the casino baron has been typically cautious and slow in opening his checkbook after at least two meetings with trump since late may. adelson is said to be talking to some other wealthy donors <u+2013> including home depot co-founder bernie marcus and energy investor toby neugebauer <u+2013> about teaming up on a super pac, say fundraising sources. one gop operative with ties to adelson told the guardian that the casino mogul may put up his funds in installments, predicting that about half would come after trump picks his running mate. the operative said adelson has been pressing trump to choose the casino owner<u+2019>s longtime ally newt gingrich, the ex-house speaker, or another staunchly pro israel figure who shares adelson<u+2019>s hawkish views on israel. <u+201c>adelson is very succinct about his expectations,<u+201d> said the operative. meanwhile, the existing super pacs are trying mightily with mixed success to bring in big checks. the great america pac, which boasts veteran gop operative ed rollins as a strategist, organized two events in june to woo big donors in dallas and new york, where a luncheon at the 101 club was hosted by peter kalikow, a wealthy real estate executive and trump buddy. eric beach, the co-chair of great america, said the pac has raised $5m and has commitments for another $4m. the pac has plans for a few more events to court big donors in los angeles and oregon before the republican national convention and by election day hopes to raise $150m, he said. in june, the pac launched a three-week, $750,000 ad buy on fox and cable channels to promote trump. <u+201c>donors care about a path to victory,<u+201d> beach said, adding that he expects the pac to focus on about 10 key states including florida, ohio and pennsylvania. other pro-trump pacs are ramping up their fundraising and ad drives. laurance gay, the managing director of the super pac rebuilding america now and a former lobbyist and one-time partner of trump campaign chairman paul manafort, said it had raised $2m, most of which has paid for two tv ads. <u+201c>our pac is gearing up to keep hillary clinton<u+2019>s head under water through the elections,<u+201d> gay said. rebuilding america now expect to raise and spend close to $20m through the gop convention next month and then hope to raise another $80m for the rest of the campaign season, gay said. the guardian has learned that gay and tom barrack, a private equity executive and old friend of trump<u+2019>s who played a big role in getting the super pac launched and told cnn it had $32m in commitments, met with adelson in june to woo him but it is unclear if they will get a check. gay said that it was no secret that <u+201c>we<u+2019>re well behind in fundraising<u+201d>. more broadly, veteran money man fred malek, who has been a top fundraiser for gop governors, cautions that trump<u+2019>s policies and temperament pose obstacles for super pac fundraising malek stresses that gop donors and voters, <u+201c>want to see a nominee who is more inclusive rather than divisive and recognizes that politics is a game of addition and not a game of subtraction.<u+201d>

donald trump's super pac backers worry candidate's errors are piling up

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

71.0

8.0

6154.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

374.0

0.0

110.0

0.0

36.0

7.0

19.0

1.0

10.0

11.0

7.0

14.0

29.0

13.0

36.0

377.0

110.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with tens of thousands of people taking to the streets to protest donald trump<u+2019>s presidential election victory, questions are swirling about whether the anger is as organic as advertised. from coast to coast, demonstrators are burning flags and effigies of the president-elect while declaring that they refuse to accept trump<u+2019>s victory. but observers online are claiming that, in some cases, protesters were bused to the scenes - a telltale sign of coordination. <u+201c>anti-trump protestors in austin today are not as organic as they seem,<u+201d> one local in the texas capitol tweeted wednesday, along with photos offered as evidence. others claimed to have found ads posted on craigslist in which a seattle-based non-profit was soliciting <u+201c>full-time activists.<u+201d> <u+201c>we are looking for motivated individuals who are seeking full-time, part-time, and permanent positions,<u+201d> reads a line from the ad from washington can! posted on wednesday. rumors have also been circulating that the new batch of anti-trump protesters has been bankrolled by individuals like billionaire liberal activist george soros and groups like moveon.org. <u+201c>wtf, @georgesoros busing in & paying #protestors to destroy cities is domestic #terrorism. #fakeprotests #bluelivesmatter have tough days,<u+201d> read one tweet in response to the viral picture of buses in austin. another theory floated on social media is that many of the signs that were distributed at rallies across the country appeared to be exactly the same, indicating they were printed and distributed by an organized group. wednesday<u+2019>s protests occurred in nearly every major city, and more are expected to come in the days leading up to president-elect donald trump<u+2019>s inauguration. some of the most troubling dissent was in the city of new orleans where protesters wound up defacing the lee memorial, spray painting <u+201c>die whites die<u+201d> and <u+201c>f--- trump<u+201d> and <u+201c>f--- white people.<u+201d> other messages scrawled on the memorial included "f--- pence" and "we are ungovernable" next to a symbol of the letter "a" in a circle -- protester shorthand for anarchy. in chicago, several thousand people marched through the loop. they gathered outside trump tower, chanting <u+201c>not my president!<u+201d> one resident, michael burke, told the associated press that the president-elect will divide the nation and stir up a deep-seated hatred. hundreds of protesters gathered near philadelphia's city hall despite chilly, wet weather. participants <u+2014> who included both supporters of democratic nominee hillary clinton and independent vermont sen. bernie sanders, who lost to clinton in the primary <u+2014> expressed anger at both republicans and democrats over the election's outcome. in boston, thousands of anti-trump protesters streamed through downtown, chanting "trump's a racist," and carrying signs that said "impeach trump" and "abolish electoral college." clinton appeared to be on pace to win the popular vote, despite losing the electoral count that decides the presidential race. in the midwest, protesters gathered in minneapolis, omaha, nebraska and kansas city. mo. the des moines register also reported that iowa<u+2019>s capital city saw some people protest as well, though it was kept to small numbers. on the west coast, some of the protests became unruly with fires being started. thousands of protesters burned a giant papier mache trump head in los angeles and started fires in oakland intersections. los angeles demonstrators also beat a trump pi<u+00f1>ata and sprayed the los angeles times building and news vans with anti-trump profanity. one protester outside la city hall read a sign that simply said "this is very bad." late in the evening wednesday, several hundred people blocked one of the city's busiest freeways, u.s. 101 between downtown and hollywood. the associated press contributed to this story. perry chiaramonte is a reporter for foxnews.com. follow him on twitter at @perrych

trump protests intensify, as doubts swirl about spontaneity

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

59.0

8.0

3901.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

0.0

250.0

0.0

55.0

1.0

0.0

28.0

12.0

8.0

6.0

10.0

5.0

11.0

3.0

12.0

21.0

22.0

254.0

55.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

those who have the most years to save for retirement appear to be the most worried that when the time comes, they won't be financially ready. that's a key finding from a new report released tuesday by bank of america and merrill edge. the survey of more than 1,000 americans found that among gen xers who were still working, 74% were most likely to believe they'll be financially stressed in retirement based on how they are currently putting money away. among millennials, 67% had the same fear. that's in contrast to 59% of current retirees who say they aren't worried about money because of how they saved. some of that disparity can be attributed to the younger generations simply fearing the unknown. "the retirees now know what their costs are in retirement,'' says aron levine, head of merrill edge at bank of america. "they know what they're spending in the near term, their health care costs, so it's a little easier to understand and look out over the next few years vs. gen x and millennials who are looking 20 to 25 years out in the future. the unknown, and everything they see and read, suggests a very stressful situation.'' but a big source of the stress is that the younger generations are juggling many situations, from aging parents to student loans. it's "that combination of having to deal with a lot of priorities and really focusing on paying down debt and the uncertainties around health care and other costs,'' levine says. health care costs are a top worry, regardless of age, with 65% of all those surveyed saying that unexpected medical costs would strain their finances in retirement. a lack of social security benefits came in second, with 38% of respondents saying that would stress their budgets. "what people do see is that (health care costs) keep going up, and the question ties into longevity,'' levine says. "if you're a gen xer or millennial you say, 'i may live a lot longer than previous generations. ... how do i save if i'm going to live into my 90s?' '' apparently, a good number of millennials believe the answer, in part, is getting money from family and friends. the report found 43% of that age group say they are counting on some financial help from loved ones if they need it in retirement. that may be tied into a belief that they'll get an inheritance to help tide them over, levine says, "and with millennials in particular, sharing is becoming a big part of how they live. zipcar and uber and social media ... so thematically, for them it's reasonable to think they'll get help from people along the way.'' a better path however, would be to have a savings plan, and many gen xers (defined by the study as ages 35 to 49) and millennials (ages 18-34) are not seeking help from a professional to create one. the report found 24% of non-retirees are working on retirement goals with an adviser vs. 38% of retirees who did the same before quitting work. "a lot of gen xers and millennials are not seeking outside help to the degree previous generations did,'' levine say, noting today's retired seniors "had a plan. they stuck with it, they got help along the way, and now that plan has worked for them for 30 or 40 years.'' eric roberge, a certified financial planner whose business caters to millennials, says that it's not too late for those who have been straggling with their savings to get on track. "for millennials, this is the time to take action around their finances,'' he says. "this involves taking a hard look at their income and expenses and their assets and debt. these items make up their financial foundations.'' next, he says, "identify an amount of money that they can contribute to their retirement accounts. saving early and often is a good recipe for creating an adequate amount of money that will support them in the future. early on in our working years is the best time to start. and, at that time, the amount of money they are saving is much more important than how this money is invested.'' all the worry about the future might be leading to a silver lining, levine says. the report found a significant bump in the percentage of people who say they're making their future finances a priority, jumping from 48% to 61% in one year. "you may see that come through in signing up for the 401(k) at work and taking advantage of opportunities when they're given them to save more,'' levine says. "emotions and stress are starting to drive better actions, whether it's thinking about how to save more, or taking specific actions to save more.''

millennials and gen x worried retirement years won't be so golden

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

8.0

4531.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

295.0

0.0

92.0

0.0

63.0

3.0

17.0

1.0

8.0

11.0

9.0

5.0

17.0

16.0

27.0

300.0

92.0

63.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the conservative justices on the supreme court gave little indication monday that they were inclined to fully revive president obama<u+2019>s stalled plan to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation and give them the right to work legally in this country. instead, the court<u+2019>s conservatives and liberals seemed split while hearing a challenge to the plan, and a 4-to-4 tie would leave in place a lower court<u+2019>s decision that the president exceeded his powers in issuing the directive. that would close obama<u+2019>s presidency with perhaps his biggest legal loss and leave in limbo about 4 million undocumented immigrants whom the initiative was intended to help: those who have been in the country since 2010, have committed no serious crimes, and have family ties to u.s. citizens or others lawfully in the country. in questions and comments over 90 minutes, the obama administration did not receive support from chief justice john g. roberts jr. or justice anthony m. kennedy, seen as most likely among the four conservatives to let the program proceed. but monday<u+2019>s oral arguments may not tell the whole story. once the justices debate the case behind closed doors, they could be motivated to search for a compromise to avoid the image of a court at an impasse after the february death of justice antonin scalia. one possibility might be for the court to recognize the president<u+2019>s authority to set priorities on whom to deport but to limit the impact of such a designation on an immigrant<u+2019>s ability to receive work authorization or become eligible for government benefits. gop-led states and republican members of congress say the president<u+2019>s november 2014 guidance on deportation states that those with deferred deportation <u+201c>are lawfully present in the united states.<u+201d> that term opens a number of opportunities and government benefits to them, according to texas and 25 other states that have objected to the plan. but solicitor general donald b. verrilli jr., representing the administration, denied that the language was legally significant; it would be more accurate to say the government is tolerating their presence, he said. <u+201c>if the court thinks it<u+2019>s a problem and wants to put a red pencil through it .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. it<u+2019>s totally fine,<u+201d> verrilli said. roberts tried that out on erin e. murphy, a lawyer for the u.s. house of representatives, who was given time to argue against the administration<u+2019>s policy. <u+201c>why don<u+2019>t we just cross out <u+2018>lawfully present,<u+2019> as the sg has suggested?<u+201d> roberts asked. <u+201c>you can<u+2019>t cross it out and achieve what<u+201d> the president intends, murphy said. whatever one calls it, the administration means for those whose deportations are deferred to be able to legally work and receive government benefits, she said. in the arguments, the court showed a familiar divide in confronting a fundamental tension of obama<u+2019>s tenure: whether the president is correctly using the substantial powers of his office to break through political gridlock, or whether he has ignored constitutional boundaries to unilaterally impose policies that should require congressional acquiescence. [here<u+2019>s who will be affected by this immigration case] but the future of the program depends on who takes obama<u+2019>s place. republican presidential candidates have vowed to revoke it. democrats have pledged to expand it. the immigration program, deferred action for parents of americans and lawful permanent residents (dapa), would allow illegal immigrants in the affected categories to remain in the country and apply for work permits if they have been here at least five years and have not committed felonies or repeated misdemeanors. obama announced the executive action in november 2014 after house republicans did not act on comprehensive immigration reform. the administration says the program is a way for a government with limited resources to prioritize which illegal immigrants it will deport. as a practical matter, the government has never deported more than 500,000 undocumented immigrants per year and often sends home far fewer than that. justice ruth bader ginsburg was in agreement: <u+201c>inevitably, priorities have to be set.<u+201d> added justice sonia sotomayor: <u+201c>so they are here, whether we want them or not.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s correct, verrilli said, and so the administration decided it would be better to have them be able to work legally. [400,000 in los angeles could be shielded from deportation if justices give green light] but kennedy saw the action as doing much more than that. it seemed, he said, <u+201c>that the president is setting the policy and the congress is executing it. that<u+2019>s just upside down.<u+201d> and roberts said the administration saw no limit to obama<u+2019>s authority. <u+201c>under your argument, could the president grant deferred removal to every .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. unlawfully present alien in the united states right now?<u+201d> he asked verrilli. but roberts did not seem convinced by verrilli<u+2019>s reference to specific undocumented immigrants whom congress has said must be immediately removed, such as those who have committed crimes or are apprehended at the border. texas solicitor general scott a. keller called obama<u+2019>s program <u+201c>an unprecedented, unlawful assertion of executive power<u+201d> and added that <u+201c>dapa would be one of the largest changes in immigration policy in our nation<u+2019>s history.<u+201d> sotomayor stopped him. <u+201c>how can you say that?<u+201d> she asked, noting that previous presidents have also protected specific groups from deportation. the liberal justices seemed to agree with the administration<u+2019>s contention that the states have no legal standing to sue, because it is up to the federal government to set immigration policy, and that the department of homeland security did not violate federal statutes in devising the program. justice stephen g. breyer was most skeptical of texas<u+2019>s argument that it had standing to sue because of a state law requiring it to provide driver<u+2019>s licenses to those authorized to work. he said it could lead to a flood of litigation on other matters. verrilli said texas could be relieved of what it sees as its burden in other ways. but justice samuel a. alito jr. said the government would insist that the immigrants who receive deferred deportation have access to driver<u+2019>s licenses if offered to others. at the beginning of the legal fight, u.s. district judge andrew s. hanen agreed with the state that, because it would face a financial cost in providing driver<u+2019>s licenses to those covered by the new program, texas had standing to challenge the initiative. a panel of the u.s. court of appeals for the 5th circuit upheld that decision on a 2-to-1 vote. circuit judge jerry smith rejected the administration<u+2019>s argument that dapa was a form of <u+201c>prosecutorial discretion<u+201d> in which a government with limited resources sets priorities for enforcement. the program, smith wrote, <u+201c>is much more than nonenforcement: it would affirmatively confer <u+2018>lawful presence<u+2019> and associated benefits on a class of unlawfully present aliens. though revocable, that change in designation would trigger<u+201d> eligibility for federal and state benefits <u+201c>that would not otherwise be available to illegal aliens.<u+201d> the court granted time in the arguments to hear from the house of representatives and from three <u+201c>jane does<u+201d> from texas who would be eligible. murphy, representing the house, said even obama did not originally think he possessed the power to take the action. <u+201c>three years ago, the executive asked congress to enact legislation that would have given it the power to authorize most of the people that are living in this country unlawfully to stay, work and receive benefits, and congress declined,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>now the executive comes before this court with the extraordinary claim that it has had the power<u+201d> all along. thomas a. saenz of the mexican american legal defense and educational fund represented the jane does. they <u+201c>seek the opportunity to apply for discretionary, temporary and revocable relief from the daily fear that they will be separated from their families and detained or removed from their homes under the current nonuniform and frequently arbitrary federal immigration enforcement system,<u+201d> he said. the case is u.s. v. texas .

initial prognosis poor for obama<u+2019>s immigration program at supreme court

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

71.0

8.0

8192.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

595.0

0.0

145.0

1.0

0.0

87.0

22.0

21.0

9.0

26.0

7.0

16.0

6.0

40.0

38.0

54.0

604.0

145.0

88.0

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.

obama, muted on human rights, lifts arms embargo on vietnam

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

103.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

3.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

presidential candidate hillary clinton told the country what she really thinks about many donald trump supporters when she lumped <u+201c>half<u+201d> of them into a xenophobic, homophobic, racist, and sexist<u+00a0><u+201c>basket of deplorables<u+201d><u+00a0>on friday. although she cautioned her comments were <u+201c>grossly generalistic,<u+201d> the blunt commentary at a new york city fund-raiser specifically targeted the nebulous alt-right movement that mr. trump has courted, whose philosophical leaders in a press conference this week outlined their plans for an ethno-state where jews might or might not be welcome. mrs. clinton has never painted trump as holding such views. but she has used the word <u+201c>deplorable<u+201d> to describe some of trump<u+2019>s rhetoric and last month said the republican candidate is <u+201c>taking hate groups mainstream<u+201d> by turning alt-right websites with 11,000 views to ones with 11 million hits, a notion she repeated friday<u+00a0>night. but using the quantifier <u+201c>half<u+201d> to describe some of his supporters crossed a new line, say critics. it was likened to the 2008 comment by barack obama claiming some americans bitterly <u+201c>cling<u+201d> to guns and religion, and mitt romney<u+2019>s 2012 statement that <u+201c>47 percent<u+201d> of americans can be written off as unapologetic welfare moochers. the flap comes as clinton<u+2019>s polling lead, according to a saturday<u+00a0>report by the reuters/ipsos states of the nation project, continues to slide. according to that rolling online survey, the battleground states of ohio and florida are no longer considered likely wins for clinton as trump has managed to shore up support among white suburban voters. clinton still has an 83 percent chance of winning the election by an average of 47 electoral college votes, reuters/ipsos reports. still, those polling shifts at least partly explain clinton<u+2019>s unusually strong assessment of some trump supporters as part of an effort to let her potential voter base know what<u+2019>s at stake, especially now that trump has tapped into what she called some of america<u+2019>s <u+201c>irredeemable<u+201d> impulses. the harshening tone is part and parcel of one of the most polarized elections in recent history, where two widely disliked candidates are trying to shore up narrow bands of support. but as obama and mr. romney have found out, calling out<u+00a0> any segment of americans for national scorn is politically risky territory in a country built on the first amendment right to speak one<u+2019>s mind without fear. <u+201c>the fact is, if somebody tells us to shut up, we<u+2019>re going to speak as loud as we can,<u+201d> says michael hill, the founder of the white nationalist league of the south. <u+201c>from her point of view, what hillary has done is stupid [by targeting trump<u+2019>s alt-right support], because she<u+2019>s legitimizing these people in the minds of folks who may not have been aware that the alt-right existed. she<u+2019>s basically saying, <u+2018>all you white folks, you<u+2019>re either going to come with me or go with the alt-right.<u+2019> well, if i have to make a choice, maybe i<u+2019>ll go look at these alt-right people. and i think that<u+2019>s happening.<u+201d> at any rate, the internet blew up. clinton supporters found it funny that trump supporters were offended by a comment that many would say pales to some of trump<u+2019>s more politically incorrect quips.<u+00a0><u+201c>suddenly not being politically correct is a bad thing?<u+00a0>trump detractor dawn howard wrote on twitter. but trump saw a clear opening to attack what his campaign characterized as a gaffe for which she should apologize. <u+201c>wow, hillary clinton was so insulting to my supporters, millions of amazing, hard working people,<u+201d> trump tweeted. <u+201c>i think it will cost her at the polls! to be sure, trump has made sport out of mocking political correctness, piling up a laundry list of dismissive statements about women, hispanics, veterans, disabled people, muslims and blacks. but while trump's sentiments are clearly resonating in large parts of the us, vanderbilt university political scientist marc hetherington suggests clinton is zeroing in a majority sentiment in the us that does skew against the alt-right<u+2019>s white identity politics. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s really important to keep in mind that there<u+2019>s a really high percentage of whites who don<u+2019>t organize their world around their racial identity at all, and in fact find the idea troubling,<u+201d> says prof. hetherington. at the same time, at least to some critics, the american left is to blame for the rise of the alt-right. clinton<u+2019>s "basket of deplorables" is an extension of a tendency by some liberals to demonize conservative thought, which has had the consequence of pushing many american moderates into trump<u+2019>s corner. <u+201c>by reflexively denouncing as a racist everyone who disagrees with them about economics, and by making every detail of ordinary life into a minefield of hidden racial transgressions, [the left has] burned up their own credibility,<u+201d> commentator robert tracinski wrote earlier this year in the federalist. <u+201c>in the process, they have weakened the culture<u+2019>s immune system against racism and made it possible for a young cohort of racists to repackage their odious creed as resistance to political correctness.<u+201d> at any rate, the condemnation of trump's influence on the body politic has become a key part of the clinton campaign narrative as election day nears. the notion is that trump is <u+201c>taking hate groups mainstream<u+201d> in a way that disregards core american values such as equal rights, which is all "profoundly dangerous." it's not an easy message to muster. in fact,<u+00a0>on thursday night clinton criticized trump for his <u+201c>conspiracy theories like the lie that president obama is not a true american.<u+201d> she then added:<u+00a0>"if he doesn't respect all americans, how can he serve all americans?" but after<u+00a0>friday<u+00a0>night's comments, americans clearly saw that clinton just went down the same road. at the same time, aside from admitting that she was generalizing, clinton did empathize with many trump voters <u+201c>who feel that government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures. they are just desperate for change <u+2026>." these trump supporters, clinton added, <u+201c>don't buy everything he says,<u+201d> but <u+201c>hold out some hope that their lives will be different<u+201d> with him as president. <u+201c>they won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead end. those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.<u+201d>

trump supporters a <u+2018>basket of deplorables.' is this clinton's '47 percent' moment? (+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

91.0

8.0

6400.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

453.0

1.0

0.0

107.0

0.0

65.0

18.0

12.0

13.0

16.0

9.0

14.0

10.0

26.0

30.0

32.0

458.0

108.0

65.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

employers hired more workers in march even as the number of job openings fell slightly, the labor department said tuesday. the job openings and labor turnover survey points to a stronger labor market two months ago than another government report suggested friday. labor said last week that employers added a net 85,000 jobs in march, including hiring and layoffs, as payroll growth sputtered amid frigid weather and a pullback in drilling by oil producers, among other factors. that was the lowest total since june 2012. job gains rebounded to 223,000 in april. tuesday's jolts report provides a more granular view of employee movements and shows a more encouraging picture. the number of hires, for example, increased by 56,000 to about 5.1 million. hiring increased in retail, professional and business services, and leisure and hospitality. it declined in construction, manufacturing and education and health services. part of the reason net job gains were weak is that layoffs and discharges also picked up, rising by 105,000, or 6.2%, to 1.8 million. at least some of those job cuts were in the oil industry, which continues to shed workers in response to low crude prices. meanwhile, about 2.8 million americans quit their jobs <u+2014> the most since april 2008 <u+2014> up from 2.7 million in february. a large number of quits is a sign of a dynamic labor market in which workers feel confident enough to leave one job for another. overall, the report "helps ease concerns that the weak 85,000 (job gain total) for march was the start of a new trend," says barclays capital economist jesse hurwitz. "confidence remains intact." less encouraging is that job openings fell by 150,000 to 5 million after hitting a 14-year high in february. but economist daniel silver of jpmorgan chase notes that openings were still up about 18% from the year-ago period. another measure of the labor market's progress is that there were 1.7 unemployed workers for each job opening in march, down sharply from a high of 6.7 in 2009. that shows the labor market is continuing to tighten, aiding job seekers, though at a slower pace than last year, hurwitz says. he expects job gains to pick up to a solid monthly average of 200,000 to 225,000 for the rest of 2015. that would mark an uptick from the 184,000 monthly pace in the first quarter but a slowdown from last year's brisk clip of 260,000. last week, labor said that employers added 223,000 jobs in april.

report on hiring, quits brightens labor market picture

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

54.0

8.0

2447.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

140.0

0.0

28.0

1.0

0.0

10.0

1.0

7.0

2.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

5.0

9.0

11.0

23.0

145.0

28.0

11.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

trump, a billionaire real estate developer, had the support of 15.8 percent of respondents in the online poll of self-identified republicans compared to 16.1 percent for bush, a former florida governor. they were followed by new jersey gov. chris christie at 9.5 percent, kentucky sen. rand paul at 8.1 percent, surgeon and author ben carson at 7.2 percent and wisconsin gov. scott walker at 5.8 percent. however, given a choice of three candidates - bush, trump or florida sen. marco rubio - bush had a comfortable lead at 42 percent among the respondents in the reuters-ipsos republican poll, compared to 28.4 percent for trump and 20 percent for rubio. in the race for the democratic presidential nomination, former secretary of state hillary clinton remained in front with the support of 48.3 percent of self-identified democrats polled, with vermont sen. bernie sanders continuing to inch up, at 22.9 percent, and vice president joe biden, who has not entered the race, at 10.7 percent. numerous businesses including nbc universal, univision, macy's, serta and nascar have cut ties with trump since he accused mexico, in his june 16 speech announcing his candidacy, of sending rapists and other criminals into the united states. trump on july 6 added that illegal border-crossers from mexico are carrying "tremendous infectious disease." the controversy over trump's immigration comments has dominated news coverage of the republican campaign in recent weeks, and he has climbed in the reuters-ipsos poll to draw essentially even with bush. on june 30, the poll had bush at 16.9 percent and trump at 12.8 percent. a hard line against illegal immigration may find a receptive audience in republican primary voters, with u.s. conservatives often accusing president barack obama of doing too little to secure america's border with mexico. trump also has accused bush of being weak on illegal immigration, bringing bush's mexican-born wife into the debate. "if my wife were from mexico, i think i would have a soft spot for people from mexico. i can understand that," trump said in a cnn interview. trump has increasingly come under fire from some of his rivals for the republican nomination including bush. "everybody has a belief that we should control our borders," bush said last week. "but to make these extraordinarily kind of ugly comments is not reflective of the republican party. trump is wrong on this." in the reuters/ipsos poll of the republican race, 404 self-identified republicans age 18 or over were questioned from july 6-10. the poll had a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 5.7 percentage points. in the reuters/ipsos poll of the democratic race, 504 self-identified democrats age 18 or over were questioned over the same time period, with a credibility interval of 5.1 percentage points.

reuters-ipsos poll: trump, bush in virtual dead heat

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

52.0

8.0

2833.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

213.0

1.0

0.0

31.0

0.0

12.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

1.0

3.0

2.0

10.0

9.0

13.0

217.0

32.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

house negotiators are close to a deal that would effectively end the national security agency<u+2019>s controversial bulk data collection program, and congressional aides believe the bill is likely to win the endorsement of sen.<u+00a0>patrick leahy<u+00a0>(d., vt.), who opposed the legislation last year.

house negotiators nearing deal to curb nsa data collection powers

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

65.0

8.0

285.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

18.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

22.0

4.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump took to twitter saturday morning where he launched his latest attacks on hillary clinton, calling her "brainwashed" after she acknowledged that she "short-circuited" when making a misstatement. when speaking to members of the national association of black journalists and the national association of hispanic journalists in washington friday, clinton sought to "clarify and explain" a statement she made that fbi director james comey said that her previous answers about her private email use were "truthful." "i may have short-circuited [her answers] and for that i will try to clarify," clinton said. trump not only labeled her speech as "habitual lying," but he also took to twitter noting that it's proof she is not fit to be president:

trump on twitter: hillary is 'brainwashed'

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

42.0

8.0

756.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

59.0

1.0

0.0

20.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

3.0

6.0

63.0

21.0

8.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

lawmakers may have let president barack obama's request for the authorization of military force against isis gather dust, but the white house insisted friday it hasn't given up on the measure, which was introduced in february. white house press secretary josh earnest hammered lawmakers -- both democrats and republicans -- who have stalled on the war powers resolution, saying the delay has been a "grave disappointment" to the white house. and he characterized congress' unwillingness to vote on the plan as ironic, given the steps lawmakers have taken to insert themselves into another of obama's key foreign policy issues, a nuclear deal with iran. "the call from this administration to leaders in congress to do their jobs has for some reason fallen on deaf ears," earnest said. "the united states congress has been essentially awol when it comes to that debate." the white house convened multiple discussions on the aumf with lawmakers before presenting the authorization measure two months ago. since then, the white house has sent top national security officials, including secretary of state john kerry and defense secretary ashton carter, to brief members of congress on the plan. but their explanations for the aumf didn't work to assuage anxious members of obama's own party, who worry a vote for the war authorization could lead to another american ground war in the middle east. republicans on capitol hill blame democrats for the standstill. rep. tom cole, r-oklahoma, said on c-span last week, "the president is essentially a war president without a war party." cole, along with a bipartisan group of 30 other lawmakers, addressed a letter to house speaker john boehner last week insisting he bring the aumf up for debate. but opposition to the plan runs deep in both parties. republicans say the plan doesn't give the president enough power to go after isis terrorists, and they argue for less restrictive language. the measure that obama presented to lawmakers in february would limit his authority to wage a military campaign against isis to three years and does not authorize "enduring offensive ground combat operations." but it doesn't include any limitations on where u.s. forces can combat isis should the terror group move outside iraq or syria. the white house points out their document was merely a starting point -- and claim they're open to negotiation. administration officials say they're committed to the absence of geographic limitations, but are open to altering the time limit and ground troop provision. as congressional action on the aumf continues to elude obama, his military is continuing its air campaign against isis. the white house claims it already has the authority to target islamic state terrorists using the 2001 war powers resolution that was passed after the september 11 attacks. but obama has said a new authorization is necessarily to put forward a united front in the fight against the islamic state. ultimately, the white house says it's exhausted its options in pushing the measure forward. "i think we've done just about everything that is imaginable that an executive branch can do to try to move a law through the congress," earnest said. "the president has higher expectations for elected leaders." this birth certificate from the halab health department records information for babies born in the isis-created province or "wilayat." mothers are reminded how important children are to god and are then instructed to follow a vaccination timetable against polio, measles and other ailments. this notice declares that the university of mosul will open on october 18, 2014, but that the philosophy and archeology departments, among others, will remain closed. staff are told to replace all mentions of the "republic of iraq" with "islamic state." a schedule for final exams at the mosul college of medicine shows areas to be tested included students' knowledge of obstetrics, parasites, x-rays and ethics. this notice criticizes the greed of some fishermen and lays out new rules, including no fishing during spawning season and no use of electrical current to catch fish, as it harms other creatures, too. this document poses a question on playing foosball. readers are told that it's ok, provided that there is no gambling, no cursing or resentment and that the figurines have no heads. this message quotes the quran, and speaks in favor of charity and helping those in need. it then details how rents above 100,000 dinars (about $85) must be cut.

white house hits 'awol' congress for shirking aumf

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

13.0

50.0

8.0

4511.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

325.0

0.0

87.0

2.0

0.0

49.0

14.0

16.0

11.0

16.0

7.0

10.0

4.0

20.0

31.0

330.0

87.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the senate voted 85 to 12 wednesday to pass the every student succeeds act. the replacement for the no child left behind law next heads to the president's desk. kelci gouge teaches a third grade class at a summer reading academy at buchanan elementary school in oklahoma city in july 2014. oklahoma lawmakers repealed common core standards for english and math instruction. the senate was expected to vote dec. 8 on a replacement for the no child left behind law, which, among other things, would shift power to deal with failing schools toward states and away from the federal government. [update: this story was updated at 12:01 p.m. to include the final vote.] across minnesota, the number of native american kids heading to college is on the rise. the reading and math scores of black students are catching up to those of whites. low-income students, kids whose native language isn<u+2019>t english, and kids with disabilities are meeting the higher expectations teachers have been setting for them. the state <u+2013> a high performer by many education measures <u+2013> still faces many academic gaps between groups of students. but it is well on its way toward a goal it set in 2012 to cut those disparities in half by 2017. minnesota offers an example of what can happen when a state puts a priority on closing achievement gaps. it developed its approach through a waiver to some of the requirements of the federal education law known as no child left behind (nclb). now that old, and many say, broken, law is on its way out. state leaders for years have been clamoring for more flexibility in how they hold schools accountable for academic improvement <u+2013> so they can prioritize and tackle issues as they see fit, not as the federal government dictates. and wednesday, the senate voted 85 to 12 to clear the long-awaited law that will finally grant them their wish. the bipartisan compromise known as the every student succeeds act (essa) already passed the house by a wide margin dec. 2. essa will leave the main tools in place to track achievement by categories such as race, income level, disabilities, and english-language learners. but a big question remains: will this shift to empowering states help or hurt the equity agenda embedded in the original law from the 1960s civil rights era? historically, not all states have shown the political will to set high standards for all students, and some observers worry they<u+2019>ll again feel somewhat off the hook. <u+201c>there probably will be less attention now on the achievement gap: the [new] law doesn<u+2019>t force that conversation the way it did under nclb,<u+201d> says chad aldeman, an associate partner at the nonprofit bellwether education partners. others are more hopeful that many states will stay the course or come up with new innovations <u+00a0>to address achievement gaps <u+2013> recognizing the impact those can have on their future workforce and economic health. minnesota<u+2019>s current accountability system uses a range of measures for school achievement, including how well individual student and subgroup test scores improve from year to year. the state legislature expanded the system in 2013 to cover all public schools, not just those that receive federal dollars for low-income students. it set up regional <u+201c>centers of excellence<u+201d> to provide assistance to schools that were struggling. and it<u+2019>s dedicating more than $180 million in state funds to the effort. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re focusing on the strengths of our schools and teachers and asking them to do more,<u+201d> says brenda cassellius, the state<u+2019>s first african-american education commissioner. so far, two-thirds of the schools are on track to meet their gap-reduction targets. at treknorth, a charter middle and high school in rural bemidje, the state goals align with a mission to prepare as many students as possible for college through participation in advanced placement courses. the school has been recognized five times in the state<u+2019>s annual list of reward schools, recently scoring an 81 out of 100 on the multiple measurements rating, which takes gap reduction into account. the more sophisticated accountability system has contributed to a healthy <u+201c>pressure to hone the subtleties of the craft of teaching,<u+201d> says the charter school<u+2019>s executive director dan mckeon. many of the low-income or native american students that make up much of the treknorth population wouldn<u+2019>t have access to ap at other schools, mr. mckeon says. he helps teachers develop the ability to stop mid-lesson to do a <u+201c>formative assessment<u+201d> <u+2013> checking to see that everyone<u+2019>s getting the main points. then they take that extra 10 minutes if they see some students struggling with a certain concept. the staff also works with families to help them understand the world of opportunity that can open up for students who put in the time on academics. on a recent trip to visit colleges around the state, mckeon says he watched<u+00a0>as one 12th-grade girl -- from a low-income family where college has not been the norm <u+2013> looked through a brochure about how college credit is calculated for students who have passed ap exams. <u+201c>she starts counting up classes since she was in 10th grade <u+2026> and she realizes that if she went to this college she<u+2019>d walk in with 29 credits under her belt,<u+201d> he says, and that would mean saving a year<u+2019>s worth of tuition and possibly earning scholarships. <u+201c>i<u+00a0>could see the realization on her face of how big of an accomplishment it was.<u+201d> as he has watched the new law move through congress, mckeon says his cynical side worries that some educators might see it as a <u+201c>release from accountability to underserved students.<u+201d> on the other hand, he says, he<u+2019>s <u+201c>excited to see what gets created at state and local levels when professional educators get the freedom to do what they know works best.<u+201d> civil rights groups are gearing up to take a seat at the table as accountability systems take shape over the next year and a half leading up to full implementation of the new federal law. many civil rights and education advocacy groups had pushed for the federal role to remain stronger. but when it comes to what states now must do in regard to english-language learners, essa actually strengthens accountability. their progress has to be accounted for by all schools, whereas previously that happened only in schools with high percentages of such students. <u+201c>states have been asking for a while now for more flexibility to own their state accountability plans, so we<u+2019>ll be monitoring how this plays out, and calling out states that aren<u+2019>t doing better by english learners<u+201d> says brenda<u+00a0>calderon, an education policy analyst at the national council of la raza. the number of english learners in the us has grown to about 1 in 10 students, she says. civil rights and student advocacy groups are also pushing local conversations about <u+201c>opportunity gaps<u+201d> that lie at the root of lower achievement. a recent report in boston, for instance, found that <u+201c>black and latino males were horrifically underrepresented in key opportunities,<u+201d> as early as third grade, that largely determined whether students ended up on a college-prep track, says dan french, executive director of the center for collaborative education in boston, which published the report. the report is helping inform a new task force in the city that<u+2019>s exploring ways to address the gaps. one need is for greater <u+201c>cultural competence<u+201d> among school staff, to understand their diverse population of students. one school, for instance held a well-intentioned celebration of the mexican holiday cinco de mayo. the problem: none of the latino students at that school had mexican heritage. <u+201c>if you don<u+2019>t know who your kids are,<u+201d> mr. french says, <u+201c>you are going to have a hard time reaching them.<u+201d> local efforts to address stubborn gaps, like this nascent one in boston <u+2013> and state support for such efforts -- will become even more important under the new federal education law. and the degree of success states have could vary greatly. the equity agenda doesn<u+2019>t get a significant boost from the new law, some education and civil rights observers say, because its definition of accountability is still too narrow. <u+201c>they are focused on accountability by test scores, but really not focused nearly enough on the learning-opportunities part of the equation<u+2026>. we still have so many kids in underfunded, underresourced schools,<u+201d> says pedro noguera, an education professor at the university of california in los angeles.

senate passes nclb replacement: will shift to states help or hurt students? (+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

1.0

0.0

8.0

84.0

8.0

8449.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

482.0

1.0

0.0

160.0

0.0

78.0

11.0

32.0

5.0

11.0

20.0

14.0

11.0

50.0

22.0

78.0

486.0

161.0

78.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

how much say congress has on a possible nuclear deal with iran will be tested tuesday as a controversial bill goes up for a vote in the senate foreign relations committee. the obama administration has been very critical of legislation that would give congress a final say in approving or rejecting a deal. in an interview with the new york times, obama said the newly agreed on framework of a nuclear deal with iran represents a <u+201c>once in a lifetime opportunity<u+201d> to prevent tehran from getting a nuclear weapon and to move toward stabilizing the middle east. on monday, the administration stepped up its lobbying campaign on capitol hill. "the way the legislation is currently written is something that we strongly oppose," white house press secretary josh earnest said. "but, again, we continue to have extensive conversations with members of congress on capitol hill." secretary of state john kerry postponed a foreign trip to meet with members of the house to discuss the negotiations. kerry, energy secretary ernest moniz, treasury secretary jack lew and senior officials in the intelligence community were holding classified briefings monday and tuesday with members of the house and senate. earnest said some republicans are "rigidly partisan" and will reject any deal just because obama supports it. he said that while there is some democratic opposition, administration officials will continue to talk with members of his party. so far, the president and other senior administration officials have made more than 130 telephone calls to members of congress to discuss the negotiations. "i think there are some democrats who will listen to this pitch," earnest said. "i don't know if it will convince them all, but there is a strong case to make and it's one that we intend to continue making." at the white house, obama met with jewish leaders. while israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu is intensely skeptical that international negotiators can reach a verifiable deal with iran, which has threatened to destroy israel, some american jewish groups have backed the international negotiations. rep. kevin mccarthy, r-calif., told reporters that he spoke with sen. bob corker, r-tenn., chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, earlier in the day. mccarthy said he told corker that if the senate approves the bill, the house will vote on it. "it's my intention to bring it to the floor of the house and move it," mccarthy said at a news conference as congress was returning from a two-week spring break. republicans and democrats maintain that congress should have a say on an international deal with tehran to curb its nuclear program and have lined up behind legislation. the white house has pushed back, threatening a presidential veto while warning that the bill could scuttle the delicate talks involving the united states, iran and five world powers. "lines in the sands have moved back," mccarthy said, claiming the u.s. has back-tracked on some of the demands it had at the beginning of the talks. "a lot of the questions will be why have they moved back and will iran ever be able to have the capability of having a nuclear weapon? that's a key question." under the bill, obama could unilaterally lift or ease any sanctions that were imposed on iran through presidential executive means. but the bill would prohibit him for 60 days from suspending, waiving or otherwise easing any sanctions that congress levied on iran. during that 60-day period, congress could hold hearings and approve, disapprove or take no action on any final nuclear agreement with iran. if congress passed a joint resolution approving a final deal -- or took no action -- obama could move ahead to ease sanctions levied by congress. but if congress passed a joint resolution disapproving it, obama would be blocked from providing iran with any relief from congressional sanctions. iran says its program is for civilian purposes, but the u.s. and its partners negotiating with tehran suspect tehran is keen to become a nuclear-armed powerhouse in the middle east, where it already holds much sway. the bill has led to a political tug of war on capitol hill, with republicans trying to raise the bar so high that a final deal might be impossible, and democrats aiming to give the white house more room to negotiate with tehran. senators of both parties are considering more than 50 amendments to the measure introduced by corker and sen. bob menendez, d-n.j. the associated press contributed to this report.

senate panel votes tuesday on iran bill that gives congress say on nuclear 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

79.0

8.0

4525.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

356.0

0.0

61.0

0.0

51.0

9.0

6.0

11.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

24.0

20.0

29.0

359.0

61.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the taliban claimed responsibility friday for a shooting incident at a military base attached to kabul<u+2019>s international airport thursday that killed three american civilian contractors and wounded a fourth, saying the attacker had infiltrated the ranks of the security forces. the contractors worked for praetorian standard inc., or psi, a small firm based in fayetteville, n.c., with offices in maryland and virginia. according to its web site, the firms says <u+201c>it specializes in providing innovative strategic planning, logistics, operational and security management support services in challenging environments around the world.<u+201d> in a statement friday, the company confirmed that <u+201c>three employees of praetorian standard, inc. were killed and one was wounded in afghanistan while supporting the efforts of the u.s. government.<u+201d> it added: <u+201c>this was a terrible day for the families involved, our company and the united states. we are shocked by the tragic nature of these deaths and offer our deepest condolences to the families of these brave men.<u+201d> the company has worked in afghanistan since 2010, mostly providing logistics, transportation and security support to a defense department and u.s. geological survey program that is exploring potential mineral deposit sources in afghanistan. the victims, whose names have not yet been released, were working out of the firm<u+2019>s kabul office. in twitter messages and a subsequent statement, taliban spokesman zabiullah mujahid identified the shooter as ihsanullah bin mullah rahmatullah, from laghman province in eastern afghanistan. he said the man had infiltrated the ranks of the afghan security forces in anticipation of an opportunity to attack americans and was working at kabul<u+2019>s airport. <u+201c>he managed yesterday evening to attain his goal and opened fire with his rifle on a group of american occupiers,<u+201d> the spokesman said. the attacker was then <u+201c>martyred by return fire,<u+201d> mujahid said. <u+201c>the martyr was able to successfully defend his religion .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. and the glory of his country, and by giving himself away as a sacrifice, he cast a number of the occupying disbelievers into the abyss of hell,<u+201d> mujahid said. he gave a higher casualty figure for the attack, claiming that <u+201c>three american soldiers died and four others were critically wounded.<u+201d> authorities said thursday that an afghan national was also killed in the attack, but it was not immediately clear whether that person was the shooter or an additional victim. immediately after thursday<u+2019>s attack, suspicion fell on a possible <u+201c>insider attack<u+201d> perpetrated by a member of the afghan security forces who also had access to the military base at the airport. an unidentified afghan air force official told the reuters news agency the shooter was an afghan soldier. it was not immediately clear how the contractors were attacked. referring to the attacker as an <u+201c>infiltrator,<u+201d> mujahid used a term often used by the taliban for an insurgent who had penetrated the afghan army or police for months or years, waiting for an opportunity to strike. when asked thursday whether the incident was an insider attack, a u.s. military spokesman, col. brian tribus, declined to comment. he said there would be no further comments on the incident until the investigation was complete. the sprawling base where the shooting occurred is protected by tall concrete blast walls and filled with hangars, office trailers and maintenance buildings. it is a hub for the coalition<u+2019>s air operations, as well as the main base of the afghan air force. as of last year, before a drawdown of u.s. combat forces, it was home to as many as 4,000 foreign military personnel and civilian contractors from more than a dozen nations, including the united states. top u.s. commanders spent much of their time there. insider attacks have long plagued the relationship between afghan forces and their u.s. and international allies, breaking down trust and reducing interaction. the assaults by rogue afghan soldiers or police particularly rose in the last years of the nato combat mission, which formally ended in december. assaults reached record levels in 2012, when there were 37 such attacks that killed 51 people, including 32 u.s. troops, according to the pentagon. since then, u.s. and coalition forces have tightened vetting procedures for afghan security forces and required that all foreign troops be armed at all times. the efforts have reduced the number of insider attacks, but they nevertheless remain a major concern. the killings were a reminder of the threats faced by the roughly 10,600 u.s. troops and thousands of american contractors who remain in afghanistan, mostly to train and advise afghan security forces. such tasks require close interaction with afghans, and it remains to be seen whether the attacks will have an adverse impact or restrict such relationships. <u+201c>we can confirm that there was a shooting incident at north kabul international airport complex 29 january at approximately 6:40 p.m.,<u+201d> tribus said in an e-mailed statement. <u+201c>three coalition contractors were killed as was an afghan local national. this incident is under investigation.<u+201d> a u.s. defense official in washington, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the nationalities of those killed, said the contractors were all americans and that the fourth one had been wounded. in august, a gunman wearing an afghan army uniform opened fire at a military training school near kabul, killing u.s. army maj. gen. harold j. greene. he was the highest-ranking u.s. officer to be killed in 13 years of war in afghanistan and the first general to be killed in the line of duty since the sept. 11, 2001, attacks that prompted the united states to intervene militarily in afghanistan, combining with afghan resistance forces to topple the radical islamist taliban regime. virtually everyone on the base at the kabul airport is armed. but that did not stop u.s. military officials from worrying about insider attacks during a flag-lowering ceremony in early december that marked the official end of the coalition<u+2019>s combat mission. before the ceremony, the officials warned journalists that if any rockets landed, or if anyone started shooting, to run and take cover. with the u.s. military drawdown, civilian contractors have become more visible. even though their numbers have also sharply decreased, thousands of contractors remain in afghanistan, most of them based in kabul. as of mid-2014, about 17,400 u.s. citizens were working in afghanistan as civilian contractors for the defense department, according to military figures reported by the web site danger zone jobs. other private contractors work for various international relief and development organizations. a year earlier, the congressional research service put the number of pentagon contractors at about 33,000. thursday<u+2019>s killings broke a roughly three-week lull in violence in the capital. in the last two months of 2014, the taliban intensified its attacks in kabul and other parts of the country, targeting foreigners as well as influential afghans and symbols of government authority. the shooting was the first suspected insider attack since u.s. and nato forces formally terminated their combat mission in afghanistan. under an agreement with the afghan government, the previous coalition force is being replaced by a follow-on mission dubbed <u+201c>resolute support,<u+201d> which began jan. 1 and consists of about 12,000 mostly u.s. troops focused on training. earlier on thursday, a roadside bomb killed a police commander and three other people in the eastern province of laghman, and a suicide bomber targeted the commander<u+2019>s funeral later in the day, according to afghan officials. they said 16 people <u+2014> four policemen and 12 civilians <u+2014> were killed and 39 were wounded when the bomber mingled with mourners in the town of mehtar lam and detonated his explosives. ryan reported from washington. daniela deane contributed from london, william branigin from washington.

taliban claims responsibility for fatal attack on americans in kabul

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

68.0

8.0

8055.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

588.0

0.0

144.0

1.0

0.0

65.0

22.0

16.0

5.0

36.0

4.0

20.0

7.0

26.0

40.0

39.0

596.0

144.0

66.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

watch the cnn republican debate tuesday, december 15 at 6:00 p.m. et and 8:30 p.m. et. washington (cnn) top republican party officials have discussed the possibility of a brokered convention , sources told cnn thursday, a new recognition that the gop nominating contest could be protracted well into the summer. at a monthly dinner meeting this week, republican party brass decided it would be prudent to plan for a contested convention, which would be triggered if no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination. five sources insisted that while the topic came up during the dinner, it did not dominate the discussion. republican strategists have long theorized about the possibility of the brokered convention , which hasn't happened in decades, but the dinner meeting appears to be the first active planning taken by the gop to prepare for it. american president gerald ford (left) listens as future american president ronald reagan (1911 - 2004) delivers a speech during the closing session of the republican national convention on august 19, 1976 in kansas city, missouri. the plans, first reported by the washington post , come as 14 republicans plan to duke it out in the iowa caucuses, a historically large field that has winnowed slowly. republicans are worried that -- given that many delegates are awarded proportionally -- there is a possibility that a brokered convention could happen. another contributing factor to concerns about a brokered convention is a new republican national committee rule that requires any gop nominee win a majority of delegates from eight different states, a hurdle that could potentially be too high in such a fractured field. "no one is quite sure what will happen," one of the sources said about the meeting, which was attended by about 20 party leaders, including republican national committee chairman reince priebus and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. despite persistent worries from donald trump's campaign that republican party officials may try to elbow him out of the nominating contest, the source said trump, who has sat atop gop polls for five months, was not the focus of the planning. it had "nothing, zero, nada to do with trump except he may be one of the candidates standing at the end," said the source. "it was not aimed at anyone." ben carson responded to the report friday morning, putting out a press release warning he may consider punishing the gop for any efforts to rig the game against outsider candidates. "if the leaders of the republican party want to destroy the party, they should continue to hold meetings like the one described in the washington post this morning," carson said. "if this was the beginning of a plan to subvert the will of the voters and replace it with the will of the political elite, i assure you donald trump will not be the only one leaving the party." tensions over planning for a potentially brokered conventions came amid reports that republican national committee officials on wednesday met with trump staffers, to discuss logistics -- including where staff is allocated, hiring plans and digital strategy. sean spicer, rnc chief strategist and communications director, downplayed the significance of the dinner on friday. "it was a dinner where the subject was how the delegate selection process works," spicer told cnn's kate bolduan. "at the end of that dinner, there were a lot of questions asked." as for why the idea came up at all? "it's great cocktail conversation," spicer said. "this is really, to be honest, with you quite silly."

republicans discussed possibility of brokered convention

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

12.0

56.0

8.0

3576.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

257.0

0.0

63.0

1.0

0.0

31.0

4.0

12.0

2.0

8.0

4.0

1.0

17.0

6.0

29.0

264.0

63.0

32.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington<u+00a0><u+2014> fbi director james comey said friday that investigators had found new emails related to the bureau's previously closed inquiry into hillary clinton's handling of classified information, restarting a long-simmering debate over the democratic nominee's conduct as secretary of state in the closing days of a presidential campaign that clinton appeared to be putting away. in a<u+00a0>letter to senior lawmakers explaining his decision, comey said "the fbi cannot yet assess" whether the information is "significant" nor could he offer a timetable for how long it will take investigators to make an assessment. but an official familiar with the matter<u+00a0>said friday that the new materials, perhaps thousands of emails, were discovered in the ongoing and separate investigation into sexually charged communications between former new york congressman anthony weiner and a 15-year-old girl. comey was briefed on the findings in recent days, resulting in the director's notification to congress, said the official who is not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. the emails were discovered in a search of a device or devices used by weiner, who is separated from longtime clinton aide huma abedin. abedin also had access to the same device or devices. the official said it was not likely that the fbi's review of the additional emails could be completed by election day. in a brief news conference in iowa on friday evening, clinton said, "the american people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately,"<u+00a0>a position earlier outlined in a statement from her campaign chairman, john podesta. the democratic nominee called on the fbi "to release all the information that it has." "as you know i've had plenty of words about the fbi lately, but i give them great credit for having the courage to right this horrible wrong. justice will prevail," <u+00a0>donald trump said at a campaign rally in cedar rapids, iowa, thursday night. during a speech in new hampshire<u+00a0>earlier in the day, the republican presidential nominee<u+00a0>gleefully<u+00a0>discussed the "breaking news announcement." "hillary clinton's corruption is on<u+00a0>a scale we have never seen before," trump said, and her "criminal scheme" should not be allowed in the oval office. "perhaps justice will be done," the gop nominee said of the development. in his statement, podesta demanded that the fbi director "provide the american public more information than is contained in the letter'' to lawmakers. "upon completing this investigation more than three months ago, fbi director comey declared no reasonable prosecutor would move forward with a case like this and added that it was not even a close call,'' podesta said. "in the months since, donald trump and his republican allies have been baselessly second-guessing the fbi and, in both public and private, browbeating the career officials there to revisit their conclusion in a desperate attempt to harm hillary clinton's presidential campaign. "it is extraordinary that we would see something like this just 11 days out from a presidential election," podesta added. speaking to reporters aboard air force one friday, white house spokesman eric schultz said nothing had "surfaced to change the president's opinion and views of secretary clinton.'' "he's going to be proud to support her from now until election day," schultz said. in july, comey announced that while clinton and her aides during her tenure as secretary of state<u+00a0>had been "extremely careless" in the way they'd handled classified information, he recommended that no criminal charges be filed. in her press conference friday, clinton said she was "confident" whatever is included in the new messages under review "will not change the conclusion reached in july." in july, comey testified before skeptical republican lawmakers to explain the bureau's recommendation, which had been adopted by attorney general loretta lynch. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re mystified and confused by the fact pattern you laid out and the conclusion you reached," house oversight and government reform<u+00a0>chairman jason chaffetz, r-utah, told comey. comey, however, was unequivocal in maintaining that the conclusion of investigators was not a close call. <u+201c>there is no way anybody would bring a case against john doe or hillary clinton for the second time in 100 years based on those facts," he told the house panel on july 7. trump has cited the closed fbi probe<u+00a0>as evidence that the election was "rigged" against him, and at a recent debate the gop nominee<u+00a0>said that, if he's elected president, he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate clinton. "hillary clinton has nobody but herself to blame," said house speaker paul ryan of wisconsin. "this decision, long overdue, is the result of her reckless use of a private email server, and her refusal to be forthcoming with federal investigators," ryan said in a statement, adding that he was again calling for clinton to no longer receive classified briefings, a traditional courtesy afforded major-party presidential nominees. republican national committee chairman reince priebus said the timing of the decision, so soon before the election, demonstrated "how serious this discovery must be." trump's campaign manager, kellyanne conway, wrote on twitter that "a great day in our campaign just got even better." meanwhile, democratic sen. dianne feinstein of california said in a statement that "without knowing how many emails are involved, who wrote them, when they were written or their subject matter, it<u+2019>s impossible to make any informed judgment on this development." she added: "the fbi has a history of extreme caution near election day so as not to influence the results. today<u+2019>s break from that tradition is appalling.<u+201d> house democratic leader nancy pelosi accused republicans of attempting to "misrepresent'' the fbi's work. "sadly but predictably, republicans are doing their best to ... warp the fbi<u+2019>s work to serve their partisan conspiracy-mongering against hillary clinton,'' pelosi said. the uncertainty of what the new fbi review will yield, and<u+00a0>when it will be completed, leaves open the question of how much of an impact it will have on the presidential campaign, as trump looks to mount what would be a historic comeback, as polls show him trailing nationally and in key battleground states. "unless the fbi closes this new investigation one way or the other next week, the likely impact will be to cut into clinton<u+2019>s margin, with the bigger effect being on down-ballot races than on the outcome of the presidential election," said patrick murray, director of the monmouth university polling institute, in an emailed statement. whatever the long-term impact, the short-term jolt to trump and his supporters, at least, seemed clear. in his new hampshire speech, the gop nominee suggested the rest of his<u+00a0>message for the day would no longer matter as much, given the fbi announcement. "the rest of my speech is going to be so boring," he joked. contributing: david jackson in manchester, n.h., and gregory korte in washington.

new emails under review in clinton case emerged from weiner probe

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

19.0

65.0

8.0

7065.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

560.0

0.0

131.0

0.0

34.0

12.0

23.0

8.0

15.0

7.0

8.0

6.0

31.0

33.0

49.0

566.0

131.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

trump will also meet with retiring indiana sen. dan coats, former georgia gov. sonny purdue and linda mcmahon, a prolific republican donor, two-time senate...

as iran talks intensify, boehner and netanyahu warn against 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

64.0

8.0

158.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

15.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

19.0

0.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

critics say the shock of congressional rejection of the nuclear deal is a path to bring iran back to the negotiating table. secretary of state john kerry calls that view 'a fantasy.' secretary of state john kerry listens while testifying before the senate armed services committee on the impacts of the nuclear deal with iran on capitol hill wednesday. the television ads are airing across the country, from washington to honolulu: the iran nuclear deal is a <u+201c>bad deal,<u+201d> the ad says, before concluding, <u+201c>we want a better deal.<u+201d> as congress debates the complex international agreement limiting iran<u+2019>s nuclear program in anticipation of a september vote, the option of rejecting this deal in favor of a <u+201c>better deal<u+201d> appears to be catching on. on wednesday, rep. grace meng (d) of new york announced she would oppose the deal on the table, believing <u+201c>the world could and should have a better deal.<u+201d> but what is the likelihood that an agreement negotiated over several years between six world powers and iran could indeed be renegotiated and toughened up if congress rejects the current deal and overcomes a promised presidential veto? the deep divisions over that question come down, more than anything, to people<u+2019>s perception of iran: whether or not it is a country the united states should be entangled with in such a complex deal, whether or not it should be allowed to possess any uranium enrichment program at all. critics of the iran deal say there is plenty of historical precedent for renegotiating and amending international agreements. they argue that iran is so intent on getting a deal with the us that tehran could be brought back to the negotiating table after the shock of a congressional rejection. <u+201c>there is an alternative to the current [deal], it is an amended deal,<u+201d> says mark dubowitz, an international sanctions expert and executive director of the foundation for defense of democracies (fdd) in washington. citing nearly 80 multilateral agreements congress has either rejected or for which it has required amendments, he says, <u+201c>congress should require the administration to renegotiate certain terms of the proposed [deal] and resubmit the amended agreement to congress.<u+201d> but senior administration officials involved in the iran negotiations say there is no chance the deal could be renegotiated <u+2013> and they warn that instead of tighter controls on iran<u+2019>s nuclear program, rejection of the deal would very likely result in a ramped-up uranium enrichment program. that, in turn, would mean a shrinking <u+201c>breakout<u+201d> time for iran to rush to produce a nuclear weapon, if it chose to, they add. calling the prospect of a <u+201c>better deal<u+201d> a <u+201c>fantasy,<u+201d> secretary of state john kerry told senators last week that those demanding a renegotiated deal, including in the tv ads he<u+2019>d seen, were proffering <u+201c>some sort of unicorn arrangement involving iran<u+2019>s complete capitulation<u+201d> <u+2013> something he said is not going to happen. some nonproliferation experts echo that position, saying the iranian nuclear program was already too advanced years ago to reduce it any more than what the deal reached july 14 does. <u+201c>sure i<u+2019>d like a better deal <u+2013> i<u+2019>d like a pony, too, but it<u+2019>s not realistic,<u+201d> says jeffrey lewis, director of nonproliferation studies at the middlebury<u+00a0>institute of international studies at monterey, calif. <u+201c>the most important thing now is to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon in the next 10 to 15 years, and this deal does that.<u+201d> others are much less certain the deal blocks iran<u+2019>s paths to a nuclear weapon, but they believe a renegotiated deal could. fdd's mr. dubowitz says he sees three different directions the iran nuclear issue could take if congress rejects the current deal and holds out for an agreement <u+201c>renegotiated on better terms.<u+201d> iran could go ahead and implement its commitments under the deal, he says. it<u+00a0>could also<u+00a0><u+201c>abandon its commitments<u+201d> and escalate it nuclear program. or it could try to do both, complying with certain commitments while abandoning others <u+2013> and thus attempt to divide world powers while advancing its nuclear program. but under any of those scenarios, dubowitz says, the us could work to <u+201c>persuade the europeans to join the us<u+201d> in demanding a renegotiation of key parts of the deal. yet many regional experts say that prospects for wooing the europeans to join the us in pressing for a tougher deal, if congress rejects the one now before it, are dim. <u+201c>european and asian partners would feel frustrated and misled<u+201d> in the wake of a us rejection of the deal, jon alterman, a middle east expert at washington<u+2019>s center for strategic and international studies, told the house armed services committee this week. european allies would likely join countries like china and india in investing in iran<u+2019>s energy sector, he added. <u+201c>broadly, the action would create distance between the us and the world and diminish distance between iran and the world,<u+201d> dr. alterman added, <u+201c>after more than a decade when the reverse was the case.<u+201d> looming large over the calls for a return to negotiations are strong suspicions on the part of deal supporters that the <u+201c>better deal<u+201d> advocates really have no interest in a stronger deal at all, but instead want to thwart any us agreement with the iranian government. <u+201c>we had a <u+2018>better deal<u+2019> in iraq after 1991 [following the gulf war], there were no restrictions, inspectors could go where they wanted when they wanted, and that deal wasn<u+2019>t good enough,<u+201d> says dr. lewis, adding that <u+201c>we still went to war. so really i don<u+2019>t believe them when they say they just want a <u+2018>better deal<u+2019> this time.<u+201d> other doubters of the sincerity of the seekers of a <u+201c>better deal<u+201d> say it<u+2019>s telling to note that the sponsor of the tv ad campaign demanding a better deal is a group called citizens for a nuclear free iran, which is backed by the american israel public affairs committee, a pro-israel organization lobbying congress hard for the deal<u+2019>s defeat. <u+201c>there really is no <u+2018>better deal<u+2019> for [such critics] in the sense of an agreement that leaves any nuclear program in the hands of the current iranian government,<u+201d> lewis says. <u+201c>any deal is bad because it means living with the islamic republic.<u+201d>

iran nuclear agreement: is a 'better deal' possible <u+2013> and at what cost? (+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

11.0

80.0

8.0

6189.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

390.0

0.0

115.0

0.0

54.0

12.0

14.0

5.0

13.0

6.0

8.0

22.0

25.0

34.0

395.0

115.0

54.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

income inequality is back in the news, propelled by an oxfam international report and president barack obama's state of the union address. the question is whether government needs to do something about this<u+2014>or whether government needs to undo many things. measuring income inequality is no simple thing, which is one source of disagreement between those who think inequality is a problem and those who think it isn't. but it is possible to cut through the underbrush and make some points clear. we can identify two kinds of economic inequality, and let's keep this in mind as we contemplate what, if anything, government ought to do. the first kind we might call market inequality. individuals differ in many ways, including energy, ambition, and ingenuity. as a result, in a market-oriented economy some people will be better than others at satisfying consumers and will hence tend to make more money. the only way to prevent that is to interfere forcibly<u+00a0>with the results of peaceful, positive-sum transactions in the marketplace. since interference<u+00a0>discourages the production of wealth, the equality fostered through violence will be an equality of impoverishment. is it better that people be equally poor or unequally affluent? this is the<u+00a0>important question that political philosopher john tomasi, author of free market fairness, puts to his classes at brown university. would they prefer a society in which everyone has the same low income, or one in which incomes vary, perhaps widely, but the lowest incomes are higher than the equal income of the first society? which would you choose? let's remember that it is entirely possible for the poorest in a society to become richer even as the gap between the richest and poorest grows. imagine an accordion-like elevator that is rising as a whole while being stretched out, putting the floor further from the ceiling. would such a society be objectionable? why is the relative position of the poorest more important than their absolute position? is concern about relative positions nothing more than envy? we could argue about that all day, but a much more urgent subject is political-economic inequality. this is the inequality fostered through the political system. since government's distinctive feature is its claimed authority to use force aggressively (as opposed to defensively), this second sort of inequality is produced by violence, which on its face should make it abhorrent. political-economic systems throughout the world, including ones typically thought to be market-oriented (or "capitalist"), such as in the united states, are in fact built on deeply rooted and long-established systems of privilege. favors, which the rest of us must pay for one way or another, typically go to the well-connected, and prominent business executives have always been well represented in that group. in the united states this has been true since the days of john jacob astor, the fur trader who had the ears of such influential politicians as james madison, james monroe, and john quincy adams. government was little more than the executive committee of leading manufacturers, planters, and merchants (to risk opprobrium by paraphrasing marx). as adam smith put it in the wealth of nations in 1776, "whenever the legislature attempts to regulate the differences between masters and their workmen, its counsellors are always the masters." while business interests today are not the only ones that get consideration in the halls of power, it's a mistake to think they do not retain major influence over government in economic and financial matters. "regulatory capture" is a well-known phenomenon, and ostensible efforts to limit it always fail. unlike market inequality, political-economic inequality is unjust and should be eliminated. how? by abolishing all direct and indirect subsidies; artificial scarcities, such as those created by so-called intellectual property; regulations, which inevitably burden smaller and yet-to-be-launched firms more than lawyered-up big businesses; eminent domain;<u+00a0>and permit requirements, zoning, and occupational licensing, which all exclude competition. these interventions and more protect incumbent firms from conditions that would lower prices to consumers, create self-employment and worker-ownership opportunities, and improve bargaining<u+00a0>conditions for wage labor. instead of<u+00a0>symbolically tweaking the tax code to appear to be addressing inequality<u+2014>the politicians' charade<u+2014>political-economic inequality should be ended by repealing all privileges right now. this column originally appeared at the future of freedom foundation.

income inequality is a problem<u+2014>when caused by government meddling

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

8.0

4635.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

370.0

1.0

0.0

72.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

11.0

17.0

2.0

15.0

16.0

12.0

4.0

31.0

33.0

44.0

379.0

73.0

61.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

sen. rand paul, r-ky., announced today that he will seek the 2016 gop presidential nomination. "i have a message <u+2014> a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words," he told supporters in louisville, ky. "we've come to take our country back." earlier, in a statement on his website, he said: "i am running for president to return our country to the principles of liberty and limited government." paul also released a video with the opening line: "on april 7, a different kind of republican will take on washington." paul faces what is likely to be a crowded republican field for 2016. although sen. ted cruz of texas, his colleague in the senate, is the only other prominent republican to have announced his intention to run for president, sen. marco rubio of florida, govs. chris christie of new jersey and scott walker of wisconsin, as well as former florida gov. jeb bush, are expected to join the fray. polls show paul in a three-way tie for third place in the race for the 2016 republican presidential nomination. bush and walker lead the most recent average of polls. paul, the son of longtime libertarian republican rep. ron paul of texas, was elected to the u.s. senate in 2010 in the tea party wave. an ophthalmologist by training, rand paul is pitching himself as a "different kind of republican." when he was first elected, he was seen as a candidate whose libertarian ideas, in the words of the washington post, "could make him the most unusual and intriguing voice among the major contenders in the 2016 field." it adds: as he prepared to announce his presidential ambitions, paul adopted a more muscular defense policy and reached out to religious conservatives. (for more on the former, you can listen to paul's interview with npr's robert siegel last september.) nick gillespie, editor in chief of reason.com and reason tv, told npr's scott simon in a recent interview that paul could be called "libertarian-ish." "you know, i think he is talking what he believes. but i think he draws a lot of ideas from his father generally without some of the baggage, to be honest. "and people are more interested, i think, now than even a few years ago of being allowed to make more choices that are important in their lives. and you see that reflected in things like the growth in pot legalization and gay marriage. then at the same time they're very skeptical of government, whether it's a conservative republican government under bush or a liberal democratic government under obama." following his rally today in louisville, ky., rand travels to new hampshire, south carolina, iowa and nevada <u+2014> the four states where the presidential nominating contests begin. you can follow more detailed coverage of this story on our it's all politics blog here.

sen. rand paul announces 2016 presidential run

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

46.0

8.0

2775.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

198.0

0.0

52.0

0.0

14.0

5.0

7.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

3.0

1.0

12.0

6.0

19.0

200.0

52.0

14.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

turns out there<u+2019>s no free lunch, even if you<u+2019>re among those lucky few dining at the harvard faculty club. the new york times is feasting on the delicious uproar created by harvard professors who are now outraged to be hit with higher health care costs as a result of obamacare. i hardly know where to start on this one. perhaps with the fact that the article appears in the new york times? i will let that one go for the moment. here<u+2019>s what<u+2019>s clear: health care costs at harvard are going up. immediately. and they are rising directly as a result of obamacare. the explanation written right at the top of harvard<u+2019>s health care enrollment guide for 2015 states that the university <u+201c>must respond to the national trend of rising health care costs, including some driven by health care reform.<u+201d> the guide even highlights, in a special little box in the margin, the exact <u+201c>impact of health care reform,<u+201d> explaining that <u+201c>the affordable care act has brought new benefits and opportunities to many people but with added costs to sponsors.<u+201d> say what?? who could have predicted that? anyone who can do math. still, the special little box goes on to point to such benefits as keeping offspring on your plan until they are 26 and the cadillac tax as added costs. and as a result, they say premiums and deductibles are rising. one french history professor gasps without a hint of irony that rising premiums are tantamount to a pay cut! welcome to our world. still the rising costs aren<u+2019>t necessarily news to everyone. several years back, harvard<u+2019>s own provost, dr. alan m. garber, sent an open letter to president obama praising the cadillac tax as a way to rein in health care costs and premiums. in subsequent interviews, he<u+2019>s defended his stance and the higher costs he and co-workers are now facing. i<u+2019>m betting he<u+2019>s having a hard time finding a tablemate at the harvard faculty club this week. provost garber should not be confused with another economist with a similar sounding name working about a mile down the charles river at mit, jonathan gruber. gruber infamously counted on the <u+201c>stupidity of the american voter<u+201d> to overlook the obvious math that<u+2019>s now confronting harvard<u+2019>s staff. harvard faculty may be a lot of things, but stupid ain<u+2019>t one of them. in fact, meredith rosenthal, a professor of health economics and policy at the harvard school of public health, told the times she was <u+201c>puzzled by the outcry. the changes in harvard faculty benefits are parallel to changes all americans are seeing. indeed they have come to our front door much later than others.<u+201d> no, i don<u+2019>t think these folks are surprised by the math. i am a graduate of the harvard economics department, and i have sat in these classrooms. i would bet the faculty just didn<u+2019>t believe they would have to foot the bill. costs may rise, but they would somehow be absorbed in the system. donors, someone <u+2026> someone else, that is <u+2026> would pay. and that is, in fact, one of the main problems in american politics. we all want life to be better for everyone. who wouldn<u+2019>t want all of their fellow americans, or all of humanity for that matter, to have good health care? but are you willing to personally take a pay cut to pay for the policy you are advocating? that<u+2019>s the hard question the president and proponents of obamacare did not want you to grapple with, because they were afraid your reaction would be akin to the screams now echoing through harvard yard. melissa francis is the host of "money with melissa francis" (2 pm/et), a program that breaks down the day's top stories and how they impact the american taxpayer. like her on facebook at melissafrancisfox and follow her on twitter@melissaafrancis. click here for more information about melissa.

obamacare 2015: harvard faculty outraged over health care hikes

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

63.0

8.0

3736.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

220.0

1.0

0.0

82.0

0.0

33.0

4.0

13.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

2.0

5.0

20.0

10.0

29.0

221.0

83.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

dr. martin luther king jr. died young <u+2014> at age 39 <u+2014> and ever since his assassination in 1968 there has been a contest over his legacy. i<u+2019>ve met black radicals who sneer at the national holiday celebrating his birth. they see the king holiday as white america<u+2019>s preference for celebrating a moderate, non-violent black leader instead of a militant, violent young malcolm x. on the other side are critics who see the king holiday as political correctness taken to new heights. king was not a president, like washington and lincoln, so they ask why he is deserving of a national holiday. blinded by racial bitterness, they suggest president reagan signed the king holiday into law in 1983 as a token political gesture. now a very good, emotionally powerful new movie <u+2014> <u+201c>selma<u+201d> <u+2014> about dr. king<u+2019>s historic role in the struggle for voting rights has set off a new fight over his legacy. this dramatic film by <u+00a0>director, ava duvernay, will be remembered less as a record of dr. king<u+2019>s greatness and more as a sign of the racial power struggles of the early 21st century. i know the real civil rights story. i<u+2019>ve written two best-selling histories of the period. the greatest social movement of the last century belongs to all americans. but some people prefer to play racial games. this movie fits in with the racially divisive discussion about who owns the history of the civil rights movement. it fits with polarizing racial figures like jesse jackson and al sharpton. they regularly exploit the history of the civil rights movement for their own personal gain <u+2014> hosting television shows and getting money from corporations <u+2014> while not doing the hard work of addressing high rates of black crime, school dropouts and family breakdown. it is also fits with many white politicians who blame the poor for every problem and find it easy to push minority voters out of their districts while ignoring the nation<u+2019>s history of denying black people the right to vote. now a version of the same race hustle is on display in hollywood. to celebrate king as a hero, the director, who is black decided to make president lyndon johnson into a white villain. in one scene johnson erupts in anger at dr. king, telling the civil rights leader, <u+201c>you<u+2019>ve got one big issue, i<u+2019>ve got one hundred and one.<u+201d> people who were in the room, black and white aides to the president and dr. king, say no such confrontation ever happened. the movie also has johnson approving of fbi director j. edgar hoover<u+2019>s scheme to send dr. king<u+2019>s wife an audio recording of her husband having sex with another woman. the historical record is clear. yes, the tape is real. no, johnson had nothing to do it. and the tape had nothing to do with events in selma. all of that is what bill moyers called <u+201c>the worst kind of creative license suggesting the very opposite of the truth.<u+201d> and when the director, duvernay, was called on the distortion, she said people who care about history are the problem. she argued that crediting johnson with supporting the selma march was <u+201c>jaw-dropping and offensive<u+201d> and amounted to ignoring <u+201c>black citizens who made it so.<u+201d> to her, the fact that johnson explicitly endorsed the idea of taking the movement to selma in a recorded phone call to dr. king is just a nuisance. white directors have similarly distorted civil rights history. the 1988 film <u+201c>mississippi burning<u+201d> featured two heroes, both white and both fbi agents. that was an incredible distortion of a story about the bravery of civil rights workers who dared to go south to stand with beleaguered black heroes against racial oppression. in truth, the fbi was often in league with local police departments in covering up racially motivated murder. in 1988 that distortion was rationalized as a smart box office decision to offer white heroes to white audiences. now that a black director has a chance to make hollywood<u+2019>s first big movie about dr. king, she sees it as time for payback and her own brand of distortion. race retains a powerful grip on american guilt, fear, lust and anger. that<u+2019>s why controlling the narrative is so important. and the key to the narrative is in the facts of slavery, legal segregation and the fight for equal rights. that is why facts about dr. king are subject to a constant power struggle. duvernay is saying she will tell her story as a black story for black audiences with a black hero, and she will twist facts as she pleases. mark twain said: <u+201c>get your facts first, then you can distort them as much as you please.<u+201d> the facts are that mostly white students went south for freedom summer; white ministers and rabbis took great risks and even died for the cause; white government officials like john doar and nicholas katzenbach put themselves between racist mobs and black people. none of this diminishes the contributions of black people. the truth is that president johnson worked to make the movement a success. the president famously brought tears to dr. king<u+2019>s eyes in 1965 when he told a joint session of congress and a television audience of 70 million that every american should stand up for equal voting rights. <u+201c>their cause must be our cause, too,<u+201d> the president said. <u+201c>because it<u+2019>s not just negroes, but it<u+2019>s really all of us who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice.<u+201d> and then, in a rhetorical crescendo, the president said: <u+201c>and we shall overcome.<u+201d> he used a phrase that told the nation he was on the side of civil rights for black people. as the author of a history of the civil rights movement, <u+201c>eyes on the prize <u+2014> america<u+2019>s civil rights years,<u+201d> i<u+2019>ve done enough research to know that any fair account of the great social movement has to acknowledge lyndon baines johnson <u+00a0>as a civil rights hero. and dr. king doesn<u+2019>t need to have anyone put down so he can look heroic. he really is a hero. that<u+2019>s a fact. juan williams is a co-host of fnc's "the five," where he is one of seven rotating fox personalities.

'selma' sets off new fight over martin luther king's contested legacy

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

69.0

8.0

5956.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

436.0

1.0

0.0

127.0

0.0

54.0

22.0

18.0

13.0

15.0

18.0

10.0

11.0

35.0

43.0

439.0

128.0

54.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

garissa, kenya <u+2014> tension and anxiety remained high friday as the kenyan military launched a campaign to flush out terrorists linked to the garissa university college massacre. the campaign came as kenyan inspector general of police joseph boinett imposed a curfew on the borderlands with somalia from 6:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. local time. few businesses remained open early on friday evening before the curfew took hold. some said the heavily armed kenyan troops were overly zealous in rooting out al shabaab terrorists who have claimed responsibility for the attacks. "it's not safe here for us as residents," said abdikadir adolwa. "the soldiers are whipping residents to force them to identify terrorists. the military have terrorized this area and we fear going to the streets of the town." many residents who could stay outside the town opted to leave while the troops were present. "they're arresting people who have no national identity cards," said nathar abdkir balza, a mother of five, who owns a hotel in garissa. "you can be arrested for loitering." ethnic somalis especially have deserted the area. al shabaab hails from nearby somalia. "the somalis like miraa but they are now afraid to come to town and buy it," said kevin kariuki, who sells miraa, or khat, an african plant that has slightly intoxicating effects when chewed. earlier friday, the kenyan government appealed for help in capturing nine men, described as "bloodthirsty, armed and dangerous," in the wake of an attack on garissa university that left 148 people dead. attackers from the somali-based terror group al-shabab told university students before they were killed that "this is the beginning of more attacks" targeting schools and universities in the country, the kenya-based standard reported. the four gunmen were killed thursday as security forces moved to end the 15-hour siege, which appeared to target christians and islamic converts. two security guards, one policeman and one soldier were among the dead. at least 79 people were injured, and more than 500 students held hostage were rescued. interior minister joseph nkaissery updated the casualties figures friday, saying the gunmen killed 148 people. he said 142 of the dead were students, three were policemen and three were soldiers. nkaissery added that 104 people were wounded. survivor claire mumo, a student, was in the college when the terrorists attacked on thursday. "i was woken up by gunshot sounds inside our dormitory. the four gunmen i noticed ordered everybody to lie down before they started shooting at us," said mumo. "the blood of my friend spilled on my head when she was shot. the gunmen thought they had shot and killed me." the gunmen left her alone because they thought she was already dead, she said. as she lay on the floor, she heard them carry out their plans. "i heard them asking and separating muslims and christians students. then shortly i heard sounds of gunshots," mumo added. "i only came out when i saw our security forces collecting bodies. i will never forget this attack. i'm lucky to be alive." survivor helen titus said one of the first things that the al-shabab gunmen did when they entered the campus early thursday was to head for a lecture hall where christians were in prayer. al-shabab is a somalia-based islamic extremist group with ties to al-qaida. "they investigated our area. they knew everything," titus told the associated press outside a hospital in garissa where she was being treated for a bullet wound to the wrist. titus, a 21-year-old english literature student, said she smeared blood from classmates on her face and hair and lay still at one point in hopes the gunmen would think she was dead. the gunmen also told students hiding in dormitories to come out, assuring them that they would not be killed, said titus, who wore a patient's gown as she sat on a bench in the hospital yard. "we just wondered whether to come out or not," she said. many students did, whereupon the gunmen started shooting men, saying they would not kill "ladies," titus said. but they also shot women and targeted christians, said titus, who is a christian. esther wanjiru said she was awake at the time of the attack. asked if she lost anyone, she said: "my best friend." another survivor, nina kozel, said she was awakened by screaming and that many students escaped by sprinting to the fences and jumping over them. some suffered bruises, she said. many men were unable to escape, and hid in vain under beds and in closets in their rooms, according to kozel. "they were shot there and then," she said. the mortuaries in garissa, near the somali border in northeastern kenya, were so overwhelmed they had to ship many of the bodies to the capital of nairobi, 200 miles away, the bbc reported. the government began evacuating students who survived the thursday terror attack, but many parents still don't know about their fate of their children. "i phoned my daughter susan since yesterday in the morning when i received bad news about the attack, but she didn't pick my calls," said eunice wangari, a mother of three. "i don't know if she's still alive or not. the government is taking too long to identify the bodies. i am very stressed." judith musyoka, 45, and boaz musyoka, 55, are still searching for their son, sammy mutiso musau in the wake of the attack that killed 147 students and staff. "i don't know if my son is still alive," said boaz. "when i heard the news about terror attack i called him several times but his phone was not going through. i need to know his fate." a curfew was imposed for two weeks on garissa and three neighboring counties. cabinet secretary of education jacob kaimenyi ordered the university closed for an unspecified period, sending many students lugging suitcases onto buses friday. the kenya national union of teachers (knut) advised teachers in the region to leave immediately if they felt unsafe. "we will not allow our teachers to risk their lives working in an insecure environment," said willison sosion, chairman of knut, who called for garissa university to be closed permanently. some kenyans were angry that the government didn't take sufficient security precautions. the attack came six days after britain advised "against all but essential travel" to parts of kenya, including garissa. a day before the attack, president uhuru kenyatta dismissed that warning as well as an australian one pertaining to nairobi and mombasa, saying: "kenya is safe as any country in the world. the travel advisories being issued by our friends are not genuine." garissa gov. nathif jama adam condemned the attack and demanded the government address security in the region to stop locals from leaving. "i want to plead with kenyans to stay here as we work with the government to boost security in our region," he said, in particular appealing to christians in the region. "we'll not allow terrorists to divide our people on religion lines." kenyan officials offered a $220,000 bounty for mohammed mohamud, who they suspect planned the attack. on social media, the interior ministry called him "the mastermind." mohamud, who goes by other aliases, may have been assisted by two youths who conducted surveillance on the university, kenya's the star newspaper reported. he reportedly has claimed responsibility for a bus attack that left dozens dead late last year. national chairperson of the national muslim council of kenya, nazlin umar fazaldin rajput, criticized the government for failing to shore up security after somali-based militants attacked civilians in retaliation for kenyan military operations against their base in somalia. kenya began those operations in 2011 after a spate of kidnappings. "all it took was four poorly armed terrorists against our entire intelligence and armed forces. this is a shame," she said. "it is not the terrorist who is an enemy, the enemy is our failed security apparatus and the officers charged with those dockets." rajput said the kenyan military can do a better job guarding the borders and the people. "until we replace inefficient officers with efficient ones and address the root cause of our suffering, we will not win the battle against terror," she said. "we have the u.n. and foreign countries giving kenya intelligence reports, but there is no efficient execution, save to harass innocent muslims." others said muslims, like all kenyans, must cooperate with authorities, pointing to another terror attack near dadaab camp for refugees <u+2014> 10 miles from garissa university <u+2014> on thursday. dadaab deputy county commissioner albert kimanthi said an unknown number of gunmen wearing balaclavas and armed with ak-47 rifles stormed the camp around 3 a.m. and killed a teacher. the gunmen injured four guards. "it's our responsibility to give intelligence necessary information to curb such attacks," he said. "the joint operation that involves the regular and administration police officers has been working hard to nab the criminals." at garissa university, maureen manyego, 21, hid in a wardrobe in a women's dormitory during the attacks. she said the terrorists lectured their victims on why they were about to die. "we are here to kill and die with you," the militants said, she told the standard. "we are not afraid of death." they told the students they were being killed "to pay for the arrogance of your political leader" who refuses to remove troops from somalia. "as long as kenya's military is in somalia, it will be paid with its citizens blood," the militants said, according to manyego.

in kenyan town where students were massacred, 'it's not safe'

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

61.0

8.0

9610.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

711.0

1.0

0.0

213.0

1.0

0.0

99.0

28.0

23.0

14.0

47.0

14.0

27.0

7.0

34.0

56.0

43.0

713.0

214.0

100.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the official candidates <u+2014> rand paul, marco rubio, and ted cruz <u+2014> gathered at nashua, new hampshire<u+2019>s crowne plaza hotel this friday and saturday for the first in the nation republican leadership summit.<u+00a0>the summit also featured unofficial candidates who are almost certainly running but can<u+2019>t quite say so yet for legal/fundraising reasons: scott walker, chris christie, jeb bush, bobby jindal, rick perry, carly fiorina, and mike huckabee, to name a few. you also had your for-pretend candidates, like donald trump and lindsey graham.<u+00a0>beneath them are the yolo candidates, like former virginia gov. jim gilmore, former new york gov. george pataki, and former u.n. ambassador john bolton. all here. former maryland gov. bob ehrlich occupies whatever tier is beneath gilmore and pataki, and he was here, too. at the very bottom of the pile is<u+00a0>this guy. here. new hampshire republicans are not the same as iowa republicans. they<u+2019>re blunt and talk fast and are in no way intimidated to ask a governor or senator or ambassador whatever<u+2019>s on their mind, in a shrewd, distrusting<u+00a0>what<u+2019>s your angle here?<u+00a0>sort of way. there<u+2019>s a libertarian bent to the state<u+2019>s conservative politics and, by and large, no one wants to waste any precious time talking about, say, gay marriage. this is not to say that the conservative die-hards in new hampshire don<u+2019>t have their own quirks. the ones in attendance at the fitn summit, at least, care a<u+00a0>lot<u+00a0>about isis establishing beachheads on the continent and the scourge of <u+201c>illegals.<u+201d> if you were wondering last fall why new hampshire gop senate candidate scott brown kept going on about isis fighters crossing the southern border to infect americans with ebola, a few conversations at the crowne plaza in nashua would make it quite clear. there<u+2019>s a paranoid style to new hampshire politics. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s trying to destroy the country,<u+201d> a woman in black-and-white shoes and a diane keaton-style tie/vest combination, whispered to me during the speech from former u.n. ambassador john bolton. she was referring to the current democratic president <u+2014> or <u+201c>democrat president,<u+201d> in the parlance of right-wing conferences. bolton had just said that the <u+201c>principle responsibility of the president of the united states is to protect the country,<u+201d> and for this woman, and presumably everyone else in the room, barack obama has performed poorly on that score. bizarrely enough, i<u+2019>m more familiar with bolton<u+2019>s talking points than any other candidate<u+2019>s, and the man presents a terrifying view of the world. everyone is trying to bomb us and our president won<u+2019>t bomb them, and bolton can<u+2019>t stand this, and he<u+2019>s going to make america care about his particular brand of foreign policy and not all these wishy-washy foofoo issues like education or health care. isis is coming for us, russia is coming for us, china, you name it. and oh, this iran deal? <u+201c>the most serious act of appeasement in american history.<u+201d> bolton likes to close with a dose of levity, about how he has a special understanding of hillary clinton since he was a year apart from bill and hillary at yale law school. hillary was a <u+201c>radical<u+201d> then, and she<u+2019>s a radical now. according to bolton, the way people are in graduate school is pretty much the way they are the rest of their lives, and hillary clinton is every bit the leftist that elizabeth warren and barack obama are. scared yet? <u+201c>i read an article in the investor<u+2019>s business daily that scared the crap out of me,<u+201d> an older man began his question to bolton. turns out isis is setting up training camps in new mexico, or maybe it<u+2019>s mexico-mexico, and they<u+2019>re pouring across the border. (the article in question<u+00a0>cites a report from judicial watch, a right-wing paranoiac crank website, saying isis has <u+201c>spotters<u+201d> in new mexico to aid in deadly terrorist crossings.) this news didn<u+2019>t surprise john bolton at all. john bolton is never surprised. john bolton has seen some things. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve been reading some things about isil,<u+201d> another older man says. he<u+2019>s been reading the internet and you just won<u+2019>t believe the stuff he<u+2019>s finding. isis is trying to establish a caliphate and, according to the koran, once the caliphate is established, all muslims are required to pledge allegiance to it and kill all non-participants. why aren<u+2019>t we stopping islam? john bolton is of course aware of this, and not surprised by it, and to him the fact that barack obama<u+00a0>won<u+2019>t even name the enemy<u+00a0>gives the enemy enormous power. but these two questioners were warm-up acts for the greatest question ever. it came from the woman sitting next to me, the same one who had whispered to me earlier that obama is <u+201c>trying to destroy the country.<u+201d> she didn<u+2019>t mean this metaphorically. she had evidence <u+2014> proof so ironclad that it could only have come from a weird multicolor-font chain email that old people forward to each other. <u+201c>what do you think about the war on terror within?<u+201d> she asks? obama has been <u+201c>filling the government with muslims. he is filling the state department with the muslim brotherhood.<u+201d> it gets worse. this woman has also heard that barack obama is <u+201c>amassing tanks and artillery weapons<u+201d> to stage a revolution <u+201c>in the streets.<u+201d> he may have several four- and five-star generals who are going along with this. and then there<u+2019>s the<u+2013> <u+201c>the answer is no,<u+201d> john bolton cut her off, laughing nervously. she had managed to surprise john bolton, and that<u+2019>s an accomplishment. <u+201c>well, you<u+2019>re probably nicer to me than the conservative media,<u+201d> mike huckabee told me, after i was introduced to him as a reporter from a liberal news outlet. i had been watching him on fox news from the hotel lounge, announcing that he announce his presidential decision in early may.<u+00a0>right after the segment aired, mike huckabee walked through the lounge on his way to something else. like a moron, i pointed at the tv and said to him <u+201c>you were just on the tv,<u+201d> as though bewildered that someone can climb out of a television set and into real life. can<u+2019>t<u+00a0>say i<u+2019>ve ever been very nice to mike huckabee,<u+00a0>but it<u+2019>s true that he<u+2019>s about to go to war with conservative media.<u+00a0>small-government fiscal conservatives have never liked huckabee. for all outspoken social conservatism and a foreign policy informed by fundamentalist interpretation of revelation, he<u+2019>s never been much of a budget-cutter. (he<u+2019>ll claim that a lot of this had to do with the democratic legislature he dealt with when he was governor of arkansas.) and in the past few days, he<u+2019>s been the (unofficial) presidential candidate coming out hardest against chris christie<u+2019>s plan to cut social security. he<u+2019>s not framing it in liberal terms <u+2014> about how means-testing social security would welfarize the program and erode its support <u+2014> and he looked sort of confused when i tried to explain that argument. but huckabee has a problem, as a vast majority of those affected almost certainly will, with people paying into social security for decades and then not getting back what<u+2019>s owed them, whether those cuts come in the form of means-testing, a raise in the retirement age, or linking cost-of-living increases to chained cpi. and since he<u+2019>s a professional politician who understands his audience, he<u+2019>s spinning it another way: the government is<u+00a0>stealing<u+00a0>the money of the people. you lent the government your money, and they<u+2019>re not letting you have it back. it<u+2019>s<u+00a0>big government theft.<u+00a0>that<u+2019>ll do. huckabee is good with people. so is chris christie, in his own, unorthodox style. it<u+2019>s an attribute he must have great strength in, since he<u+2019>s preparing a campaign centered on yelling at people about cutting social security and medicare. christie came to the summit to continue selling his plan. sharp cuts to social insurance programs are an extension of the overall christie message of tough love, or a belief that in america<u+2019>s heart of heart lurks a masochist. christie said he is starting his run (unofficially! per the lawyers! ) with a 12-point proposal on cutting entitlement spending because he wants to run a campaign based on <u+201c>strength, clarity, and hard truths.<u+201d> <u+201c>leadership<u+201d> is the other word christie loves to employ. to christie, <u+201c>leadership<u+201d> means the willingness to put forth these <u+201c>hard truths,<u+201d> like how social security needs a good whooping. it<u+2019>s a testament to his skills that he<u+2019>s even trying something like this. but in order for it to be successful he<u+2019>ll need to convince people that what he<u+2019>s saying, and the policies he<u+2019>s pushing, are the only possible correct ones. that he<u+2019>s telling the truth, and anyone who disagrees with him is a liar, and his plan is literally the only way to shore up social security, medicare and medicaid for the long haul. if anyone can do this, it<u+2019>s christie. but it<u+2019>s far from a sure thing that anyone can do this. another plank of christie<u+2019>s big plan is to reform social security disability benefits. there are too many working-age people out there falsely claiming disability and we need to get them back in the workforce. grr!<u+00a0>during his q&a segment, a woman took issue with this part of the plan. she told him that she has a 24-year-old son with asperger<u+2019>s syndrome and he can<u+2019>t keep a job, so he really needs disability benefits. christie assures her that her son<u+2019>s case is legitimate and he has no intention of harming him the woman, having secured a pledge from christie to protect her son<u+2019>s bennies, then asked christie what he<u+2019>s going to do about all the illegals immigrants coming to take our jobs. near the end of his answer christie acknowledged, in another one of his hard truths, that the 11 or 12 million undocumented immigrants in the country cannot be relied upon to all <u+201c>self-deport.<u+201d> (poor mitt romney.) was this the part where humanity<u+2019>s truthiest truth-teller was going to go all-in for amnesty? not quite. he merely suggested that leaders of both parties are going to have to come together to find a solution for that. the reason it hasn<u+2019>t happened already, according to christie, is that there<u+2019>s been <u+201c>no leadership from the white house.<u+201d> you might think that pushing with its political might a bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill would count as<u+00a0>some<u+00a0>kind of leadership on this issue, but apparently not. that<u+2019>s just another hard truth from chris christie. independent journal review is a conservative viral news, politics and culture site that gets something like ten trillion visitors a day. isn<u+2019>t that neat? the outlet was a sponsor of the summit and held party at a nearby restaurant, in collaboration with facebook. it was open bar and complemented by a sensational spread of fancy cheeses and little steak nibbly things (i am not a food writer) and fresh, raw oysters on the half shell. free swag all over the place. internet money is the best money. i walked out of the bathroom and there was marco rubio sitting at a big table all to himself, on a laptop, as though cramming a college paper about british romanticism. he was fielding questions on facebook. rubio, 43, is considered the youthful, hip candidate in the field, the <u+2019>90s rap fan who really gets millennial culture. he<u+2019>s all about these edgy, disruptive new technologies that allow politicians to respond to questions people submit on a website. <u+201c>facebook has gotten older, but instagram has gotten younger,<u+201d> rubio said to an instagram representative after the q&a. he quickly corrected himself. <u+201c>i mean, twitter has gotten older, but instagram has gotten younger.<u+201d> exactly. after rubio, it was time for millennials<u+2019><u+00a0>real<u+00a0>presidential standard-bearer, john bolton, to do his facebook q&a. scott brown was also at this party for some reason. ted cruz shows no intention of dropping anytime soon his joke about how he would shut down the irs and put all of its employees on the southern border, though now he includes a disclaimer to <u+201c>the media<u+201d> that he<u+2019>s being tongue-in-cheek. eliminating the irs is part of his tax reform plan, which is to institute a flat tax where returns can be filed on a standard-sized postcard. (which agency collects and enforces the flat tax postcards in our post-irs utopia? details, details, blah blah blah. we<u+2019>re no fun, in the media.) cruz would also <u+201c>repeal every word<u+201d> of obamacare and <u+201c>repeal every word<u+201d> of common core. he makes it easy to remember, at least. you can fit ted cruz<u+2019>s policy platform on a standard-size postcard. cruz, the final speaker of the event on saturday, was only able to take a couple of questions. the crowne plaza, in an aggressive pursuit of billings, booked the ballroom where the conference was taking place for a wedding reception at 5:00. cruz finished speaking at 4:00. the tight booking made for some interesting scenes as conference hangers-on mingled with the newlyweds in their formalwear. wisconsin gov. scott walker was speaking at a small dinner event for select guests at the other end of the hotel, but he took a respite from the dinner to congratulate the bridge and groom outside the bathroom. a few hours later, i walked out of my hotel with a few other reporters, and there was ted cruz getting out of his car. he looked exhausted, so naturally we harassed him with more questions. i asked him about chris christie<u+2019>s social security plan and its many, many hard truths. he wouldn<u+2019>t endorse the plan itself, of course, but he did lay out his broad outlines for social security reform. he supports gradually increasing the retirement age, and <u+201c>having social security benefits grow to match inflation, rather than having growth exceed inflation.<u+201d> (this is the idea behind linking cost-of-living increases to the slower-growing <u+201c>chained cpi<u+201d> measure of inflation.) just as the questions wrapped up, with cruz<u+2019>s aides tugging on him to walk away from reporters and get inside the sanctuary of his hotel room <u+2014> you get the sense that this is a common occurrence <u+2014> cruz turned back and said to me that he hasn<u+2019>t given up on winning me over. (more tugging from the aides.) it turns out that sen. ted cruz is familiar with<u+00a0>salon<u+2019>s coverage of ted cruz,<u+00a0>which is largely negative. though he didn<u+2019>t say so explicitly, ted cruz clearly understands that his fate in the new hampshire gop primary rests on his ability to woo salon. the sooner they all realize this, the better. we take this gatekeeper role seriously and look forward to further engagement with him and our 18 other candidate-friends from the weekend. good luck to all.

<u+201c>he<u+2019>s filling the government with muslims<u+201d>: hanging out with ted cruz, mike huckabee and rand paul inside new hampshire<u+2019>s wacky gop 2016 cattle call

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

23.0

148.0

8.0

14321.0

0.0

3.0

12.0

0.0

1006.0

2.0

0.0

322.0

2.0

0.0

127.0

14.0

33.0

14.0

29.0

33.0

26.0

15.0

56.0

55.0

84.0

1018.0

324.0

129.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

most<u+00a0>parents will do just about anything for their children, especially when it comes to education. predictably, at a time when college costs are exploding and students are staggering under more than $1 trillion in debt, one opportunistic lender is making huge profits on loans to their doting moms and dads. less predictably, that lender is the united states government. the fast-growing federal program known as parent plus now serves 3.2 million borrowers, who have racked up $65 billion in debt helping their kids go to school. the loans have much in common with the regular student loans that have created a national debt crisis and a 2016 campaign issue, but plus has much higher interest rates and fees, and far fewer opportunities for loan forgiveness or reductions. in fact, the plus program, which includes similar loans to graduate students, is the most profitable of the 120 or so federal lending programs. that sounds like a good thing, until you remember the government<u+2019>s profit comes from its own citizens, often citizens of modest means. parent plus was created in 1980 to provide small loans to help reasonably well-off families finance the american dream of an undergraduate education. but in an era of skyrocketing education costs, it has grown to look a lot like publicly funded predatory lending, providing almost any borrowers with almost unlimited cash to attend any school with almost no regard to their ability to repay. thirteen percent of undergraduates now rely on parent plus, and many of their parents are falling into debt traps. <u+201c>you feel so guilty that you haven<u+2019>t done enough for your kid, and they make it so easy to get the loans,<u+201d> said elizabeth hill, a 57-year-old property appraiser from the boston suburbs with more than $30,000 in<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>debt. <u+201c>then they<u+2019>ve got you by the<u+00a0>cojones. it<u+2019>s like <u+2018>the sopranos,<u+2019> except it<u+2019>s the government.<u+201d> for all the controversy swirling around student loans, lending money directly to students at least has a <u+201c>human capital<u+201d> rationale,<u+00a0>since recipients pursue degrees that can boost their earning power and help them fulfill their obligations.<u+00a0>but when parents borrow, they<u+2019>re often taking on new debts just as their earning power is starting to dwindle. they<u+2019>re not building human capital. they<u+2019>re just getting closer to retirement, mortgaging their futures on behalf of their children.<u+00a0>and<u+00a0>if they default, the government can garnish their wages and even their social security checks <u+2014> less brutal than <u+201c>the sopranos,<u+201d> but just as effective. according to the white house budget office, the expected recovery rate for defaulted parent plus loans is a remarkable 106 percent, a testament to uncle sam<u+2019>s unique power as a collection agency. overall, the program is expected to return $1.23 on every dollar it lends this year, thanks to its relatively high interest rates and minimal opportunities for debt relief, as well as the government<u+2019>s relentlessness in tracking down overdue education loans. the only federal loans that generate slightly better returns are the similar plus loans to graduate students, which have much lower default rates. politico has been investigating the<u+00a0>government<u+2019>s<u+00a0>bizarre $3.3<u+00a0>trillion loan portfolio,<u+00a0>which is riddled with tensions between the interests of borrowers and taxpayers. some credit programs are almost comically risky for the government, most memorably a rural broadband effort with an official default rate of a seemingly impossible 116 percent.<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans are the flip side of the coin, generating reliable profits for<u+00a0>taxpayers but<u+00a0>serious risks for moderate-income borrowers. just about everyone i interviewed thought congress should consider major reforms to<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>when it takes up a higher education bill this<u+00a0>fall, but<u+00a0>no one was too optimistic that reforms would pass,<u+00a0>largely because of those profits. <u+201c>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>is classic predatory lending. it<u+2019>s not a safe product for many of these families, and the debts will hound them forever,<u+201d> said rachel fishman, an education policy analyst at the nonpartisan new america think tank. <u+201c>but it<u+2019>s a cash cow for the government, so it<u+2019>s going to be extremely difficult to reform.<u+201d> parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>is not a trap for everyone. the latest data suggest that only 5 percent of borrowers are defaulting within their first three years of repayment, although that figure is rising rapidly. the<u+00a0>white house budget tables<u+00a0>suggest the expected default rate over the course of the loans is well above 10 percent, which is still well below the rate for regular student loans. there<u+2019>s a wealth of evidence that college degrees boost lifetime earnings, and defenders of parent plus say it<u+2019>s an important tool for increasing college graduation rates. plus loans have also become a key revenue source for many schools, particularly historically black colleges and for-profits that tend to serve lower-income families. but that just illustrates the increasingly tortured economic paradoxes at the heart of modern higher education, where schools have no incentive to provide affordable prices as long as they can count on federal dollars for making<u+00a0>education affordable.<u+00a0>ultimately, parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>sluices more cash into the college-industrial complex, helping educators jack up their tuitions while pressuring parents to make up the difference with debt, while doing nothing to ensure they<u+2019>re getting a real return on their investment. it enhances accessibility, but not really affordability, simply giving<u+00a0>parents a way to punt<u+00a0>the skyrocketing costs into the future.<u+00a0>even some advocates who fiercely defended parent plus during a high-profile controversy in 2011,<u+00a0>when the obama administration briefly reined in<u+00a0>loans to<u+00a0>parents with sketchy credit histories, told me the program is deeply troubled and inherently flawed. when i spoke to white house education adviser roberto rodriguez about this conundrum, he emphasized that president barack obama has crusaded to make america the world<u+2019>s leader in access to higher education, expanding<u+00a0>pell grants to low-income students and <u+201c>income-based repayment<u+201d> for burdensome student loans, while proposing to make community college free. parent plus, he said, is another important tool to help young people pursue a better life. but he also said he's<u+00a0>concerned that too many struggling parents are getting in too deep. when i asked him if the education department was running a predatory lending program, he didn<u+2019>t say no. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s the heart of the matter,<u+201d> rodriguez said. <u+201c>you want to expand access and choice, but you also want to make sure families can afford these loans.<u+201d> hill and her husband are solidly middle class and proudly thrifty; she drives a 15-year-old minivan and shops at tj maxx. she and her husband put away money for their son aaron<u+2019>s education, and though they burned through some savings when hill lost her job early in the great recession, they figured they<u+2019>d be fine when aaron chose the university of massachusetts at amherst over several private colleges. he also won some academic grants and maxed out on federal student loans. but even a public school like umass cost $25,000 a year.<u+00a0>hill just couldn<u+2019>t make the numbers work. until, suddenly, she could. hill discovered she was eligible for<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus, which would cover whatever aaron<u+2019>s grants and loans didn<u+2019>t. at the time, hill felt like she had won something, even though the loans are entitlements for anyone without a recent history of <u+201c>adverse credit.<u+201d> she feels differently now that aaron has moved back home with his degree and taken a job at a local liquor store <u+2014> and her husband may have to postpone his plans for retirement to make ends meet. <u+201c>you<u+2019>re at your wits<u+2019> end, you want to help your kid, and this fairy princess appears on your computer and says: <u+2018>want some money?<u+2019><u+201d> hill recalled. <u+201c>you<u+2019>re like: bingo! it<u+2019>s more than you can afford, but dammit, education is important, right? then four years later, you can<u+2019>t believe how much you owe.<u+201d> when congress created parent plus 35 years ago, the loans were capped at $3,000 per year, until that was lifted in 1992 so families could borrow as much as they wanted toward the cost of attendance at any public or private school. but the rules do not allow colleges to ask about their income or their ability to pay. and the borrowers don<u+2019>t have to start making payments until the student leaves school, although the interest accumulates the whole time. congress set the maximum interest rate at 9 percent in 1980, which seemed generous at a time when mortgage rates were skyrocketing toward 18 percent, but parent plus is no longer a particularly attractive deal for families with other options. the current rates are about 7 percent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>a 4 percent origination fee, a lot lower than credit card debt or payday loans, but a lot higher than subsidized student loans. <u+201c>i figured the rate wasn<u+2019>t terrible, and the money was so easy to get,<u+201d> said debbie hounanian, a 56-year-old office manager in the los angeles suburbs who racked up $54,000 in<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>debt. <u+201c>i had no idea what i was getting into.<u+201d> today, the average<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loan is about $13,000, and many<u+00a0>parents pile up much larger debts now that some schools<u+00a0>cost more than $50,000 a year. the loans are almost impossible to discharge in bankruptcy, just like student loans, but they<u+2019>re ineligible for most of the income-based payment<u+00a0>relief available for student loans. consumer advocates compare them to subprime mortgages before the bust, encouraging families to bite off more debt<u+00a0>than they can chew <u+2014> except<u+00a0>that parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>also has a government imprimatur. toby merrill, who runs a harvard-affiliated legal services clinic that focuses on predatory lending, recalls one ready-to-retire borrower who contacted her after running up $150,000 in<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>debt on three children. <u+201c>the question was: what are my options?<u+201d> merrill said. <u+201c>it was sad, because the answer was: you don<u+2019>t really have options.<u+201d> as state aid for higher education has plunged while the cost of college has escalated,<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans have become an increasingly routine method of filling the gap, with about 700,000 new loans every year. some schools actually include<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>in their financial aid offers, telling<u+00a0>parents they<u+2019>ve qualified to take out, say, $20,000 in<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans, a rather disingenuous way of saying the actual offer will leave them $20,000 short of the school's official cost of attendance. colleges with tight budgets have little incentive to tell students they can<u+2019>t afford to enroll, and strong incentives to encourage students to load up on<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans that pass directly into their coffers. the president of albany state university in georgia even admitted at a public hearing that cash-strapped colleges have been steering students from student loans into more onerous and expensive<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans, because they<u+2019>re required to report default rates for student loans but not for<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus. the 2011 controversy over parent plus, when the obama administration temporarily tightened the program<u+2019>s lax vetting process, illuminated the extent to which colleges and families have become dependent on the cash.<u+00a0>it erupted after the education department<u+2019>s financial aid office finally recognized a longstanding absurdity: the <u+201c>adverse credit<u+201d> reviews for<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>applicants were flagging some delinquent debts, but not debts that were so delinquent they had been sent to collection agencies or written off. as a result, many applicants were getting loans with worse credit than rejected applicants. <u+201c>it made no sense,<u+201d> said ben miller, who was a senior policy adviser at the department during the<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>flap and is now director of post-secondary education at the left-leaning center for american progress. <u+201c>but fixing the problem had a much bigger impact than anyone realized it would.<u+201d> quietly, the department started counting more bad debts in its credit reviews <u+2014> and<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>rejection rates soared. students<u+00a0>who couldn<u+2019>t renew their loans began<u+00a0>dropping out of school. and schools that relied heavily on<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>revenue began hemorrhaging cash. at historically black colleges and universities, which had been particularly hard-hit by the recession, the number of<u+00a0>plus recipients dropped 45 percent over the next two years, depriving them of an estimated $150 million. three struggling black colleges<u+2014>in virginia, georgia, and north carolina <u+2014> ended up shutting their doors, and larger schools like morehouse endured mass layoffs. <u+201c>our schools were screaming bloody murder,<u+201d> said thurgood marshall college fund president johnny c. taylor jr., a leading advocate for historically black colleges and universities. <u+201c>forget salt <u+2014> this was pouring acid in our wounds.<u+201d> for-profit schools absorbed an even bigger hit, a 54 percent decline in<u+00a0>plus enrollment. but for obvious political reasons, the black schools (with fierce support from the congressional black caucus) led the fight to get the first african-american president to reverse or at least delay the changes. taylor and other advocates had several tense meetings with education secretary arne duncan, repeatedly asking why a two-decade-old snafu had to be corrected immediately, why the tougher reviews couldn<u+2019>t be limited to new plus<u+00a0>applicants, why a secretary who had said expanding access to college would be his <u+201c>north star<u+201d> was restricting access to college. duncan emphasized that the changes weren<u+2019>t directed at black schools, but taylor shot back that they were having a disproportionate effect on black schools. <u+201c>the secretary kept saying: my lawyers are telling us to do this; we<u+2019>re doing our best to work it out,<u+201d> taylor said. <u+201c>give me a break! we were trying to revive a community with double the unemployment rate of the majority community.<u+201d> eventually, duncan publicly apologized to black college leaders for the abruptness of the changes, acknowledging that <u+201c>communication internally and externally was poor.<u+201d> he promised to consider appeals from all rejected plus<u+00a0>applicants, and launched a process to write new<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>credit rules. <u+201c>it was an operational screw-up of epic proportions,<u+201d> said justin draeger, president of the national association of student financial aid administrators. <u+201c>but it was a pretty good reminder that<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>helps a lot of people pay for college.<u+201d> in 2014, the department announced the new<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>rules, essentially reversing its efforts to tighten credit checks. bad debts are no longer grounds for rejection if they<u+2019>re less than $2,085 (versus $500 in the old rule) or less than two years old (versus five years). the department didn<u+2019>t even require loan counseling for all<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>borrowers, just those who managed to get loans despite adverse credit. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a shame. most<u+00a0>parents would be better off taking a second mortgage,<u+201d> said natalia abrams, director of the advocacy group student debt crisis. <u+201c>instead, they<u+2019>re getting trapped. they assume that if the government is offering these loans, they must be safe.<u+201d> to my surprise, taylor<u+00a0>told me he agrees. taylor was probably the most outspoken critic of the administration<u+2019>s short-lived efforts to rein in<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus, and he still believes it was unfair to change the rules so suddenly after a brutal downturn. but he asked me not to describe him as a<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>defender. he said the program is so exploitative that he once investigated a class-action lawsuit, but found that debt-ravaged<u+00a0>parents were too ashamed to go public. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a horrible program, totally out of control,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve got to figure out a way to make college affordable, but<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>is definitely not the answer.<u+201d> obama's new consumer financial protection bureau has raised alarms about predatory lending by bankers and mortgage brokers. at a recent event, richard hunt, the president of the consumer bankers association, posed a question to cfpb director richard cordray: <u+201c>why aren<u+2019>t you doing anything about<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus?<u+201d> cordray replied that he didn<u+2019>t have jurisdiction over the federal government, but hunt believes that if one of his members offered a similar loan product with similarly negligible underwriting standards, the bureau would be all over it. <u+201c>the silence has been deafening,<u+201d> hunt said. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s sinister to see the government throw money at people with no clue if they can pay it back.<u+201d> hunt would like to see the private sector <u+2014> that is,<u+00a0>his members <u+2014> take over the business. and some private lenders are starting to compete with<u+00a0>parent plus <u+2014> one rhode island bank is offering a similar product with a much lower interest rate of 3 percent and no origination fees for the most<u+00a0>creditworthy borrowers. but while<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans don<u+2019>t have the same protections as federal student loans, they do include some options most private banks won<u+2019>t match, like the ability to defer payments for years. what<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>lacks is flexibility.<u+00a0>parents who qualify can borrow whatever they need for their kids to attend whatever school they want, while<u+00a0>parents who get rejected can<u+2019>t borrow a dime. in another hearing, an<u+00a0>administrator of a north carolina college shared<u+00a0>a sad vignette about a homeless woman who was denied a<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loan, implicitly suggesting the government should have extended her virtually unlimited credit. in fact, that<u+2019>s exactly what would have happened if her credit had been clean. nobody would have been allowed to try to gauge whether her income or assets gave her any hope of repayment.<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>suffers from a paradox that also afflicts government loans for agriculture, shipbuilding and just about everything else: it<u+2019>s highly risky for borrowers who need it<u+00a0>most<u+00a0>desperately, while<u+00a0>the<u+00a0>borrowers who<u+00a0>could most easily handle the debt<u+00a0>could probably get by without it. many critics argue that<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>should be abolished, and that the government should expand pell grants and raise caps on student loans instead. but even those who want to continue the program <u+2014> including rodriguez in the white house and republican staffers on capitol hill <u+2014> seem to agree there are relatively<u+00a0>obvious<u+00a0>ways to strengthen it. the most evident would be real underwriting standards to evaluate the ability to pay of potential borrowers. another would be strict loan caps. or a combination of those reforms could link the creditworthiness of borrowers to the size of the loans they<u+2019>re eligible to receive, the<u+00a0>kind of calculation real banks make.<u+00a0>even draeger, who represents aid administrators at 3,000 colleges and universities, said the system needs structural changes to protect vulnerable families. <u+201c>we definitely support new underwriting standards.<u+00a0>parents are getting in too deep, and it<u+2019>s affecting their ability to retire and enjoy life,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>right now, schools just have to follow the rules, and from a consumer protection standpoint, the rules are dangerous.<u+201d> the major obstacle to reform, beyond washington<u+2019>s general dysfunction and polarization, is the immense profitability of<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus.<u+00a0>these days, the government borrows money at almost no cost, so lending at 7 percent plus fees can add up: parent plus could reduce the deficit by $3 billion this year.<u+00a0>that means any effort to scale it back and restrict it to creditworthy borrowers would cost the government<u+00a0>a lot of money. politicians generally<u+00a0>don<u+2019>t like paying more money to provide fewer benefits, especially when a well-organized political coalition has defended<u+00a0>those benefits in the past. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s the perversity of a loan program like this,<u+201d> one senior gop aide said. <u+201c>it makes it that much harder to fix.<u+201d> in other words, washington has become as dependent on<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>loans as the schools that flack them and the<u+00a0>parents who receive them. the status quo has<u+00a0>tremendous<u+00a0>power, because<u+00a0>congress likes profitable programs, schools like reliable revenue, and<u+00a0>parents like to help their kids. hill and her husband have another son getting ready to start ithaca college, just as they<u+2019>re starting to pay back aaron<u+2019>s loan, but they're determined to help out again. they haven't figured out how they're going to do that yet, because<u+00a0>there's no way they're<u+00a0>going back to the<u+00a0>parent<u+00a0>plus<u+00a0>well again. <u+201c>fool me once, right?<u+201d> hill said. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t want to put my kid in a bind, but these loans are<u+00a0>ridiculous. the guilt system only goes so far.<u+201d>

the u.s. government<u+2019>s predatory-lending program

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

70.0

47.0

8.0

20191.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1263.0

1.0

0.0

335.0

0.0

218.0

36.0

44.0

27.0

38.0

33.0

40.0

20.0

77.0

91.0

112.0

1265.0

336.0

218.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

since 1991, murder and violent crime have plummeted in the u.s. but in a widely discussed op-ed in the wall street journal titled "the new nationwide crime wave,<u+201d> heather mac donald recently made a startling claim: <u+201c>gun violence in particular is spiraling upward in cities across america.<u+201d> she demonstrated this by citing murder rate increases in six cities. murders of police were also surging out of control, she said; they had <u+201c>jumped 89 percent in 2014." last week, mac donald, the thomas w. smith fellow at new york<u+2019>s <u+00a0>manhattan institute <u+00a0>appeared on numerous tv channels, including fox news and cnn. as is so common, the claims have become exaggerated, giving the impression that crime is on the rise all across the u.s. fortunately, that<u+2019>s all hype. mac donald simply cherry-picked those places that had experienced rising crime rates. overall, the 15 largest cities have actually experienced a slight decrease in murders. there has been a 2 percent drop from the first five months of 2014 to the first five months of this year. murder rates rose in eight cities and fell in seven. there is no nationwide murder wave. murder rates fell dramatically in some of these cities. comparing this year<u+2019>s january-to-may murder data with last year<u+2019>s, we find that san jose<u+2019>s murder rate fell by a whopping 59 percent; jacksonville<u+2019>s fell by 31 percent; indianapolis<u+2019> by 28 percent; san antonio<u+2019>s by 25 percent; and los angeles<u+2019> by 15 percent. presumably, we aren<u+2019>t going to focus only on these cities and start claiming a national victory over crime. mac donald is undoubtedly correct that something unusual is happening in baltimore. when comparing this may to last may, arrests have plummeted by 50 percent, murders have risen by 76 percent and overall violent crime is up by 15 percent. this surely has something to do with police officers<u+2019> hesitation to stick their necks out. who can blame them, when they<u+2019>re being labeled as criminals for doing their jobs? but there<u+2019>s no evidence that what is happening in baltimore is happening elsewhere. murder rates have indeed gone up in milwaukee, st. louis, chicago and atlanta, but higher murder rates alone don<u+2019>t mean a lack of effective law enforcement. last thursday, mac donald speculated in a new york times piece that this year<u+2019>s 15 percent increase in murders in new york city is due to a drop in arrests <u+2013> "arrests are down 17.4 percent through may 31 compared to the same period last year.<u+201d> but, just as likely, part of the drop in arrests might be related to the overall drop in crime. while murder rates rose, the 5.5 percent drop in total violent crime and 7.5 percent decline in property crime are being ignored. these declines suggest something is occurring that is more complicated than police simply being afraid to do their jobs. after all, why would police pulling back from their jobs cause more murders but fewer robberies? crime goes up and down for all sorts of reasons. it is too early to figure out why some cities are seeing more crime and others are seeing less. sheer randomness will always cause a few outliers. police do a dangerous job, and any dramatic increase in police killings would be horrible. but the nationwide spike in police killings is not all that mac donald claims it is. after averaging 55 police deaths per year for a decade, the number of deaths fell to 27 in 2013. the number went back up to 51 in 2014. though that was a large increase, the unusual year was 2013, not 2014. but the biggest problem with these last numbers is that, unlike the crime numbers that compare periods clearly before and after the <u+201c>ferguson effect<u+201d> and the baltimore riots, the spike in police killings occurred too early. according to the officer down memorial page, murders of police through may nationwide are down 38 percent this year compared to last year (16 versus 26). with misleading claims by left wing groups such as propublica claiming that police are shooting young black males at much higher rates than young white males, it was probably only a matter of time before some conservatives like mac donald made their own misleading claims. fortunately, there has been no nationwide spike in murders or police killings so far this year. if there is a nationwide <u+201c>ferguson effect,<u+201d> the data don<u+2019>t show it. cherry-picking half a dozen of the worst crime numbers from the largest cities might scare people and get massive media attention, but it doesn<u+2019>t tell us anything about policy. john r. lott, jr. is a columnist for<u+00a0>foxnews.com. he is an economist and was formerly chief economist at the united states sentencing commission. lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done in conjunction with the crime prevention research center. he is the author of nine books including "more guns, less crime." his latest book is "the war on guns: arming yourself against gun control lies (august 1, 2016). follow him on twitter@johnrlottjr.

there is no nationwide crime wave (and police killings are not up)

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

66.0

8.0

4947.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

357.0

1.0

0.0

75.0

0.0

35.0

12.0

9.0

6.0

15.0

4.0

5.0

22.0

27.0

26.0

365.0

76.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

officially, mitt romney returned to iowa, the quadrennial presidential proving ground, to give a boost to joni ernst. but at a closed-door breakfast fundraiser here monday, the first question from a donor had nothing to do with ernst<u+2019>s senate campaign. <u+201c>when you get elected to the senate, your job should be to convince mitt romney to run for president again,<u+201d> a donor told ernst, according to several attendees. the republican candidate said she would, while romney laughed. when romney and ernst gathered in a west des moines boardroom with about 40 agriculture executives sunday night, one businessman after another pleaded with romney to give the white house another shot. and at a rally for ernst in cedar rapids on monday, the state legislator who introduced romney said, <u+201c>if his address was 1600 pennsylvania avenue, i would sleep a lot better.<u+201d> after romney and ernst finished speaking, some activists chanted, <u+201c>run, mitt, run!<u+201d> romney, the 2012 gop presidential nominee and now the tacit head of the republican party, visited iowa as part of a feverish nationwide tour designed to help the gop take control of the senate. he has insisted that he is not interested in running for president a third time. but his friends said a flurry of behind-the-scenes activity is nudging him to more seriously consider it. romney has huddled with prominent donors and reconnected with supporters in key states in recent months. because of the vacuum of power within his party and the lack of a clear 2016 front-runner, confidants said romney is grappling with this question: if drafted, would he answer the party<u+2019>s call? further juicing the speculation was a des moines register-bloomberg news poll released over the weekend showing that romney is the only potential 2016 candidate who would beat hillary rodham clinton (d) among likely iowa voters, 44<u+00a0>percent to 43<u+00a0>percent. people in romney<u+2019>s vast political orbit who are waiting and wishing on him to launch another campaign said romney has done little to quiet them and has been hazy about his plans following next month<u+2019>s midterm elections. former minnesota governor tim pawlenty (r), who briefly ran against romney in 2012 before becoming a close ally, said he wants to see romney give it another go. <u+201c>there is a feeling that the country missed out on an exceptional president,<u+201d> pawlenty said. <u+201c>if he runs, i believe he could win the nomination and the general election. it<u+2019>d be the right person at the right time, and i would encourage him to do it.<u+201d> pawlenty noted that ronald reagan ran unsuccessfully for president twice before being elected in his third attempt <u+201c>and was stronger for it.<u+201d> in contrast with romney, pawlenty said, <u+201c>the emerging class of republican candidates is untested and unproven.<u+201d> within romney<u+2019>s political network, there has been informal chatter about a third run since early 2013, according to people familiar with the discussions. it bubbled up in phone calls and at dinners and has gained steam this year. requests continue to pour in for him to appear on the campaign trail, and advisers said he is eager to mount a multi-state fly-around swing before nov.<u+00a0>4. in iowa, however, romney seemed uncomfortable with the 2016 talk. at the west des moines rally, he spoke for only five minutes, criticizing president obama on income inequality, foreign affairs and other issues. when reporters tried to question him afterward, he sneaked into a dark maze of cubicles. he also said that now that he was no longer a candidate, he had a joke to share involving obama, golfer phil mickelson and tennis great andre agassi. as romney told it, obama shows up at a bank to cash a check without his id. the teller asks him to prove who he is, saying that mickelson proved his identity by hitting a golf ball into a cup and agassi proved his by hitting a tennis ball at a target. <u+201c>is there anything you can do to prove who you are?<u+201d> the teller asks. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t have a clue,<u+201d> obama replies in the joke. the crowd ate it up. former aides and senior republicans say romney appreciates the gop masses crowing that he was right about issues such as russia and health care. but what really intrigues him, they said, are the vulnerabilities among top-tier candidates in the republican field. if romney moves toward a race, it would be because he sees a path to victory. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s the market pulling him,<u+201d> said kent lucken, a longtime friend and adviser who accompanied romney to iowa. <u+201c>people look at hillary as the likely democratic nominee, and the party needs a strong leader who can stand up to her and who<u+2019>s been through the process.<u+201d> romney is returning to boston on tuesday for a dinner that he and his wife, ann, are hosting for former campaign advisers and business associates. the event <u+2014> to benefit neurological research at brigham and women<u+2019>s hospital <u+2014> has romney intimates abuzz. save-the-date notices have gone out for the third annual romney policy retreat in park city, utah, in june 2015 <u+2014> a signal that he wants a platform to promote his issues as the presidential primary campaign season gets underway. romney is also mingling privately with top donors who could fund a third campaign. romney visited sept.<u+00a0>23 with joe ricketts, a billionaire investor who finances the ending spending super pac, at ricketts<u+2019>s palatial penthouse apartment covering the entire 78th floor of the time warner center in new york. on oct. 6, romney also took part in a gop fundraising dinner at the manhattan apartment of woody johnson, the new york jets owner and former romney campaign finance chairman. several 2016 hopefuls gave presentations to the donors, while romney served as a co-host and made no pitch. at johnson<u+2019>s home, romney and media magnate rupert murdoch spoke about romney<u+2019>s political future. according to two romney allies familiar with the conversation, romney was cagey with murdoch but expressed concerns about the developing gop field. romney told murdoch that he felt uneasy about the party<u+2019>s non-interventionist drift on foreign policy and the base<u+2019>s embrace of ideological hard-liners. many romney boosters believe that his window of opportunity will be in mid- to late 2015, should sens. rand paul (r-ky.) or ted cruz (r-tex.) ascend and party establishment types turn to romney as a savior. if former florida governor jeb bush (r) opts out of a campaign, <u+201c>there is going to be more pressure on mitt to go,<u+201d> said tom rath, an influential new hampshire republican. at a luncheon this month in atlanta to help gop senate nominee david perdue, <u+201c>people sat up and paid attention<u+201d> to romney, said sen. johnny isakson (r-ga.). <u+201c>i pulled him aside afterward to thank him for coming. he said he<u+2019>s not running, and i take him at his word. but i don<u+2019>t think the door is entirely closed, and circumstances can change.<u+201d> that phrase <u+2014> <u+201c>circumstances can change<u+201d> <u+2014> has been repeated by many romney backers since the former nominee used it to describe his own thinking about 2016 in a radio interview last month with hugh hewitt. spencer zwick, romney<u+2019>s former national finance chairman, talks regularly with romney and said he has been receiving daily calls from donors and other supporters. <u+201c>there are still plenty of donors who hope circumstances will change and there will be an opportunity for romney to run again,<u+201d> he said. zwick is part of a slimmed-down inner circle, including longtime advisers beth myers, peter flaherty, stuart stevens, lanhee chen and aides kelli harrison and matt waldrip, who are advising romney on political activities this fall. romney traveled through iowa with three trusted advisers and friends: david kochel, ron kaufman and lucken. he also reunited with supporters from campaigns past. in cedar rapids, romney spotted jim wilson, a virginia man who logged more than 40,000 miles chasing the gop nominee from coast to coast in his campaign-festooned gmc pickup. the two hugged. <u+201c>you son of a gun,<u+201d> romney said. another fan, gary chidester, 64, came to the west des moines rally with a full coterie of romney paraphernalia for the former candidate to autograph: campaign placards, enlarged photographs and buttons of mitt and wife ann, and paperback and audio copies of romney<u+2019>s book <u+201c>no apology.<u+201d> he also held a framed drawing that a friend gave him of a black cruise ship named obama sinking into the sea and a white ship named romney with the caption, <u+201c>we<u+2019>re here to save you.<u+201d> <u+201c>he<u+2019>s the only qualified person to run this time,<u+201d> chidester said. <u+201c>mitt is a business genius. that<u+2019>s why i<u+2019>ve listened to this tape three times. he had it all down <u+2014> he had russia down, he had the debt down <u+2014> and all the other republicans are novices by comparison.<u+201d>

can<u+2019>t quit mitt: friends say romney feels nudge to consider a 2016 presidential run

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

83.0

8.0

8680.0

0.0

1.0

6.0

0.0

584.0

0.0

164.0

2.0

0.0

70.0

5.0

23.0

3.0

9.0

13.0

6.0

37.0

20.0

52.0

590.0

164.0

72.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on this day in 1973, j. fred buzhardt, a lawyer defending president richard nixon in the watergate case, revealed that a key white house tape had an 18...

trump sees biden the same as 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

36.0

8.0

154.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

9.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

12.0

3.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

graphic | a breakdown of what candidates talked about and who they interacted with.

now what? where the democratic candidates go from here.

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

55.0

8.0

83.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

4.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

result signals a long war between clinton establishment and the party's young base. hillary<u+00a0>clinton<u+2019>s<u+00a0>asterisk-heavy victory in iowa might<u+00a0>have been the narrowest of wins for her, but it was arguably the worst of all possible outcomes for the democratic party. as of this writing, the result was a statistical tie, 49.9% for clinton and 49.6% for bernie sanders. the<u+00a0>margin of victory in the delegate count was decided by six<u+00a0>coin tosses that <u+201c>flip truthers<u+201d> will forever remember as mysteriously biased toward<u+00a0>clinton. clinton raced to the podium to declare victory, but the news media<u+00a0>will continue to describe it as a tie, probably forever. sanders' supporters won<u+2019>t even make that concession, bitterly complaining about irregularities and, again, coins that seemed to be in clinton<u+2019>s pocket, figuratively speaking. a crushing defeat would have been worse for clinton, of course. but this wasn<u+2019>t much better. in fact, the nature of this victory will probably bring out the worst in clinton. if she lost decisively, as<u+00a0>she did in iowa in 2008, she'd have the option of playing the victim. maybe she'd<u+00a0>even cry again, like she did in portsmouth, n.h., in <u+2019>08, earning the sympathy vote.<u+00a0>instead, she won iowa this time. but saying so requires lawyerly qualifications and caveats. everyone knows this <u+201c>win<u+201d> was nothing to brag about. according to<u+00a0>the new york times, her<u+00a0><u+201c>advisers said they did not know if a significant staff shakeup was at hand, but they said that the clintons were disappointed with monday<u+00a0>night<u+2019>s result and wanted to ensure that her organization, political messaging and communications strategy were in better shape for the contests to come.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s not exactly william wallace in braveheart shouting of victory. clinton simply can<u+2019>t go around talking about her <u+201c>win<u+201d> in iowa without seeming ungracious and grasping.<u+00a0>every time she tries, it will, by the very nature of that victory, seem like spin. already, her supporters are fanning out across cable news overselling the win and reinforcing the sense that team clinton is disconnected from reality. also, any bragging from the clinton camp will further antagonize sanders' supporters, many of whom are already quite hostile to clinton. but the real loser in all this is the democratic party. the ghost of eugene mccarthy has hovered over the democratic race for a year. in 1968, the left-wing senator from minnesota challenged president johnson in the new hampshire primary. mccarthy actually lost by a significant margin. but the mere fact that he got 42% of the vote against the sitting president was enough to ultimately knock johnson out of the race and entice robert f. kennedy into it. these are different times, and clinton isn<u+2019>t an incumbent president. even so,<u+00a0>numerous observers raised the possibility that if clinton suffered a devastating loss in both iowa and new hampshire, it might be enough to entice vice president biden, al gore, michael bloomberg or someone else into the race to save the party from the prospect of a socialist nominee or a fatally flawed clinton candidacy. there was never any question in my mind that clinton will never drop out. like richard gere in an officer and a gentleman, she<u+2019>s got nowhere else to go. but there was some slim possibility that someone else would get in and beat her and sanders. that won<u+2019>t happen now. she will almost surely go on to lose in new hampshire. after that, her best hope is to grind out a victory over many months, antagonizing sanders' supporters, who are disproportionately made up of exactly the kind of young activists clinton desperately needs to win in november. the window for a democratic savior <u+2014> if one ever existed <u+2014> slammed shut monday<u+00a0>night. the democrats are stuck with what they<u+2019>ve got. jonah goldberg,<u+00a0>american enterprise institute<u+00a0>fellow and<u+00a0>national review<u+00a0>contributing editor, is a member of usa today's board of contributors. in addition to its own editorials, usa today publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our<u+00a0>board of contributors. to read more columns like this, go to the<u+00a0>opinion front page.

jonah goldberg: hillary's iowa 'win' is a big loss for democrats

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

64.0

8.0

4099.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

305.0

0.0

75.0

0.0

26.0

12.0

14.0

8.0

12.0

7.0

16.0

6.0

20.0

24.0

26.0

310.0

75.0

26.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a new poll released monday indicates hillary clinton holds an advantage over five potential republican opponents in hypothetical match-ups for the 2016 presidential election. if the contest were held today, 45% of likely voters say they would pick the former secretary of state over mitt romney, who garners 39%. she has a 43%-37% advantage over former florida gov. jeb bush and a 42%-36% margin over new jersey gov. chris christie. all three of clinton's margins over bush, christie and romney fall within the sampling error of plus-or-minus 3.6 percentage points. when matched against sen. ted cruz of texas and sen. rand paul of kentucky, however, her lead widens. forty-six percent of likely voters side with clinton, compared to 33% who pick cruz. in a head-to-head with paul, who's been aggressive in reaching out to democrats and independents, clinton still comes out ahead, 45%-37%. bloomberg conducted interview with 753 likely voters from december 3-5.

poll: hillary clinton ahead in 5 potential match-ups - politics.com

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

67.0

8.0

968.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

57.0

1.0

0.0

14.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

5.0

63.0

15.0

7.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on the front lines of the battle against the islamic state, suspicion of the united states runs deep. iraqi fighters say they have all seen the videos purportedly showing u.s. helicopters airdropping weapons to the militants, and many claim they have friends and relatives who have witnessed similar instances of collusion. ordinary people also have seen the videos, heard the stories and reached the same conclusion <u+2014> one that might seem absurd to americans but is widely believed among iraqis <u+2014> that the united states is supporting the islamic state for a variety of pernicious reasons that have to do with asserting u.s. control over iraq, the wider middle east and, perhaps, its oil. <u+201c>it is not in doubt,<u+201d> said mustafa saadi, who says his friend saw u.s. helicopters delivering bottled water to islamic state positions. he is a commander in one of the shiite militias that last month helped push the militants out of the oil refinery near baiji in northern iraq alongside the iraqi army. the islamic state is <u+201c>almost finished,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>they are weak. if only america would stop supporting them, we could defeat them in days.<u+201d> [inside the surreal world of the islamic state<u+2019>s propaganda machine] u.s. military officials say the charges are too far-fetched to merit a response. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s beyond ridiculous,<u+201d> said col. steve warren, the military<u+2019>s baghdad-based spokesman. <u+201c>there<u+2019>s clearly no one in the west who buys it, but unfortunately, this is something that a segment of the iraqi population believes.<u+201d> the perception among iraqis that the united states is somehow in cahoots with the militants it claims to be fighting appears, however, to be widespread across the country<u+2019>s sunni-shiite sectarian divide, and it speaks to more than just the troubling legacy of mistrust that has clouded the united states<u+2019> relationship with iraq since the 2003 invasion and the subsequent withdrawal eight years later. at a time when attacks by the islamic state in paris and elsewhere have intensified calls for tougher action on the ground, such is the level of suspicion with which the united states is viewed in iraq that it is unclear whether the obama administration would be able to significantly escalate its involvement even if it wanted to. <u+201c>what influence can we have if they think we are supporting the terrorists?<u+201d> asked kirk sowell, an analyst based in neighboring jordan who publishes the newsletter inside iraqi politics. in one example of how little leverage the united states now has, iraqi prime minister haidar al-abadi pushed back swiftly against an announcement tuesday by defense secretary <u+00ad>ashton<u+00a0>b. carter that an expeditionary force of u.s. troops will be dispatched to iraq to conduct raids, free hostages and capture islamic state leaders. [is it too late to solve the mess in the middle east?] iraq<u+2019>s semiautonomous region of kurdistan, where support for the united states remains strong, has said it would welcome more troops. but abadi indicated they would not be needed. <u+201c>there is no need for foreign ground combat troops,<u+201d> he said in a statement. <u+201c>any such support and special operations anywhere in iraq can only be deployed subject to the approval of the iraqi government and in coordination with the iraqi forces and with full respect to iraqi sovereignty.<u+201d> the allegations of u.s. collusion with the islamic state are aired regularly in parliament by shiite politicians and promoted in postings on social media. they are persistent enough to suggest a deliberate campaign on the part of iran<u+2019>s allies in iraq to erode american influence, u.s. officials say. in one typical recent video that appeared on the facebook page of a shiite militia, a lawmaker with the country<u+2019>s biggest militia group, the badr organization, waves apparently new u.s military mres (meals ready to eat) <u+2014> one of them chicken and dumplings <u+2014> allegedly found at a recently captured islamic state base in baiji, offering proof, he said, of u.s. support. <u+201c>the iranians and the iranian-backed shiite militias are really pushing this line of propaganda, that the united states is supporting isil,<u+201d> warren said. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s part of the iranian propaganda machine.<u+201d> the perception plays into a widening rift within iraq<u+2019>s ruling shiite elite over whether to pivot more toward iran or the united states. those pushing the allegations <u+201c>want to create a narrative that iran is our ally and the united states is our enemy, and this undermines abadi, who is america<u+2019>s ally,<u+201d> sowell said. [police call him an isis recruiter. he says he<u+2019>s just an outspoken preacher.] iraqi government officials say they don<u+2019>t believe the charges and point out that abadi regularly pushes back against them. but abadi<u+2019>s own position has weakened in recent months. he is battling for his political survival against a variety of shiite militia leaders whose power has been bolstered by the increasingly dominant role played on the battlefield by the militias, collectively known as hashd al-shaabi, or popular mobilization units. iraqi officials complain that their task is hampered by what is universally perceived as the lackluster u.s. response to the threat posed by the islamic state. <u+201c>we don<u+2019>t believe the americans support daesh,<u+201d> said naseer nouri, spokesman for the ministry of defense, using the arabic acronym for the islamic state. <u+201c>but it is true that most people are saying they do, and they are right to believe that the americans should be doing much more than they are. it<u+2019>s because america is so slow that most people believe they are supporting daesh.<u+201d> u.s. warplanes routinely fail to respond to requests for air support because of u.s. rules of engagement that preclude strikes if there is a risk civilians may be hit, he said. according to warren, that standard frequently is not met. the united states has conducted more than 3,768 strikes in iraq as of nov.<u+00ad><u+00a0>19, according to the u.s. military, and the tempo of strikes has increased lately, u.s. officials say. but it also appears that the fighters are unaware when they do receive u.s. air support. the u.s. military reported near-daily strikes in support of the offensive to recapture baiji last month and continues to respond regularly to requests for strikes in the vicinity, warren said. [in the fight against the islamic state, iraq<u+2019>s leader begins to look shaky] the fighters there insist there have been no strikes by the americans at all. <u+201c>we<u+2019>d be better off without them,<u+201d> said 1st lt. murtada fadl, who is serving with the iraqi elite forces in baiji. he said that the only air support had come from the iraqi air force and that he wishes the government would ask the russians to replace the americans. in a part of the world where outcomes are often confused with intentions and regional complexities enable conspiracy theories to thrive, the notion that the united states is colluding with the islamic state holds a certain logic, according to mustafa alani, director of the dubai-based gulf research center. most arabs are too in awe of american might to believe that the united states is deliberately adopting a minimalist approach, he said. <u+201c>the reason is that the americans aren<u+2019>t doing the job people expect them to do,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>mosul was lost and the americans did nothing. syria was lost and the americans did nothing. paris is attacked and the americans aren<u+2019>t doing much. so people believe this is a deliberate policy. they can<u+2019>t believe the american leadership fails to understand the developments in the region, and so the only other explanation is that this is part of a conspiracy.<u+201d> on the streets of baghdad, most iraqis see no other explanation. <u+201c>the image of the u.s. was damaged in the region, so they created daesh in order to fight them and restore their image,<u+201d> said mohammed abdul khaleq, a journalist for a local tv station who was drinking coffee in a cafe favored by writers, most of whom said they agreed. a rare dissenting voice was offered by hassan abdul-wahab, 23, selling luggage in a nearby shop. <u+201c>it is true that most people believe that,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>but it<u+2019>s not based on reason. it<u+2019>s based on racism <u+2014> because iraqis don<u+2019>t like americans in the first place.<u+201d> did these tweets encourage a chicago teen to try joining the islamic state? why the islamic state leaves tech companies torn between free speech and security with fight against the islamic state in iraq stalled, u.s. looks to syria for gains

iraqis think the u.s. is in cahoots with the islamic state, and it is hurting the war

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

85.0

8.0

8417.0

0.0

11.0

0.0

702.0

3.0

0.0

191.0

2.0

0.0

109.0

23.0

13.0

7.0

26.0

10.0

9.0

2.0

39.0

47.0

48.0

713.0

194.0

111.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republicans opened their national convention here monday night by weaving savage attacks on hillary clinton into testimonials to donald trump<u+2019>s compassion, strength and readiness to be commander-in-chief in the face of terrorist attacks on the homeland and around the world. after the republican national convention got off to a chaotic start because of an afternoon procedural skirmish, trump made a splashy debut on the convention stage to introduce his wife, melania, whose speech was a highlight of an otherwise uneven evening. <u+201c>i have been with donald for 18 years, and i have been aware of his love for this country since we first met,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>he never had a hidden agenda when it comes to his patriotism because, like me, he loves his country very much.<u+201d> but minutes after she finished, the quicken loans arena began emptying out as retired lt. gen. michael flynn delivered a rambling and unfocused speech that dragged on for nearly half an hour. the result: sen. joni ernst of iowa, poised to deliver a breakout performance, could not take the stage until well after prime time and addressed a mostly empty arena. <u+201c>hillary clinton has failed to stop the expansion of terrorism,<u+201d> ernst said, adding: <u+201c>she is entirely unfit to serve as our nation<u+2019>s commander-in-chief.<u+201d> the trumps were the stars of monday night<u+2019>s show, however. donald strode onto the convention stage about 10:20 p.m., walking out in silhouette to queen<u+2019>s anthem, <u+201c>we are the champions.<u+201d> <u+201c>we<u+2019>re going to win so big,<u+201d> the candidate vowed, as he introduced his wife, melania, for her keynote address. a former fashion model born in slovenia, melania trump has shied away from public speaking. monday night, she spoke with composure and movingly talked about her husband<u+2019>s love of family and country. <u+201c>donald thinks big, which is especially important when considering the presidency of the united states,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>no room for small thinking. no room for small results. donald gets things done.<u+201d> melania trump sought to broaden her husband<u+2019>s appeal to the general population, including groups that have been outright hostile to his candidacy, saying that love binds their family and that together they would bring compassion to the white house. <u+201c>donald intends to represent all the people, not just some of the people,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>that includes christians and jews and muslims. it includes hispanics and african americans and asians and the poor and the middle class.<u+201d> afterward, donald trump returned to the stage, kissed his wife and pointed at her with his signature gesture, as if to show her off to the roaring crowd. former new york mayor rudy giuliani gave one of the night<u+2019>s most impassioned addresses, strongly defending trump, whom he has known for decades. <u+201c>what i did for new york, donald trump will do for america,<u+201d> said giuliani, who steered his city through the terrorist attacks of sept. 11, 2001. many of the earlier speakers delivered hard-edged remarks seemingly designed to play to trump<u+2019>s base supporters. a trio of speakers railed against undocumented immigrants <u+2014> whom they repeatedly called <u+201c>illegal aliens<u+201d> <u+2014> for killing their loved ones and argued that only trump could keep the country safe. <u+201c>my son<u+2019>s life was stolen at the hands of an illegal alien,<u+201d> said mary ann mendoza, mother of fallen police sgt. brandon mendoza. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s time we had an administration that cares more about americans than about illegals. a vote for hillary is putting all our children<u+2019>s lives at risk.<u+201d> others who took the stage in prime time here in cleveland aimed at clinton. patricia smith, whose son sean died in the 2012 terrorist attacks on a u.s. diplomatic outpost in benghazi, libya, reduced convention delegates to tears with an emotional address about her son<u+2019>s death <u+2014> which she said she blames on clinton, the-then secretary of state. <u+201c>i blame hillary clinton personally for the death of my son,<u+201d> smith said. she pointed out a delegate holding up a <u+201c>hillary for prison<u+201d> sign and said, <u+201c>that<u+2019>s right <u+2014> hillary for prison. she deserves to be in stripes.<u+201d> smith served as the moving opening act in a series of presentations about clinton<u+2019>s handling of the benghazi attacks, the subject of many congressional and other investigations. giuliani accused her of <u+201c>dereliction of duty<u+201d> in benghazi. <u+201c>she loves her pantsuits,<u+201d> said darryl glenn, a gop senate candidate in colorado. <u+201c>but we should send her an e-mail and tell her that she deserves a bright orange jumpsuit.<u+201d> a few speakers aimed their remarks to the broader electorate. sen. tom cotton (r-ark.), for instance, said twice, <u+201c>help is on the way<u+201d> <u+2014> a memorable line from conventions past, including the 2000 speech by former vice president richard b. cheney. a number of speakers of color echoed trump<u+2019>s core themes of grievance, including some racial provocations. <u+201c>frankly, somebody with a nice tan needs to say this: all lives matter,<u+201d> said glenn, who is black. david clarke, the milwaukee county sheriff, who also is african american, cried out <u+201c>blue lives matter in america.<u+201d> his call of support for law enforcement officers was received with chants of <u+201c>usa! usa! usa!<u+201d> in the convention hall. clarke went on to criticize the black lives matter movement. giuliani bemoaned the racial divisions on display across the country and that first responders <u+201c>have a target on their back.<u+201d> <u+201c>when they come to save your life, they don<u+2019>t ask if you are black or white,<u+201d> the former mayor said. <u+201c>they just come to save you.<u+201d> an emotional high point early in the night was a speech from marcus luttrell, the former navy seal immortalized as the <u+201c>lone survivor,<u+201d> who got involved in politics after former texas governor rick perry and his wife, anita, took him in as a surrogate son and nursed him to health. luttrell said that after spending time with trump, he is confident the business mogul could fix chronic problems in the department of veterans affairs. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve got to make sure the hell the veterans return from is not the hell the veterans come home to, okay?<u+201d> luttrell said. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s what was promised and that<u+2019>s what<u+2019>s deserved. period.<u+201d> the focus on national security and immigration comes at a perilous time. recent terrorist attacks in the united states and abroad, coupled with police shootings in dallas and baton rouge, la., have created fear and worry. willie robertson, the long-bearded star of <u+201c>duck dynasty,<u+201d> took the podium wearing an american flag bandana around his head and vowed repeatedly that trump would <u+201c>have your back.<u+201d> during the convention<u+2019>s afternoon proceedings, anti-trump forces expressed vocal dissent from the convention floor, though party officials snuffed out attempts to slow trump<u+2019>s march to the presidential nomination. a renegade group of delegates seeking to force a rules vote that would have embarrassed trump fell short. they were hoping to register disapproval of new party rules that favor trump, but a handful of state delegations backed out under pressure from party leaders. the outcome cleared the path for trump, who touched down in cleveland around 7:30 p.m., to accept the gop presidential nomination later this week without having to clear new hurdles. but it underscored the deep rifts that continue to plague the republican party during a week that was supposed to reflect unity. the trumps arrive in a convention city with republican rifts ever raw, both on the floor of the quicken loans arena and on the sidelines. trump<u+2019>s top backers on monday aggressively disparaged ohio gov. john kasich and other republicans who have declined to support the celebrity mogul for president <u+2014> an unusual provocation for a team hoping to foster unity. on the convention floor, pro-trump republicans dealt the decisive blow to anti-trump republicans in a pair of voice votes. that prompted an outcry and a disorderly sequence of events on that was broadcast live on cable news networks. <u+201c>roll call vote! roll call vote!<u+201d> angry delegates chanted, while trump supporters sought to overpower them with chants of <u+201c>trump! trump!<u+201d> the colorado delegation briefly walked off the floor. sen. mike lee of utah, a trump critic, expressed befuddlement and indignation that no roll call vote was held and that the podium was briefly abandoned. <u+201c>there<u+2019>s no precedent for this in parliamentary procedure,<u+201d> lee told reporters on the convention floor. <u+201c>we are now in uncharted territory.<u+201d> he called the outcome <u+201c>surreal.<u+201d> [schedule: see who is speaking on the second day of the republican national convention] earlier in the day, former senator gordon humphrey of new hampshire came to the convention floor claiming to be holding a packet of documents with the requisite number of signatures from enough states to force the vote they wanted. trailed by dozens of reporters, humphrey delivered the signatures to a convention official, who reviewed them. but that<u+2019>s as far as it went, as three state delegations pulled back their support, according to rep. steve womack of arkansas, who presided over the drama. that left the trump foes below the threshold they needed to reach. separately, new jersey gov. chris christie said it was <u+201c>unacceptable<u+201d> for former candidates who pledged to support the eventual nominee to hold out now. and trump campaign chairman paul manafort targeted kasich, who is in cleveland this week but refusing to step foot in the convention, and the bush family, who are skipping the festivities altogether. the broadsides from trump allies, which drew some swift rebuttals from kasich backers, inflamed tensions at the start of the quadrennial confab, which will feature four days of speeches, meetings and parties that will culminate in trump<u+2019>s formal acceptance speech on thursday night. <u+201c>certainly the bush family, we would have liked to have had them. they<u+2019>re part of the past. we<u+2019>re dealing with the future,<u+201d> manafort told reporters monday morning. manafort said on msnbc that kasich was <u+201c>embarrassing his state<u+201d> by skipping the convention. christie reminded michigan republicans that as a candidate for president, he and other gop candidates pledged to support the eventual nominee. <u+201c>it is unacceptable to me, and it should be unacceptable to you that anyone who signed that pledge is not now adhering to that pledge and supporting our party<u+2019>s nominee,<u+201d> said christie. the governor, who is now a staunch trump supporter and surrogate, didn<u+2019>t call anyone out by name. [seven things to watch at the republican convention in cleveland] as white house hopefuls, kasich and former florida governor jeb bush pledged loyalty to the eventual nominee before later backing away. so did sen. ted cruz (tex.). like bush and kasich, cruz has not endorsed trump. but cruz is speaking at the convention. kasich<u+2019>s allies defended the governor on social media. ohio gop chairman matt borges tweeted: <u+201c>manafort still has a lot to learn about ohio politics. doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s talking about. hope he can do better.<u+201d> <u+201c>impossible to know <u+2018>strategy<u+2019> behind this,<u+201d> tweeted john weaver, a top kasich adviser in his presidential run. christie added: <u+201c>everyone has a right to their own conscience and their own beliefs. but the fact of the matter is, as i said before, if you<u+2019>re a republican and you have voted for republican nominees for president and you<u+2019>re not working for donald trump, you<u+2019>re working for hillary. and that<u+2019>s the bottom line.<u+201d> for trump, the convention comes at a crucial time. he is trying to put weeks of distracting feuds and staff turnover behind him and demonstrate to the country that he is the best-qualified candidate for the white house. peter holley, jenna johnson, louisa loveluck, karen tumulty and laura vozzella contributed to this report.

republican national convention: speakers, including wife melania, testify to donald trump<u+2019>s readiness to be president; others savage 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

9.0

140.0

8.0

11698.0

0.0

7.0

12.0

0.0

734.0

1.0

0.0

220.0

0.0

69.0

29.0

27.0

15.0

26.0

15.0

24.0

10.0

54.0

57.0

68.0

746.0

221.0

69.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) mitt romney's decision to pass on 2016 anoints jeb bush as the clear establishment favorite in the republican presidential race and lays down a challenge to the party's divided conservatives. though the first contests will not take place in early voting states for a year, romney's swerve, announced on a conference call with supporters on friday, is the most important moment yet in the nascent gop contest. it removes the prospect of a bruising battle for big establishment donor cash and moderate, right of center, republican primary voters between romney, the 2012 nominee and bush, heir to a dynastic political machine. "i think it is hard to argue that today's news did not help gov. bush," said matt moore, chairman of the republican party in south carolina, which holds one of the crucial early voting primaries next year. bush sent the republican race into overdrive with his sudden announcement last month that he was actively exploring a run for president. since then, he has been flying around the nation in an apparent bid to put up a formidable "shock and awe" early fundraising number to define the contest in his favor. though bush is seen as leading establishment republicans, romney's decision could improve new jersey gov. christie's hopes of financing a long campaign. "today's news certainly does re-open the fight for donors. i know many donors had been frozen in recent weeks, taking a 'wait and see' approach," said moore. "there's a finite amount of money that can be raised -- so every candidate benefits." kevin madden, a one-time adviser to romney who is now a cnn commentator, said his former boss's decision opened up an early trial of strength between christie and bush. "this becomes the first big test between those candidates, which one of them can quickly move to lock down those donors. it is a very successful, very large fundraising network. it's going to be an important asset." some party insiders also believe conservative candidates who can also straddle the line with the establishment could benefit from romney's departure. a top adviser to one potential republican primary contender said in an interview that romney's exit likely helps both florida sen. marco rubio and wisconsin gov. scott walker, who both have strong conservative support but have also been warmly received by some establishment-minded donors. "they're acceptable to the establishment but they also have support within the various conservative bases <u+2014> among economic conservatives, social conservatives and national security conservatives," the adviser said. romney's decision not to run doesn't remove him from the 2016 calculus entirely <u+2014> it sets him up to be a potential kingmaker in one of the most wide-open primary fields in recent memory. though sources told cnn's dana bash not to expect a romney endorsement of another candidate in the near future, contenders will be clamoring for his blessing. a top rubio aide said "any leading candidate would" want romney's support. jim merrill, romney's top strategist in new hampshire, said that his "guess is [romney] probably will" endorse a candidate in the primary. romney's statement, however, made clear that he was not stepping aside in favor of bush. in fact he appeared to take a veiled swipe at the 61-year-old former florida governor. "i believe that one of our next generation of republican leaders, one who may not be as well known as i am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started, may well emerge as being better able to defeat the democrat nominee," romney told his supporters. he appeared to be implying that the gop would be best served by a younger candidate taking on clinton, who will be 69 at the time of the general election in november 2016. rubio, 43, quickly picked up on the idea of a generational shift, stressing repeatedly in a short statement praising romney that he was close to the 2012 nominee. "he certainly earned the right to consider running, so i deeply respect his decision to give the next generation a chance to lead." walker, 47, also picked up the signals, thanking romney in a tweet for "opening the door for fresh leadership in america." romney may also be making a point by sitting down for dinner on friday night with christie, 52, in new york. his exit will also shift the terrain more practically in the early states, where his former staffers can now join the campaign of their choice. merrill said he's been receiving calls from former romney operatives in the state <u+2014> and interested candidates <u+2014> wondering what's next, but he wasn't yet leaning toward any candidate in particular. "[romney's] not gonna be a candidate, so that means we are open for business," merrill said. reverberations are also being felt in iowa, where voters will get the 2016 ball rolling next year and where romney lost by only a handful of votes to rick santorum on the way to the gop nomination in 2012. a des moines register/bloomberg poll published friday showed 57 percent of likely caucus goers had favorable feelings about romney. but that figure was down from 65 percent in october. romney may have calculated that he would have struggled to keep that level of support, fighting bush and christie for moderates and facing fresh faced conservatives like walker and firebrand sen. ted cruz. "there a lot of people who had second thoughts about romney," said steffen schmidt, an iowa state university professor who is an authority on the state's fabled caucuses. "mitt romney would have had a much harder time in iowa," in 2016, schmidt said. bush is basking in a second straight day of good news. on thursday, he poached david kochel, one of the state's most highly regarded political consultants for a possible post running his campaign. kochel previously worked for romney in iowa, and his departure was seen as a serious blow to the former massachusetts governor. the narrowing of the establishment field may hold a wake up call for conservatives who hoped a candidate preferred by the grass roots would emerge this cycle. but with candidates like walker, cruz, mike huckabee, santorum and kentucky sen. rand paul all tipped to appeal to certain sections of the conservative electorate, they face a familiar problem : the lack of a single right-wing favorite to take on the establishment's pick. romney's announcement, which kept political pundits guessing until minutes before he spoke with supporters, was in keeping with the already rich drama of the 2016 race. even a month ago, no one thought that romney, who twice ran for president and lost, could find a rationale to underpin another shot. but in three frenzied weeks, romney, apparently disdaining the quality of the crowded gop race, and bumped into a swift decision by bush's early move, appeared to be about to jump in. bush had previously effectively forced out another possible establishment candidate sen. rob portman, by getting into the race. romney traveled to california to headline the republican national committee's winter meeting, and stoked speculation by consulting former staffers and party heavyweights about a possible run. for now, most of those close to romney believe he will resume his role as the de-facto leader of the party until a nominee emerges, speaking out on key issues. "you'll see him do what he's already been doing post-2012 <u+2014> be someone that stands up to president obama, speaks the truth when the opportunity calls," merrill said.

romney exit widens establishment lane for bush

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

46.0

8.0

7539.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

496.0

0.0

118.0

1.0

0.0

40.0

13.0

22.0

2.0

15.0

11.0

8.0

11.0

36.0

20.0

49.0

501.0

118.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

**want fox news first in your inbox every day? sign up here.** buzz cut: <u+2022> panicky hillary starts shouting <u+2022> nyt dumps on heidi cruz <u+2022> rubio touts pistol purchase <u+2022> gop power index: christie fades <u+2022> driven by destiny panicky hillary starts shouting you can turn the volume back up on your televisions, the democratic debate is done and the shouting has ended. apparently believing that commitment and sincerity can be measured in decibels, hillary clinton turned up the volume in sunday night<u+2019>s showdown with rival bernie sanders. she also matched her louder volume with sharper attacks on sanders. but the vermont socialist came ready to fight, counterpunching and even landing a few blows. you<u+2019>d have to give him the win, if only narrowly, on the grounds that not only did he dominate the discussion but that she was strangely treating him as the frontrunner. or maybe it was just that she was trying to fight on sanders<u+2019> turf. he<u+2019>s been shouting since before it was cool. clinton seems to be abandoning the mantra of her campaign <u+2013> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m a fighter<u+201d> <u+2013> for an effort to approximate the anger that candidates on both sides of the aisle have been trying, with varying degrees of success, to ape. but it<u+2019>s hard to believe that clinton is angry, or at least that she is angry about something other than the fact that her party seems to delight in spurning her. life has been very good to the clintons over the past 16 years, to say the least. except for the politics part. clinton and her crew could assuage themselves after her 2008 primary loss that they were victims of history <u+2013> the sudden ascendance of a gifted, african-american candidate was more of a force of nature than a reflection of her political weakness. but what if she were struggling with a guy who was deeply white and five years older than her? what if the guy this time was not a gifted speechmaker but one who gave shout-y campaign boilerplate in a brooklyn honk? what if he had been honking around washington for 25 years and was generally written off as a crank? it has apparently all been enough to rattle clinton, whose onetime indulgence of sanders has turned into attacks and who seems to be on the verge of yet another campaign reboot. tied or trailing sanders in the first two nominating contests, it<u+2019>s hard to say she<u+2019>s wrong. a huge lead in south carolina and what, last month at least, was a wide advantage in nevada still suggest that clinton isn<u+2019>t yet in danger of being toppled a second time <u+2013> and that her strategy of aggressively pursuing black voters and other parts of the obama coalition is paying off. but would those leads look so stout if clinton were to lose the first two contests? certainly not. just ask south carolina democratic powerbroker rep. jim clyburn, who told the nyt, <u+201c>the reality is, if mrs. clinton loses iowa and new hampshire, that could create new and real problems for her here.<u+201d> as of now, you can still call clinton the presumptive democratic nominee, but we are now seeing a scenario in which she might have to waste several damaging months on a fight that will harm her general election chances and distract public attention from the bazooka blasts on the gop side. with your second cup of coffee<u+2026> america seems to owe an awful lot to high-living french noblemen. and if you like the idea of separation of power between branches of government, then say <u+2018>joyeux anniversaire<u+2019> to<u+00a0>charles-louis de secondat, baron de la br<u+00e8>de et de montesquieu, born on this date in 1689. montesquieu led something of a dissipated life as a young nobleman at court in paris, but became increasingly serious about his political writing and philosophizing. a visit to england would open his mind further and give birth to a riot of political thought. but perhaps chief among his insights was the value of divided government.<u+00a0>britannica explains: <u+201c>dividing<u+00a0>political authority<u+00a0>into the legislative, executive, and judicial powers, [montesquieu] asserted that, in the state that most effectively promotes liberty, these three powers must be confided to different individuals or bodies, acting independently<u+2026> though its accuracy has in more recent times been disputed, in its own century it was admired and held authoritative, even in england; it inspired the<u+00a0>declaration of the rights of man<u+00a0>and the<u+00a0>constitution of the united states.<u+201d> nyt dumps on heidi cruz the nyt digs deep into the life of ted cruz<u+2019>s wife, heidi, with a focus on an incident 11 years ago in which a police officer found her, head in hands, sitting beside an expressway onramp. the article, which revisits the incident twice and at length, casts her as an unstable woman who has thrown away a promising career to support her husband. it is some really ugly stuff. trump in free fire zone with cruz attacks - abc news: <u+201c>with two weeks left before voters in iowa cast the very first votes in the 2016 presidential election, republican front-runner<u+00a0>donald trump<u+00a0>is turning up the heat on his fiercest rival in the hawkeye state -<u+2013> sen.<u+00a0>ted cruz. <u+2018>i don't think ted cruz has a great chance, to be honest with you,<u+2019> trump told abc news chief anchor george stephanopoulos in an interview on <u+201c>this week<u+201d> sunday. <u+2018>look, the truth is, he's a nasty guy. he was so nice to me. i mean, i knew it. i was watching. i kept saying, <u+2018>come on ted. let<u+2019>s go, okay.<u+2019> but he<u+2019>s a nasty guy. nobody likes him. nobody in congress likes him. nobody likes him anywhere once they get to know him. he<u+2019>s a very <u+2013>- he's got an edge that<u+2019>s not good. you can't make deals with people like that and it's not a good thing. it's not a good thing for the country. very nasty guy.<u+2019><u+201d> [in a new digital ad, a pro-cruz pac uses trump<u+2019>s past praise of cruz as narration for their spot.] trump<u+2019>s faith - weekly standard does a dive into the faith background of donald trump and whether or not his lack of an active membership in any faith will give pause to evangelicals with other options this cycle. cruz begins aggressive campaign schedule in n.h. - dallas morning news: <u+201c>u.s. sen. ted cruz of texas is trying to beat the odds and pull out victories in both [iowa and new hampshire]<u+2026>on sunday he started a five-day new hampshire tour packed with 17 events in all 10 of the state<u+2019>s counties.<u+201d> rubio touts pistol purchase tampa bay times: <u+201c>marco rubio<u+00a0>went shopping for a handgun on christmas eve, tying it to the threat of isis. <u+2018>i have a right to protect my family if someone were to come after us,<u+2019> he said sunday on cbs<u+2019> face the nation. <u+2018>in fact, if isis were to visit us, or our communities, at any moment, the last line of defense between isis and my family is the ability that i have to protect my family from them, or from a criminal, or anyone else who seeks to do us harm. millions of americans feel that way.<u+2019> rubio first disclosed the gun purchase on friday while visiting sturm, ruger & co. in new hampshire. he linked guns and isis again while in iowa on saturday.<u+201d> kasich lands endorsement of three n.h. papers - ap: <u+201c>three new hampshire newspapers are endorsing ohio gov. john kasich for president as the republican aspires to a top-tier primary finish there. the nashua telegraph, foster<u+2019>s daily democrat and portsmouth herald all threw their support behind kasich in sunday editions.<u+201d> what if it<u+2019>s a two-man race? - what happens if jeb bush or chris christie can succeed in crippling marco rubio and leaves the republicans with only two choices? one might assume that establishment support would flow to cruz, a lifelong republican and sitting senator. not necessarily, says molly ball in a dispatch from the trail: <u+201c>some republicans who have moved through the stages of grief from denial to bargaining, if not yet acceptance, have begun to suggest that trump might be preferable to cruz. trump is, if you squint, a sort of moderate republican; he<u+2019>s a dealmaker; and surely he<u+2019>s craven enough to reverse his most alienating positions and say what people want to hear if he gets to the general election. cruz, on the other hand, is an ideologue. the scariest prospect of all is that he really means what he says, and might, if elected, take it upon himself to actually upend the establishment<u+2019>s cherished status quo.<u+201d> gop power index: christie fades new jersey gov. chris christie has painted himself a straight-talker since he was elected to the governorship in 2009, and has made it a cornerstone of his presidential campaign<u+2019>s <u+201c>telling it like it is<u+201d> slogan. town hall videos of his early days as governor hit the internet, and people around the country were drawn to this frank, no nonsense guy. when he took on the teacher<u+2019>s unions, and was asked about his own children<u+2019>s private education, he responded, <u+201c>it<u+2019>s none of your business,<u+201d> which resonated with people tired of hearing exhaustive explanations from politicians. but his straight-talk attitude hasn<u+2019>t quite delivered on is message of late. as christie tries to find a path from the middle of the pack in new hampshire to national viability, he<u+2019>s come under increasing scrutiny. and voters are hearing a lot more run-on sentences than they were used to from christie. in the fox business network debate last week, christie claimed that he never supported justice sonya sotomayor<u+2019>s appointment to the supreme court, but his statement at the time reads: <u+201c>i support her appointment to the supreme court and urge the senate to keep politics out of the process and confirm her nomination. qualified appointees should be confirmed and deserve bi-partisan support.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s been the same of gun control. although he has vetoed limits on clip-size and photo ids for gun owners, christie<u+2019>s record on guns is scattered. national review<u+2019>s jim geraghty points out that in a 1993 race for new jersey senate, christie issued a statement asserting that<u+00a0><u+201c>we already have too many firearms in our communities. the issue which has energized me to get into this race is the recent attempt by certain republican legislators to repeal new jersey<u+2019>s ban on assault weapons. in today<u+2019>s society, no one needs a semi-automatic assault weapon.<u+201d> in november 2015, christie told bret baier in an interview for <u+201c>special report<u+201d> that he didn<u+2019>t remember making that statement. on the radar - carly fiorina,<u+00a0>ben carson<u+00a0>and<u+00a0>rand paul [watch fox:<u+00a0>chris<u+00a0>stirewalt<u+00a0>joins <u+201c>the real story with<u+00a0>gretchen carlson<u+201d> in the 2 p.m. et hour with the latest on who<u+2019>s up and who<u+2019>s down in the 2016 power index.] what would you say? -<u+00a0>give us your take on the 2016 power index. we will share the best and brightest with the whole class. send your thoughts to<u+00a0>[email protected] driven by destiny on a day when we remember the legendary figure of martin luther king jr., npr shares the reminiscence of tom houk, king<u+2019>s driver and body man at the peak of the civil rights movement. houck headed to atlanta to join the movement and was surprised at being picked up by dr. king and his wife coretta scott king, with the reverend at the wheel. after lunch that day, she asked houck if he might drive the children to school the following day: <u+201c>[j]ust like that, houck began his stint as the kings' family driver. for nine months, houck drove martin luther king jr. around atlanta, though king liked to drive himself often, too. <u+2018>but he was a terrible driver,<u+2019> houck says. <u+2018>and he turned waok radio in atlanta on full blast.<u+2019> that wasn't the only puzzle presented to houck. there were also the cigarettes. <u+2018>dr. king was a chain smoker, all right? but coretta did not like the cigarettes,<u+2019> houck says. <u+2018>so when we would come back to the house, first thing coretta would do, she would check dr. king's pockets. so he started giving me his cigarettes.<u+2019> in the midst of the struggle, houck found himself a co-conspirator in king<u+2019>s vice. and with good reason: houck idolized the reverend for his virtues.<u+201d> chris stirewalt is digital politics editor for fox news. want fox news first in your inbox every day? sign up here. chris stirewalt joined fox news channel (fnc) in july of 2010 and serves as digital politics editor based in washington, d.c. <u+00a0>additionally, he authors the daily "fox news first" political news note and hosts "power play," a feature video series, on foxnews.com. stirewalt makes frequent appearances on the network, including "the kelly file," "special report with bret baier," and "fox news sunday with chris wallace." <u+00a0>he also provides expert political analysis for fox news coverage of state, congressional and presidential elections.

panicky hillary starts shouting

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

50.0

31.0

8.0

12465.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

869.0

0.0

240.0

0.0

97.0

29.0

13.0

34.0

18.0

15.0

48.0

51.0

86.0

872.0

240.0

97.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

when henry adams wrote in the early 20th century that "politics, as a practice whatever its professions, had always been the systematic organization of hatreds," there was ample reason to take him literally. the world back then was on the verge of a cataclysmic war that would kill 17 million people and help incubate both communism and fascism. adams had come of age in london as the son of the american ambassador under president abraham lincoln, a man who knew all too well how political disputes can turn bloody. and adams' great-grandfather, the second president of the united states, was accused by thomas jefferson's supporters during the famously acrimonious 1800 election of having, among many other unpleasant things, a "hideous hermaphroditical character." so maybe the one positive of the 2016 version of american political hatred is that it probably won't make people work double shifts down at the morgue. but everything else about this repellant contest between the two most reviled major-party nominees in modern history points to an alarming resurgence of that foul and dangerous defect of judgment known as collectivism. when we hear the c word nowadays it's usually in the context of stalin's agricultural five-year plans or the rah-rah slogans on 1930s posters. but there's another, more personal meaning of the term that has dwindled in usage, even while its application to major-party politics seems to ratchet up each cycle. and that is: treating the disparate individuals within any given bloc as sharing a collective set of characteristics, intentions, and pathologies. it's what hillary clinton meant with "basket of deplorables," it's what donald trump has done with "mexican heritage" and its variants, and it's all too often the nightstick that our friends and loved ones grab for when talking about politics in a presidential year. what makes the democratic version of collective antipathy particularly noxious is the fact that it often comes disguised as a treacly appeal to unity. trump "wants to divide us," clinton lamented at the democratic national convention. "we have to heal the divides in our country.<u+2026>and that starts with listening, listening to each other. trying, as best we can, to walk in each other's shoes." unless, of course, you have or work with large amounts of money. "wall street, corporations, and the super-rich are going to start paying their fair share of taxes," clinton thundered later in the same speech. "if companies take tax breaks and then ship jobs overseas, we'll make them pay us back." clinton's vanquished democratic opponent, the democratic socialist bernie sanders, is even more tin-eared about his own hypocrisy. "this election is about which candidate understands the real problems facing this country and has offered real solutions," sanders said in his convention speech. "not just bombast, not just fearmongering, not just name calling and divisiveness." but a few minutes later, sanders engaged in some bombastic fearmongering of his own, bemoaning that "the wealthiest people in america, like the billionaire koch brothers<u+2026>spend hundreds of millions of dollars buying elections and in the process undermine american democracy." (david koch is a trustee of reason foundation, which publishes this magazine.) clinton's most controversial instance of othering during this season came at a september fundraiser in new york, where she said, "to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of trump's supporters into what i call the basket of deplorables. right? the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamophobic<u+2014>you name it.<u+2026>now some of those folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not america." while the irredeemable and un-american twists were new (as was the memorable metaphor), clinton's behind-closed-doors sentiment only mirrored what the democratic nominee has said routinely throughout this dreary campaign. at an october 2015 democratic presidential primary debate, clinton was asked by moderator anderson cooper, "which enemy are you most proud of?" her reply, after some throat-clearing: "probably the republicans." some people laughed, but it wasn't really a joke. when vox editor in chief ezra klein asked clinton nine months later whether she regretted the remark, she said, "not very much," adding: "you know, they say terrible things about me, much worse than anything i've ever said about them. that just seems to be part of the political back and forth now<u+2014>to appeal to your base, to appeal to the ideologues who support you. we have become so divided." do tell. the best that you can say about hillary clinton's collectivism<u+2014>and the democratic habit of mind that accepts and repeats such formulations unblinkingly<u+2014>is that at least the deplorables chose their own status, whether through true bigotry or mere party membership. donald trump's others, by contrast, are often born that way. in june, trump told the wall street journal that district judge gonzalo curiel, who was presiding over a case involving the failed trump university, should have been disqualified by his "mexican heritage." "i'm building a wall," the eventual gop nominee explained. "it's an inherent conflict of interest." in a follow-up interview, face the nation's john dickerson asked trump to clarify what exactly the mexican parents of an indiana-born judge had to do with curiel's adverse rulings in the case. "excuse me, i want to build a wall," trump shot back. "i mean, i don't think it's very confusing.<u+2026>has nothing to do with anything except common sense. you know, we have to stop being so politically correct in this country." gross generalizations and shorthand stereotypes often make sense<u+2014>until they don't. on the playgrounds and in the popular culture of my youth, mexicans were lazy, poles were stupid, and "queers" were people who you'd "smear" on a football field because they were so weak. now, mexicans are uniquely industrious, poles win nobel prizes, and the buffest guy at the gym is probably gay. the same thing donald trump now says about the chinese, the entire political and journalistic class was saying about the japanese in the 1980s. yes, facts on the ground change, but stereotypes often recede when the dominant culture recognizes them as reductionist, shameful, even ridiculous. reverting to that kind of collectivism, assigning negative value indiscriminately across an entire population, feels retrograde in a country so steeped in individualistic ethos. once we start dismissing 20 percent of the population (or 47 percent, as with mitt romney), particularly in a discussion involving politics, we are playing with fire. determinism, when wedded to state power, has produced some of the worst moments in american history. ayn rand's writing on this is hard to top. "like every form of determinism," rand wrote in the virtue of selfishness, "racism invalidates the specific attribute which distinguishes man from all other living species: his rational faculty. racism negates two aspects of man's life: reason and choice, or mind and morality, replacing them with chemical predestination." the problem isn't just racism's malign effects on the recipient. it also has rotting effects on the intellect of the originator: "like every other form of collectivism, racism is a quest for the unearned," rand wrote. "it is a quest for automatic knowledge<u+2014>for an automatic evaluation of men's characters that bypasses the responsibility of exercising rational or moral judgment." american political discourse in 2016 too is about bypassing the responsibility of judgment and trying to bludgeon people into line through insult comedy. here's hoping that more and more of our fellow citizens will refuse to take the politicians' bait. and that hillary clinton starts reading some ayn rand.

the collectivist 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

1.0

25.0

8.0

7823.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

570.0

1.0

0.0

142.0

0.0

64.0

24.0

18.0

21.0

29.0

12.0

22.0

9.0

34.0

51.0

54.0

573.0

143.0

64.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) ben carson spent much of friday aggressively rebutting media reports about his past -- a striking departure from the mellow personality he has displayed on the campaign trail. "there is a desperation on behalf of some to try to find ways to tarnish me because they've been looking through everything, they have been talking to everybody i've ever known, everybody i've ever seen," carson told reporters at a media availability in florida. "'there's got to be a scandal. there's got to be some nurse he's had an affair with. there's got to be something.' they have gotten desperate," carson continued. "next week, it will be my kindergarten teacher who said i peed in my pants. it's ridiculous. but it's ok because i totally expect it." carson's personal narrative -- a centerpiece of his campaign and star power -- has long revolved around his accounts of his violent past and descriptions of the healing powers of his faith. in a story published on thursday, cnn reported that childhood friends of carson were surprised about violent incidents he has described in a book, public speeches and interviews and had no recollection of such events. scott glover and maeve reston spoke with nine friends, classmates and neighbors who grew up with carson, and none had any memory of the anger or violence the candidate has described. friday morning on cnn's "new day," he said the network's reporting of his past was a "bunch of lies." "this is a bunch of lies, that is what it is," carson told alisyn camerota when she asked about the report by glover and reston in which they spoke to people carson grew up with. "this is a bunch of lies attempting to say i'm lying about my history. i think it's pathetic, and basically what the media does is they try to get you distracted." camerota pushed back on carson's argument that the reporters did not talk to people who knew him earlier than high school, but carson rejected that and launched into an aggressive attack on the media. he accused the media of not scrutinizing president barack obama and hillary clinton to the same degree. "the vetting that you all did with president obama doesn't even come close, doesn't even come close to what you guys are trying to do in my case, and you're just going to keep going back, 'he said this 12 years ago' -- it is just garbage," carson said. "give me a break." reston and glover repeatedly approached the carson campaign during their reporting and again before publication of the story. but the campaign staff declined to comment or to assist them in locating classmates or victims of violence who could provide insights about carson's past. on "new day," carson did not explain which aspects of the story he feels are incorrect. cnn's story pointed out that none of the people interviewed challenged the veracity of his accounts, but said they were surprised at them and did not reflect the youth that they knew. friday night, carson told reporters that the piece was a "bold-faced lie." in his autobiography, carson did not explicitly say he applied to the school. "afterward, sgt. hunt introduced me to general (william) westmoreland, and i had dinner with him and the congressional medal winners. later i was offered a full scholarship to west point. i didn't refuse the scholarship outright, but i let them know that a military career wasn't where i saw myself going," carson wrote. carson himself acknowledged in an interview with the new york times that the scholarship offer was "informal." "it was, you know, an informal 'with a record like yours we could easily get you a scholarship to west point,'" he said. armstrong williams, carson's business manager, said earlier in the day that the candidate has "always been clear that he never applied. he gracefully let them know that medicine was his calling." "it's clear that what the politico writer, with what he was trying to gain with the headline, did not substantiate it with his article," williams told cnn's wolf blitzer. politico also reported that west point would have a record of whether he applied in 1969. but west point spokeswoman theresa brinkerhoff told cnn there would be no records about carson's interaction with the school unless he actually enrolled. files on potential cadets from that time would have only been kept three years unless the person became a student, she said. "no matter what at this point, because the records were so many years ago, we wouldn't have anything on him," she said. while an official letter of admission would have come from the adjutant general of the army, who was not westmoreland, she said it was common for top military officials to recruit the best and brightest high school students. and she said she could imagine that the school's lack of tuition -- as a federally funded institution -- could have been communicated or interpreted as a scholarship. "i wouldn't find that odd, that a general would pursue a discussion to kind of talk to him and say, 'do you know what west point would offer you?' and if you're using general terminology to a 17-year-old, i could see how you would call them scholarships. we don't use that terminology, (but) i could see how that could occur," brinkerhoff said. speaking at a gala for the black republican caucus of south florida in palm beach gardens friday night, carson was reflective on the "dirty world" of politics. "a lot of times people say, 'why would someone who has had a wonderful career get involved in the dirty world of politics?' i frequently ask myself that when i wake up in the morning. it is a dirty world," carson said. he did not mention the scrutiny on him during the remainder of the speech, but briefly alluded to how he is more forcefully pushing back now. "a lot of people think that i'm soft because i'm quiet. i think they're starting to find out that i'm not soft. and that i can be loud, particularly when the injustice is being done," he said.

ben carson slams reporters over questions about his past

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

56.0

8.0

5957.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

407.0

1.0

0.0

124.0

0.0

54.0

14.0

8.0

9.0

12.0

8.0

21.0

28.0

34.0

409.0

125.0

54.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

and then there was one. there is an expression on wall street for a stock that just keeps moving up and up, while everybody is scratching their heads trying to figure out what<u+2019>s going on. they put their hands up and say <u+201c>don<u+2019>t fight the tape.<u+201d> it comes from back in the day when there actually was ticker tape, and when wall street wasn<u+2019>t everyone<u+2019>s favorite punching bag. but it helps explain what is going on right now in the mind bending age of donald trump. you can<u+2019>t fight the tape and you can<u+2019>t fight a phenomenon.<u+00a0> donald trump is a phenomenon.<u+00a0> barack obama was a phenomenon.<u+00a0> a phenomenon is a <u+201c>happening<u+201d> or an <u+201c>experience.<u+201d><u+00a0><u+00a0> it doesn<u+2019>t happen much folks, but it<u+2019>s happening now.<u+00a0> so get ready for the ride of a lifetime. the point is all the wise old men and naysayers and chart readers in the world can<u+2019>t stop a political phenomenon when it<u+2019>s pulling out of the trump train station. nobody was going to beat barack obama in 2008.<u+00a0> that<u+2019>s a fact. <u+00a0>it was his moment.<u+00a0><u+00a0> it wasn<u+2019>t that john mccain ran a bad campaign, or picked the wrong vp. it was just that it didn<u+2019>t matter, it was over when it started.<u+00a0><u+00a0> it has to do with understanding your moment,<u+00a0>reading the populace, knowing that they want exactly the opposite of what they<u+2019>ve had in the white house.<u+00a0> they want a charismatic candidate to match what they are feeling and promise to give them exactly the big fat cheeseburger they<u+2019>ve been wanting ever since they went on that awful diet. michelle obama told her husband it was iowa or bust for them.<u+00a0>she knew that if they couldn<u+2019>t win iowa, they couldn<u+2019>t win america, but if they could <u+2013> there would be no stopping them.<u+00a0> she told her husband it was now or never and that she would only do this thing once. even though he was a new senator, she correctly assessed this was their <u+201c>moment<u+201d> and they would not get a redo.<u+00a0>she was absolutely right on. the country was war weary and the handsome young senator promised <u+201c>hope and change.<u+201d><u+00a0> political pendulums swing hard and feed on stark contrast.<u+00a0>he was not a bush and not a clinton.<u+00a0> not at all. in fact, he was barack hussein obama.<u+00a0>he was kennedy-esque, with a young attractive family.<u+00a0> he was bobby kennedy<u+2019>s dream of how the civil rights movement crescendos. he was the man who perfectly matched the mood, and he grabbed it.<u+00a0>that<u+2019>s what it<u+2019>s all about. just ask governor chris christie, who missed his moment. had he run against barack obama in 2012,<u+00a0><u+00a0> he would have won.<u+00a0> the tough talking new jersey governor was getting a ton of attention in 2011. he<u+2019>d shockingly won a blue state governor<u+2019>s race when the odds were stacked against him.<u+00a0>he was <u+201c>telling it like it is<u+201d> to anybody who crossed him.<u+00a0><u+00a0>he shouted down teacher<u+2019>s unions for depriving kids of the education they deserved.<u+00a0> he told firefighters and policeman that the pensions they<u+2019>d been promised would never arrive, if they weren<u+2019>t willing to give back a little to keep the programs solvent. <u+00a0>these youtube hits were going viral, getting coverage. the portly governor with his tie askew was the opposite of the snappily dressed lean and eloquent president, who<u+2019>d lost his shine a bit, four years in. but while gop leaders begged christie to run, he demurred.<u+00a0> he said he wasn<u+2019>t ready.<u+00a0><u+00a0> it wasn<u+2019>t his time. but as it turns out, it was.<u+00a0>and he never got it back. so now we have had 8 years of obamacare and obamanomics.<u+00a0><u+00a0>eight years of promising to end the <u+201c>era of war<u+201d>. still we are mired in rising costs, stunted economic growth and an epic battle with an enemy that is a <u+201c>he who shall not be named.<u+201d> except that everybody knows his name is radical islamist terrorist. in fairness, the president<u+2019>s approval numbers have risen of late to 51 percent,<u+00a0>many are satisfied. however, it may have something to do with the tenor of the sloppy primaries that have given him almost <u+201c>former president<u+201d> nostalgia points already.<u+00a0>still there is an undeniable restlessness in the country.<u+00a0> we see it in the crowds who turn out in droves for bernie and donald. as long as it took for republicans to see,<u+00a0>donald trump<u+00a0>is the perfect storm of message <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> (genius simplicity) and man.<u+00a0>this brash businessman, anti-obama sold his brand brilliantly with his huge success on <u+201c>the apprentice.<u+201d><u+00a0>now reality tv meets politics.<u+00a0> i bet mark burnett wishes he<u+2019>d thought of it. <u+00a0>he was from the beginning the guy we all already knew. love him or hate him, he leapt over the <u+2018>name recognition<u+2019> hurdle like it was a parking curb.<u+00a0>and it didn<u+2019>t even cost him a dime. but surely he would not abide the rigor and tedium of the campaign trail.<u+00a0> what would he do fly his jet all around the country?<u+00a0> yes. <u+00a0>stay at holiday inns in places that don<u+2019>t have trump hotels, um yes. surely this rich guy, wouldn<u+2019>t have a way with voters.<u+00a0> he<u+2019>d rather be in his tower, <u+00a0>as his beautiful wife sips champagne (he doesn<u+2019>t drink), <u+00a0>not out there in flyover state diners and arenas pressing the flesh.<u+00a0>wrong.<u+00a0> he would say scandalous things! <u+00a0>yes. just think of all the tape and tabloid that already existed on this guy? there would be no way he<u+2019>d get away with it. <u+00a0>wrong again. besides, the republicans had the deepest bench they<u+2019>d had in a long time.<u+00a0> superstars.<u+00a0> scott walker, jeb bush, ted cruz, marco rubio, carly fiorina the list went on. and on, actually. it even spilled across two debate stages, there were so many bright and talented options.<u+00a0> <u+00a0>all they had to do was nominate the most conservative, electable one, as bill buckley had instructed. (see mitt romney, john mccain, bob dole). <u+00a0>and they must remember as ronald reagan warned, no shooting inside the tent guys.<u+00a0> well, without apologies to buckley or reagan, <u+00a0>the guy who beat them all was not your textbook conservative to be sure and he shot up the tent until it fell down on top of them, as he slipped out the back flap and dusted off his suit. here<u+2019>s the thing. his message was right on for his audience.<u+00a0> he talked to them about what he felt was wrong with the country and how he wanted to fix it. too many illegals stealing your jobs and committing crimes?<u+00a0> build a wall.<u+00a0>your company went under?<u+00a0> we will get you a better job!<u+00a0> sick of everything being so damned pc?<u+00a0>me too! he said.<u+00a0> don<u+2019>t worry, we are going to win again.<u+00a0> you<u+2019>ll be so tired of winning. <u+00a0>that sounds awesome, they cried!<u+00a0> and then -- <u+00a0>to top it all off -- he made them laugh. <u+00a0>he made them howl actually, at the off-color jokes and <u+201c>craps<u+201d> and <u+201c>hells<u+201d> he sprinkled in with his happy warrior rants. the pundits scoffed.<u+00a0> <u+00a0>it<u+2019>ll be over by summer<u+2026> make that fall<u+2026> the super bowl?<u+00a0>the conventions?<u+00a0> forget it guys. trump<u+2019>s son don jr. nailed it. he said my dad is a <u+201c>blue-collar billionaire<u+201d> <u+201c>a common sense conservative,<u+201d> none of this highfalutin panel jibber jabber.<u+00a0> gimme trump,<u+00a0>the gop voters said. the guy gets me. donald has wanted this shot at the white house since the early <u+2018>90<u+2019>s when he took out full page ads and wrote letters railing against japan and how they were eating our lunch and it needed to stop.<u+00a0> now his handsome, well-educated and well-liked kids are taking the weight off him at the office, and he knows,<u+00a0>this is his time. it<u+2019>s now or never.<u+00a0>and one other thing. <u+00a0>don<u+2019>t look for mr. trump to get all presidential on you any time soon.<u+00a0> why would he?<u+00a0> as any good businessman knows, if it ain<u+2019>t broke, don<u+2019>t fix it. and like he says, it<u+2019>s too soon for that. but can he seal the deal? buckle your seat belts, america.<u+00a0> it<u+2019>s going to be a bumpy ride. martha maccallum currently serves as the co-anchor of "america's newsroom" alongside bill hemmer (weekdays 9-11am/et). she joined fox news channel (fnc) in january 2004. click here for more information on martha maccallum.

martha maccallum: it's donald trump's moment. and this is how we got here, america

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

82.0

8.0

7674.0

0.0

4.0

6.0

0.0

469.0

2.0

0.0

212.0

1.0

0.0

101.0

15.0

25.0

16.0

20.0

19.0

22.0

14.0

24.0

40.0

53.0

475.0

214.0

102.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

america's constitutional democracy is going to collapse. some day <u+2014> not tomorrow, not next year, but probably sometime before runaway climate change forces us to seek a new life in outer-space colonies <u+2014> there is going to be a collapse of the legal and political order and its replacement by something else. if we're lucky, it won't be violent. if we're very lucky, it will lead us to tackle the underlying problems and result in a better, more robust, political system. if we're less lucky, well, then, something worse will happen. very few people agree with me about this, of course. when i say it, people generally think that i'm kidding. america is the richest, most successful country on earth. the basic structure of its government has survived contested elections and great depressions and civil rights movements and world wars and terrorist attacks and global pandemics. people figure that whatever political problems it might have will prove transient <u+2014> just as happened before. but voiced in another register, my outlandish thesis is actually the conventional wisdom in the united states. back when george w. bush was president and i was working at a liberal magazine, there was a very serious discussion in an editorial meeting about the fact that the united states was now exhibiting 11 of the 13 telltale signs of a fascist dictatorship. the idea that bush was shredding the constitution and trampling on congressional prerogatives was commonplace. when obama took office, the partisan valence of the complaints shifted, but their basic tenor didn't. conservative pundits <u+2014> not the craziest, zaniest ones on talk radio, but the most serious and well-regarded <u+2014> compare obama's immigration moves to the actions of a latin-american military dictator. in the center, of course, it's an article of faith that when right and left talk like this they're simply both wrong. these are nothing but the overheated squeals of partisans and ideologues. at the same time, when the center isn't complaining about the excessively vociferous complaints of the out-party of the day, it tends to be in full-blown panic about the state of american politics. and yet despite the popularity of alarmist rhetoric, few people act like they're actually alarmed. accusations that barack obama or john boehner or any other individual politician is failing as a leader are flung, and then abandoned when the next issue arises. in practice, the feeling seems to be that salvation is just one election away. hillary clinton even told kara swisherthat her agenda as a presidential candidate would be to end partisan gridlock. it's not going to work. the breakdown of american constitutional democracy is a contrarian view. but it's nothing more than the view that rather than everyone being wrong about the state of american politics, maybe everyone is right. maybe bush and obama are dangerously exceeding norms of executive authority. maybe legislative compromise really has broken down in an alarming way. and maybe the reason these complaints persist across different administrations and congresses led by members of different parties is that american politics is breaking down. to understand the looming crisis in american politics, it's useful to think about germany, japan, italy, and austria. these are countries that were defeated by american military forces during the second world war and given constitutions written by local leaders operating in close collaboration with occupation authorities. it's striking that even though the us constitution is treated as a sacred text in america's political culture, we did not push any of these countries to adopt our basic framework of government. in a 1990 essay, the late yale political scientist juan linz observed that "aside from the united states, only chile has managed a century and a half of relatively undisturbed constitutional continuity under presidential government <u+2014> but chilean democracy broke down in the 1970s." the exact reasons for why are disputed among scholars <u+2014> in part because you can't just randomly assign different governments to people. one issue here is that american-style systems are much more common in the western hemisphere and parliamentary ones are more common elsewhere. latin-american countries have experienced many episodes of democratic breakdown, so distinguishing latin-american cultural attributes from institutional characteristics is difficult. still, linz offered several reasons why presidential systems are so prone to crisis. one particularly important one is the nature of the checks and balances system. since both the president and the congress are directly elected by the people, they can both claim to speak for the people. when they have a serious disagreement, according to linz, "there is no democratic principle on the basis of which it can be resolved." the constitution offers no help in these cases, he wrote: "the mechanisms the constitution might provide are likely to prove too complicated and aridly legalistic to be of much force in the eyes of the electorate." in a parliamentary system, deadlocks get resolved. a prime minister who lacks the backing of a parliamentary majority is replaced by a new one who has it. if no such majority can be found, a new election is held and the new parliament picks a leader. it can get a little messy for a period of weeks, but there's simply no possibility of a years-long spell in which the legislative and executive branches glare at each other unproductively. but within a presidential system, gridlock leads to a constitutional trainwreck with no resolution. the united states's recent government shutdowns and<u+00a0>executive action on immigration are small examples of the kind of dynamic that's led to coups and putsches abroad. there was, of course, the american exception to the problems of the checks-and-balances system. linz observed on this score: "the uniquely diffuse character of american political parties <u+2014> which, ironically, exasperates many american political scientists and leads them to call for responsible, ideologically disciplined parties <u+2014> has something to do with it." for much of american history, in other words, us political parties have been relatively un-ideological and un-disciplined. they are named after vague ideas rather than specific ideologies, and neither presidents nor legislative leaders can compel back-bench members to vote with them. this has often been bemoaned (famously, a 1950 report by the american political science association called for a more rigorous party system) as the source of problems. it's also, according to linz, helped avert the kind of zero-sum conflicts that have torn other structurally similar democracies apart. but that diffuse party structure is also a thing of the past. american politics is much more polarized today than it was 25 or 50 years ago. but not everyone buys the theory that today's era of party polarization spells big trouble. political scientist jonathan bernstein argues that it's "not some sort of freakish un-american phenomenon." the real exception, bernstein says, the middle of the twentieth century, when the parties weren't polarized. polarization is the norm, he says, and he's right. a long line of research starting with keith poole and howard rosenthal, political scientists at the university of georgia and new york university respectively, records all congressional votes and then analyzes the types of political coalitions that emerge. this system, known as dw-nominate, lets you measure the degree of party polarization precisely. when democrats all vote one way and republicans all vote the other way, politics is highly polarized. when votes frequently scramble the parties, it is less polarized. what this research shows is that the steady march toward polarization over the past generation is a return to a situation that existed during an earlier period. the story here, like so much in american politics, is race. southern democrats had a range of views on non-racial issues but monolithically supported white supremacy and held together in the democratic party to maximize their leverage in congress. the result was that the democratic party included northern liberals who supported civil rights and southern conservatives who supported segregation. so polarization temporarily went away in congress. but as segregation receded as an issue in american politics, the parties slowly but surely sorted themselves by ideology, and so today, there is no republican in congress more liberal than the most conservative democrat, or vice-versa. american politics has re-polarized. according to bernstein, this change may be discomfiting but it's nothing to worry about. american politics has been polarized before and it was fine. what this story of reversion misses is the crucial role of ideology. polarization and ideology are clearly related concepts, but simply counting congressional votes doesn't really tell us what those votes were about. georgetown university professor hans noel greatly improved our understanding of the relationship between the two by extending the dw-nominate methodology to people who aren't elected officials. for his book political parties and political ideologies in america, noel constructs ideological space scores for writers and political pundits <u+2014> people who address the same issues as elected officials but who are not serving on capitol hill. what he found is that while gilded age members of congress voted in a highly partisan way, their voting didn't reflect any polarization of ideas evident in broader american society. as charles calhoun, a leading scholar of gilded age politics has written, the main concern of actual members of congress was not policy, but "patronage power, the privilege of placing one's political friends and supporters in in subordinate offices." in other words, a member of congress would get to distribute federal jobs and contracts to his supporters and in exchange the beneficiaries of his patronage would support his party's ticket at all levels. for this reason, the obscure-sounding job of customs collector of the port of new york was important enough in the 1870s that chester a. arthur leapt from it to the vice presidency. the first real filibuster was held over whig efforts to assign a printing contract to friendly companies. even though party discipline was strict in these days, it was not really about much beyond who held the spoils. over the course of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s the rise of progressive and liberal ideology and the formation of a conservative ideology to counter it upended this system. so much so that by the 1970s it had become common to observe that american political parties were in decline. university of california irvine political scientist martin wattenberg achieved the apogee of this literature with his 1985 classic the decline of political parties in america (since updated in five subsequent editions), citing the waning influence of party professionals, the rise of single-issue pressure groups, and an attendant fall in voter turnout. but as historian sam rosenfeld writes, under-the-hood changes in the process for selecting presidential nominees and congressional leaders "ultimately helped to create a newly receptive institutional setting for issue-based activism within the parties," leading to the parties' reconstitution around modern ideological lines. today's partisan polarization, in other words, is not the same as its gilded age predecessor. the old polarization was about control over jobs and money <u+2014> the kind of thing where split-the-difference compromises are easiest. that polarization was eventually undermined by a new politics built around principles. for decades, politicians found themselves cross-pressured between their commitments to a national party network and to various ideological causes. today, however, politicians are no longer cross-pressured. we have strong gilded age-style parties, but organized around questions of principle rather than questions of patronage. you can take this theory too far, of course. there have been moments in american life where questions of principle sharply split american politics. we had ideological parties (or at least one) in the 1850s when the anti-slavery republican party rose to the fore. but the example is not enormously encouraging <u+2014> the constitutional process collapsed and we had four years of civil war, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and then, even after a union victory, white supremacy was re-established in the south through a two-decade campaign of terrorism. not all breakdowns of constitutional processes are as violent as the american civil war. for a less catastrophic, more realistic view of the kind of thing that could happen here, it's useful to look to some less-familiar but more-recent events in honduras. back in late 2008, left-wing president manuel zelaya was locked in persistent conflict with an opposition-controlled congress. with neither side able to prevail within the context of the existing system, zelaya decided he wanted to add a fourth question to the upcoming november 2009 election. in addition to voting for president, congress, and municipal offices, zelaya would ask the voters whether they wanted to hold a constituent assembly to re-write the constitution <u+2014> presumably to allow him to run for re-election. unfortunately for zelaya, honduras' existing constitution made no provision for re-writing the constitution by plebiscite. consequently, in march 2009, zelaya determined that the solution was to hold another plebiscite. on june 28, hondurans would go to the polls to vote in a non-binding referendum on whether the constitutional question should be added to the november ballot. this, he hoped, would give him the democratic legitimacy needed to go forward with the constitutional revision. zelaya's opponents in congress, evidently concerned that the president would win, sued. they won a court case enjoining the president against holding the referendum. zelaya pressed ahead regardless. in honduras, the military typically assists with election logistics, so zelaya ordered the army to begin distributing ballots. general romeo v<u+00e1>squez vel<u+00e1>squez, the chief the honduran military, refused to comply. on may 24, zelaya fired the general. several other commanders quit in solidarity. the supreme court ruled that the dismissal was unconstitutional. throughout june, the constitutional process essentially broke down with protests and counter-protests dominating the capital. on june 28, the military deposed zelaya in a coup, retroactively justified by a back-dated supreme court ruling. roberto micheletti, the president of the national congress, was installed in his stead. the military quickly handed power over to a new group of civilians. the coup was legitimated by the national congress and the supreme court. and its perpetrators argued with some justification that there was no constitutional alternative. zelaya was trying to circumvent the rules, so they had no choice but to circumvent them too in response. the deadlock was ultimately resolved by force rather than legal procedure. zelaya did not have enough support to amend the constitution through the existing process, and honduras' constitutional system created no legal mechanism for impeachment of a president. the supreme court arbitrarily ruled that zelaya's effort to circumvent the amendment process via referendum was illegal, while congress' effort to circumvent the impeachment process was fine. there were quite a few injuries as protesters clashed with security forces, but no massive bloodshed. honduras' coup is worth paying attention to not because the exact same scenario is likely to play out in the united states, but because it reveals how genuinely difficult it is to maintain constitutional politics in a presidential system. presidents feel themselves to be accountable for steering the nation. and all the evidence indicates that the public and the media do in fact hold presidents broadly accountable for national outcomes. throughout the united states' 2012 presidential campaign, for example, it was universally assumed that good news for the american economy (or for america more broadly) would redound to barack obama's benefit even though control of policymaking was split between the white house and a gop-dominated congress. as obama<u+00a0>put it in a november 2014 press conference, "people are going to ask for greater accountability and more responsibility from me than from anybody else in this town." the problem is the president is not only held accountable for things that are in part outside his ability to control (gas prices, ebola, or shark attacks) but for things that are actually under the control of his political adversaries. "i'm the guy who's elected by everybody," concluded obama, "and they want me to push hard to close some of these divisions, break through some of the gridlock, and get stuff done." if you're going to be held accountable for outcomes, in other words, then you'd better act. in a parliamentary system, this is simply democratic accountability in action. a head of government who strongly believes the nation needs actions the legislature won't approve can dissolve parliament and hold a new election to decide the issue. in honduras' presidential system, the very act of trying to schedule a vote to resolve the deadlock was itself unconstitutional. the united states, of course, is<u+00a0> a long way from a coup. what we are witnessing instead is a rise in what georgetown university professor mark tushnet labeled "constitutional hardball" in a 2004 article. constitutional hardball describes legal and political moves "that are without much question within the bounds of existing constitutional doctrine and practice but that are nonetheless in some tension with existing pre-constitutional understanding." in other words, moves that do not violate the letter of the law, but do trample on our conventional understanding of how it is supposed to work. tushnet's article is vital reading today in part because the different partisan context in which it was written can help shock people out of their entrenched positions. his lead example is from the george w. bush administration, when liberals were concerned about the president taking power away from congress. tushnet describes the "strained" argument offered by republican senators in 2005 that democratic party filibusters of bush's judicial nominees violated the constitution. at the time, of course, democrats found the view that republicans might simply ban the use of filibusters for this purpose outrageous. "the filibuster serves as a check on power," said harry reid, "that preserves our limited government." joe biden called the republicans' attempt to end the fillibuster "an example of the arrogance of power." but ultimately the hardball tactic for ending filibusters was used by democrats in 2013 to halt republican obstruction of obama's nominees. republicans, reid said, "have done everything they can to deny the fact that obama had been elected and then reelected." he argued he had no choice but to abandon a principle that just a few years ago he said was crucial to preserving american liberty. meanwhile, republicans who had supported the 2005 effort to weaken the filibuster executed a perfect flip-flop in the other direction. tushnet's other example from the mid-2000s <u+2014> texas' decision to redraw congressional district boundaries to advantage republicans between censuses <u+2014> seems almost adorably quaint by the standards of the obama era. from its very first months, obama's presidency has been marked by essentially nothing but constitutional hardball. during the bush years, democratic senators sporadically employed a variety of unusual delaying tactics to stymie his agenda. in 2009, mitch mcconnell and senate republicans retaliated by using tons of them, constantly. suddenly filibustering went from something a senate minority could do to something it did on pretty much all motions. george washington university congressional scholar sarah binder<u+00a0>observes that "leaders in the 1970s rarely felt compelled to file for cloture [to break filibusters], averaging fewer than one per month in some years" while in recent years reid has filed over once per week. as jim manley, a former aide to the democratic senate leadership, explained to the atlantic, the obstruction not only prevented many of obama's more controversial measures from becoming law; it also drastically altered the process of even routine governance. as a political strategy, mcconnell's tactics were vindicated by the 2010 midterms, which showed that making the president look partisan, clumsy, and inept was a winning strategy. republicans in congress subsequently moved beyond unusual acts of obstruction to an unprecedented use of the statutory debt ceiling into a vehicle for policymaking. traditionally a bit of oddball american political theater immortalized in a funny west wing scene, in 2011 the gop threatened to provoke an unfathomable financial and constitutional crisis unless the obama administration agreed to sweeping spending cuts. again, there was nothing illegal about what republicans in congress did here <u+2014> it was just, in its intent and its scope, unprecedented. and it's fairly clear that these actions, while consistent with republican party electoral success, have not exactly produced a well-respected legislature. congressional approval ratings are so low <u+2014> and have been for so long <u+2014> that it's become a subject of pollster humor. in 2013, public policy polling found that congress was less popular than genghis khan, traffic jams, cockroaches, or nickelback. in a less joking spirit, gallup finds that the voters have less confidence in congress than any other american institution, including big business, organized labor, banks, or television news. as relations with congress have worsened, the obama administration has set about expanding executive authority over domestic policy to match bush-era unilateralism in the national security domain. this came to the fore most publicly with obama's decision to protect millions of unauthorized migrants from deportation without congressional agreement. as vox's andrew prokop has argued, the pattern is actually much broader. obama's handling of k-12 education policy is in some ways an even more paradigmatic example of constitutional hardball. the george w. bush-era education law no child left behind laid out penalties for state education systems that didn't meet certain, rather unrealistic, targets. the law's authors assumed that when the law came up for reauthorization, the targets would be changed. in case congress didn't act in time, the secretary of education also had the authority to issue waivers of the penalties. since congress no longer really functions, there has been no reauthorization of the law. so the obama administration has issued waivers <u+2014> but only to states that implement policy changes ordered by the department of education. university of chicago political scientist william howell told prokop this was a "new frontier" for executive policymaking. yale law school's bruce ackerman says obama used "a waiver provision for modest experiments and transformed it into a platform for the redesign of the statute." obama's actions are clearly legal <u+2014> but they are just as clearly a decision to creatively exploit the letter of the law to vastly expand the scope of executive power over the law. those who like these actions on their merits comfort themselves with the thought that these uses of executive power are pretty clearly allowed by the terms of the existing laws. this is true as far as it goes. but it's also the case that obama (or some future president) could have his political opponents murdered on the streets of washington and then issue pardons to the perpetrators. this would be considerably more legal than a zelaya-style effort to use a plebiscite to circumvent congressional obstruction <u+2014> just a lot more morally outrageous. in either case, however, the practical issue would be not so much what is legal, but what people, including the people with guns, would actually tolerate. america's escalating game of constitutional hardball isn't caused by personal idiosyncratic failings of individual people. obama has made his share of mistakes, but the fundamental causes of hardball politics are structural, not personal. personality-minded journalists often argue that a warmer executive would do a better job of building bridges to congress. but as dartmouth's brendan nyhan points out, "bill clinton's more successful outreach to his opponents didn't keep him from getting impeached. likewise, george w. bush was more gregarious than obama, but it didn't make him any more popular among democrats once the post-9/11 glow had worn off." there's a reason for this, and it gets to the core of who really runs american politics. in a democratic society, elected officials are most directly accountable to the people who support them. and the people who support them are different than the people who don't care enough about politics to pay much attention, or the people who support the other side. they are more ideological, more partisan, and they want to see the policies they support passed into law. a leader who abandons his core supporters because what they want him to do won't be popular with most voters is likely, in modern american politics, to be destroyed in the next primary election. the amateur ideological activists who eroded the power of the party professionals in the 1970s are now running the show. while gilded age activists traded support for patronage jobs, modern-day activists demand policy results in exchange for support. presidents need to do everything within their legal ability to deliver the results that their supporters expect, and their opponents in congress need to do everything possible to stop them. at one point, republican congressional leaders were highly amenable to passing an immigration reform bill and the obama administration insisted it had no means of circumventing the legislative process. but under pressure from their respective bases, republicans found it impossible to compromise and obama decided he had better find a way to go around congress. it is true that the mass public is not nearly as ideological as members of congress. but the mass public is not necessarily active in democratic politics, either. emory's alan abramowitz finds that "the american public has become more consistent and polarized in its policy preferences over the past several decades." he also writes that "this increase in consistency and polarization has been concentrated among the most politically engaged citizens." this rise in ideological activism has a number of genuinely positive impacts. it makes politics less corrupt. the least-polarized state legislatures in america are in places like rhode island and louisiana, bastions of<u+00a0>corruption rather than good government. it's not a coincidence that the tea party surge led to the end of earmarked appropriations. but it heightened executive-legislative conflict and leads to what linz termed "the zero-sum character of presidential elections." looking back at bush's election in 2000, one of the most remarkable things is how little social disorder there was. the american public wanted al gore to be president, but a combination of the electoral college rules, poor ballot design in palm beach county, and an adverse supreme court ruling, put bush in office. the general presumption among elites at the time was that democrats should accept this with good manners, and bush would respond to the weak mandate with moderate, consensus-oriented governance. this was not in the cards. not because of bush's personal qualities (if anything, the bush family and its circle are standard-bearers for the cause of relative moderation in the gop), but because the era of the "partisan presidency" demands that the president try to implement the party's agenda, regardless of circumstances. that's how we got drastic tax cuts in 2001. if the bush years shattered the illusion that there's no difference between the parties, the obama years underscore how much control of the white house matters in an era of gridlock. the broadly worded clean air act, whose relevant provisions passed in 1970, has allowed obama to be one of the most consequential environmental regulators of all time <u+2014> even though he hasn't been able to pass a major new environmental bill. he's deployed executive discretion over immigration enforcement on an unprecedented scale. and he's left a legacy that could be rapidly reversed. a future republican administration could not only turn back these executive actions, but substantially erode the affordable care act. the lessons of the 2000 and 2008 elections make it unnerving to imagine a bush-gore style recount occurring in 2015's political atmosphere. the stakes of presidential elections are sky-high. and the constitutional system provides no means for a compromise solution. there can be only one president. and once he's in office he has little reason to show restraint in the ambitions of the legislative <u+2014> or non-legislative <u+2014> agenda he pursues. in the event of another disputed election, it would be natural for both sides to push for victory with every legal or extra-legal means at their disposal. indeed, we ought to consider possibilities more disastrous than a repeat of the 2000 vote. what if a disputed presidential election coincided with a supreme court vacancy? what if the simultaneous deaths of the president and vice president brought to power a house speaker from the opposite party? what if neither party secured a majority of electoral votes and a presidential election wound up being decided by a vote of the lame duck house of representatives? what if highly partisan state legislatures start using their constitutional authority to rig the presidential contest? a system of undisciplined or non-ideological political parties has many flaws, but it is at least robust to a variety of shocks. our current party alignment makes for a much more brittle situation, in which one of any number of crises where democratic norms and constitutional procedures diverge could bring us to a state of emergency. the idea that america's constitutional system might be fundamentally flawed cuts deeply against the grain of our political culture. but the reality is that despite its durability, it has rarely functioned well by the standards of a modern democracy. the party system of the gilded age operated through systematic corruption. the less polarized era that followed was built on the systematic disenfranchisement of african-americans. the newer system of more ideological politics has solved those problems and seems in many ways more attractive. but over the past 25 years, it's set america on a course of paralysis and crisis <u+2014> government shutdowns, impeachment, debt ceiling crises, and constitutional hardball. voters, understandably, are increasingly dissatisfied with the results and confidence in american institutions has been generally low and falling. but rather than leading to change, the dissatisfaction has tended to yield wild electoral swings that exacerbate the sense of permanent crisis. as dysfunctional as american government may seem today, we've actually been lucky. no other presidential system has gone as long as ours without a major breakdown of the constitutional order. but the factors underlying that stability <u+2014> first non-ideological parties and then non-disciplined ones <u+2014> are gone. and it's worth considering the possibility that with them, so too has gone the american exception to the rule of presidential breakdown. if we seem to be unsustainably lurching from crisis to crisis, it's because we are unsustainably lurching from crisis to crisis. the breakdown may not be next year or even in the next five years, but over the next 20 or 30 years, will we really be able to resolve every one of these high-stakes showdowns without making any major mistakes? do you really trust congress that much? the best we can hope for is that when the crisis does come, americans will have the wisdom to do for ourselves what we did in the past for germany and japan and put a better system in place.

american democracy is doomed

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

28.0

8.0

32509.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

2374.0

0.0

570.0

0.0

355.0

46.0

53.0

22.0

55.0

39.0

48.0

34.0

104.0

111.0

161.0

2378.0

570.0

355.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president<u+00a0>barack obama<u+00a0>held a meeting with six illegal immigrants in the<u+00a0>oval office wednesday, vowing to veto any legislation that would roll back his executive actions on immigration.

obama hosts <u+2018>dreamers,<u+2019> vows to block any rollback of immigration actions

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

73.0

8.0

185.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

19.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

24.0

3.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump has a gift for managing news cycles. if his bloated head contains a spark of genius, this is where it shines. trump understood as far back as 2013 what it would take to execute a political con of this scale: work the media, create controversy, become an impossible-to-ignore circus. this is what trump meant when he said <u+201c>it<u+2019>s about the power of the mass audience.<u+201d> he<u+2019>s approached his campaign in the same way a producer would approach a reality tv show. it<u+2019>s about spectacle, really. <u+201c>they will never take the lights off of me,<u+201d> trump told a group of incredulous republicans who didn<u+2019>t believe he could run for president without paid advertising. he was obviously correct: we haven<u+2019>t taken the lights off of him, and doing so is unthinkable at this point, given his position in the race. on wednesday, nate silver of fivethirtyeight.com dove a little deeper into the trump coverage, trying to understand how this happened. <u+201c>trump has been able to disrupt the news pretty much any time he wants,<u+201d> silver wrote, <u+201c>whether by being newsworthy, offensive, salacious or entertaining. the media has almost always played along.<u+201d> of course, the press has played along <u+2013> it can<u+2019>t do otherwise. a corporatized media has turned citizens into consumers, and politicians into products. trump understands this and he acts accordingly <u+2013> it<u+2019>s really quite simple. his whole career has been about brand management, which is now all the training a national politician needs. trump<u+2019>s media-centric strategy has been wildly successful. he<u+2019>s received what amounts to $1.9 billion in tv coverage despite having spent only $10 million on paid advertising. <u+201c>by contrast,<u+201d> silver notes, <u+201c>trump<u+2019>s republican rivals combined have received slightly less than $1.2 billion worth of television coverage, meaning that trump has been the subject of the clear majority (62 percent) of candidate-focused tv coverage.<u+201d> silver<u+2019>s broader conclusion is that trump has <u+201c>hacked the system,<u+201d> which is to say he<u+2019>s exploited a broken process with a perverse incentive structure. he writes: <u+201c>put another way, trump has hacked the system and exposed the weaknesses in american political institutions. he<u+2019>s uncovered profound flaws in the republican party. he<u+2019>s demonstrated that third-rail issues like racism and nationalism can still be a potent political force. he<u+2019>s exploited the media<u+2019>s goodwill and taken advantage of the lack of trust the american public has in journalism. trump may go away <u+2013> he<u+2019>s not assured of winning the gop nomination, and he<u+2019>ll be an underdog in november if he does <u+2013> but the problems he<u+2019>s exposed were years in the making, and they<u+2019>ll take years to sort out.<u+201d> all of this is undoubtedly true. our political institutions have failed us. the system is so corrupt, so inert, that it<u+2019>s become more or less unresponsive to the general will. the republican party, for its part, has done nothing but stir the pot. by becoming a party of anti-government nihilists, they<u+2019>ve conditioned voters to despise the state. <u+201c>washington<u+201d> has become a euphemism for everything wrong. but that<u+2019>s only because republicans sought to break the government (via brinkmanship and obstructionism) in order to reproach the democrats for mismanaging it. the result is a large bloc of voters who literally prefer anyone other than a politician <u+2013> experience and credentials be damned! thus it<u+2019>s no surprise trump has inched his way to the top of the gop. everything about our political climate incentivizes his approach. the balkanized media guarantees people will continue to get the information they want, not the information they need, which further undermines trust in the institution. and the so-called mainstream media will persist in covering the circus, because that<u+2019>s their business. it<u+2019>s about shareholders and ratings <u+2013> and nothing besides. trump has indeed exposed these problems. what silver doesn<u+2019>t say, but certainly implies, is that this is only the beginning. others will follow trump. the problems he<u+2019>s laid bare aren<u+2019>t going away. so long as the system remains unchanged, a donald trump or a sarah palin or a herman cain will inevitably emerge. trump is a force of nature, and his blend of amorality and shamelessness is rare, but future hucksters will learn from his campaign. we may see the end of trump in november, but we haven<u+2019>t seen the end of the crisis he personifies.

this is only the beginning: nate silver explains how donald trump has <u+201c>hacked the system<u+201d> and created a roadmap for future political con men

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

140.0

8.0

4370.0

0.0

1.0

9.0

0.0

323.0

3.0

0.0

102.0

1.0

0.0

44.0

9.0

15.0

9.0

7.0

10.0

4.0

6.0

21.0

25.0

33.0

332.0

105.0

45.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in the sharpest official mexican government comments to date on republican front-runner donald trump, the foreign minister called trump<u+2019>s policies and comments <u+201c>ignorant and racist<u+201d> and his proposed wall on the u.s.-mexico border <u+201c>absurd.<u+201d> <u+201c>when an apple<u+2019>s red, it is red. when you say ignorant things, you<u+2019>re ignorant,<u+201d> said foreign affairs secretary claudia ruiz massieu, mexico<u+2019>s top diplomat. <u+201c>it is impossible to think of a 2,000-mile border being walled off and trade between our two countries stopped,<u+201d> ruiz massieu said. <u+201c>it is impractical, inefficient, wrong and, frankly, it is not an intelligent thing to do.<u+201d> as for mexico paying for trump<u+2019>s proposed wall, she said: <u+201c>it is not a proposition we would even consider. it is an impossible proposition.<u+201d> ruiz massieu spoke friday evening, capping a week in which two former mexican presidents told the washington post that trump<u+2019>s policies and growing popularity are poisoning mexican views of the united states. from the start of his campaign, republican presidential candidate donald trump has been promising that he will build a wall along the u.s.-mexico border and that mexico will pay for it. not if these men have anything to say about it. (sarah parnass/the washington post) former presidents vicente fox and his successor, felipe calder<u+00f3>n, who ran mexico from 2000 to 2012, have said the fact that trump is winning republican primaries and is a front-runner for the white house is damaging the image of the united states abroad. [fox and calder<u+00f3>n take aim at trump and his <u+2018>stupid wall<u+2019>] trump<u+2019>s comments, and how well they are playing with voters, are especially alarming in this country, which does more than $500<u+00a0>billion worth of trade each year with the united states and buys more u.s. goods than china and japan combined. trump<u+2019>s call for deporting undocumented immigrants and building a massive wall along the length of the mexican border is a central pillar of his campaign. millions of mexicans see it as insulting and racist and say he has specifically targeted mexicans by saying mexico is sending its worst citizens to the united states, including <u+201c>criminals<u+201d> and <u+201c>rapists.<u+201d> mexican officials see trump<u+2019>s calls for tariffs on cars made in mexico and his giant wall as a threat to the thriving trade that millions of jobs in both countries depend on. fox used an expletive rarely heard from a politician in public to reject the idea of mexico paying for trump<u+2019>s wall this week. then trump demanded fox apologize for his language. on friday, la jornada, a leading left-leaning newspaper, published a cartoon of a furious-looking trump shouting: <u+201c>i demand respect. only i can use bad manners and bad words!<u+201d> trump has become a popular target of scorn in mexico, where he has been trashed in folk songs and in computer games in which players get to fling shoes, cakes and tomatoes at him. mexican president enrique pe<u+00f1>a nieto, who was elected to a six-year term in 2012, has largely avoided responding to trump directly, but he said in a meeting this week with vice president biden in mexico city that building walls <u+201c>only means isolating oneself and ending up alone.<u+201d> biden was in mexico for high-level economic talks, which also included the u.s. secretaries of commerce, interior, transportation and energy, and the deputy secretary of homeland security. biden<u+2019>s comments this week were top news when he told pe<u+00f1>a nieto that trump<u+2019>s views about mexico were <u+201c>the exact opposite<u+201d> of the position of the <u+201c>majority of the american people.<u+201d> <u+201c>i feel almost obliged to apologize for some of what my political colleagues have said about mexico,<u+201d> biden said. <u+201c>the main message i wanted to say to you is that i understand that you can<u+2019>t poison the well and, at the same time, work out a real estate arrangement to buy the well,<u+201d> biden said. [trump<u+2019>s border wall price tag would be a huge portion of the mexican economy] in an interview late friday evening in her office, ruiz massieu, said trump does not represent the views of most americans. <u+201c>it sounds ignorant and racist because it is,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>we are pretty sure that<u+2019>s not the way most americans feel. it was a country that was founded on tolerance, on openness, on taking in people from other places and enriching a society by embracing diversity. that<u+2019>s the way american values are.<u+201d> she said that saying the mexican american community does not contribute to the united states<u+2019> well-being and growth is <u+201c>ignorant<u+201d> and <u+201c>ignores the facts.<u+201d> she added: <u+201c>history has also shown that when anti-immigrant rhetoric turns into policy or laws, it is a bad idea. you lose money, you lose people, you lose trust.<u+201d> she said the mexican government would respond to trump<u+2019>s rise by urging mexican americans in the united states to <u+201c>participate and become heard in the electoral process, which is not over yet.<u+201d> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m optimistic that people will stand up for themselves and vote in accordance to their values and their views,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>for mexicans and many people around the world, what this has brought to light is that you have to continuously work to remind everyone that it is better to work together,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>it is better to build bridges than to build walls.<u+201d>

mexico<u+2019>s top diplomat calls trump<u+2019>s policies <u+2018>ignorant and racist<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

66.0

8.0

5209.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

431.0

0.0

84.0

0.0

43.0

13.0

16.0

10.0

9.0

11.0

7.0

31.0

29.0

36.0

438.0

84.0

43.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

negotiators have been hesitant to publicly share details, but there is obvious discord between iranians and the u.s. on iran's demand for sanctions relief. iranians have long insisted that a final agreement, to be reached by june 30, should trigger an instant lifting of the broad sanctions imposed by the u.s., the european union, and the united nations. american negotiators have argued that sanctions relief must occur gradually, as iran demonstrates compliance with terms of the nuclear agreement. both sides are facing tremendous pressure back home to avoid compromising. sanctions have crippled iran<u+2019>s economy, which is heavily dependent on oil exports. perhaps more importantly, iranians see the international sanctions as an injustice that should be reversed immediately as part of any comprehensive nuclear deal. senate foreign relations chairman bob corker (r-tenn.) is pushing for a veto-proof majority on a bill that would allow congress to vote on the final deal and strip the president of authority to temporarily waive sanctions. sen. chuck schumer (d-n.y.) became the most recent democratic senator to lend his support, tentatively putting the corker bill about four votes shy of the 67 needed to override a presidential veto. sens. mark kirk (r-ill.) and robert menendez (d-n.j.) have formidable support for a separate bill, which would impose new sanctions on iran if negotiators fail to reach an agreement by the june 30 deadline. sensing hesitance from democrats, menendez agreed to delay voting on the bill until after the march 31 deadline. obama has promised to veto both bills and has pleaded with lawmakers to hold off on legislation until the negotiations are complete. the president said either the corker or the kirk-menendez bill would likely derail negotiations at this point. failure to reach a political framework by tuesday could prompt lawmakers to take action. sanctions are far from the only hurdle. iran currently has 19,000 centrifuges, including 10,000 that are spinning to produce uranium. while leaked details of the talks indicate that the parties have agreed to iran keeping about 6,000 centrifuges in operation, there is disagreement about how sophisticated the remaining centrifuges can be, and where they can produce uranium. on thursday, the associated press reported that tehran may be able to continue running centrifuges at fordow, a once-secret underground bunker that would likely be invulnerable to a military strike if it were to host illegal nuclear activity in the future. menendez responded to the report with outrage. <u+201c>we have pivoted away from demanding the closure of fordow when the negotiations began, to considering its conversion into a research facility, to now allowing hundreds of centrifuges to spin at this underground bunker site where centrifuges could be quickly repurposed for illicit nuclear enrichment purposes,<u+201d> he said in a statement. <u+201c>my fear is that we are no longer guided by the principle that <u+2018>no deal is better than a bad deal,<u+2019> but instead we are negotiating <u+2018>any deal for a deal<u+2019>s sake.<u+2019><u+201d> the rumored concession at fordow would be in return for increased limitations on centrifuges and research and development work at other nuclear sites, according to the ap. fordow would be subject to international inspections and the centrifuges there would operate on zinc, xenon, or geranium, rather than uranium, which can be enriched to fuel a nuclear weapon. regardless of the number of centrifuges ultimately left in operation, iran<u+2019>s stockpiles of uranium puts its breakout period -- the time needed to produce enough material for a nuclear weapon -- less than the one year baseline that the u.s. has insisted upon for any final agreement. at one point, tehran appeared willing to ship its stockpile of uranium to russia, where it would be converted to fuel rods. in recent days, iranian negotiator abbas araqchi balked at the idea of sending uranium abroad, as first reported in the new york times. an alternative to exporting uranium may be to dilute it into lower-grade material that could not be used for weapons. further complicating the goal of reaching a political framework is defining what that means. because political and technical components of iran<u+2019>s nuclear program often overlap, there has never been a publicly shared list of benchmarks for tuesday's deadline. in fact, it's unclear whether the political framework should produce a signed document, or simply an understanding between the negotiating parties. <u+201c>the march 31 deadline for reaching a framework agreement is a soft target,<u+201d> davenport explained in an email to the huffington post. <u+201c>given that the expectation for the end of march is a broad framework outlining the major parameters of a deal, a signed document is extremely unlikely because there will still be technical annexes that both sides will want to see worked out. <u+201c>while failure to reach a framework agreement by the end of march will certainly result in a backlash from those that want to derail negotiations and kill the prospects for a deal, the real focus must remain on completing an entire agreement by june 30,<u+201d> davenport added.

iran nuclear talks go to the wire with 50-50 chance of success

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

62.0

8.0

5172.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

359.0

1.0

0.0

76.0

1.0

0.0

28.0

14.0

9.0

13.0

7.0

12.0

3.0

25.0

28.0

32.0

362.0

77.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the younger trump swears his foundation gives all of its money away to good causes. which is true, if you don<u+2019>t count the cash spent on trump-owned resorts. or the plastic surgeon. those are some of the beneficiaries of the eric trump foundation, an eponymous public charity headed by the republican presidential nominee<u+2019>s third-born. though eric trump<u+2014>the executive vice president of development and acquisitions for the trump organization, and one of his father<u+2019>s top surrogates and closest political advisers<u+2014>recently claimed his father had donated <u+201c>hundreds of thousands<u+201d> to his charity, the only available evidence seems to suggest payments, in fact, went the other way: the eric trump foundation (etf) paying hundreds of thousands over the last 10 years to host lavish fundraising events at<u+00a0>donald trump<u+2019>s golf courses. in promotional videos and press releases, etf touts a 95 to 100 percent donation ratio and implies that by benefit of being a trump, namesake properties are handed over for charity events at little or no cost. but according to a daily beast analysis of annual irs reports and new york state financial disclosures from the charity<u+2019>s inception in 2007 to 2014, the most recent year for which data is available, etf spent $881,779 on its annual golf invitational at trump-owned clubs, a portion of which<u+2014>$100,000 in 2013 and $88,000 in 2014<u+2014>was reported as paid directly <u+201c>to a company of a family member of the board of directors.<u+201d> in other words, donald trump himself. donald trump, and his private foundation, are already in hot water as reports swirl of suspected self-dealing, or using his foundation funds for private gain. indeed, the man who considers a presidential run as an opportunity to turn a profit made headlines and invited criticism this week, after the washington post revealed that the self-professed billionaire had reportedly used monies from the donald j. trump foundation to pay off $258,000 in legal disputes. previous reports found donald trump had also used the fund<u+2014>which he hasn<u+2019>t personally donated to since 2008<u+2014>to purchase portraits of himself, and gift $25,000 to florida attorney general pam bondi in a possible quid pro quo to head off an investigation into his shady trump university, both of which may have violated federal and state tax laws. new york<u+2019>s attorney general is currently investigating the reports. of course, viewed through the prism of his father<u+2019>s questionable philanthropic practices, eric trump<u+2019>s foundation seems downright angelic. eric trump<u+2019>s foundation operates with almost no overhead: eric neither pays himself nor his board members and relies on trump organization employees who volunteer for whatever the foundation may need. most importantly, eric trump<u+2019>s charity has, over the last 10 years according to its tax reports, raised $6.5 million for st. jude children<u+2019>s research hospital, a beloved tennessee-based nonprofit that treats children with catastrophic diseases free-of-charge. that figure nearly doubles, when you include the year-long fundraisers utilizing trump hotels<u+2014>where guests are encouraged to donate and buy special services, a percentage of which goes to st. jude<u+2014>and employees, who both contribute their money and volunteer their time by competing in company-wide contests and organizing events like car washes, bake sales, and walk-a-thons, to raise cash that goes straight to the hospital<u+2014>over $600,000 this past year, according to etf<u+2019>s executive director, paige scardigli. <u+201c>we pride ourselves on having an extremely low expense ratio and that is only made possible by leveraging off the trump assets,<u+201d> scardigli wrote in an email to the daily beast. <u+201c>trump assets are not profiting from these etf events, but instead they are donating their time and resources to the cause.<u+201d> <u+201c>we<u+2019>re so lucky as trumps to have the best hotels in the world, to have the best golf courses in the world, and other great assets, and we<u+2019>re so lucky to be able to use those assets at our disposal for a great purpose. and that<u+2019>s really what etf is,<u+201d> eric says in a 2016 video. <u+201c>it sounds like they were just making a number up,<u+201d> said elizabeth keating, a boston university professor who studies nonprofit finance. <u+201c>they should have had a proposal that said, <u+2018>these are the costs,<u+2019> for which there should be an invoice, detailing what the foundation was paying for. instead it sounds like the golf course just said, 'give us $100,000.'<u+201d> scardigli took the reins as etf<u+2019>s director in january, replacing a woman who left the organization after eight months. and hers wasn<u+2019>t the only high-level dropout this year. the foundation<u+2019>s board of directors and executive committee have each lost a member since march: jeffrey lichtenberg, a freelance real-estate broker and consultant with a history of bid rigging on construction projects, and nathan crisp, until recently, a trump hotels executive who police accused of twice slamming a brooklyn mother to the ground on easter. when asked why the trump organization didn<u+2019>t donate the use of the courses, michael cohen, a longtime attorney to donald trump and board member on the eric trump foundation, said, <u+201c>i believe there are certain rules that you do have to pay for certain things<u+2014>they<u+2019>re not marked up. it<u+2019>s inexpensive. i think there<u+2019>s some law that says you have to.<u+201d> trump national golf club westchester, where etf<u+2019>s annual event is held, did not return a request for event pricing, but charities which have held fundraisers at trump clubs showed similar expenses and revenue in their tax reports (known as 990s), suggesting eric trump indeed paid a standard rate<u+2014>around $100,000<u+2014>for use of his father<u+2019>s property. tic toc stop, a charity dedicated to funding tourette syndrome research, paid $51,700 for a smaller golf outing in 2014. and according to the boston globe, the dana-farber cancer institute<u+2014>which has held its annual gala at trump<u+2019>s florida club, mar-a-lago, for the last six years<u+2014>paid around $150,000 for a fundraiser with up to 600 guests. the most recent etf fundraiser boasted 500 attendees. though the eric trump foundation<u+2019>s website says, <u+201c>we exclusively support st. jude children<u+2019>s research hospital,<u+201d> that isn<u+2019>t the case. in 2012, etf began donating in earnest to other causes, cutting small checks to 40 individual charities in addition to the outsize donation given to the children<u+2019>s hospital. some of these small donations<u+2014>like the $1,600 to the american society for enology and viticulture, a california wine industry organization where eric trump once gave a keynote address<u+2014>have seemingly little to do with the charity<u+2019>s mission of helping sick children. the cat<u+2019>s cradle of connections don<u+2019>t end there. the gsm fund paid out $43,231 that same year for their golf tournament<u+2014>an annual event held at trump<u+2019>s hudson valley course that cost nearly double what the charity gave out in grants that year. they, along with at least six other charities that have received donations from the eric trump foundation since 2012, hold fundraising events at trump golf clubs.

eric trump <u+2018>charity<u+2019> spent $880k at family-owned golf resorts

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

12.0

61.0

8.0

7035.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

452.0

0.0

125.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

10.0

19.0

4.0

11.0

19.0

9.0

7.0

35.0

21.0

48.0

455.0

125.0

61.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

for most people, a salaried job paying $25,000 a<u+00a0>year is far from exceptional. it corresponds to an hourly wage of roughly $14, which isn<u+2019>t enough to live on in many pricey metro areas. but, according to existing federal<u+00a0>labor rules, a $25,000 job can be classified as managerial<u+00a0>or given another designation that exempts it from overtime pay. that's why the obama administration<u+00a0>moved this week to change those rules. as of dec. 1, the minimum annual salary that can be excluded from overtime will be raised from $23,660 to $47,476, unless opponents manage to block the change in congress or the courts. the move is long overdue. the percentage of people eligible for overtime has been in a free fall since its high in 1975. then, 62% of salaried workers were paid overtime for work over 40 hours. today the number is 7%. and it was even lower before<u+00a0>2004, when the bush administration made some needed changes. setting a new minimum salary is, to be sure, an inexact science. an annual salary of $23,660<u+00a0>might once have been called middle income, even managerial. today, that<u+00a0>does not pass the laugh test as a threshold for a management<u+00a0>or professional job. the new level of $47,476 is slightly less than it would have been had it been adjusted<u+00a0>for inflation each year since 1975. it would<u+00a0>increase the percentage of workers<u+00a0>who qualify for overtime to 35%.<u+00a0>that seems like a reasonable place to start. it also seems reasonable that the new level should be indexed for inflation as well. but this and future administrations need to recognize<u+00a0>that any action can produce unintended consequences, and should be willing to adjust the number if circumstances warrant. these new rules are the latest effort by the obama administration to push up worker pay in the face of a decidedly hostile congress. with republicans refusing to budge on the federal<u+00a0>minimum wage, obama settled on overtime rules in part because he could alter them without legislation. in truth, the overtime rules are probably a better way to assist workers than by tweaking the minimum wage, now at $7.25 an hour. the minimum wage affects a small segment of the working population (about<u+00a0>1.5 million people,<u+00a0>compared with<u+00a0>4.2 million people who'd<u+00a0>qualify for overtime under the new rules).<u+00a0>and if the minimum<u+00a0>is raised too far too fast, employers could respond by eliminating jobs. the response to changing overtime rules is likely to be less severe. if employers don<u+2019>t want to pay overtime, they are more likely to cut people back to 40 hours a week, or to bump their salaries<u+00a0>up to the new annual minimum of $47,476, than they are to eliminate jobs. critics of the new rules argue that they will turn millions of professionals into clock-punchers while adding rigidity to what have been flexible and collegial work environments.<u+00a0>there might be<u+00a0>some truth to this. but clearly the current system has not served the interest of workers well. most people in the lower- to middle-income brackets<u+00a0>would rather have fair pay for their long hours than a fancier<u+00a0>job title. usa today's editorial opinions are decided by its<u+00a0>editorial board, separate from the news staff. most editorials are coupled with an opposing view <u+2014> a unique usa today feature. to read more editorials, go to the<u+00a0>opinion front page<u+00a0>or sign up for the<u+00a0>daily opinion e-mail newsletter.

overdue change in overtime pay: our view

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

40.0

8.0

3330.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

220.0

0.0

49.0

0.0

26.0

2.0

13.0

3.0

4.0

6.0

16.0

12.0

25.0

225.0

49.0

26.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

update: a federal judge has ordered a defiant kentucky clerk to jail after she refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. u.s. district judge david bunning told rowan county clerk kim davis she would be jailed until she complied with his order to issue the licenses. davis said "thank you" before she was led out of the courtroom by a u.s. marshal. she was not in handcuffs. bunning also warned deputy clerks around the state that they could suffer the same fate should they refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. davis has refused to issue marriages licenses for two months since the supreme court legalized gay marriage. she argues that her christian faith should exempt her from signing the licenses. liberty counsel attorney mat staver, who is representing davis,<u+00a0> called the ruling <u+201c>outrageous.<u+201d> <u+201c>if this country has come to this point where a judge jails someone like kim davis for their religious convictions <u+2013> then we have lost our religious liberty,<u+201d> staver told me. he said davis will be fingerprinted and photographed <u+201c>just like a criminal.<u+201d> <u+201c>this cannot be tolerated,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>this is ultimately going to spark a huge debate around the country. this is not the kind of country <u+2013> this is not the america that our founders envisioned.<u+201d> the associated press contributed to this report. kim davis could become the first christian in america jailed as a result of the supreme court decision legalizing gay marriage. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve weighed the cost and i<u+2019>m prepared to go to jail, i sure am,<u+201d> mrs. davis told me in an exclusive interview. <u+201c>this has never been a gay or lesbian issue for me. this is about upholding the word of god.<u+201d> <u+201c>this is a heaven or hell issue for me and for every other christian that believes,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>this is a fight worth fighting.<u+201d> click here to join todd<u+2019>s american dispatch <u+2013>a must-read for conservatives! davis is the clerk of rowan county, ky. <u+2013> a small patch of earth in the northeastern part of the state. she was elected last november <u+2013> taking the place of her mother, who held the position for nearly 40 years. it<u+2019>s fair to say that issuing marriage licenses was something of a family business <u+2013> until the day the supreme court legalized gay marriage. davis is a devout apostolic christian, and she knew that should gay marriage become legal, she could not and would not sign her name on a same-sex marriage certificate. <u+201c>i would have to either make a decision to stand or i would have to buckle down and leave,<u+201d> she said, pondering her choices. <u+201c>and if i left, resigned or chose to retire, i would have no voice for god<u+2019>s word. so when that day came, she issued an edict: no more marriage licenses would be issued in rowan county. it was a decision that would bring down the wrath of militant lgbt activists and their supporters. <u+201c>they told my husband they were going to burn us down while we slept in our home,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s been told that he would be beaten up and tied up and made to watch them rape me. i have been told that gays should kill me.<u+201d> liberty counsel, the public interest law firm that represents davis, says forcing her to issue same-sex marriage licenses violates her religious beliefs.<u+00a0>but the courts don<u+2019>t seem interested in that argument. a federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, an appeals court upheld that decision and the u.s. supreme court declined to intervene. should davis continue to defy the law, she could be fined or sent to jail. no matter what the court decides, davis says she will not violate her religious beliefs <u+2013> and she will not resign her post. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m very steadfast in what i believe,<u+201d> she told me. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t leave my conscience and my christian soul out in my vehicle and come in here and pretend to be something i<u+2019>m not. it<u+2019>s easy to talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?<u+201d> the mainstream media and the activists have been ruthless. they<u+2019>ve portrayed her as a monster <u+2013> a right-wing, homophobic hypocrite. she<u+2019>s been smeared by tabloid-style reports on her checkered past. they<u+2019>ve written extensively about her failed marriages. it<u+2019>s true, she<u+2019>s been married four times. but what<u+2019>s missing in the mainstream media coverage is the context. her life was radically changed by jesus christ in 2011, and since then she has become a different person. <u+201c>my god in heaven knows every crack, every crevice, every deep place in my heart,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>and he knows the thoughts that are in my mind before i even think them. and he has given me such a beautiful and wonderful grace through all of this.<u+201d> she once lived for the devil, but now she lives for god. she<u+2019>s a sinner saved by grace. <u+201c>i had created such a pit of sin for myself with my very own hands,<u+201d> she told me. so how does she handle the reporters and talking heads who call her a hypocrite? <u+201c>all i can say to them is if they have a sordid past like what i had, they too can receive the cleansing and renewing, and they can start a fresh life and they can be different,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>they don<u+2019>t have to remain in their sin, there<u+2019>s hope for tomorrow.<u+201d> davis did not seek the national spotlight. she had no intention of becoming a spokeswoman for religious liberty, and she bristles at the idea that she is a hero of the faith. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m just a vessel god has chosen for this time and this place,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m no different than any other christian. it was my appointed time to stand, and their time will come.<u+201d> todd starnes is host of fox news & commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. his latest book is "god less america: real stories from the front lines of the attack on traditional values." follow todd on twitter<u+00a0>@toddstarnes and find him on facebook.

exclusive: kentucky clerk: 'this is a fight worth fighting'

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

4.0

59.0

8.0

5660.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

429.0

1.0

0.0

155.0

0.0

36.0

20.0

24.0

12.0

26.0

14.0

18.0

8.0

28.0

36.0

41.0

436.0

156.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

an old saying asserts that falsehoods come in three escalating levels: <u+201c>lies, damn lies, and statistics.<u+201d> now, however, we<u+2019>ve been given an even-higher level of intentional deception: policy speeches by donald trump. take his recent highly publicized address outlining specific economic policies he would push to benefit hard-hit working families. it<u+2019>s an almost-hilarious compilation of trumpian fabrications, including his bold, statesmanlike discourse on the rank unfairness of the estate tax: <u+201c>no family will have to pay the death tax,<u+201d> he solemnly pledged, adopting the right-wing pejorative for a tax assessed on certain properties of the dearly departed. fine, but next came his slick prevarication: <u+201c>american workers have paid taxes their whole lives, and they should not be taxed again at death.<u+201d> workers? the tax exempts the first $5.4 million of any deceased person<u+2019>s estate, meaning 99.8 percent of americans pay absolutely nothing. so trump is trying to deceive real workers into thinking he<u+2019>s standing for them, when in fact it<u+2019>s his own wealth he<u+2019>s protecting. what a maverick! what a shake-<u+2019>em-up outsider! what an anti-establishment fighter for working stiffs! oh, and don<u+2019>t forget this: what a phony! sure, the donald sounds like a populist on the stump, bellowing that the systems been jerry-rigged by and for the corporate and political elites, which is killing the middle class. well, he<u+2019>s right about that, but what<u+2019>s he going to do? don<u+2019>t worry, he says smugly, i<u+2019>ll fix it, i<u+2019>ll make the system honest again <u+2014> trust me! as groucho marx said, <u+201c>to know if a man is honest, ask him <u+2014> if he says he is, he<u+2019>s a crook.<u+201d> or, in the case of this phony populist, just look at the specific policies he laid out as his fixes for our economy. trumpeting the package as his blueprint for the <u+201c>economic renewal<u+201d> of america<u+2019>s working class. but trump<u+2019>s idea of <u+201c>working class turns out to be millionaires and billionaires, for that<u+2019>s who would get the bulk of benefits from his agenda <u+2014> rewarding the very corporate chieftains he denounces in his blustery speeches for knocking down middle-income families and grabbing all of the new wealth our economy is creating. his proposed tax cuts, for example, don<u+2019>t benefit low-wage workers at all and provide only a pittance of gain for those with middle-class paychecks, but corporations are given a huuuuuuuge windfall with over a 50 percent cut in their rate. his tax giveaway will also take $240 billion a year out of our public treasury <u+2014> money desperately needed for such basics as expanding educational opportunities and restoring our nation<u+2019>s dilapidated infrastructure. in his policy speech, he offered a new tax break to help hard working people reduce their cost of child care <u+201c>by allowing parents to fully deduct [such] spending from their taxes.<u+201d> trump even gave this push a personal touch, saying his daughter ivanka urged him to provide a helping hand to working parents because <u+201c>she feels so strongly about this.<u+201d> before you tear up over their show of dad and daughter working-class empathy, however, note that 70 percent of american households don<u+2019>t make enough to warrant itemizing tax deductions. thus, the big majority of americans that are most in need of child care help get nothing from trump<u+2019>s melodramatic gesture. once again, his generosity is for his own elite class, for the tax benefits would flow uphill to wealthy families like his who can purchase the platinum packages of care for their children. what we have here is the same old failed, establishmentarian, economic elitist hokum that republicans have been peddling for decades, only bigger and more extreme. rhetoric aside, the reality of trump<u+2019>s plan is to replace ronald reagan<u+2019>s trickle-down theory with his own arrogant, anti-worker scheme of tinkle-down economics. as an early 19th century labor leader noted, <u+201c>figures don<u+2019>t lie, but liars do figure.<u+201d> that fits the donald perfectly.

donnie<u+2019>s little lies are yuuuge: trump has redefined what it means to be deceitful on the campaign trail

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

104.0

8.0

3934.0

0.0

5.0

9.0

0.0

283.0

1.0

0.0

82.0

3.0

0.0

30.0

12.0

14.0

9.0

7.0

13.0

14.0

8.0

26.0

24.0

36.0

292.0

83.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

raleigh, north carolina (cnn) as soon as the first debate of the 2016 presidential election was over, both donald trump and hillary clinton were quick to claim victory. but by the next morning, one of them had become far less cheerful. just hours after clinton and trump clashed on stage at hofstra university in one of the most highly anticipated political events in modern history, the two presidential nominees took markedly different tones as they reflected on the previous night's debate. clinton and her aides showed all of the outward signs of a team riding high. the democratic nominee boarded her plane at westchester county airport to applause and cheers from her staff. before taking off to raleigh, north carolina, for a campaign rally, a smiling candidate walked to the back of the plane to gloat to reporters about a "great, great" evening "one of my favorite baseball players growing up, ernie banks, used to get so excited about going to play that he would say, 'lets play two,'" clinton said. "so i am looking forward to the next debate and the one after that." and taking a dig at trump's complaint after the debate that he was given a "defective" microphone, clinton quipped: "anybody who complains about the microphone is not having a good night." and in fact, the republican nominee did not appear to be having a good morning. calling into fox news' "fox & friends" early tuesday, trump rattled off more than one complaint about the debate. those compliments were long gone. "i had some hostile questions," trump said on fox news. "he didn't ask her about the emails at all. he didn't ask her about her scandals. he didn't ask her about the benghazi deal that she destroyed. he didn't ask her about a lot of things she should have been asked about. there's no question about it." trump was still irritated -- and even conspiratorial -- about his microphone. "my microphone was terrible," trump complained. "i wonder: was it set up that way on purpose?" to top things off, trump unloaded on former miss universe alicia machado, who has alleged that the businessman's disparaging treatment of her had led to eating disorders and depression. with no apparent consideration for the political recklessness of his crude comments, trump once again went after machado's physical appearance, bringing her up on his own. "that person was a miss universe person, and she was the worst we ever had. the worst. the absolute worst," trump said. "she gained a massive amount of weight and it was a real problem. we had a real problem." those remarks could prove to be detrimental for a candidate already struggling with women voters and with the perception that he lacks the temperament to be president. late monday, the clinton campaign released a new video featuring machado. "he'd tell me, 'you look ugly,' or, 'you look fat,'" machado says in the video. "sometimes he'd 'play' with me and say: 'hello, miss piggy,' 'hello, miss housekeeping.'" machado also held a press call tuesday afternoon to respond to trump's comments and express her support for clinton. she told reporters that watching the 2016 election was like a "really bad dream." "i never imagined in 20 years later i will be in this position," she said. "watching this guy again doing stupid things and stupid comments." speaking in raleigh tuesday afternoon, clinton continued to make digs at trump's debate performance, saying it was "very clear that he didn't prepare." "what we hear from my opponent is dangerously incoherent," she said. "it's unclear exactly what he is saying, but words matter." marguerite scott, a retired 68-year-old woman from cary, north carolina, who attended the raleigh campaign event, said she was struck by trump appearing to lose his composure during the debate. scott lso chastised the gop nominee for his comments tuesday about machado. "men in general should stop objectifying women. if she is fat, that is her business," scott said. "and to put her on blast like that shows what a misogynist person he is."

day after debate, clinton gloats and trump fumes

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

48.0

8.0

4040.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

243.0

0.0

85.0

0.0

19.0

11.0

12.0

10.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

14.0

22.0

25.0

245.0

85.0

19.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

implausible schemes to put mike pence, rather than donald trump, on the top of the ballot have been flying since a once-secret recording of trump<u+2019>s lurid boasting about sexual assault leaked to the public on friday evening. pence has issued a public statement on trump<u+2019>s remarks, saying he <u+201c>does not condone his remarks and cannot defend them<u+201d> <u+2014> but accepted trump<u+2019>s apology and suggested he<u+2019>d stick by him through the second presidential debate on sunday night. anonymous sources say privately pence is <u+201c>beside himself<u+201d> over the details in the leaked audio. meanwhile, multiple prominent republicans <u+2014> from former rival for the nomination carly fiorina to former bush secretary of state condoleezza rice and a number of members of congress <u+2014> have called for trump to step aside and allow pence to be the nominee. on some level, the republican longing for pence in the face of these new details about trump<u+2019>s past makes sense. he<u+2019>s an experienced politician with a long track record. he has impeccable social conservative credentials. he<u+2019>s the governor of a state. he can pay attention in a debate long enough to land punches on tim kaine. and he has almost certainly never been secretly recorded talking about a woman<u+2019>s <u+201c>tits<u+201d> or <u+201c>pussy<u+201d> or bragging about kissing women against their will. but if republican politicians are really horrified by trump<u+2019>s remarks <u+2014> and not just by the possible electoral implications <u+2014> pence made one decision that should disqualify him in their eyes, too: mike pence agreed to be donald trump<u+2019>s vice president. pence lent trump the legitimacy he needed to unite the republican party. he spent months apologizing for trump, explaining what trump really meant, and doing everything he could to put trump in the oval office. trump himself pointed to <u+201c>party unity<u+201d> as one of the key reasons for choosing pence as his running mate in the first place, making no secret of the role he viewed the indiana governor as playing in the campaign. it<u+2019>s not as if pence didn<u+2019>t know what he was doing. by the time trump picked him as his running mate on july 14, trump had already: nor was trump<u+2019>s rampant sexism a secret. his public feuds with celebrities aside, the new york times had already published a long article on times trump was accused of crossing boundaries with women in his private life. and, of course, trump had spent years publicly doubting that president obama was born in the united states. this is not a complete list. but by the time trump was picking a running mate, it was clear that he was a man with a history of bigoted, racist, sexist behavior and remarks. this is what pence agreed to make palatable to the republican establishment, to social conservatives, and to swing voters. pence was going against his own principles, as these tweets from before he joined the ticket show: and pence has stood by trump throughout the ensuing controversies <u+2014> trump<u+2019>s fights with a gold star family and the 1997 miss universe among them. he<u+2019>s watched trump tell black voters that they should vote for him because <u+201c>what do you have to lose?<u+201d> and say that the central park five, proved innocent by dna evidence, should have been executed anyway. to characterize pence as a paragon of respect and decency who happened to wake up one morning and, through no fault of his own, be trump<u+2019>s running mate ignores the role pence played in trying to make trump palatable to voters and the establishment in the first place. if the case against trump<u+2019>s presidency is his poor judgment and his lack of respect for women, what does pence<u+2019>s tacit approval of all of this say about him?

mike pence enabled donald trump. stop saying he<u+2019>d make a good president.

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

72.0

8.0

3613.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

230.0

1.0

0.0

80.0

0.0

21.0

5.0

13.0

4.0

8.0

6.0

8.0

6.0

24.0

17.0

34.0

233.0

81.0

21.0

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.

bernie's california endgame

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

27.0

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

paris <u+2014> a historic crowd of more than a million people including more than 40 world leaders jammed the streets sunday, proclaiming "je suis charlie," expressing solidarity against terrorism and paying homage to victims of last week's deadly attacks. french president fran<u+00e7>ois hollande, british prime minister david cameron, german chancellor angela merkel were among the leaders who linked arms to start the march amid intense security. the u.s. representative was jane hartley, the ambassador to france. the gathering brought together leaders of nations and causes often at odds, such as ukrainian president petro poroshenko and russian foreign minister sergey lavrov, and palestinian leader mahmoud abbas and israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. the emotionally charged rally came just days after 17 people and three islamic extremist gunmen were killed in three horrifying days of terror in france. france's interior ministry described the demonstration as the largest in the nation's history. more than 3.7 million marched throughout the country, including between 1.2 million and 1.6 million in the capital. the ministry said a precise number was impossible to determine given the enormity of the turnout. "today, paris is the capital of the world," hollande said. "our entire country will rise up toward something better." hollande and netanyahu later visited the grand synagogue in paris, which for security reasons did not hold sabbath services this weekend for the first time since world war ii. "today i walked the streets of paris with the leaders of the world to say enough terror -- the time has come to fight terror," netanyahu said. he also stressed that the enemy is not islam, but extremists. the attackers' primary target was the paris office of charlie hebdo, a satirical weekly publication that has published spoofs of the islamic prophet mohammed. the slogan "je suis charlie" <u+2014> i am charlie <u+2014> has swept across france and around the globe. twelve people were killed when brothers said, 34, and cherif kouachi, 32, stormed the offices magazine's offices wednesday. two days later police tracked them to a printing house near charles de gaulle airport where they were killed. on thursday, amedy coulibaly, 32, shot and killed a policewoman. on friday he killed four people -- all jewish -- at a kosher market and threatened more violence unless the police let the kouachis go. he was killed later in the day during a police assault. french prosecutors said coulibaly is also linked to the shooting of a jogger on the same day as the charlie hebdo massacre. video emerged showing coulibaly pledging allegiance to the islamic state and claiming he coordinated the attacks with the kouachi brothers. sunday was a day for healing and for unity. rallies in support of freedom of expression were held across france and in major cities around the globe. in new york, the empire state building was lit in the colors of the french flag as a solidarity gesture. the lights were to be darkened at 8 p.m. et in memory of those killed in the paris attacks. in paris, the military and police were out in force, with more than 2,000 police officers patrolling the area, french officials said. another 2,000 officers and 1,300 soldiers were protecting key buildings, landmarks, transportation hubs and jewish sites. the rally, featuring family members of those who died in the attacks, drew french celebrities, christian, jewish and muslim community leaders, and politicians from across the french political spectrum. paris public transport operator ratp made travel on its metro, bus and tram network free to reduce traffic in the center of the capital. crowds began gathering hours before the rally started at 3 p.m. local time (9 a.m. et) in central paris. the boulevards and streets leading to place de la republique soon became blocked by the throngs, but a cheerful spirit pervaded among demonstrators. "today is not the day to be grumpy parisians," said one woman sporting a bright-red french beret. hawkers sold buttons and banners reading "je suis charlie" as well as "je suis ahmed" and "je suis juif (jewish)." banners and signs in honor of those who died, cartoons drawn on posterboard and plastic, and mosaics on the ground made from pens, were also being sold. the display of world leaders did not impress reporters without borders, which issued a statement saying it was "appalled" by some of the countries represented in a rally so closely tied to freedom of expression. "journalists and bloggers are systematically persecuted (in) egypt, russia, turkey and united arab emirates," the statement said. "we must demonstrate our solidarity with charliehebdo without forgetting all the world's other charlies. ... we must not let predators of press freedom spit on the graves of charlie hebdo." some rallies kicked off earlier sunday. in dammartin-en-groele, the small industrial town northeast of paris where the kouachi brothers were killed by police, tens of thousands of people came out and sang la marseillaise, the french national anthem, and chanted "je suis charlie." blandine siet, 51, who lives in the montparnasse neighborhood in south paris, said she would join the capital city's rally with a group of friends and neighbors to protest the restrictions to freedom of expression that she fears may result from the attack oncharlie hebdo. "france is a free country with strong (democratic) values and i want it to stay that way," she said. meanwhile, thousands of people gathered sunday for the funeral of ahmed merabet, the police officer shot as he lay wounded on the ground just after the charlie hebdo attack. mourners waved signs reading "thank you, ahmed" and "je suis ahmed." bacon reported from mclean, va. contributing: jane onyanga-omara in london; jabeen bhatti in berlin; the associated press

'charlie' draws historic crowd, world leaders to paris

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

54.0

8.0

5860.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

400.0

1.0

0.0

117.0

0.0

39.0

13.0

9.0

18.0

5.0

10.0

3.0

22.0

20.0

34.0

404.0

118.0

39.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington -- facing an increasingly narrow path to the nomination and failing to thwart donald trump's dominance, sen. ted cruz (r-texas) withdrew from the 2016 presidential race on tuesday. "tonight, i'm sorry to say that path has been foreclosed," cruz said in a speech tuesday night in indianapolis, "but the voters chose another path." "we are suspending our campaign," he added. as trump barreled toward the 1,237 delegates required to win,<u+00a0>cruz's campaign in recent weeks resorted to increasingly desperate measures, mounting a last-ditch effort to win the indiana primary, one of the only remaining primary states that gave cruz a chance of winning. but indiana turned out to be the final nail in the coffin -- trump won handily in the hoosier state, including among social conservatives, a demographic that in theory favored cruz. to reinvigorate his campaign, cruz last week named former presidential candidate and hewlett-packard ceo carly fiorina as his running mate, even though candidates typically do not name their running mate until they have amassed enough delegates for the nomination. his campaign also announced a plan to coordinate with the campaign of ohio gov. john kasich, the other remaining candidate.<u+00a0>kasich's team agreed to pull resources out of indiana and cede the race there to cruz. however, this effort quickly backfired, when each candidate caused confusion by diminishing its importance. kasich said voters in indiana should still vote for him. like many of the gop candidates and party leaders, cruz underestimated the strength of trump's appeal. initially, he often defended<u+00a0>trump instead of attacking him, strategizing that he could pick up trump<u+2019>s supporters if the businessman exited the race. but when it became apparent that trump's populist and nationalist rhetoric was resonating with republican voters, with the reality television star dominating the majority of the primaries, cruz began to target trump on the debate stage and on the campaign trail -- to little avail. once positioned as a strong threat to become the republican presidential nominee, the texas senator was the first candidate in either party to officially declare his intent to run for the presidency in 2016. bypassing the typical first step in a presidential campaign -- the exploratory committee -- he kicked off his campaign in march of 2015 with a rousing speech at liberty university, the christian university founded by the rev. jerry falwell. "what is the promise of america? the idea that -- the revolutionary idea that this country was founded upon, which is that our rights don<u+2019>t come from man. they come from god almighty,<u+201d> he said in his announcement speech. a star of the tea party movement, cruz made social conservatism and religious liberty a fundamental part of his pitch to voters. he highlighted his staunch opposition to gay marriage on the basis of religious freedom, particularly after the supreme court decision in june 2015 that legalized gay marriage nationwide. in response, cruz said he would introduce a constitutional amendment to hold elections for supreme court justices. over the summer, he held a religious freedom rally in the key state of iowa, during which he proclaimed that <u+201c>there is a war on faith in america today, in our lifetime<u+201d> and bemoaned the <u+201c>persecution<u+201d> of christians. but despite touting his conservative credentials and fashioning himself as an anti-establishment candidate, cruz never quite managed to rally conservatives around him. the texas senator was hugely unpopular among his colleagues, with most gop lawmakers reluctant to endorse him until it became clear he was the only viable option to potentially halt trump's momentum. only then did republicans begin backing him, though many gave<u+00a0>tepid reasons<u+00a0>for doing so and perceived him merely as the lesser of two evils when compared to trump. sen. lindsey graham (r-s.c.) announced his support of cruz just weeks after joking that he wanted to murder him. former house speaker john boehner (r-ohio) told students at stanford university that cruz was "lucifer in the flesh" and "a miserable son of a bitch." cruz's campaign never had the enthusiasm and fervor of trump's insurgency.<u+00a0>for example, when cruz introduced himself at the second gop debate in september, the audience responded with silence. and while cruz portrayed himself as an outsider, most voters viewed him as an establishment candidate, compared to the brash, take-no-prisoners trump.<u+00a0> as the reality of cruz's downfall and trump's presumptive nomination begins to sink in, the republican party faces a serious dilemma: whether to support trump as the party's nominee and potentially hand democratic front-runner hillary clinton the presidency, or risk further damage to the party with trump at the helm. soon after cruz's announcement tuesday, republican national committee chairman reince priebus urged his party to unite around trump.

ted cruz drops out of the 2016 presidential race

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

4930.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

372.0

1.0

0.0

110.0

0.0

36.0

14.0

19.0

11.0

16.0

14.0

12.0

9.0

23.0

22.0

41.0

374.0

111.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican legislators have repeatedly tried to end federal funding for planned parenthood <u+2014> questioning why the non-profit gets money from the government in the first place. in the wake of<u+00a0>sting videos taped inside planned parenthood clinics, sen. rand paul (r-ky)<u+00a0>promised to use "all legislative vehicles at his disposal" to force a vote defunding the organization. sen. ted cruz (r-tx) made similar promises to file an amendment that would, according to the hill, "eliminate all federal funding for planned parenthood." planned parenthood receives more than $500 million annually in government funding, mostly through medicaid and grants. most of this money goes toward providing low-income women with family planning services like std screening and contraceptive coverage. planned parenthood is, without a doubt, one of the largest providers in this space: of the 6.7 million women who rely on public programs to pay for contraceptives, 2.4 million of them <u+2014> 36 percent <u+2014> do so at planned parenthood's 817 clinics across the country. if congress did defund planned parenthood, it would be a huge blow to the group: about 40 percent of its budget comes from government grants, and much of that spending gets done on the federal level. because planned parenthood is such a large provider in this space, it's hard to see other clinics stepping in to fill the gap that it would leave. just over 40 percent of planned parenthood's budget comes from government grants and reimbursements, the organization's most recent budget report shows. between june 2013 and 2014, planned parenthood received $528.4 million in public funding, a big chunk of its $1.3 billion national budget. that $528.4 million figure covers both state and federal funding, and planned parenthood does not publicly break out how much money it gets just from federal funding. the best estimate arguably comes from the government accountability office, which estimated that planned parenthood received $105 million in federal funding in 2012. there are two main ways planned parenthood receives public funds. one is through medicaid, the public health insurance program that covers 71 million low-income americans. whenever a medicaid patient has an appointment at a planned parenthood clinic, the nonprofit will bill the health plan for whatever services the patient uses. the other source of funding is grants, largely through the title x family planning program <u+2014> the only domestic grant program dedicated to family planning. organizations like planned parenthood often use title x grants to subsidize birth control, std screenings, and other reproductive health services for low-income patients who may lack health insurance coverage. planned parenthood receives title x funds both directly from the federal government and from states, which will sometimes make the nonprofit's health center a subgrantee for the dollars they receive from the federal government. both title x and medicaid provide low- to middle-income women with financial assistance to cover family planning costs. medicaid might, for example, reimburse planned parenthood when it provides a patient with an hpv vaccine. and a planned parenthood clinic could use title x grants to subsidize the placement of an iud, which can cost upward of $500 for an uninsured patient. the exact family planning benefits that medicaid covers varies from state to state. but generally, many states will cover contraceptives, std screenings, hpv vaccines, and cancer screenings as well as sterilization and reversal procedures <u+2014> and will reimburse planned parenthood when it is the provider. thirty-two states and the district of columbia have medicaid programs that will pay for abortions, although those health plans are barred from using federal dollars <u+2014> and have to use the state's share of funding to pay for the procedure. title x often covers the same type of services as medicaid, except for women who are not on the public program. one important difference: title x funds are never available to be used for abortions, even in states where the medicaid program covers the procedure. federal law expressly prohibits the use of title x funds to pay for abortions <u+2014> while abortion providers like planned parenthood can qualify for grants, the government requires that no federal dollars go toward the termination of pregnancies. no legislation to defund planned parenthood has ever passed, so its a bit hard to know <u+2014> and even how, exactly, planned parenthood would lose its fund varies in different legislative proposals. historically, when congressional republicans have talked about "defunding planned parenthood," they've meant barring the group from receiving title x funds. this is the type of bill the house passed in 2011. it would have disallowed any abortion providers <u+2014> planned parenthood clinics or otherwise <u+2014> from getting title x grant funds. that type of bill would put a dent in planned parenthood's budget, but it would be far from ending the group's federal funding. they would still receive funding through medicaid, a much larger program than title x <u+2014> and near certainly a bigger chunk of planned parenthood's budget. planned parenthood does not provide a breakdown of its government funding, but separate data suggests it almost certainly gets way more public revenue from the medicaid patients it sees. one analysis from the guttmacher institute shows that medicaid, a program jointly funded by states and the federal government, pays for 75 percent of publicly funded family planning services in the united states <u+2014> while title x covers 10 percent. in order to fully defund planned parenthood, congress would need to pass a law that bars medicaid from reimbursing its clinics for patient visits there. this type of amendment hasn't historically come up in congressional debates about cutting planned parenthood's budget, perhaps because it's a much more drastic move than proposing cuts to planned parenthood's title x funding.

planned parenthood gets over $500 million annually in public funds. here's where it goes.

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

89.0

8.0

6000.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

405.0

2.0

0.0

77.0

1.0

0.0

48.0

9.0

15.0

8.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

26.0

19.0

29.0

410.0

79.0

49.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

chicago <u+2014><u+00a0>a judge will hear arguments on friday<u+00a0>from<u+00a0>an<u+00a0>illinois voter alleging<u+00a0>that<u+00a0>republican presidential hopeful<u+00a0>ted cruz is not a "natural-born citizen" and should be disqualified for<u+00a0>the party's nomination. lawrence joyce,<u+00a0>an illinois voter who has objected to cruz's placement on the illinois primary ballot next month, will have his case heard in the circuit court of cook county in chicago. joyce's previous objection, made to the state's board of elections, was dismissed on february 1. he appealed the decision and was granted a hearing for friday before judge maureen ward kirby. joyce<u+00a0>challenges cruz's right to be president in the wake of questions put forth by gop rival donald trump about being born in canada.<u+00a0>cruz maintains he is a natural-born citizen since his mother is american-born. "what i fear is that ted cruz becomes the nominee, come september, congressman alan grayson of florida will go forward with his threats and probably several other democrats will file suit to prevent ted cruz from being on the ballot," joyce, a pharmacist and attorney from poplar grove, ill, told usa today. grayson, a democrat, has told reporters that he will file a lawsuit contesting cruz's citizenship if the senator from texas wins the gop nomination. "what democrats will do at that point is cherry pick which county courthouse they are going to show up in order to file these petitions," joyce said. "and at that point, i fear they'll get a string of victories in the lower courts and the funding for ted cruz would dry up, his numbers would plummet in the polls, he may be forced to give up the nomination." joyce, who said he is backing republican contender ben carson,<u+00a0>said he has not spoken to the trump campaign. but joyce did say he raised the issue with the carson campaign, which he said was uninterested in pursuing the matter. the illinois man said he was hesitant to file the lawsuit out of concern that getting involved in such a high profile case could be detrimental to his own law practice. "i tried to talk myself out of it and was unable to do so," joyce said. "it's plain as day that ted cruz is not a natural born citizen of the united states." cruz, at a cnn-hosted town hall meeting wednesday night, defended his citizenship and right to run, saying he was born in canada to a u.s. citizen, making him an automatic u.s citizen. his mother was born in wilmington, del., cruz said. <u+201c>i never breathed a breath of air on this planet when i was not a u.s. citizen,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>it was the act of being born that made me a u.s. citizen.<u+201d> he added: <u+201c>there will be some who try to work political mischief on it, but as a legal matter, this is clear and straightforward.<u+201d> cruz spokesman rick tyler said thursday night he had no comment about the lawsuit. the trump campaign<u+00a0>could not immediately be reached for comment. a federal lawsuit was filed in texas last month asking for a determination of<u+00a0>cruz's eligibility to run. and voters in new york, who raised similar concerns about cruz's citizenship,<u+00a0>on thursday filed a challenge with the state board of election challenging the senator's eligibility to be on the ballot. sanford levinson, constitutional law professor at the university of texas school of law, said joyce would have to prove standing <u+2013> or why cruz<u+2019>s potential ineligibility affects him specifically <u+2013> for the judge to proceed with the case. even if the judge declares cruz to be ineligible to run, the gop candidate<u+2019>s campaign would undoubtedly file an appeal, potentially tying the case up for months, he said. it<u+2019>s surprising that a lower court would even agree to hear the case, which is entangled in broader constitutional issues, sanford said. <u+201c>i<u+2019>d be very,<u+00a0>very surprised if [the judge] were to say he<u+2019>s ineligible,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>at that point, all hell would break loose."

chicago court to hear 'natural-born' case to knock ted cruz off ballot

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

70.0

8.0

3836.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

285.0

1.0

0.0

79.0

0.0

37.0

12.0

10.0

5.0

15.0

2.0

11.0

6.0

20.0

29.0

287.0

80.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

rudy giuliani and the price of milk while running for president in 2007, former new york mayor rudy giuliani told a reporter at a montgomery, ala., supermarket that he estimates "a gallon of milk is probably about a $1.50, a loaf of bread about a $1.25, $1.30, last time i bought one." it must have been a few election cycles since his last trip: the grocery store's website listed milk for $3.38 and bread up to $3.49.

nydn calls out 'traitor' senate republicans

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

420.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

29.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

31.0

4.0

3.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

while bernie sanders has been mathematically eliminated, the ability to appeal to millennial attitudes is only going to grow more crucial in future elections, political scientists say. democratic presidential candidate sen. bernie sanders is hugged by a supporter after addressing the crowd following the closing of the polls in the california presidential primary in santa monica, calif., june 7. garner jarrett never used to care much about politics. the massage therapist and actor, who is in his late 20s, had been an indifferent voter at best and never before voted in a presidential primary. but the promise of change that democratic candidate bernie sanders brought to the national stage <u+2013> and the access to information about him that the internet made possible <u+2013> moved mr. jarrett enough to not only cast his vote at his neighborhood polling station in koreatown on tuesday. it also propelled him to reevaluate his view of the american political process, he says. <u+201c>this election changed the way i participate on a deeper scale,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>i started seeing stuff about a candidate i cared about. it inspired the hope that things could get better.<u+201d> jarrett<u+2019>s remarks articulate in part the attitudes that are coming to define millennial voter concerns and behavior. those attitudes first emerged in the 2008 presidential election: a tendency to lean toward liberal values; a drive to champion social justice issues and call for change in established processes; and a reliance on the internet and social media for information, communication, and political mobilization. as the generation comes into its own <u+2013> already millennials match baby boomers in their share of the us electorate <u+2013> those perspectives will more heavily inform the issues and processes that determine future elections, political analysts and generational experts say. what has grown more pronounced since 2008 and 2012 <u+2013> and which senator sanders<u+2019>s campaign underscored <u+2013> is a push away from even the perception of being part of <u+201c>the establishment,<u+201d> whether it<u+2019>s washington or wall street. such a drive, if sustained, could have lasting influence on the way millennial voters engage in elections and the kinds of issues toward which they steer conversation, says jan leighley, a professor who specializes in political behavior at american university in washington. <u+201c>the likely consequences of millennial support of a bernie candidacy is that a) you may have mobilized a generation more than they would have otherwise, and b) you may just have pulled hillary to the left,<u+201d> she says. tuesday, hillary clinton made history as the first woman to top a major party ticket by securing the number of delegates she needed to clinch the democratic nomination <u+2013> even before the last six states went to the polls, according to the associated press. three of the states <u+2013> new jersey, new mexico, south dakota <u+2013> have been called for her, while she holds a commanding lead in the night's biggest delegate prize, california. <u+201c>tonight caps an amazing journey <u+2013> a long, long journey,<u+201d> mrs. clinton said in her victory speech. <u+201c>thanks to you, we<u+2019>ve reached a milestone. the first time in our nation<u+2019>s history that a woman will be a major party<u+2019>s nominee.<u+201d> sanders, who won in montana and north dakota, refused to bow out, vowing to fight on until washington, d.c., goes to the polls june 14. while he has been mathematically eliminated, his success in galvanizing young people like jarrett speaks to the value of a politician<u+2019>s ability to verbalize millennial concerns in a passionate way. <u+201c>[sanders] struck a chord that this generation is receptive to,<u+201d> says michael hais, a veteran market researcher and co-author of three books on millennials. more and more, he notes, leaders will have to speak in a language and communicate using methods that this generation understands <u+2013> as the senator has done. <u+201c>they<u+2019>ve had these basic attitudes <u+2026> and that<u+2019>s going to persist,<u+201d> mr. hais adds. <u+201c>they are going to shape the policy of the future.<u+201d> despite their numbers, only 46 percent of millennials, 18-to-34 year olds, are likely to vote. they make up just<u+00a0> 17 percent of likely voters in california. that<u+2019>s not unusual, as voters tend to participate more in elections as they grow older. baby boomers today have higher rates of voter turnout than millennials, but boomers came out to vote at about the same rate as millennials when they were the same age, according to data from the center for information and research on civic learning and engagement, a nonpartisan research institute at tufts university in boston. <u+201c>the reality is youth are very small percentage of the vote,<u+201d> says professor leighley. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s true even in [presidential] election years <u+2026> [and] even under the most generous assumptions.<u+201d> still, millennials did show up at polling stations across los angeles on primary day <u+2013> making it more likely that they will vote again. <u+201c>the biggest predictor of participating in a future election is if you participate in a previous one,<u+201d> says jeff gulati, a political science professor at bentley university in waltham, mass. and those millennials who spoke with the monitor echoed jarrett, the koreatown resident, when it came to their hopes for and expectations of a leader <u+2013> and the reasons they came out to vote. <u+201c>this [election] makes me want to be more aware,<u+201d> says serenity self, 26, as she walks out of bellevue recreation center, which served as a polling station in l.a.<u+2019>s silver lake neighborhood. <u+201c>bernie bringing up delegates and superdelegates made me question the<u+00a0>whole [electoral] process. i think finally people are seeing the light.<u+201d> <u+201c>this is the most active i<u+2019>ve ever been in a campaign,<u+201d> says david hemphill, 33, a children<u+2019>s book publisher who spent primary day canvassing for sanders in boyle heights in east los angeles. <u+201c>he gave a voice to things that i have felt for a long time and haven<u+2019>t really heard someone speak to.<u+201d> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m looking at our power structure in this country through a different lens than i was a year ago,<u+201d> he adds. elementary school teacher angelo gonzales, 28, says he wavered between mrs. clinton and sanders, but ultimately chose the latter because of his bold vision. <u+201c>i guess i wanted to make a statement,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>ten years ago i would<u+2019>ve scoffed at bernie sanders. i would have said he wanted too much change. but change is good. it<u+2019>s a powerful thing. we want someone to step up.<u+201d> some political analysts are wary of making definitive statements about the long-term impact of this election <u+2013> and of sanders<u+2019>s campaign <u+2013> on millennial attitudes, and vice versa. though the senator did manage to energize a large swath of the demographic, professor gulati says, not all millennials are sanders supporters, or democrats for that matter. they<u+2019>re also young, and therefore still developing their views and political stances, says professor leighley at american university. <u+201c>you<u+2019>re talking about individuals who don<u+2019>t have firmly-held attitudes and don<u+2019>t have much experience,<u+201d> she says. <u+201c>the issues that they<u+2019>re raising are issues that every other age group are raising <u+2013> economic security, jobs, some aspect of maybe the role of government in allowing or helping individuals to get ahead. that<u+2019>s not much different from what elections usually are about.<u+201d> another enduring effect of this election, analysts say, is the role of the internet and social media <u+2013> not just in terms of how candidates are reaching potential voters, as they did for obama during his campaigns, but also how voters are informing themselves about the candidates and their issues. they are, says hais, the generation expert, <u+201c>the best way of appealing to millennials, more than anything.<u+201d> <u+201c>there<u+2019>s so much information out there,<u+201d> video editor andrea otto, 27, says. <u+201c>you can look into the money of campaigns, you can be better informed. you don<u+2019>t have to take what mainstream media outlets are telling you.<u+201d> <u+201c>i think this election is unique in that social media is coming to be huge,<u+201d> adds jarrett from koreatown. <u+201c>you can take a person nobody knows about, and through social media, he<u+2019>s able to become an important candidate.<u+201d> mr. hemphill, the children<u+2019>s book publisher, goes a step further. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re the most educated, connected generation in the history of the world,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>we have the internet at our fingertips. we can look at things that any leader said five years ago, 10 years ago. we can track someone that easily.<u+201d> <u+201c>people really discount what the internet voice is. i think it<u+2019>s very short sighted,<u+201d> he adds. <u+201c>i think that people are [now] awake and alive and i can only hope that it continues. we can<u+2019>t go back.<u+201d>

as sanders refuses to bow out, millennials urge him to keep fighting

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

68.0

8.0

8641.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

587.0

1.0

0.0

159.0

0.0

61.0

7.0

28.0

2.0

7.0

26.0

4.0

10.0

47.0

13.0

70.0

593.0

160.0

61.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington <u+2014> the future of same-sex marriage and president obama's health care law hang in the balance as the supreme court's 2014 term draws rapidly to a close this month. but those aren't the only big issues on the justices' plate. free speech and fair elections. religious liberty and racial discrimination. clean air and capital punishment. all await rulings over the next three weeks as the court completes action on 20 cases remaining this term. the next decisions will come thursday morning. here's a look at the elite eight: <u+2022> same-sex marriage. in a decision likely to come on the term's last day <u+2014> possibly june 29 or 30 <u+2014> the court will decide whether gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry or whether state bans against same-sex marriage can remain in place. six cases from ohio, michigan, tennessee and kentucky have been consolidated for the court's consideration. in them, 32 total plaintiffs are asking for the right to marry or to have marriages licensed elsewhere recognized in their home states. most legal experts predict the court, led by justice anthony kennedy, will rule in favor of the gay and lesbian couples. <u+2022> obamacare. the future of obama's health care law is on the line for the second time in three years, and it's anyone's guess how the court will rule. passed in 2010 and narrowly upheld by the court in a 5-4 ruling in 2012, the law has extended health insurance to 12 million americans. but four words in its lengthy text <u+2014> "established by the state" <u+2014> now endanger federal subsidies relied upon by 6.4 million participants in 34 states that did not create their own exchanges or marketplaces. the justices must decide whether the law prohibits that financial aid. <u+2022> clean air. environmental regulations approved by the obama administration regularly come before the supreme court, and this year is no exception. a major rule requiring coal- and oil-fired power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants hangs in the balance. the justices appeared closely divided on the central issue in the case <u+2014> whether the environmental protection agency should have considered the nearly $10 billion annual cost in relation to the potential benefits before approving the regulation <u+2014> when it was argued. a decision in favor of objecting states and utilities could send the epa back to the drawing board. <u+2022> housing discrimination. the third time could be the charm for the court's conservatives, who tried twice in recent years to consider cases challenging the way housing bias claims are decided. under the fair housing act of 1968, minority groups have been able to win lawsuits by showing that housing practices <u+2014> such as sales, rentals, zoning and lending <u+2014> have a disparate impact on minorities. housing industry opponents challenging the law say it was intended only to ban intentional discrimination. <u+2022> lethal injections. the death penalty also is never far from the high court's docket. after a steady diet of cases and emergency appeals on issues such as claimed intellectual disabilities and the actions of defense lawyers and prosecutors, the court now must rule on a relatively new method of execution. the case involves the use of a sedative called midazolam as part of a three-drug cocktail used by several states, including oklahoma, where three death-row inmates are challenging its use. unlike stronger barbiturates that are in short supply, the drug has failed in some cases to block pain and suffering during the lethal injection process. <u+2022> license plates. this is a free speech case that hinges on who is speaking <u+2014> the state government issuing specialty license plates or the vehicles' owners. texas, which like every other state issues such plates to produce revenue while promoting a variety of causes, refused to approve the sons of confederate veterans' request for a plate featuring the confederate flag. the justices must decide if the government has the right to suppress its own speech or must allow private speech by motorists, no matter how offensive. <u+2022> political maps. in the second case to reach the court this year on political redistricting, the justices must decide whether nonpartisan commissions can replace state legislatures in drawing congressional district maps every 10 years. those commissions are used in seven states, including california, to take the redistricting process out of the hands of politicians with a vested interest. but the arizona state legislature's republican majority argued that the constitution gives that power solely to state legislatures. a majority of the court's justices appeared to agree during oral arguments. <u+2022> religious signs. also from arizona comes a case combining religious freedom and highway clutter. tiny good news community church is challenging the town of gilbert's sign ordinances, which restrict signs advertising upcoming events <u+2014> such as church services <u+2014> far more than political and ideological signs. while acknowledging that local governments can regulate for the purposes of beautification, the justices likely will rule that the town went too far in limiting church event signs to 6 square feet and 13 hours. that would be good news for good news.

supreme court races the clock on gay marriage, obamacare and more

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

5228.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

408.0

1.0

0.0

98.0

0.0

31.0

14.0

19.0

8.0

19.0

15.0

13.0

7.0

22.0

23.0

39.0

411.0

99.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

while the full field of republican presidential candidates resumed campaigning friday, it was sens. ted cruz and marco rubio who emerged from last night's fox business debate the apparent main challengers to front-runner<u+00a0>donald trump -- though new jersey gov. chris christie's feisty exchanges may have left some thinking what was once a 17-candidate scramble, now is a four-man showdown. or, maybe five, as former florida gov. jeb bush, who managed to get in a few shots at trump, picked up the endorsement friday morning of former candidate sen. lindsey graham. trump, though, quickly dismissed the backing, tweeting that bush<u+2019>s <u+201c>chances of winning are zero,<u+201d> the same as graham<u+2019>s polling. the exchanges all marked a newly aggressive campaign heading into the final stretch before iowa. for trump and cruz in particular, the fox business network debate in south carolina marked the first where real tensions showed through. before, the two top-polling candidates essentially refused to attack each other, preserving a d<u+00e9>tente that extended to the campaign trail. trump, after the debate, acknowledged in one tv interview that their <u+201c>bromance<u+201d> is over. the debate could set the tone for the final two weeks before the leadoff iowa caucuses, with the leading candidates now searching aggressively for weak spots in each other<u+2019>s records. on friday, the candidates spread all over the early-voting state map. trump is following on his strong performance with an iowa rally friday morning. cruz is charging through south carolina, while rubio is in new hampshire. trump also has rented out space at an iowa theater and is giving residents free tickets to a showing of <u+201c>13 hours: the secret soldiers of benghazi<u+201d> friday evening, according to the des moines register. the movie depicts the 2012 terror attack on the u.s. compound in benghazi, a topic that has haunted hillary clinton<u+2019>s presidential bid. with the polls tightening in the middle in the granite state <u+2013> and at the top in iowa <u+2013> nearly a half-dozen candidates are now firing at each other on a regular basis. rubio sustained his attacks going into friday, launching a new tv ad that calls accusations from bush <u+201c>desperate<u+201d> <u+2013> and reprising his criticism on cruz<u+2019> consistency in an interview with fox news. <u+201c>i like ted, we<u+2019>re friends, but he campaigns as a consistent conservative. <u+2026> that is not his record; he has flipped his position on birthright citizenship, on legalization of illegal immigrants,<u+201d> he told fox news. when rubio launched that same attack at cruz thursday night, though, cruz deftly countered. <u+201c>i appreciate you dumping your oppo research folder on the debate stage,<u+201d> cruz said, maintaining that he opposes <u+201c>amnesty<u+201d> while rubio backs citizenship for illegal immigrants. through most of the debate, cruz showed off his skills as practiced debater. he employed this early on to fend off a challenge from trump over the canada-born senator<u+2019>s eligibility to seek the presidency. he accused trump of pushing <u+201c>birther theories<u+201d> because the polls are tightening. then, in a retort reminiscent of reagan<u+2019>s famous <u+201c>youth and inexperience<u+201d> quip, cruz tried to flip the script by noting some <u+201c>birther theories<u+201d> say a candidate must have two parents born on u.s. soil to be eligible. pointing out trump<u+2019>s mother was born in scotland, cruz said: <u+201c>on the issue of citizenship, i<u+2019>m not going to use your mother<u+2019>s birth against you.<u+201d> trump said, <u+201c>but i was born here <u+2026> big difference.<u+201d> but trump, though, was seen as landing a decisive retort when cruz criticized him for <u+201c>new york values.<u+201d> recalling memories from after 9/11, trump passionately described the <u+201c>horrific<u+201d> clean up and the <u+201c>smell of death<u+201d> in the city. <u+201c>it was with us for months, the smell,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>and everybody in the world loved new york, loved new yorkers -- and i have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement.<u+201d> not to be overshadowed, rubio and christie both broke through on several occasions. while rubio and cruz tangled over their immigration records and voting consistency, rubio also accused christie of endorsing <u+201c>many of the ideas that barack obama supports, whether it is common core or gun control or the appointment of sonia sotomayor or the donation he made to planned parenthood.<u+201d> <u+201c>i stood on the stage and watched marco <u+2026> rather indignantly, look at governor bush and say, <u+2018>someone told you that because we're running for the same office, that criticizing me will get you to that office,<u+2019><u+201d> he said. <u+201c>it appears that the same someone has been whispering in old marco's ear too.<u+201d> often left on the sidelines of the rhetorical battles were ohio gov. john kasich and retired neurosurgeon ben carson. carson has seen his numbers steadily slide in iowa, though kasich is still polling strong in new hampshire.

gloves off for top tier in gop race after 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

2.0

48.0

8.0

4788.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

348.0

0.0

90.0

0.0

21.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

15.0

7.0

10.0

5.0

14.0

24.0

25.0

350.0

90.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

this is partly a function of her recent climb in the polls, while donald trump has begun to slide. it is also partly a function of her strict adherence to right-wing ideology on issues such as abortion and national security, and partly a function of the affect she<u+2019>s developing on the campaign trail. of the top three current candidates <u+2013> fiorina, trump and ben carson <u+2013> it is the former hp executive who has emerged with the steely resolve and chest-thumping, unapologetic jingoism so beloved by conservatives. combine this with specific policy prescriptions and you get a formidable candidate who, unlike someone like jeb! bush, seems to grow, not wilt, in the spotlight. full disclosure: two weeks ago, i wrote an entire column arguing the exact opposite of what i<u+2019>m about to say. but fiorina<u+2019>s debate performance and her ongoing defense of her comments on planned parenthood, combined with polls indicating the air really has started leaking out of the trump balloon, have me rethinking my position. her mtp interview was a textbook example of fiorina<u+2019>s effectiveness in appealing to the right wing, particularly when she<u+2019>s in the cross hairs of a mainstream media outlet. (that she was questioned by chuck todd, an interviewer so hapless he might as well have been my 2-year-old nephew asking <u+201c>but why?<u+201d> after every fiorina answer, certainly helped.) asked why she<u+2019>s sticking to the well-documented fictions<u+00a0>she keeps telling about the infamous planned parenthood videos, fiorina smiled like a shark, shook her head, condescended to and talked over todd, and reiterated with all the assurance of a champion bullshit artist that yes, there is no question that <u+201c>planned parenthood is aborting fetuses alive to harvest their brains and other body parts. that is a fact.<u+201d> it is useless to point out how many times this garbage has been debunked. fiorina not only either believes it or can convincingly pretend to, but she also gives the antiabortion movement on the right some additional credibility. while one expects, say, former baptist minister mike huckabee<u+2019>s strident antiabortion rhetoric, fiorina does not wear her religion on her sleeve. nor does she, as<u+00a0>nearly every other candidate does, come from a legislative background where she has wrestled with the abortion issue. she can plausibly claim to be a secular true believer, making antiabortion positions not just the province of evangelicals and other religious conservatives. fiorina also has an advantage over the openly religious ben carson in this area, one created by the latter<u+2019>s soft-spoken demeanor. the republican base is in a fighting mood. the more spark she shows, the more she can draw conservatives away from the retired neurosurgeon who is currently a hair behind donald trump in the polls. but where fiorina<u+2019>s demagoguery becomes even more dangerous is in its specificity about policy. compare her talk on foreign policy to those of trump and carson. when asked during the debate how she would interact with vladimir putin, fiorina told cnn<u+2019>s audience, what i would do, immediately, is begin rebuilding the sixth fleet, i would begin rebuilding the missile defense program in poland, i would conduct regular, aggressive military exercises in the baltic states. i<u+2019>d probably send a few thousand more troops into germany. vladimir putin would get the message. imagine you are a russian hard-liner sitting in moscow watching this debate and hearing the gop<u+2019>s third-leading candidate promising a foreign policy aimed at your country that is so muscular, ronald reagan<u+2019>s corpse just got an erection. you<u+2019>re not thinking that fiorina sounds more unhinged than general buck turgidson or the fact that barack obama is also conducting aggressive military exercises in the baltics and the sixth fleet is as big and strong as ever. you<u+2019>re thinking comrade putin will stand strong against this foolishness when carly fiorina is in the oval office. and if you are a conservative voter in america, you<u+2019>re thinking, carly won<u+2019>t be a chump like that wimp obama, who has let putin walk all over him. that swelling in your chest is a jingoistic pride that you haven<u+2019>t felt during the long, dark years that the kenyan usurper has been destroying america from within. compare fiorina to the boastfulness of donald trump, who talks in generalities: i<u+2019>ll make us great again, i get along with everyone so i<u+2019>ll get along with the russians and chinese, i<u+2019>m a successful businessman, i<u+2019>ll make fantastic deals and everyone will be very happy. trump also promised he would actually talk to putin instead of ordering the sixth fleet into the turkish straits practically the moment he takes his hand off the bible at his inauguration. despite all his bluster, trump at the end of the day wants to be the friendly executive strolling across the construction site and shaking hands with all the hardhat-sporting workers. fiorina wants to be the one yelling at them to quit staring at her and get back to work. after all, talking and making friends is also what that community organizer barack obama does.

carly fiorina is more dangerous than donald trump: her brazen demagoguery puts his to shame

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

91.0

8.0

5059.0

0.0

1.0

6.0

0.0

398.0

2.0

0.0

105.0

0.0

36.0

7.0

16.0

6.0

20.0

10.0

6.0

3.0

21.0

27.0

30.0

404.0

107.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu blasted the framework agreement reached by world powers to curb iran's nuclear program,<u+00a0>repeatedly<u+00a0>calling it a "free path to a bomb" that will spark an arms race in the middle east. under the framework announced last week, international sanctions would be lifted in phases if iran meets its commitments. the<u+00a0>international atomic energy agency would conduct inspections to monitor significant limits on iranian nuclear facilities, and the restrictions would be in place for at least a decade. in a series of interviews on sunday political talk shows, netanyahu called for world leaders to strike a "better deal" that significantly<u+00a0><u+2014> and permanently<u+00a0><u+2014> rolls back iran's nuclear infrastructure. sanctions should be ratcheted up <u+2014> not lifted<u+00a0><u+2014> to<u+00a0>pressure iran until it stops its "aggression in the region," he said.<u+00a0>netanyahu questioned whether inspections would be effective, saying iran has shown that it cannot be trusted. "i wouldn't bet the shop on inspections," the israeli leader said on cnn's "state of the union." "it's not a country that you can<u+00a0>place your trust in. and it's not a country that you're going to resolve its congenital cheating. you're just not going to replace it by placing more inspectors there." the "very, very bad" agreement only allows iran to build a vast arsenal by placing temporary restrictions and lifting sanctions that had crippled the country's economy, netanyahu said. he repeatedly said the agreement would "pump up their terror machine worldwide."<u+00a0>echoing concerns among skeptics of the framework, netanyahu said it would spark a nuclear arms race in the middle east, with sunnis states already seeing shiite iran as a major threat. "i think this is a dream deal for iran and a nightmare deal for the world," netanyahu said on nbc's "meet the press." netanyahu did not outwardly criticize president obama, but he said there is a "legitimate difference of view" between the two leaders. netanyahu said he believes obama is doing what is best for the united states. but the agreement will jeopardize<u+00a0>not only israel but also surrounding countries in the middle east, the israeli leader said on abc's "this week." the framework agreement does not block iran's path to nuclear weapons, and instead paves it, he said.

netanyahu blasts <u+2018>very, very bad<u+2019> iran nuclear agreement

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

56.0

8.0

2301.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

170.0

0.0

37.0

0.0

23.0

8.0

1.0

3.0

9.0

1.0

5.0

2.0

12.0

11.0

172.0

37.0

23.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the party looks to kamala harris, catherine cortez masto, tammy duckworth and maggie hassan to help lead it out of the abyss.

gop avoids showdown over epa climate change rules

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

49.0

8.0

125.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

4.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

at this point, even amid one of the most captivating political upheavals in recent memory, the election process of 2016 is starting to feel like an extended car ride with a group of people after the conversational possibilities have run out. we<u+2019>re all buckled up, with a long way to go, but everyone<u+2019>s most irritating habits are already out in force. we<u+2019>re feeling candidate fatigue, a malady first observed in the 1980s, perhaps earlier, and it<u+2019>s the inevitable consequence of an exceptionally drawn-out political process combined with ample media coverage. candidate fatigue strikes people at different times. people were already complaining of al gore fatigue in 1999, and the complaints were deafening by 2000. john kerry fatigue<u+2014>yes, there was that in 2004. but it plagues everyone eventually: barack obama, john mccain, mitt romney. yes, yes, yes. and now it<u+2019>s all-of-them fatigue. hillary clinton, donald trump, bernie sanders, ted cruz, and john kasich rotate seats regularly, each of them taking turns at the wheel. each takes a different approach to driving, all of them tiresome. donald trump used to be the most interesting driver, because he took strange turns and it kind of worked. he also crashed through fruit stands, and that was fascinating, at first. then it seemed like he was driving through fruit stands for no reason other than that it pleased him. perhaps you thought trump had a grander plan with this, that there were some shortcuts being taken now in order to get everyone somewhere worthwhile later. perhaps you don<u+2019>t think so anymore. hillary clinton is a more controlled driver, at first glance. she sits straight at the wheel, signals diligently, looks attentive. but she doesn<u+2019>t seem to notice, or maybe care, that she<u+2019>s weaving between lanes and belching up exhaust. ask her about it and she smiles, sometimes laughs, and says she doesn<u+2019>t know what you<u+2019>re talking about. she sometimes sings, to project cheer. she does not have a good singing voice. ted cruz, when driving, moves his seat back, leans the seat-back down, and steers with just one hand, his right, resting his left arm in the open window. this is meant to look confident, manly, and controlled. but it<u+2019>s 40 degrees outside and raining. everyone is cold. ted has planned everything out carefully. he doesn<u+2019>t want you to touch his things. when you left your journal in the hotel room, though, he found it and said he intended to keep it, because technically he was in possession of it. then he started reading it and smirking, occasionally pushing his hand in the air in a shushing gesture and telling you to calm down. john kasich pulls his seat nearly all the way forward, and he places both hands on the very top of the wheel, elbows at the bottom. he fumes at other drivers, and he gets angry when he makes a wrong turn. if he feels people aren<u+2019>t behaving themselves, he likes to pull over, park on a shoulder, and turn around in his seat to lecture everyone. no one can explain why he<u+2019>s in the car or where he<u+2019>s going. bernie sanders has two hands on the wheel and drives alertly but also, like kasich, irritably. he yells a lot. he often lifts his arms and spreads his hands, upturned, into the air, to signal incredulity. when hillary takes potshots at his driving, he tells her he<u+2019>s driving fine. he looks tired, and the car<u+2019>s running out of gas, but he thinks he can make it. people tell him to try some of the new features or do some reading to get up to speed on the auto world, but he has an approach to driving and he<u+2019>s sticking to it. candidate fatigue can be a dangerous thing, actually. in 2000, journalists who were stuck with al gore got so sick of him that they got unfair, amplifying every one of his missteps and inventing some more to boot. that<u+2019>s one reason reporters are rotated more often now. it makes them less likely to fall in love with the candidate or descend into hate. so one must keep that in mind. especially since there are over six months to go. in any case, we must be grateful to these candidates on the presidential car ride, as they weather the madness of a presidential campaign. it<u+2019>s rough enough to watch them. imagine how much rougher it is to be them.

has hillary clinton outstayed her welcome?

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

42.0

8.0

4202.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

265.0

1.0

0.0

109.0

0.0

45.0

9.0

8.0

4.0

11.0

22.0

27.0

268.0

110.0

45.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republicans on monday blasted secretary of state john kerry for suggesting in a letter to his iranian counterpart that the administration could help the country get around new visa restrictions passed by congress. <u+201c>instead of bending over backwards to try to placate the iranian regime, the white house needs to be holding it accountable for its recent missile tests, its continued support for terrorism, and its wrongful imprisonment of americans,<u+201d> house foreign affairs committee chairman ed royce, r-calif., said in a statement to foxnews.com. at issue are tightened security requirements for america<u+2019>s visa waiver program, which allows citizens of 38 countries to travel to the u.s. without visas. under changes in the newly signed spending bill, people from those countries who have traveled to iran, iraq, syria and sudan in the past five years must now obtain visas to enter the u.s. top tehran officials, however, complained the changes violate the terms of the nuclear deal, which says the u.s. and other world powers will refrain from any policy intended to adversely affect normalization of trade and economic relations with iran. kerry responded to these concerns in a dec. 19 letter to his iranian counterpart, mohammad javad zarif -- and suggested the administration could simply bypass the rules for iran. <u+201c>i am also confident that the recent changes in visa requirements passed in congress, which the administration has the authority to waive, will not in any way prevent us from meeting our [nuclear deal] commitments, and that we will implement them so as not to interfere with legitimate business interests of iran,<u+201d> he said. kerry<u+2019>s letter to zarif assured that the u.s. would <u+201c>adhere to the full measure of our commitments.<u+201d> as for changes to the visa program, kerry floated several alternative options for easing any impact on iran <u+2013> including waiving the new requirements. <u+201c>to this end, we have a number of potential tools available to us, including multiple entry ten-year business visas, programs for expediting business visas, and the waiver authority provided under the new legislation,<u+201d> he wrote. the legislation indeed includes a provision allowing the homeland security secretary to waive the requirements if the secretary determines this <u+201c>is in the law enforcement or national security interests of the united states.<u+201d> but house majority leader kevin mccarthy, r-calif., voiced concern on monday that kerry was proposing a <u+201c>blanket<u+201d> waiver to accommodate iran<u+2019>s complaints. he said that is not congress<u+2019> intent. <u+201c>contrary to what the secretary of state seems to be saying to iranian foreign minister javad zarif, it was not and has never been congress<u+2019>s intent to allow the administration to grant a blanket waiver to travellers from iran in order to facilitate the implementation of the iran deal,<u+201d> he said in a statement. mccarthy said the point of the legislation was to strengthen security and <u+201c>keep the american people safe from terrorism and from foreign travelers who potentially pose a threat to our homeland.<u+201d> kerry<u+2019>s assurances also raised concerns that the u.s. may be backing down to iran<u+2019>s complaints while at the same time reluctant to punish tehran for its own potential violations. <u+201c>instead of undermining congressional intent regarding the visa waiver program, the white house should instead focus on iran<u+2019>s repeated violations of the u.n. security council's bans on missile tests,<u+201d> mccarthy said. <u+201c>iran<u+2019>s unwillingness to follow these international agreements should be a red flag that the iran nuclear deal isn<u+2019>t worth the paper it is written on.<u+201d> omri ceren, with the washington, d.c.-based israel project, also told the washington free beacon, <u+201c>according to the obama administration<u+2019>s latest interpretation, the nuclear deal allows iran to test ballistic missiles in violation of international law, but does not allow congress to prevent terrorists from coming into the united states.<u+201d> the same article noted that the state department official in charge of implementing the nuclear agreement warned congress last week that the new visa rules <u+201c>could have a very negative impact on the deal.<u+201d> indeed, kerry<u+2019>s letter came as top-ranking iranian officials accused the u.s. of flouting the nuclear agreement. iran<u+2019>s deputy foreign minister abbas araghchi said sunday that the change <u+201c>contradicts<u+201d> the nuclear deal. "definitely, this law adversely affects economic, cultural, scientific and tourism relations,<u+201d> araghchi was quoted by state tv as saying. asked about kerry<u+2019>s assurances at monday<u+2019>s daily briefing, state department spokesman john kirby said the secretary made clear they would <u+201c>implement this new legislation so as not to interfere with legitimate business interests of iran.<u+201d> kirby said the law would be followed, but there are a <u+201c>number of potential tools<u+201d> to ensure this does not violate the nuclear deal. as for the dhs waiver authority, he said it<u+2019>s too soon to say <u+201c>if and when<u+201d> that might be used. the kerry letter initially was obtained and published by the national iranian american council. the state department confirmed the document<u+2019>s authenticity on monday. foxnews.com<u+2019>s judson berger and the associated press contributed to this report.

republicans blast kerry for suggesting iran could skirt new visa rules

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

70.0

8.0

5235.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

398.0

0.0

91.0

0.0

40.0

7.0

11.0

6.0

12.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

29.0

17.0

27.0

403.0

91.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the horrific story of the unarmed walter scott<u+2019>s death<u+00a0>at the hands of officer michael slager<u+00a0>continues to reverberate. aside from the incontrovertible evidence on the tape that the accused officer shot him in the back as if he were doing target practice, there has since emerged more tape of the traffic stop itself and audio of the officer speaking with his superiors on the phone raising even more questions about his state of mind at the time of the shooting. but as journalists have gone back and studied the officer<u+2019>s record and found that he was previously investigated for taser abuse. and on even further investigation it was found that<u+00a0>this jurisdiction is known as <u+201c>taser town<u+201d>: until the eight shots heard <u+2019>round the world, cops in north charleston, south carolina, were primarily distinguished by their zesty use of tasers. as computed by a local newspaper in 2006, cops there used tasers 201 times in an 18-month period, averaging once every 40 hours in one six-month stretch and disproportionately upon african americans. the charleston post & courier did the tally after the death of a mentally ill man named kip black, who was tasered six times on one occasion and nine times on another. black died immediately after the second jolting, though the coroner set the cause of death as cocaine-fueled <u+201c>excited delirium syndrome.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s important to note that<u+00a0>taser international has spent large sums<u+00a0>convincing local coroners that this syndrome (which primarily seems to kill people in police custody) makes it the victim<u+2019>s responsibility if they have the bad luck to die from being shot full of electricity with a taser. it<u+2019>s not just illegal drugs in the system which can allegedly cause it. adrenaline can as well. so if a person fails to remain calm in face of an arrest and finds the feeling of 50,000 volts going through their system to be stressful they have no one to blame but themselves if they die. those who have been following the story of walter scott understand the significance of the taser. it<u+2019>s not just that the officer evidently lied about scott taking his taser, thus somehow justifying his using lethal force, or the fact that he appears to have tried to plant the taser next to the slain man<u+2019>s body to cover his tracks. the man who filmed the shooting said<u+00a0>this: it<u+2019>s not unusual for people to try to escape from a taser if they can. it is, quite literally, a torture device designed to force compliance with terrible pain. the people of taser town, particularly african american men, undoubtedly understand exactly what is going to happen if they find themselves in the custody of a police officer.<u+00a0>here<u+2019>s one example of how it would likely go down,<u+00a0>as reported by the guardian: slager is among three patrolmen named in a lawsuit filed by julius wilson, who said he was arrested after being stopped in his car in august last year. wilson is also suing the city of north charleston, the city police department and police chief eddie driggers. speaking at a press conference<u+00a0>on monday, wilson described slager and his colleagues as <u+201c>bad, corrupt cops<u+201d>. he said: <u+201c>the use of excessive force or punishment to torture suspects is not something that should be tolerated by the north charleston police department.<u+201d>[<u+2026>] wilson, who has a criminal record, said he was stopped on<u+00a0>25 august<u+00a0>because his vehicle had a broken tail light. scott, 50, was stopped for the same reason on 5 april before fleeing and being shot dead by slager. wilson was stopped by an officer edwards, he said, who was joined 10 minutes later by slager and an officer clemens despite wilson calmly <u+201c>making small talk and laughing<u+201d>. after refusing to step out until he was told why he was being arrested, wilson claimed, he was forcibly pulled out of his vehicle by slager and the two other officers. the three then <u+201c>forcibly restrained wilson on his stomach on the pavement face down,<u+201d> the lawsuit stated. despite wilson <u+201c>not moving, nor resisting<u+201d> and lying with his hands above his head, the lawsuit claimed, slager broke a silence among the officers by shouting: <u+201c>watch out! i<u+2019>m going to tase!<u+201d> he then allegedly <u+201c>shot his ncpd-issued taser into wilson<u+2019>s back<u+201d>. the lawsuit alleged wilson <u+201c>writhed in pain from the electric shock<u+201d>. it said when slager warned his colleagues he was about to fire his taser, <u+201c>wilson was cooperating fully<u+201d> and allowing the two other officers to place his hands behind his back. tasers guidelines vary by department and jurisdiction, but generally their use is only considered reasonable when the subject poses a safety threat. clearly, shooting an unarmed 50-year-old man when he runs from the taser is not one of those cases. the video of the scott incident shows that officer slager is confused on that issue, to say the least. and it<u+2019>s just as clear, based on that same standard, that nobody could ever claim such force is justified when presented with<u+00a0>an unarmed suspect facing down on the ground, with his hands behind his back. using a taser in that situation is simply a form of unofficial street justice, a little torture at the hands of the authorities to make a point. tasers are not simply used in place of lethal force, and they<u+2019>re not always used to force compliance. they are very often used as on-the-spot punishment by police who want to teach citizens a lesson. take<u+00a0>the now notorious california incident<u+00a0>that happened to be filmed by a local news station, in which <u+00a0>a man on horseback led police on a chase through the desert. when he fell from the horse, police swarmed and he very clearly laid down on his stomach and put his hands behind his back. then the police beat the hell out of him and tasered him repeatedly. this footage has garnered widespread criticism because of the beating, and for good reason. it<u+2019>s brutal, primitive behavior. but you won<u+2019>t find many people expressing outrage about the electric shocks being administered to this man over and over again.<u+00a0>here<u+2019>s a typical news report of the incident: in video captured by cameras aboard a helicopter for knbc, deputies gather around the man after he falls from a horse he was riding to flee from them. the video shows deputies using a stun gun on him and then repeatedly kicking and hitting him. knbc reported that the man <u+2014> identified by authorities as francis pusok <u+2014> appeared to be kicked 17 times, punched 37 times and hit with a baton four times. again, if you look at the footage, pusok was on the ground, face down with his hands behind his back before anyone tasered him or physically assaulted him. and yet the tasering is apparently considered a-ok. at the very least, it isn<u+2019>t mentioned as something that shocks the conscience the way the beating does.perhaps this is because the searing pain of electro-shock doesn<u+2019>t leave much in the way of a mark. but hideously painful it is. yet for some reason, delivering this particular agony to a suspect is not something people reject when there is no danger to police or bystanders, and the suspect is compliant. but police do it routinely, and are rarely sanctioned for it. some of this undoubtedly stems from the fact that popular culture has turned tasering into slapstick comedy. movies and tv shows and countless youtube videos portray it as a hilarious joke. <u+201c>don<u+2019>t tase me bro<u+201d> became as national catch phrase. but it<u+2019>s not funny. tasers can kill people. and regardless of what level of respect and compliance one thinks police are entitled to get from the public, they are not entitled to torture and punish citizens to teach them a lesson. walter scott ran from the pain of the taser and he was shot in the back numerous times for doing it. francis pusok was compliant and was tasered and beaten repeatedly anyway. it appears that such shootings and beatings, when captured on film anyway, are still considered beyond the pale in america these days. in both cases, officers will have to face some sanction for their behavior. slager is facing a murder charge. it<u+2019>s unknown what the california cops will face, but the fbi is investigating, so there may be some federal civil rights charges. it will be very interesting if any of the officers are charged with assault for using the taser. let<u+2019>s just say it will be among the vast minority of cases ever brought if they are.

the walter scott outrage nobody is talking about

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

8262.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

603.0

1.0

0.0

196.0

0.0

77.0

39.0

17.0

23.0

48.0

10.0

33.0

16.0

27.0

65.0

38.0

605.0

197.0

77.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a&q is a special series that inverts the classic q&a, taking some of the most frequently posed solutions to pressing matters of policy and exploring their complexity. in modern politics, nothing brings people together more than talking about how far apart they are. twelve years ago, a speech denouncing political polarization thrust barack obama into the national spotlight, and that very premise will outlast him when he leaves the white house next january. the american public is divided<u+2014>over economic policy, social policy, foreign policy, race, privacy and national security, and many other things. a host of factors, from partisan gerrymandering to exclusionary party primaries, are driving them further apart. here we break down those factors behind our polarized politics, along with some of the most common proposals to fix it. political polarization is worse now than it<u+2019>s ever been. let<u+2019>s stop right there: is this really true? it<u+2019>s a common cry of politicians, government-reform advocates, pundits, journalists, and disaffected voters to bemoan the state of politics and declare that <u+201c>washington is broken,<u+201d> perhaps irrevocably. but people often forget that american history is rife with examples of debilitating polarization that make the partisan battles of today pale by comparison. this was a key point president obama made in his recent speech to the illinois general assembly, where he said that <u+201c>it isn<u+2019>t true that today<u+2019>s issues are inherently more polarizing than the past.<u+201d> a fundamental dispute over the institution of slavery plunged the nation into a civil war a century-and-a-half ago. in 1856, violence over slavery erupted in the august chamber of the u.s. senate, when an anti-slavery lawmaker from massachusetts, charles sumner, was caned on the senate floor by a member of the house from south carolina, preston brooks. fans of the broadway hit, hamilton, have also been reminded of another black mark on u.s. political history, when the nation<u+2019>s first treasury secretary was killed in a duel by the sitting vice president, aaron burr, in 1804. more recently, look at the emotional debates over racial equality and the vietnam war during the 1960s and 1970s. the country witnessed the assassinations of john f. and robert kennedy, martin luther king, and malcolm x. the segregationist former governor of alabama, george wallace, was shot and paralyzed while he campaigned for president in 1972. rioting and civil unrest plagued major cities and college campuses across the countries for long stretches at a time. fine, the 1860s and the 1960s were bad. but the fact that the nation hasn<u+2019>t fallen into civil war and our leaders haven<u+2019>t been gunned down is a pathetically low bar for a first-world country with the greatest military and strongest economy on earth. even during the tumult of the 1960s, congress created medicare and medicaid, enacted landmark civil-rights legislation, and passed a sweeping education bill that still serves as the foundation for federal funding of public schools today. ever since obama<u+2019>s first two years in office, congress hasn<u+2019>t done anything except shut down the government and come close to tanking the economy with a near-default on the nation<u+2019>s debt. immigration reform stalled. gun reform went nowhere. congress can<u+2019>t even agree to declare war on isis, and now that antonin scalia has died, it might leave the supreme court short-handed for more than a year. congress is hopelessly gridlocked, and we need major political reform to fix it. what<u+2019>s wrong with congress? or more precisely: is anything actually wrong with congress, or is it simply functioning how it was designed to function? the confrontations over the last few years have led to rampant complaints that the national legislature is <u+201c>dysfunctional,<u+201d> which in turn has contributed to a stunningly-low approval rating for congress. (it sunk to single digits and has recently hovered in the low-to-mid teens.) for one, lawmakers in washington have struggled not only to pass big bills, but they<u+2019>ve had trouble completing even the most routine tasks of governance. in 2011, republicans refused for months to raise the debt limit and nearly caused an unprecedented default that could have sunk the fragile economic recovery. two years later, conservatives forced a two-and-a-half week government shutdown over funding for the healthcare law. in the senate, both parties<u+2014>and particularly republicans until last year<u+2014>have used the filibuster more frequently than ever before to stall legislation and presidential appointments. this has led to calls to either reform the filibuster or scrap it entirely as a way to speed up the legislative process and make it easier for congress to reflect the will of the people. in 2013, democrats did change the rules to make it easier to confirm executive and judicial appointees (below the supreme court), and republicans didn<u+2019>t bother to reverse those changes when they took control last year. yet for all of the consternation, if you are a democrat, congress functioned quite well in the first two years of obama<u+2019>s term. the house and senate passed so much significant legislation<u+2014>the stimulus bill, health care, student loans, and wall street reform<u+2014>that the white house and congressional democrats had trouble explaining it all to voters. then came the tea party wave of 2010, and the american people elected a republican house to serve as a check on the obama administration. it<u+2019>s only natural that divided government would lead to some gridlock, because congress was designed to only pass laws if there is a consensus in favor of them<u+2014>especially in the senate, which was created as a check on the inflamed passions that would lead to political overreactions by the house. so if you don<u+2019>t like how congress is working, blame the founders<u+2014>which is exactly what my colleague yoni appelbaum did last year, when he wrote that the gridlock on display in recent years may be <u+201c>a product of flaws inherent<u+201d> in the constitution<u+2019>s design. sure, but the founders never imagined that partisan gerrymandering would render the house of representatives so polarized that most lawmakers now fear a primary challenge from the right or left more than they fear losing to the other party in a general election. they have no incentive to compromise. we need non-partisan redistricting commissions to redraw the lines and make house members more accountable to people other than the extremes of each party. well, the founders never imagined political parties at all<u+2014>but that doesn<u+2019>t mean the system can<u+2019>t work. is redistricting reform possible, and would redrawing house districts help reduce polarization? the 435 congressional districts are redrawn every 10 years after the census, and historically, it has been the purview of state legislatures to determine the districts in their state. naturally, the party in power tends to draw them to maximize its advantage, a process that over time has resulted in some totally ridiculous-looking districts that stretch horizontally or diagonally across states, or connect two population centers with a strip as thin as a single road. the washington post did a good rundown of the most oddly-shaped districts in 2014. the republican wave election in 2010, which extended from congress down to governorships and state legislatures, gave the gop significant power in redistricting after the decennial census that year. the results were obvious in 2012, when republicans retained a large majority in house seats, 234-201, despite the fact that democrats won 1.4 million more votes than gop candidates in house races. yet complaints about gerrymandering cross party lines. when obama spoke in illinois, it was the republicans in the state legislature who cheered his call for reform, knowing that in the land of lincoln it is democrats who draw the districts. and two retiring members of the gop's tea party class of 2010, representatives richard hanna of new york and scott rigell of virginia, blamed gerrymandering for some of the hyper-partisanship they experienced during their years in congress. good-government groups have been pushing for states to turn over their redistricting process to non-partisan<u+2014>or at least truly bipartisan<u+2014>commissions as a way to keep politicians from <u+201c>picking their voters<u+201d> rather than the other way around. this past june, the supreme court gave a boost to these efforts by upholding the congressional map drawn by an independent commission in arizona that had been created through a successful ballot initiative. the republican-controlled state legislature had tried to invalidate the commission's map by arguing that the constitution vested the power to draw districts in the legislature<u+2019>s hands, not the voters<u+2019>. in a 5-4 opinion written by justice ruth bader ginsburg, the high court sided with the voter-empowered commission. a dozen states, including california, currently use some form of a commission to draw districts, and new york will turn to one after the 2020 census. according to nyu<u+2019>s brennan center for justice, there are <u+201c>serious reform efforts<u+201d> underway in an additional nine states. given the intense interest state legislators have in keeping power over redistricting both on the local and federal level, even reform advocates acknowledge it is difficult to see the total elimination of partisan gerrymandering across the country anytime soon. as for whether redistricting commissions actually lead to less polarization, that answer also is likely a long way off. when california implemented its new map in 2012, there was a big increase in turnover in the state<u+2019>s congressional delegation. but it will take a while to assess whether those new legislators are any less partisan or more accountable to their constituents than their predecessors. it<u+2019>s the parties themselves that are the problem. they were never supposed to have this much influence over elections. more and more voters consider themselves independent, but in many district and statewide elections in heavily republican or democratic areas, the only race that matters is the primary, and independent voters often find themselves shut out. every state should follow the california and nebraska model and adopt non-partisan elections, which empower more voters earlier in the electoral process. would non-partisan elections, in place of party primaries, re-empower the political center by engaging more independent voters? that<u+2019>s the argument from the advocates behind open primaries, a group that is pushing states nationwide to replicate the models in california, which went to a <u+201c>top-two<u+201d> primary system in 2012, and nebraska, which has had a non-partisan state legislature since 1936. <u+201c>top-two<u+201d> or <u+201c>jungle primaries<u+201d> are tailor-made for districts or states that are dominated by one party. in those elections, whether in deep-red rural areas or heavily-liberal urban districts, often the party primary is the only competitive race, and the general election becomes a one-sided affair. if the primaries are reserved only for registered republicans or democrats, independents are effectively shut out of the voting process, and the election becomes a race to the right or left, and rarely the center. the idea behind creating a top-two primary that<u+2019>s open to everyone is that voters would have two opportunities to legitimately weigh in. and in districts or states where two members of the same party end up going up against each other, it would force them to compete in the general election for the votes of the entire electorate, not just the party base. advocates hold up nebraska as an exemplar, citing the fact that even though it<u+2019>s a conservative state, its non-partisan legislature has been able to reach agreement on bills to raise the gas tax, abolish the death penalty, and give driver<u+2019>s licenses to undocumented immigrants<u+2014>policies that would be unthinkable in many republican-dominated states. there are now efforts to enact non-partisan elections through ballot initiatives in arizona and south dakota, although supporters acknowledge that the idea hasn<u+2019>t yet gained much support in congress or reached a tipping point in many other states. and opponents argue that non-partisan elections would disproportionately benefit wealthy candidates who want to circumvent the party system, as michael bloomberg did when he was elected mayor of new york and promptly tried<u+2014>and failed<u+2014>to implement non-partisan elections in the city. the solution is automatic voter registration, or even compulsory voting like they have in australia. would more engagement decrease polarization? it<u+2019>s possible. one big critique of the current state of politics is that because such a low percentage of people typically vote, those that do hold more power, and they are more likely to be either very liberal or very conservative. this is especially true in party primaries, which often determine the winner in lopsided states and districts and in which the most motivated people are likeliest to vote. oregon and california have enacted laws to automatically register people who have driver<u+2019>s licenses and who are otherwise eligible to vote. hillary clinton has endorsed the policy nationally. why americans are so polarized: education and evolution two versions of america emerge in the presidential campaign in australia, eligible citizens are required to vote and can face a fine or a court date if they don<u+2019>t. not surprisingly, the turnout rate there is more than 95 percent. in a 2010 policy paper, william galston of the brookings institution recommended that states experiment with compulsory voting as a way to reduce polarization and force candidates to appeal to a broader electorate. needless to say, that is unlikely to happen in the united states on a large scale anytime soon. even the push for universal registration, with the potential to opt out, has drawn opposition from republicans who argue that people shouldn<u+2019>t be forced to participate if they don<u+2019>t want to. there is also skepticism among conservatives that the effort is more about democrats trying to increase voting among minority and young voters, who tend to lean their way and who vote less frequently than older, white citizens. let<u+2019>s be honest. the real issue isn<u+2019>t gerrymandering or the parties: it<u+2019>s money. the influence of wealthy donors has only gotten more pronounced over the years, and the supreme court<u+2019>s 2010 ruling in the citizens united case only tilted the scales even more in the direction of corporations and billionaires. we need to overturn citizens united and fully adopt public financing of elections. isn<u+2019>t money the root of all that<u+2019>s wrong in politics today? do we have any hope of reducing polarization if we can<u+2019>t get rid of the corrupting influence of money? there<u+2019>s no denying that politics is awash in money: the presidential campaign is now a billion-dollar industry, and it takes millions of dollars to win races for governor, senator, and even some for the house. the citizens united decision allowed wealthy interests to spend unlimited sums of money to run ads in support of or in opposition to candidates, and the result has been an even greater flood of negative ads on television around election time. yet while there are legitimate concerns about candidates being beholden to the billionaires supporting them, money in politics doesn<u+2019>t flow entirely in the direction of polarization. take bloomberg, for example: inarguably, the billionaire businessman would not have been mayor of new york without the tens of millions he spent to win his elections. but he is seen as a centrist figure in politics and has spent money on the national level decrying partisanship and dysfunction (even though he has taken partisan positions on certain issues, like guns and climate change). big-business groups like the u.s. chamber of commerce also spend large sums of money to influence elections. but while the chamber ardently opposes obamacare and environmental regulations costly to industry, it sides with the establishment against the tea party in other areas and has spent heavily to back compromises on things like infrastructure bills and immigration reform. money may tip the scales in favor of corporate interests and the whims of the wealthy, but that doesn<u+2019>t always benefit the extremes. in the end, there may not be any one-shot solutions or simple answers. the present degree of political polarization didn<u+2019>t arise overnight, and seems unlikely to dissipate that quickly, either. but even if they don<u+2019>t solve the entirety of the problem, many voters are drawn to particular solutions<u+2014>and there<u+2019>s evidence that some can make at least an incremental difference. these are some of the intriguing questions left to consider: what does the shocking popularity of donald trump say about political polarization? is his success a reflection of a deep split, or does it actually transcend polarization because he is winning support among republican voters despite having so many positions that contradict conservative orthodoxy? if the republican party really does split this summer, what are the chances of a viable third-party or independent candidacy, and what impact could that have on political polarization? beyond this election, is the creation of a viable third party or centrist movement another possible solution to polarization? is polarization strictly a national problem? does the fact that we see more bipartisanship in state government offer hope that polarization in washington will begin to soften? on what issues are americans<u+2014>and their elected representatives<u+2014>actually not polarized? what are the remaining areas of consensus? maybe there<u+2019>s an answer we haven<u+2019>t considered yet. drop your thoughts into an email to [email protected].

what's the answer to political polarization in the u.s.?

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

56.0

8.0

17766.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

1240.0

2.0

0.0

314.0

1.0

0.0

149.0

36.0

29.0

16.0

39.0

19.0

32.0

19.0

56.0

75.0

83.0

1245.0

316.0

150.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

french warplanes launched a ferocious retaliatory assault late sunday on targets in raqqa, syria <u+2014> the islamic state<u+2019>s de facto capital <u+2014> after coordination with u.s. defense officials who helped with the targeting. the french defense ministry said that 10 aircraft dropped 20<u+00a0>bombs on facilities used by the<u+00a0>militant group, which has claimed responsibility for friday<u+2019>s terrorist attacks in paris, striking a command center, a militant-training facility and an arms depot. opposition activists reached in raqqa said they counted at least 30 bombs, which they said had hit, among other things, a soccer stadium, a museum and medical facilities. they said the strikes had knocked out electricity in the city of about 200,000 people. the french statement said the operation, launched from bases in the united arab emirates and jordan, was conducted in coordination with u.s. forces, which have compiled an extensive target list in raqqa. american officials, speaking at the group of 20 summit here that president obama is attending, said the french operation was discussed between the two militaries, as well as in telephone calls saturday and sunday between defense secretary ashton b. carter and his french counterpart. u.s. planes have repeatedly struck in and around raqqa, in north-central syria, in recent months. in iraq on sunday, foreign minister ibrahim al-jafari said iraqi intelligence had obtained information before the paris attacks that the islamic state was planning an imminent terrorist strike overseas that may have been aimed <u+201c>in particular<u+201d> at france, the united states and iran. <u+201c>we notified these countries and warned them,<u+201d> jafari said in a statement, which did not include specifics of when the iraqis acquired the information. u.s. intelligence officials did not confirm the report. administration officials said the united states would not alter its strategy against the islamic state in response to the paris attacks, despite evidence that the terrorist group was expanding its ability to hit western targets. in recent weeks, obama has approved the escalation of airstrikes in syria and iraq and has authorized the deployment of 50 special operations troops to assist syrian kurdish and arab forces pushing toward raqqa. officials said that, in response to the attacks in paris, the administration was seeking renewed global commitment to that intensified military action, and to a negotiated settlement of syria<u+2019>s civil war. france<u+2019>s retaliation came as obama held talks with allied leaders and with russian president vladi<u+00ad>mir putin at the summit being held in this turkish mediterranean resort city. obama vowed again on sunday to help france hunt down the perpetrators of the attacks. deputy national security adviser ben rhodes said obama agreed with french president fran<u+00e7>ois hollande that the rampage, which killed at least 132 and wounded more than 350, was an <u+201c>act of war.<u+201d> but he and others disputed suggestions from republicans that obama, who said in an interview last week that the u.s.-led coalition had contained the islamic state, has consistently underestimated the adversary. [manhunt in europe for at least 1 suspect <u+2018>directly involved<u+2019> in paris attacks] the president was referring to recent setbacks for the militant group on the battlefield in iraq, rhodes told reporters. the islamic state, also known as isis, isil and daesh, a derogatory term in arabic, has long harbored ambitions to sow bloodshed farther from its home base in syria, he said, emphasizing that obama has been realistic that the fight would be long and difficult. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s the manifestation of what has been the ambition of isil for some time now <u+2014> to conduct attacks beyond iraq and syria,<u+201d> rhodes said. <u+201c>the president indicated when he launched the counter-isil strike campaign that he knew isil had those ambitions, which is why we have always focused on the threat of foreign fighters.<u+201d> the highly coordinated assaults on several locations in paris on friday evening have shaken the gathering of global leaders here. the islamic state claimed responsibility for the attacks, which intelligence officials said were carried out by three teams of terrorists affiliated with the extremist group. the attacks prompted hollande to declare that france would lead a <u+201c>merciless<u+201d> fight against the islamic state, a move that could increase pressure on the obama administration to take stronger actions to ensure that the islamic state cannot attack the united states directly. gop leaders, including some presidential candidates, have faulted obama<u+2019>s strategy as too limited to contain the islamic state. the paris attacks, along with the recent bombing of a<u+00a0>russian commercial plane claimed by the group, have thrust the administration<u+2019>s approach in the middle east into the 2016 campaign for the white house. democratic front-runner hillary rodham clinton, who served as secretary of state in obama<u+2019>s first term, has struggled to articulate how she would deal with the threats. republican presidential hopeful jeb bush said in an interview on nbc<u+2019>s <u+201c>meet the press<u+201d> that the united states <u+201c>should declare war and harness all of the power the u.s. can bring to bear.<u+201d> [in paris, a soccer game, an asian dinner, a concert <u+2014> and then terror] after a meeting with turkish president recep tayyip erdogan, the summit host, obama said that the attacks in paris, and last month in ankara, were attacks <u+201c>on the civilized world,<u+201d> and that the united states would <u+201c>stand in solidarity<u+201d> with the victims in <u+201c>hunting down the perpetrators of this crime and bringing them to justice.<u+201d> rhodes emphasized that the attacks did not change the white house<u+2019>s reluctance to establish a massive ground force of u.s. troops in the region, saying the administration remains confident that it can push back the islamic state by relying on local forces it is training and advising in iraq and syria, along with punishing airstrikes. <u+201c>the further introduction of u.s. troops to fully re-engage in ground combat in the middle east is not the way to deal with this challenge,<u+201d> rhodes said. in vienna on saturday, diplomats from the region and from europe, the united states and russia agreed to press the various factions they back in syria<u+2019>s civil war to come together no later than jan.<u+00a0>1 to begin talks on forming a transitional government. once that process starts, participants agreed, they will support a u.n.-monitored cease-fire between forces of president bashar al-assad, backed by russia and iran, and a wide array of rebel groups variously backed by the united states, saudi arabia, turkey and others. [coordinated assault seems to mark new chapter in terrorism] the administration has said that settling the ongoing civil war would allow global competitors to focus on defeating the islamic state in both syria and iraq. the paris attacks, rhodes said, <u+201c>can serve to create a greater sense of urgency in the international community behind supporting various elements of the counter-isil campaign and support for a diplomatic resolution of the syrian conflict.<u+201d> obama met with putin on the sidelines of the summit. white house officials said that they spoke for 35<u+00a0>minutes and that the discussion <u+201c>centered around ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict in syria, an imperative made all the more urgent by the horrifying terrorist attacks in paris,<u+201d> and on the <u+201c>diplomatic progress<u+201d> achieved in vienna. while the united states has insisted that assad must relinquish power, russia, assad<u+2019>s main backer, has bombed rebel forces in a bid to help him remain in control. obama and putin were joined in their meeting, held in the lounge area of a hotel conference center, by u.s. national security adviser susan e. rice and a man who appeared to be an interpreter. a closed-circuit video feed showed them sitting around a coffee table, with obama leaning forward in his chair and talking intently with putin, who was also leaning in, as other world leaders milled about. the president also met here with saudi arabia<u+2019>s king salman. in brussels, nato dropped the flags of its 28 member nations to half-staff to honor the french dead. nato officials said that france so far has declined to invoke the alliance<u+2019>s article 5, which would oblige all members to join its fight against the militants. the only time article 5 has ever been invoked <u+2014> at the request of the united states <u+2014> was after the september 2001 al-qaeda attacks. <u+201c>we support the french authorities in their determination to deal with the terrorist threat,<u+201d> a nato official said sunday, <u+201c>and a number of allies are already working with france on their ongoing operations and investigations in the wake of the attacks.<u+201d> loveday morris in dahuk, iraq, and hugh naylor in beirut contributed to this report.

france launches fierce assault on isis targets in syria

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

55.0

8.0

8789.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

700.0

1.0

0.0

164.0

0.0

93.0

29.0

20.0

9.0

42.0

11.0

9.0

7.0

38.0

46.0

58.0

705.0

165.0

93.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

new york <u+2014> former arkansas governor mike huckabee, a likely contender for the 2016 gop presidential nomination and a leading voice for christian conservatives, said thursday that governors and state legislatures should consider ways to resist a supreme court decision that recognized same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. on usa today's capital download, huckabee likened such a possible decision, on an issue now being weighed by the high court, to the notorious dred scott case before the civil war that ruled african americans couldn't be citizens. pushing back against such an opinion "is not without historical and judicial precedence," he said in an interview promoting his new book, god, guns, grits, and gravy, published wednesday by st. martin's press. if he were still governor, he said, "i think i would put it before the legislature. i mean, we would ask, 'we have a constitutional amendment in our constitution. do we want to hold to that? do we want to put it before a referendum of the people?' i mean, there are a lot of different angles to pursue it. (or) you could just surrender and say, 'ok, we just agree that the court is right.' " whatever the legal basis for huckabee's stance <u+2014> and constitutional scholars question whether there is one <u+2014> as a political matter his fervent opposition all but guarantees that the issue of gay marriage will be prominent in the gop presidential debate. while other leading contenders also oppose gay marriage, some of them, including new jersey gov. chris christie, have said court decisions recognizing the right make it a settled question. "rather than just immediately capitulate to nine people in robes, and what it will probably be is five people in robes against four people who disagree ... then you have a very, very divided court," he told the weekly newsmaker series. "do we really surrender the entire american system of government to five people, unelected, appointed for life, with no consequences for the decisions they make? the founders never intended for there to be such incredible, almost unlimited power, put in the hands of so few people." however, erwin chemerinsky, dean of the university of california law school, irvine, said states would have no options if the supreme court decided that laws prohibiting same-sex marriage violated the constitution. "there have been efforts by states to circumvent or ignore supreme court decisions, most notably the intense southern resistance to brown v. board of education and desegregation," chemerinsky said. "the supreme court made it clear that its ruling was the law of the land. this will be no different." the issue has been joined, he noted. "already, marriage equality exists in 36 states, mostly because of court decisions, and there has not been the type of resistance huckabee suggests." still, it is a sign of huckabee's appeal to the evangelical christians who are among the gop's most loyal voters that his new book immediately shot to no. 1 in sales among political books on amazon and into the top 100 among books of all sorts. in his folksy, conversational style, he unfavorably contrasts new york, los angeles and washington, d.c. <u+2014> places he dubs "bubble-ville" <u+2014> with those from the heartland, which he dubs "bubba-ville." at one point in the book, he discussed how "goooood" it is to eat game. "i'm sorry if that sounds cruel to any vegan readers," he added. "(and are there any? raise your hands, if you have the strength.)" in the interview, huckabee also: <u+2022> acknowledged he was likely to make his second bid for the white house. he also ran in 2008. "if everything continues to work well and i sense that there is, say, the proper financial and political support, then i think it's a given that that's where the destination is." <u+2022> predicted former president bill clinton would be an asset to his wife, hillary rodham clinton, if she runs for the democratic nomination. "i mean, he had a good presidency. i'm a republican but i admire good governing." <u+2022> dismissed as overblown a furor over comments in his new book criticizing beyonce and jay-z for using sexually explicit lyrics, and the president and first lady for allowing their daughters to listen to them. "i do think they're good parents," he said of the obamas, adding he has some of beyonce's songs on his iphone. "she's an incredibly gifted singer and dancer. she doesn't need to get into the vulgar in order to be successful and influential." he also denied charges of hypocrisy, leveled this week by jon stewart in a combative interview on the daily show, because he had played bass backing up rocker ted nugent as he sang "cat scratch fever," a song with sexually suggestive lyrics of its own. <u+2022> discussed reports that the fbi had decided not to pursue civil-rights charges in the police shooting in ferguson, mo., saying the justice department would have proceeded if it could have found any standing to do so. "it was obvious that (attorney general) eric holder wanted to be able to bring charges," he said. "it was almost evident from the beginning that he was hoping that they would be able to find some way to indict or bring some charges against officer darren wilson." now, he said, "i hope that (civil rights activist and msnbc anchor) al sharpton will have a rally and apologize for having incited so many people to actions that were hurtful to the people of ferguson, hurtful to many minority business owners whose businesses were burned and looted because passions were inflamed."

huckabee: resisting the supreme court on gay marriage?

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

54.0

8.0

5519.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

411.0

1.0

0.0

106.0

0.0

46.0

15.0

19.0

4.0

20.0

13.0

9.0

6.0

37.0

24.0

52.0

416.0

107.0

46.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

des moines, iowa <u+2014>true-blue democratic activists at a party fundraising dinner friday night were positively giddy to have two possible presidential contenders there live and in person <u+2014> martin o'malley and jim webb <u+2014> and their frontrunner, hillary clinton, ready to dive into the race. but they've got plenty of questions on their minds for clinton, who kicked off her campaign sunday, and her potential challengers for the democratic nomination. here's what they had to say in interviews with the des moines register at the polk county democrats' spring dinner: 1. will clinton start to stand for something? it has been nearly eight years since clinton campaigned here, and no one knows what to expect, said many of the activists gathered at a labor union hall in des moines. they're wondering: has she grown into a more conservative democrat over the years? or will she take cues from ultra-left heartthrob sen. elizabeth warren of massachusetts and have the guts to stand tall on progressive issues? will she have what it takes to capture the aspirations of the people? "i'm a hillary supporter, but i haven't closed my mind to say, 'it's hillary or nobody,'" said joan thorup, a des moines beaverdale resident who has already met o'malley three times. "things may have changed since the last time i saw her on the campaign trail." several union members taking a smoke break outside the united auto workers hall where the dinner was held said the last time they heard clinton speak, at the harkin steak fry in september, she said nothing substantive. asked how she can reignite a blaze of passion in iowa, earl agan jr. answered, "i don't think she can." he's business manager for the operative plasterers & cement masons' international association local no. 21 and area 561 iowa. "we've had too many clintons and bushes. i won't vote for her." agan blanches at news reports about clinton's family foundation accepting millions of dollars from middle eastern countries known for violence against women, sex discrimination and other human rights abuses. "it doesn't play well," he said. but several of agan's fellow labor activists said if clinton gives some home-run speeches detailing how she'd deal with income inequality, she could win allegiance. other iowa democrats said they're confident that the corporate marketing geniuses who have taken leaves of absence from their high-powered jobs to help the clinton campaign will know how to refresh an older brand. 2. what will the dividing lines be? what tack can possible democratic challengers like former maryland governor martin o'malley and former senator jim webb of virginia take to successfully pry iowa voters away from clinton? "i'm not sure how they'll draw distinctions," patty judge, a former lieutenant governor, said after listening to both men's speeches. "they're both great guys, and they both have a great story to tell, but how they're going to distinguish themselves, i don't know." several democrats, describing the economy and personal prosperity as base issues, said the dividing line will be ideas for championing the middle class. some have voiced misgivings about clinton's corporate connections, said rick smith, an urbandale-based democrat known as a super-activist. other democrats said they'll be hunting for the contender who's most fierce on climate change. another likely litmus test will be the iraq war and what clinton says about dealing with the islamic state and the instability it has spawned. some anti-war iowans will never forgive clinton for her "yes" vote 12 years ago in favor of going to war in iraq, several activists said. and the general election may well turn on foreign policy, smith predicted. in webb's iowa speech friday night, his refrain was that he took principled stances. it wasn't easy to be one of the earliest to say the iraq war was wrong, he said. but five months before the vote, he wrote a guest piece for the washington post saying the war was going to be a "strategic blunder," he said. 3. will any laborers migrate to the gop? a moderate gop presidential candidate who supports construction of projects like the keystone xl and bakken pipelines could attract democratic building trades workers tired of the big environmental lobby blocking projects that could put iowa laborers to work. several union members told the register that the reality is that the united states isn't going to divest from oil, and they believe the country can have pipelines and a clean environment at the same time. o'malley opposes the keystone line and told the register he didn't know details about the bakken line, which would cross iowa, but likely opposes it. clinton has yet to fully explain her position on the keystone pipeline. webb is a proponent of it. iowa activists are also worried that republicans will out-democrat the democrats with compelling populist ideas. republicans will argue that the gop can best help working people improve their lives. "i often hear people say there's no difference in the parties. i try not to get mad but say, 'can we talk'?" smith told the dinner audience. 4. will clinton engage in a real battle with fellow democrats? every activist the register interviewed at the dinner proclaimed joy that o'malley and webb appear on the cusp of presidential bids. they also still hope warren and vermont u.s. sen. bernie sanders run, partly to pull clinton to the left. "i'm open to them all," said desmund adams, a clive businessman. "i don't think the passion is connected to the candidate. the passion is connected to the politics." "folks want to see a democrat win. that's what pays the bills," said adams, who has launched an exploratory committee as he considers running for congress in iowa's 3rd district. several democrats said they will be watching to see whether clinton engages in a real battle with her challengers, rather than ignoring them or pussy-footing around them with kind words. 5. will clinton shout down the gop? not only do iowa democrats want a vigorous democrat-on-democrat fight for the caucuses, they want to see their presidential contenders play hard with the gop, hitting back with satisfying, quotable one-liners. "we cannot let them get away with these misstatements, these constant misstatements of the facts," smith said. des moines democrat sophia douglas noted republicans' furor over clinton using a private email server as secretary of state, which has thwarted public scrutiny of her messages. after dealing with plenty of "faux scandals" like that, she said, "the clintons should know better by now." douglas said the gop battle cry over the benghazi, libya, terrorist attacks that killed four americans didn't seem to rattle clinton. "i loved how she was looking at them like, 'i can eat you for breakfast, lunch and dinner,'" douglas said. "she knows how to throw a punch, and she knows how to take a punch." when wisconsin gov. scott walker goes on his anti-labor rants, the iowa activists said they want their candidates to stand up to him and explain to iowans how repugnant that is. and they're fed up with the gop contenders dominating the newspaper headlines and airwaves. "it drives me crazy," said jerry tormey, an urbandale democrat. "we're not getting equal time. and they're saying such ludicrous stuff. so we need hillary. "and we need martin o'malley," tormey added. "and we need elizabeth warren and bernie sanders."

as hillary clinton heads to iowa, 5 questions she'll face

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

57.0

8.0

7450.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

509.0

2.0

0.0

155.0

0.0

67.0

20.0

17.0

7.0

16.0

14.0

16.0

9.0

38.0

31.0

48.0

513.0

157.0

67.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the state department accused israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu of taking congressional testimony by secretary of state john kerry out of context in netanyahu's address to a joint meeting of congress tuesday. in a statement released early wednesday, state department spokeswoman jen psaki quoted in full an article written on the website factcheck.org that claimed certain remarks made by netanyahu about iran's nuclear program "misrepresented what kerry had said" in testimony before the<u+00a0>house foreign affairs committee feb. 25. in his address, netanyahu said kerry had disclosed that iran could "legitimately possess" 190,000 centrifuges for the enrichment of uranium by the time a deal designed to restrict iran's nuclear capability for a decade would expire. the israeli leader, who referred to kerry as "my long-time friend" in his speech, said that amount of centrifuges could put iran "weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy." however, the factcheck.org article circulated by psaki noted that kerry had only said that a peaceful nuclear power program could use that same number of centrifuges. "[i]f you have a civilian power plant that<u+2019>s producing power legitimately and not a threat to proliferation, you could have as many as 190,000 or more centrifuges," kerry told committee members. later in his speech, netanyahu described the proposed agreement as one that "doesn't block iran's path to the bomb; it paves iran's path to the bomb. "so why would anyone make this deal?" the prime minister asked. "because they hope that iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse? well, i disagree." the state department statement was the latest salvo in an ongoing war of words that marked the run-up to netanyahu's address and climaxed with harsh criticism for the israeli leader from congressional democrats, including house minority leader nancy pelosi, who branded the speech an "insult to the intelligence of the united states." president obama himself told reporters tuesday afternoon that he didn't watch netanyahu's address but read the transcript and it contained "nothing new." obama claimed the prime minister did not offer any "viable alternatives" to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. as netanyahu spoke tuesday, kerry was holding a three-hour negotiating session with iranian foreign minister mohammad javad zarif in the swiss resort of montreux in hopes of completing an international framework agreement to curb tehran's nuclear program. however, in that same feb. 25 hearing, kerry said netanyahu "may have a judgment that just may not be correct here" in initially opposing an interim agreement reached this past november. negotiators from the so-called p5+1 countries, a group which includes the u.s., britain, russia, china, germany, and france, are scrambling to meet a march 31 deadline to finalize the framework of a permanent deal, with a july deadline for a final agreement. during his speech, netanyahu urged negotiators to keep pressuring with economic sanctions because tehran needs the deal most. "now, if iran threatens to walk away from the table <u+2014> and this often happens in a persian bazaar <u+2014> call their bluff," netanyahu said. "they'll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do." in a sign that netanyahu's speech was resonating outside the chamber of the house of representatives, zarif decried comments that president barack obama made on monday <u+2014> as part of an administration-wide effort to push back on the israeli's criticism <u+2014> in which he said that iran would have to suspend its nuclear activities for at least a decade as part of any final agreement. zarif, in a statement quoted by iran's official news agency irna, said obama's remarks were "unacceptable and threatening," aimed at attracting u.s. public opinion while reacting to netanyahu "and other extremist opponents of the talks." for his part, kerry told reporters tuesday that both sides were "working away, productively." the associated press contributed to this report.

state department says netanyahu twisted kerry's words in speech to congress

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

75.0

8.0

4182.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

284.0

0.0

61.0

0.0

28.0

10.0

12.0

5.0

11.0

7.0

6.0

20.0

22.0

25.0

287.0

61.0

28.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

presidential<u+00a0>candidate marco rubio saturday<u+00a0>warned fellow republicans<u+00a0>against the party being defined by donald<u+00a0>trump, and suggested he may have to disavow the gop frontrunner if trump becomes the nominee. "i still at this moment intend to support the republican nominee," rubio said. "but <u+2026> it's getting harder every day.<u+201d> later, during a rally at an industrial park in largo, rubio told supporters of trump: "if he is our nominee, this is what our party is going to be defined by." citing trump's comments that he would like to punch a protester in the face, or that he would pay the legal fees of supporters who do so, rubio<u+00a0>said trump's rhetoric is feeding into people's anger and encouraging behavior that leads to violence. rubio supporters said professional protesters appeared to start the problems at the trump rally, but the billionaire's rhetoric has created a toxic atmosphere. "it's kinda nice he says what he thinks," said april powers, 54, an accountant from pinellas park, fla. "but sometimes he's just way over the top -- he's too much." janet rontos, 79, a retired school teacher from largo, said trump encourages rough stuff with his rhetoric. "'punch 'em in the face! get 'em out of here!'" she said, imitating trump. rontos added, however, that "he'll get away with it" because trump's<u+00a0>supporters are so fervent. after a strong showing in thursday's republican debate in miami, rubio is positioning himself as the anti-trump vote in the florida primary. rubio had this message for the florida supporters of texas sen. ted cruz and ohio gov. john kasich. "i don't blame people in ohio if they conclude that, while they like me, the only way to stop trump there is to vote for kasich," rubio said in naples friday. "i have made the argument here in florida that if you're a ted cruz supporter or a john kasich supporter, voting for them in florida means you're voting for donald trump because i am the only one who can beat him in florida." he talked directly about the high stakes of florida's outcome. "i've always felt that the winner of the florida primary is probably going to be the nominee," he said. but he stopped short of saying he would drop out if he lost the primary in his home state. "we haven't even thought about that," he said. "we're just focused on winning florida." in the chaos of a heated campaign, however, rubio admited that he regrets the tone of his political attacks on trump, although he said they were in response to trump's own negativity. rubio spent about 15 minutes greeting people eating late lunches at the yabba island grill and a crowd of about 200 supporters who crowded into sugden plaza with rubio bumper stickers, signs and copies of rubio's book 100 innovative ideas for florida in downtown naples on friday afternoon. the crowd was made up largely of snowbirds, some from as far away as iowa and massachusetts, although a few locals ducked out from work to see their home state political celebrity. "marco gave me a hug," squealed lindy connor, a massachusetts resident who is wintering in sarasota. "i told him i was from massachusetts and i voted for him and he said wow and then i guess that he just had to give me a hug. i told him he has people who love him, even up in liberal land." not every one in the crowd was a supporter, however. john moore of naples came out with a handmade sign held high urging rubio to drop out of the race to give cruz florida's 99 delegates. "i voted to send rubio to the senate," moore said. "he was the tea party's guy then and i gave him my vote. but now, he needs to reinforce his dedication to the cause and prove to me that he is really a patriot and step down in time to give cruz our delegates. <u+201c>that is what a true conservative would do. he wouldn't let his ambition hurt the cause. he wouldn't let his political ambition serve up florida, and most likely the united states, on a silver platter to donald trump."

'it's getting harder every day,' rubio says of possible trump support

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

3939.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

0.0

269.0

0.0

93.0

1.0

0.0

24.0

9.0

11.0

5.0

10.0

8.0

10.0

19.0

16.0

26.0

273.0

93.0

25.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

there<u+2019>s an infection hospitals can nearly always prevent. why don<u+2019>t<u+00a0>they? by one estimate, 210,000 deaths every year are associated with preventable harm caused by hospitals. our multimedia feature "do no harm" explores how different attitudes toward patient harm can make a difference between life and death for a patient. vox reporter sarah kliff invited me along to document the reporting, which resulted in the following video.

there<u+2019>s an infection hospitals can nearly always prevent. why don<u+2019>t they?

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

73.0

8.0

432.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

28.0

2.0

0.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

6.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

6.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

31.0

6.0

8.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) donald trump drew a distinction between eligibility questions surrounding marco rubio's run for the presidency versus those clouding ted cruz's bid, saying the florida senator is qualified because although his parents were not u.s. citizens at the time of his birth, he was born in the u.s. -- unlike cruz. "it's a different, very different thing because he was born here. he was born on the land," trump told cnn's jake tapper on "state of the union." "ted was not born on the land, and there's a very strict reading that you have to be born on the land. (harvard law professor) laurence tribe actually said based on ted's views, he would have to be born on the land." cruz was conferred american citizenship at birth because his mother is an american citizen, and legal experts have largely agreed that would qualify him for natural-born citizenship. the texas republican also had canadian citizenship until he renounced it in 2014. "he was born in canada. he was a canadian citizen until 15 months ago, if you can believe that," trump said. "he says he didn't know," tapper replied. "he didn't know. well, he didn't know about his financial papers either. you know, how are you going to be president if you didn't know about a million dollar loan from goldman sachs," trump asked, referring to a controversy that surfaced earlier this week over cruz's 2012 senate bid. "and you said it's something you don't know about. now he doesn't know that he was a canadian citizen? i mean that's in a way maybe worse than all the other things we're talking about." "there have been lawsuits filed. and i said lawsuits are going to be filed," he said. "the democrats are going to file lawsuits. they filed lawsuits. now, he's got a problem." trump also hammered cruz over his criticism of "new york values," which the texas senator said referred to the empire state's support of abortion rights, same-sex marriage and a focus on money and greed. trump called those remarks "very, very insulting." "i immediately thought of the world trade center, and the bravery of new yorkers and the genius of new yorkers to be able to take that whole section and rebuild after the tragedy," he said. asked if cruz was making a subtle ethnic dig with his "new york values" comment, trump said he didn't know, adding, "probably you would have to ask him." but, trump said, "i thought it was disgraceful that he brought that up ... i think he came across badly. some people gave him pretty good reviews on the debate. i think he came across as very strident and not a nice person, and people don't like that." trump said the "only place (cruz) is doing fairly well is in iowa." "i you look at these other places, he's not doing well, and certainly not doing well nationally," trump added. still, he doesn't want to take any chances, which is why he's been spending on ads recently. "i'm going to start spending money for two reasons. number one, i feel guilty because i'm $35 million under budget," he said. "number two, i don't want to take a chance." trump pointed out that spending millions has not helped former florida jeb bush emerge as a leading candidate. "jeb is spending so much money. think of it, he spent $69 million, i spent nothing. he's at the bottom of the pack, i'm at the top of the pack," he said. he then attacked former presidential candidate lindsey graham for endorsing bush. "i think it's incredible. first of all, lindsey graham got out with zero. he had zero. he had nothing. that's number one, so he's not gonna get any voters and i think it's a very bad thing for lindsay graham," trump said. "a lot of people think that was a shameful chapter in american history, though," tapper said. "well, some people do, and some people think it was a very effective chapter, and what happened was when they removed some, meaning brought them back, when they brought them back, they removed some, everybody else left," trump said. "and it was very successful, everyone said. so i mean, that's the way it is. look, we either have a country, or we don't. if we don't have strong borders, we have a problem." trump said the american political process is in need of campaign finance reform, adding that he -- a candidate who has repeatedly touted his decision to self-fund his campaign as a selling point for his candidacy -- hasn't decided if he would accept public financing for the general election. "i don't know yet. i haven't thought of it. i am thinking about this one," he said. "that's the way it is. somebody gives them money. not anything wrong, just psychologically, when they go to that person, they're going to do that," he said. "they owe them, and by the way, they may therefore vote negatively towards the country. that's not gonna happen with me." the american political process is in need of campaign finance reform, trump said. "well i think you need it, because i think pacs are a horrible thing," he said. "first of all everybody is dealing with their pac. you know, it's supposed to be like this secret thing -- they're all dealing." trump says he wasn't mocking reporter with disability trump was previously criticized for appearing to mock serge kovaleski, a new york times reporter with arthrogryposis, a chronic condition which limits the movement of his arms. at a south carolina rally in november, trump waved his arms in an awkward manner while discussing a comment made by kovaleski. but trump said he wasn't mocking him. "if you could go back and do it again, would you do it differently?" tapper asked. "yes, i would. but let me just tell you something. i had no idea what this reporter looked like or that he had difficulty," trump said. trump told tapper he would never mock a person with a disability. "i was not imitating. i would never -- who would ever do that? if somebody had a disability, who would mock a disability? i would never. i'm a smart person ... who would ever mock somebody, especially if you're running for office?" trump said. "i would have not done it, because it's confusing," he added. "some people believe me when i say it, i mean, i swear to you, that's true. i had no idea." "no, i have a great relationship with god. i have a great relationship with evangelicals," he said. trump said he doesn't ask for forgiveness because he doesn't do a lot of bad things. "i don't like to have to ask for forgiveness. and i am good, i don't do a lot of things that are bad, i try and do nothing that's bad. i live a very different life than probably a lot of people would think," trump said. tapper asked trump how it felt to be implicitly criticized by south carolina gov. nikki haley in her republican response to president barack obama's state of the union address last week. "it was my great honor because i'm angry and they both said i was angry. and i get along very well with nikki, and you know, nikki said we're friends and we are friends. i supported her, but i am angry," trump said. "and when she said there's an anger that we shouldn't have, i said, well, i disagree with one thing. there's an anger that we should have. our country is going to hell."

donald trump says he has no questions about marco rubio's eligibility to be president

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

85.0

8.0

7158.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

502.0

1.0

0.0

135.0

1.0

0.0

74.0

16.0

17.0

9.0

11.0

18.0

7.0

32.0

29.0

38.0

509.0

136.0

75.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the rise of political polarization in the u.s. government has been mirrored by a similar trend of growing animosity between people who support different parties. but how have these <u+2013> often uncivil <u+2013> rivalries arisen? using data from two representative surveys of americans in 2010 and 2012, patrick r. miller find that partisans treat politics as they would a sports rivalry, with parties viewed in terms of good and evil, with a strong motivation to win at any cost, often independent of policy outcomes. he also finds that not only are those that view politics as a rivalry the most politically knowledgeable, they are also the most vicious, uncivil, and party-driven voters. this hostile mindset is made worse by a combination of competitive elections and politicians who further fan the flames of partisan rivalries. americans are justifiably cynical about politics. congress is more polarized than ever, leaving ideological extremists to govern a more centrist citizenry. lawmakers seem incapable of civil compromise on even uncontroversial issues; leaving washington gridlocked on pressing policy problems. but an ugly truth of american politics today is that average citizens too readily condemn politicians for our political problems without owning their role in enabling that dysfunction. if our politicians are aggressively and uncompromisingly uncivil, they make just be reflecting the voters who elected them. my coauthor, pamela johnston conover, and i have been researching the nature of political party identities in america since 2010. political scientists around that time began researching a growing social distance between average republicans and democrats, even in nonpolitical respects like comfort with one<u+2019>s child marrying someone of the other party. what is it about parties, we wondered, that could elicit such intense hostility between everyday people? for us, the answer is in how people construct their sense of self. all of us are attached to identities<u+2014>national, racial, religious, schools, and even parties<u+2014>that shape who we believe we are and how we perceive the world. like our religions, many americans inherit party attachment from their parents. many of us learn that we are democrats or republicans long before we learn that those loyalties mean that we should be liberal or conservative, pro-choice or pro-life, or for or against the social welfare state. in new research we focus on average partisans<u+2014>everyday democrats and republicans<u+2014>and their potentially unhealthy political attitudes. politics in an intensely polarized era like today reinforces for citizens that the parties are not just distinct, but starkly different in belief and who they favor. and our regular elections ensure that our party team always has another <u+201c>game<u+201d> with the other team looming. we show that this creates an environment where many partisans treat politics like a sports rivalry, akin to kansas-missouri or unc-duke in college sports. partisans with that mentality view politics in stark good-evil terms and are motivated to participate in politics foremost by a strong desire to win at any cost. we conducted two nationally representative surveys of americans in 2010 and 2012. before fielding the surveys, we conducted extensive interviews with average partisans to better understand the mentality that our surveys would assess. when we asked what motivated them to vote, many partisans seemingly did not connect that a party must win an election to advance policy. instead, many talked about victory and policy ends as if they were disconnected or competing motivations (lesson: be wary of assuming that average citizens think strategically about politics). accordingly, we asked partisans about their electoral motivations. the survey showed that 41 percent of partisans agreed that simply winning elections is more important to them than policy or ideological goals. just 35 percent agreed that policy is a more important motivator for them to participate in politics. only 24 percent valued both equally. troublingly, 38 percent of partisans agreed that their parties should use any tactics necessary to <u+201c>win elections and issue debates.<u+201d> when those who agreed with this view were asked what tactics they had in mind, the most common ones they offered were: voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats, lying, personal attacks on opponents, not allowing the other party to speak, and using the filibuster to gridlock congress. democrats and republicans were equally likely to express this incivility. these sentiments about victory and incivility were most common among partisans who most strongly viewed the opposing party as a <u+201c>rival.<u+201d> these most hostile partisans also expressed the strongest partisanship and the greatest anger at the other party. and curiously, these same citizens were also the most politically knowledgeable when asked a battery of basic political knowledge questions, meaning that our most informed citizens are also the most vicious, uncivil, and party-driven voters. these effects were also independent of ideological or issue positions, which means that once a partisan develops a sense of strong interparty rivalry, it turns into a hostile dynamic with a psychological life of its own. so there is a certain type of voter<u+2014>thankfully not all<u+2014>for whom politics is primarily about group loyalty and using any means to claim victory over their rivals. not about issues per se. not about ideology or candidates. just <u+201c>we<u+2019>re good, they<u+2019>re bad, and let<u+2019>s win.<u+201d> but so what? two other results from our research imply a lot about american politics today. first, competitive elections exacerbated these hostile attitudes toward the other party. using cook political report rankings for both survey years, we found that partisans voting in the most competitive races reported the highest levels of rivalry, desire to win, and incivility. what does that say about political campaigns? for some voters, sure, elections are about issues and selecting a compatible candidate. but for many partisan voters, those same elections are just red meat riling them up over the symbolism of party labels. rather than bringing us together to discuss our differences and deliberate, our elections are alienating many of us from one another. second, these most hostile partisans were also the most likely to participate in campaigns (volunteer, donate money, persuade friends, etc.) and vote. think about the implications of that. candidates depend on others<u+2019> resources and votes to win, especially from their own parties. so if the most mobilized partisans are also the most hostile toward the other party, then a major incentive for politicians is to placate that hostility even if it poisons the political environment. they can do that in campaigns with vitriolic and often relatively issueless partisan appeals, but also by acting as <u+201c>partisan warriors<u+201d> in office: not compromising, abusing the filibuster, or stridently partisan press appearances on fox and msnbc. easy as it is to blame politicians for dysfunctional politics, citizens have some responsibility for enabling that ineptitude. in reality, the intense polarization of american politics likely results from a two way give and take: electorates produce uncompromising and uncivil politicians partly because those politicians may best appeal to the most mobilized partisan voter. but through campaigns and the partisan press, politicians also lead partisans to a hostile mindset where they view the other party as an evil rival. obviously, many believe that fierce partisanship is a good thing. in practice, though, our founders designed a government to force compromise between factions, and a system where it is unlikely that any one party will gain such complete control of government that compromise is unnecessary. it is easy for partisans who never shoulder any responsibility for making government policy work to view politics as a sport where purity, loyalty, and contempt for the opposition make a good game. but whether they make good government is a whole other matter. this article is based on the paper, <u+201c>red and blue states of mind: partisan hostility and voting in the united states<u+201d> in political research quarterly. please read our comments policy before commenting. note:<u+00a0> this article gives the views of the author, and not the position of usapp<u+2013> american politics and policy, nor of the london school of economics. patrick r. miller <u+2013> university of kansas patrick r. miller is an assistant professor of political science at the university of kansas. he specializes in american public opinion, political psychology, elections, and survey and experimental methodology. his current research focuses on civility and partisan identity in the u.s. he tweets about politics at twitter.com/pmiller1693.

partisan voters treat politics and elections like a competitive sports rivalry.

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

79.0

8.0

8868.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

735.0

0.0

121.0

2.0

0.0

121.0

26.0

20.0

22.0

16.0

13.0

11.0

36.0

54.0

743.0

121.0

123.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the obama administration issued controversial new rules wednesday aimed at protecting the nation's drinking water but decried by congressional critics as a regulatory "power grab." the environmental protection agency, in announcing the finalized clean water rule along with the army corps of engineers, said the changes mark a "historic step for the protection of clean water" and would help roughly 117 million americans who get drinking water from streams not clearly protected before these regulations. the rule would clarify which smaller streams, tributaries and wetlands are covered by anti-pollution and development provisions of the clean water act. but the rules have run into deep opposition from farm groups and the republican-led congress. the house voted to block the regulations earlier this month, and a similar effort is underway in the senate. critics argue the rules could greatly expand the reach of federal regulators, making every stream, ditch and puddle on farmers' and others' private land subject to federal oversight. <u+201c>the administration<u+2019>s decree to unilaterally expand federal authority is a raw and tyrannical power grab that will crush jobs,<u+201d> house speaker john boehner, r-ohio, said in a written statement following the rules release. boehner said more than 30 governors and government leaders rejected the epa<u+2019>s water rule. <u+201c>these leaders know firsthand that the rule is being shoved down the throats of hardworking people with no input, and places landowners, small businesses, farmers and manufacturers on the road to a regulatory and economic hell.<u+201d> north dakota republican rep. kevin cramer said in a statement the rules "trample on the rights of private property owners as well as local and state governments" and vowed to work with colleagues to overturn it. epa administrator gina mccarthy, however, said the rule will only affect waters that have a "direct and significant" connection to larger bodies of water downstream that are already protected. the epa said the rule focuses on streams, not ditches -- limiting protection to ditches constructed out of streams or those that "function like streams and can carry pollution downstream." two supreme court rulings had left the reach of the clean water act uncertain. the epa has said 60 percent of the nation's streams and waterways are vulnerable, and these rules clarify which of those waters are protected. the regulations would only kick in if a business or landowner takes steps to pollute or destroy those waters. mccarthy has acknowledged the proposed rules issued last year were confusing and said the final rules were written to be more clear. she said the regulations don't create any new permitting requirements for agriculture and even adds some new exemptions for artificial lakes and ponds and water-filled depressions, among other features. these efforts were "to make clear our goal is to stay out of agriculture's way," mccarthy said in a blog posted on the epa website. but after the rules were released, sen. james inhofe, r-okla., chairman of the senate environment and public works committee, said his panel will consider the senate bill to force the epa to withdraw and rewrite the rules this summer and <u+201c>continue our work to halt epa<u+2019>s unprecedented land grab." inhofe said the rule makes it "more important than ever for congress to act."<u+00a0>among other concerns, he said the final rule allows the epa to regulate isolated waters -- even ponds in farmers' fields -- by declaring them a "regional water treasure." the associated press contributed to this report.

epa unveils comprehensive water regs, critics decry 'power grab'

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

8.0

64.0

8.0

3584.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

198.0

1.0

0.0

64.0

1.0

0.0

21.0

11.0

5.0

8.0

9.0

3.0

14.0

23.0

17.0

202.0

65.0

22.0

na