ComplexDataLab/Misinfo_Datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the republican party has put itself in an impossible position. for months they<u+2019>ve told us, over and over and over again, how unstable trump is, how unfit for office he is. they<u+2019>ve told us he<u+2019>s a <u+201c>con artist,<u+201d> a <u+201c>clown,<u+201d> a <u+201c>bigot.<u+201d> now that he<u+2019>s decimated their party, now that<u+2019>s he toppled every hackneyed candidate he<u+2019>s faced, they<u+2019>re forced to perform an about-face and endorse him as their nominee for president. it won<u+2019>t work. and no one will buy it. hillary clinton<u+2019>s campaign has already done the easy work of compiling the statements made by republicans about trump. the result, predictably, is brutal. in less than 90 seconds, we hear <u+2013> mostly from other republican presidential candidates <u+2013> why trump is a menace who must be stopped. here<u+2019>s a few highlights: <u+201c>this is an individual who mocked a disable reporter, who attributed a reporter<u+2019>s question to her menstrual cycle<u+2026><u+201d> <u+2013> mitt romney <u+201c>the most vulgar person to ever aspire to the presidency.<u+201d> <u+2013> marco rubio <u+201c>the man who only feels big when he<u+2019>s trying to make other people feel small<u+201d> <u+2013> carly fiorina <u+201c>the man is utterly amoral<u+2026>a narcissist at a level i don<u+2019>t this country has ever seen.<u+201d> <u+2013> ted cruz <u+201c>he<u+2019>s a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot<u+2026>this guy is so unfit to be commander-in-chief<u+201d> <u+2013> lindsey graham some party elders will have the dignity to follow their conscience and hold to their convictions. both george w. bush and george h.w. bush, for instance, informed the hill that they do <u+201c>not plan to participate in or comment on<u+201d> the presidential race. neither bush attended the previous convention, but the decision not to comment at all is revealing. it says, as clearly as possible, <u+201c>we can<u+2019>t support donald trump for president.<u+201d> others, like south carolina gov. nikki haley, who accused trump of cynically exploiting an angsty public during her response to the obama<u+2019>s state of the union address, are already falling into line. <u+201c>i have great respect for the will of the people,<u+201d> she told the charleston post and courier, <u+201c>and as i have always said, i will support the republican nominee for president.<u+201d> she quickly added, however, that she<u+2019>s <u+201c>not interested in serving as vice president.<u+201d> and there will be many republicans, like sen. kelly ayotte of new hampshire and former florida gov. bob martinez, who know trump is cartoonishly unqualified but nevertheless support his candidacy. from a new york times report this morning: <u+201c>senator kelly ayotte of new new hampshire, who is in a tough re-election race, signaled that she would <u+2018>support<u+2019> mr. trump but not <u+2018>endorse<u+2019> him, as a spokeswoman put it, a rhetorical contortion that other republicans repeated privately. representative raul r. labrador of idaho, a staunch conservative, said he would support mr. trump but derided him for <u+2018>not knowing much about the constitution or politics.<u+2019> former gov. bob martinez of florida, who retains a strong network of donors, said he would raise money for mr. trump but was unsure about his proposals, like temporarily banning foreign muslims from entering the united states.<u+201d> this is what happens when politicians put re-election or party over the moral imperative to do right by the country. you can<u+2019>t say, in good faith, that trump doesn<u+2019>t know anything <u+201c>about the constitution or politics<u+201d> but that you support him nonetheless. this is the presidency, after all <u+2013> it<u+2019>s rather important that the candidate know such things. nor is there any room to equivocate about trump<u+2019>s proposal to ban all muslims from entering the country <u+2013> it<u+2019>s both wrong and unconstitutional. republicans let this monster into their house. he<u+2019>s their problem. they have a responsibility to do what<u+2019>s right <u+2013> the stakes are too high to do otherwise. if they choose blind fidelity to the party over their obligation to the country, they<u+2019>ve lost the right to call themselves public servants.

the new mess republicans have created for themselves: clinton<u+2019>s brutal anti-trump ad highlights why the gop can<u+2019>t plausibly endorse 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

1.0

0.0

137.0

8.0

3848.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

252.0

3.0

0.0

91.0

1.0

0.0

40.0

8.0

10.0

4.0

10.0

7.0

6.0

16.0

23.0

24.0

260.0

94.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on monday, cotton drafted a letter <u+2014> signed by 46 other senators <u+2014> addressed to<u+00a0><u+201c>leaders of the islamic republic of iran,<u+201d> warning that any deal reached on the country<u+2019>s nuclear program could be killed by the next administration <u+201c>with the stroke of a pen.<u+201d> the letter generated fierce criticism not only from the obama administration and congressional democrats, but also from conservative quarters, including the wall street journal<u+2019>s editorial board, which kelly noted called cotton<u+2019>s correspondence a <u+201c>distraction.<u+201d> <u+201c>well, on the contrary, megyn, i think that this debate we<u+2019>re having is incredibly important and helpful to raising just what a bad deal president obama is about to make with iran,<u+201d> cotton responded. <u+201c>the last two days, we<u+2019>ve focused on the terms of the deal, which is: one, president obama will accept a 10-year sunset clause; and two, he has conceded a vast uranium enrichment capability to iran that paves the way for iran to get the bomb, as prime minister netanyahu said last week,<u+201d> he added, referring to israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu<u+2019>s inflammatory march 3 address before congress. kelly pressed: <u+201c>but what<u+2019>s the point in writing to the iranian mullahs?<u+00a0>what are you gonna do?<u+201d> she noted that many in the iranian leadership have dismissed cotton<u+2019>s letter, while he has irked the obama administration and even alienated congressional democrats skeptical of the nuclear talks. <u+201c>megyn, if you talk to most iran experts, they<u+2019>ll tell you that iran<u+2019>s leaders don<u+2019>t understand our constitutional system,<u+201d> cotton answered. <u+201c>so we need to be crystal clear with the leaders of iran: any deal that<u+2019>s not approved by congress won<u+2019>t be accepted by congress,<u+201d> he later said. kelly continued to emphasize that if cotton is so keen on congressional review, offending democrats in congress may not be the optimal way to go about the matter. for his part, cotton asserted that he wants democrats to join his effort, effectively torpedoing diplomacy and reprimanding their president. good luck with that.

megyn kelly interrogates tom cotton on iran letter: <u+201c>what<u+2019>s the point in writing to the iranian mullahs?<u+201d>

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

105.0

8.0

2026.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

121.0

2.0

0.0

35.0

1.0

0.0

11.0

4.0

9.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

11.0

10.0

20.0

130.0

37.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

we're not with her. that's what democratic voters in west virginia said tuesday night, with hillary clinton losing to bernie sanders. although the loss was not unexpected, clinton's campaign sure seems like one long slog of speeches, handshakes and voter selfies on the way toward the 2016 convention in philadelphia. this extended campaign, however, is actually the best thing that could have happened to clinton. she has benefited enormously from the presence of sanders. now team clinton must build on lessons learned from the primaries as they prepare to run against donald trump in the general election. then look at clinton these days, speaking out about income inequality, campaign finance reform, and the evils of the big banks on wall street. hmm, where could those winning themes have come from? from bernie, thank you, who proved that progressive voters are tired of not having a voice in national politics. his success pushed clinton to the left, and she is a better candidate for it. despite clinton's experience as first lady, senator, and secretary of state, there is an understandable tendency of many democratic voters to be wary of anything resembling a clinton "coronation."

why hillary clinton wins even when she loses

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

44.0

8.0

1196.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

75.0

2.0

0.0

23.0

0.0

9.0

4.0

6.0

1.0

4.0

5.0

3.0

5.0

6.0

13.0

78.0

25.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the city of cleveland and department of justice announced tuesday how they are moving forward on agreed changes to the city's police force. the consent decree is the next step after the city agreed to changes last year following a scathing report from doj investigators regarding patterns of civil rights violations and excessive force by the cleveland police . it will mean years of court-supervised monitoring of the cleveland police department. in a 105-page report , justice and city leaders unveiled reforms that included commitments to "bias-free policing" , new crisis-intervention efforts and changes to officer recruitment and discipline. the leaders called on the city to buy into the changes and embrace what they billed as a transformation in the city's policing. "i am issuing a call of action to our entire community to support this hard work together," said u.s. attorney steven m. dettelbach. "the people who may criticize the police are not the enemy -- they are part of the community." when then-attorney general eric holder announced the findings in december, the city's mayor and police chief said they were in agreement that recommended changes had to be implemented. the agreement required the city to create a reform plan.

cleveland, doj announce changes in police force

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

47.0

8.0

1249.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

90.0

0.0

27.0

0.0

19.0

7.0

3.0

2.0

9.0

2.0

1.0

9.0

8.0

18.0

92.0

27.0

19.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) after he shot two journalists on live tv and before he shot himself, bryce williams sent a message: "i've been a human powder keg for a while....just waiting to go boom." those were the words the gunman wrote in a chilling fax to abc news, according to the network. the document purportedly from the virginia shooter came after he gunned down wdbj-tv journalists alison parker and adam ward , spurring a manhunt that ended when he turned a gun on himself as troopers closed in. the shooter -- a former reporter for the roanoke station -- is dead, but the investigation into wednesday's attack is far from over. authorities say the fax to abc, the gunman's other attempts to reach out to the media and his social media posts just after opening fire could be key pieces of evidence as they try to pinpoint what led to the deadly shooting. franklin county sheriff bill overton said authorities weren't sure about the gunman's motive, but are looking at his past employment at wdbj as well other evidence, including the fax he allegedly sent to abc news in new york. "many of you have gotten a lot of the correspondence, emails that had been sent out. it's obvious that ... this gentleman was disturbed in some way of the way things had transpired," and that "at some point in his life, things spiraled out of control," overton said. in the message, according to abc, the gunman said the charleston, south carolina, church shooting in june is what put him over the edge, but he wrote that his "anger has been building steadily" because of racial discrimination and sexual harassment he claims to have endured. the writer expressed admiration for the shooters who massacred students at columbine high school and virginia tech. and he said he put a deposit down for a gun two days after the charleston shooting. "as for dylann roof? you (deleted)! you want a race war (deleted)? bring it then you white (deleted)!!!" the document reportedly said. during a live broadcast from near moneta, at about 6:45 a.m., tv viewers saw the camera fall to the ground and caught the briefest glimpse of a man who appeared to point a gun toward the downed cameraman. the station cut away to a shocked anchor back in the studio. and the tv station's camera wasn't the only one rolling. two videos posted on a twitter account under the name bryce williams show someone walking up to the wdbj news crew and pointing a gun at them. another tweet said, "i filmed the shooting." the facebook and twitter account were suspended shortly after the tweets. video shows the gunman approaching parker, a wdbj reporter, and photographer ward as parker conducted a routine interview for a local story. ward's back is to the gunman. parker is in profile, and the interviewee is facing the gunman. the shooter appears to take his time aiming the gun, presenting it and then withdrawing it, before composing the angle of his video. he opens fire on parker first. both parker and the interview subject scream. police are not sure how the gunman knew parker and ward were reporting from bridgewater plaza, overton said. authorities tracked the shooter's cell phone to locate him, according to federal officials and the augusta county sheriff's department. just before 11:30 a.m., virginia state police saw the car they believed williams was driving headed east on interstate 66. with emergency lights activated, a trooper tried to pull him over, police said. the driver refused to stop and sped away before running off the road and crashing into an embankment around mile marker 17.1 in fauquier county, more than 170 miles away from the site of the shooting. troopers found the driver inside with a self-inflicted gunshot wound, virginia state police sgt. f.l. tyler told reporters. he was transported to a hospital and pronounced dead wednesday afternoon, tyler said. williams was a reporter at wdbj for about a year, according to a former employee of the station. he was fired from that job, though the reason was not made public, the ex-employee said. "two years ago, we had to separate him from the company. we did understand that he was still living in the area," wdbj general manager jeff marks said. (williams) had a level of a long series of complaints against co-workers nearly from the beginning of employment at the tv station," said dennison, who is now spokesman for the hawaii department of land and natural resources. "that really had nothing to do with his termination, and after a lot of investigation both internally and externally, all of these allegations were deemed to be unfounded. and they were largely under, along racial lines, and we did a thorough investigation and could find no evidence that anyone had racially discriminated against this man," he said. marks, the station's current general manager, said he'd heard williams had leveled accusations in the past, but he noted that he and parker hadn't worked at the station at the same time. "i don't think (reporter) alison (parker) and that individual even overlapped here," he said. according to tweets from the bryce williams account, alison had "made racist comments," while "adam went to hr on me after working with me one time!!!" there was no elaboration, and cnn was unable to immediately confirm whether either claim was true. court documents indicate williams crossed paths with ward on the day he was fired. ward filmed the former reporter's angry outburst as police tried to get him to leave the station's building, according to the documents, which are part of a lawsuit flanagan filed against the tv station. that day, williams also handed his manager a small wooden cross, and said "you'll need this," before being escorted out of the building by police. the court documents outline months of disciplinary action against williams. in addition to describing multiple meetings about his anger and behavior, they show that station management told him to seek counseling. the woman parker was interviewing was injured in the shooting. gardner is recovering from emergency surgery and is in stable condition, according to carilion franklin memorial hospital in rocky mount. the gunman was believed to have fired six or seven times, marks said. ward's fianc<u+00e9>e was in the control room and saw the shooting, marks told cnn. "our hearts are broken," marks said. "we have people walking around here in tears, lots of hugs." ward joined wdbj in 2011 after graduating from virginia tech with a degree in communication and media studies, according to his facebook page. he began attending the university in 2007, a few months after a gunman went on a deadly rampage, leaving 32 people dead. another journalist at the anchor's desk said ward was engaged to be married to morning show producer at wdbj, melissa ott, and ward recently told her, "i'm going to get out of news. i think i'm going to do something else." parker was the morning reporter for the roanoke station and a native of virginia, having spent most of her life outside martinsville. she joined wdbj last year after completing a summer internship as a news reporter in 2012. "today we received news that no family should ever hear. our vivacious, ambitious, smart, engaging, hilarious, beautiful, and immensely talented alison (was) taken from the world. this is senseless and our family is crushed," parker's family said in a statement. chris hurst, a reporter for the station, described himself as "numb." he tweeted that he and parker "were very much in love" and had just moved in together after dating nine months, "the best nine months of our lives. we wanted to get married. we just celebrated her 24th birthday." a local pastor, "a friend of the newsroom," is at the station, consoling parker's and ward's co-workers, marks said. "you know, you send people into war zones, you send people into dangerous situations and into riots, and you worry that they are going to get hurt.," marks told cnn. "you send somebody out to do a story on tourism and -- how can you expect something like this to happen?"

police: bryce williams kills self after on-air slayings

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

29.0

55.0

8.0

8065.0

0.0

7.0

6.0

0.0

536.0

0.0

167.0

0.0

36.0

21.0

7.0

29.0

18.0

22.0

10.0

34.0

35.0

52.0

542.0

167.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

predictions are dangerous things. that said, here<u+2019>s a prediction for you: john harwood will never again participate in a gop debate. republicans are beyond angry about the conduct of the cnbc moderators <u+2014> harwood, carl quintanilla and becky quick <u+2014> during wednesday night<u+2019>s primary debate. actually, more than one republican asked me before the debate what i thought of harwood as a moderator. i<u+2019>ve known john for forever and i admit to breaking out in a mild cold sweat whenever i was told he was holding on the phone. but i thought of him as a mostly fair-minded, smart reporter, even if i<u+2019>ve also always thought of him as <u+201c>one of them<u+201d> as far as republican thinking goes. generally, i don<u+2019>t think there is anything wrong with having an adversarial group of moderators ask good questions. but the moderators<u+2019> approach to this debate was beyond properly adversarial and was probably a game-changer in more ways than one. after every election, the parties tweak the debate process and change the rules to one degree or another. you can bet the old paradigm of turning over management of the debates to a specific media organization <u+2014> especially one with a reputation for an anti-republican bias <u+2014> is going to end. sen. ted cruz (r-tex.), who had a breakthrough moment in the debate railing against the moderators<u+2019> insulting questions, did a follow-up interview with fox news anchor bret baier and reiterated a pretty good suggestion about the debate structure. cruz asked why the republican national committee doesn<u+2019>t plan at least one debate with rush limbaugh, sean hannity and mark levin as moderators. well, that<u+2019>s not a bad idea. it<u+2019>s easy to suggest that the moderators should be at least neutral<u+00a0>so they don<u+2019>t simply offer up a series of softball questions that don<u+2019>t challenge the candidates or put them outside of their comfort zones. but the words <u+201c>rush limbaugh<u+201d> and <u+201c>softball questions<u+201d> have never been used in the same sentence. i don<u+2019>t think this group of republican candidates would ever feel coddled by limbaugh, hannity and levin. that trio would all ask tough questions that are of real interest to republican voters. and i think it would be a ratings juggernaut.<u+00a0> anyway, cruz is right <u+2014> the moderators in the democratic primary debate praised the candidates and avoided creating too much fighting or tension among the candidates. there<u+2019>s a big difference between a moderator asking probing questions that republican voters want to know the answers to and taking pot shots and making belittling points under the guise of asking a question. after all, this is the republican primary contest and we have a big field of talented candidates. there<u+2019>s nothing wrong with asking questions that are central to republican concerns and sensibilities. the primaries should be all about republicans asking other republicans questions. the debacle of the cnbc debate was probably the last gasp of the grandstanding liberal media as far as the gop<u+2019>s managers are concerned. the media will no longer be allowed to conduct debates the way they think their like-minded colleagues in the media want a republican debate to be conducted. or in this case, the way they think their like-minded colleagues in the media want the republican primary process to be belittled, disrupted and generally diminished. that being said, the gop shouldn<u+2019>t overdo it in crying foul about the debate. we don<u+2019>t need a warren commission and we don<u+2019>t need to get bogged down and look like a bunch of whiners. republicans should not be distracted by the process. we are complaining that the debate wasn<u+2019>t about the issues, so let<u+2019>s have our say but then move on and start discussing the issues that republican voters care about.

the insiders: cnbc has probably changed gop presidential campaign debates forever

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

5.0

81.0

8.0

3708.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

224.0

1.0

0.0

67.0

0.0

24.0

11.0

10.0

6.0

11.0

5.0

8.0

3.0

15.0

22.0

20.0

229.0

68.0

24.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama challenged the nation friday to confront the <u+201c>terrible toll of gun violence<u+201d> a day after a white man opened fire in a historic black church, killing nine people whose mourning relatives addressed the alleged killer for the first time with a message of despair and forgiveness. in an emotional courtroom encounter here, a mother and daughter, a sister and grandson, among others, spoke directly to dylann roof, the 21-year-old charged friday with nine counts of murder. he appeared for the bond hearing from jail through closed-circuit television. as roof<u+2019>s face filled much of the screen <u+2014> his eyes lowered, two guards in body armor flanking him from behind <u+2014> surviving relatives told roof his crime had devastated their families. but some said they forgave him, and, recalling the spirit of the venue where he staged his attack, pledged to pray for his soul. <u+201c>we welcomed you wednesday night in our bible study with welcome arms,<u+201d> felicia sanders, whose son tywanza sanders was allegedly killed by roof. police say roof spent an hour among the parishioners wednesday evening before opening fire. <u+201c>tywanza sanders was my son. but tywanza sanders was my hero. tywanza was my hero,<u+2019><u+2019> she said, her voice trembling. <u+201c>may god have mercy on you.<u+201d> thousands of miles away, addressing the u.s. conference of mayors in san francisco, obama spoke angrily about charleston, which joins a grim roll call of cities such as newtown, conn., aurora, colo., and oak creek, wis., where mass shootings have occurred during his time in office. his frustration was directed primarily at congress, which failed to pass a set of publicly popular gun control bills that he pushed after the december 2012 elementary school shootings in newtown, where 20 children and six others were killed. <u+201c>we don<u+2019>t know if it would have prevented what happened in charleston,<u+201d> obama said. <u+201c>but we might still have some more americans with us. we might have stopped one shooter. some families might still be whole. you all might have to attend fewer funerals. <u+201c>and we should be strong enough to acknowledge this,<u+201d> he said. the force of his words signaled a shift from his comments at the white house a day earlier. then, he expressed a sense of resignation that any gun control measures, while needed to prevent another mass shooting, would likely happen <u+201c>at some point<u+201d> after he left office. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not resigned. i have faith we will eventually do the right thing,<u+201d> obama said friday without offering specific policy proposals of his own. <u+201c>you don<u+2019>t see murder on this kind of scale, this kind of frequency in any other advanced nation on earth.<u+201d> the attack inside the emanuel african methodist episcopal church has left charleston in mourning and a nation, from the president to parishioners here, struggling to understand and explain the aftermath. the shooting was the deadliest attack on a place of worship in the united states since 1991, when nine people were killed at the wat promkunaram temple near phoenix. authorities announced friday that roof had been charged with nine counts of murder and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime. his attorney has not commented, though his family issued a statement friday extending sympathies to the victims and asking for privacy. <u+201c>words cannot express our shock, grief and disbelief as to what happened that night,<u+2019><u+2019> the statement said. more evidence also emerged that roof, a high school dropout with a criminal record that began this year, may have been motivated by racial hatred. law enforcement officials said he had confessed, and that during the confession, expressed strong anti-black views. officials characterized him as unrepentant and unashamed. roof told officers that he wanted word of his actions to spread, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing. yet roof also acknowledged to authorities that he had briefly reconsidered his plan during the time he spent watching the bible study group after entering the church, two people briefed on the investigation said. roof said he <u+201c>almost didn<u+2019>t go through with it because they were so nice to him,<u+201d> one of the people said, before he concluded that <u+201c>i had to complete my mission.<u+201d> as he methodically fired and reloaded several times, the person said, roof called out: <u+201c>you all are taking over our country. y<u+2019>all want something to pray about? i<u+2019>ll give you something to pray about.<u+201d> an affidavit filed by charleston police detective richard burckhardt said the time that roof spent with parishioners before opening fire amounted to about an hour. the document does not state what, if anything, occurred in the moments before the shooting. but it says all victims were hit multiple times. before leaving the church, the affidavit states, roof stood over someone <u+201c>and uttered a racially inflammatory statement to the witness.<u+201d> south carolina<u+2019>s governor on friday urged prosecutors to seek the death penalty for the shootings. <u+201c>we will absolutely want him to have the death penalty,<u+201d> gov. nikki haley told nbc<u+2019>s <u+201c>today<u+201d> show. but prosecutors said the decision about whether to seek execution had not yet been made. the prosecutor pursuing the case, scarlett a. wilson, said at news conference that she will make the decision after speaking to relatives of the victims. <u+201c>they deserve to know the facts first. they deserve to be involved in any conversations regarding the death penalty,<u+201d> wilson said. meanwhile, a federal civil rights investigation into the attacks was also underway, which authorities said will be conducted along with the state probe. federal officials have described it as a hate crime investigation. when roof was arrested <u+2014> about 250 miles from charleston in neighboring north carolina <u+2014> he had a glock .45-caliber semiautomatic handgun that law enforcement officials said he obtained in april, either receiving it as a birthday gift or buying it himself with birthday money. the gun was purchased legally, officials said. at roof<u+2019>s bond hearing, nadine collier, the daughter of 70-year-old shooting victim ethel lance, was among those who addressed him. <u+201c>i forgive you,<u+201d> collier said, her voice breaking. <u+201c>you took something very precious from me. i will never talk to her again. i will never, ever hold her again. but i forgive you. and have mercy on your soul.<u+201d> roof is being held on a $1<u+00a0>million bond. horwitz and markon reported from washington. anne gearan in charleston; ken otterbourg in shelby; and brian murphy, j. freedom du lac, mark berman, thad moore and julie tate in washington contributed to this report.

from victims<u+2019> families, forgiveness for accused charleston gunman dylann roof

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

77.0

8.0

6637.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

474.0

0.0

133.0

0.0

40.0

30.0

23.0

12.0

36.0

17.0

22.0

13.0

34.0

40.0

480.0

133.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump may have eased some republican fears tuesday night when he declared his intention to stay inside the party. but if their angst has been temporarily eased at the prospect of what he would do if he loses, they still face a far more troubling, and increasingly plausible, question. what happens to the party if he wins? with trump as its standard-bearer, the gop would suddenly be asked to rally around a candidate who has been called by his once and former primary foes <u+201c>a cancer on conservatism,<u+201d> <u+201c>unhinged,<u+201d> <u+201c>a drunk driver <u+2026> helping the enemy.<u+201d> a prominent conservative national security expert, max boot, has flatly labeled him <u+201c>a fascist.<u+201d> and the rhetoric is even stronger in private conversations i<u+2019>ve had recently with republicans of moderate and conservative stripes. this is not the usual rhetoric of intraparty battles, the kind of thing that gets resolved in handshakes under the convention banners. these are stake-in-the-ground positions, strongly suggesting that a trump nomination would create a fissure within the party as deep and indivisible as any in american political history, driven both by ideology and by questions of personal character. indeed, it would be a fissure so deep that, if the operatives i talked with are right, trump running as a republican could well face a third-party run<u+2014>from the republicans themselves. that threat, in turn, would leave republican candidates, contributors and foot soldiers with painful choices. a look at the political landscape, the election rules and the history of intraparty insurgencies suggests that it could turn 2016, a year that offered republicans a reasonable chance to win the white house and with it total control of the national political apparatus, into a disaster. with trump as the nominee, the republican party would face a threat to unity on several fronts. his victory would represent a triumph of an insurgent movement, or impulse, within the party. historically speaking, this is exactly the kind of intraparty victory that guarantees political civil war. the most striking examples of party fissure in american politics have come when a party broke with a long pattern of accommodating different factions and moved decisively toward one side. it has happened with the democrats twice, both over civil rights. the party had long embraced the cause of civil rights in the north while welcoming segregationists<u+2014>and white supremacists<u+2014>from across the south. in 1948, the party<u+2019>s embrace of a stronger civil rights plank led southern delegations to walk out of the convention. that year, south carolina governor strom thurmond led a national states rights democratic party<u+2014>the <u+201c>dixiecrats<u+201d><u+2014>that won four southern states. had president harry truman not (barely) defeated tom dewey in ohio and california, the electoral college would have been deadlocked<u+2014>and the choice thrown into the house of representatives, with southern segregationists holding the balance of power. twenty years later, alabama governor george wallace led a similar anti-civil-rights third party movement that won five southern states. a relatively small shift of voters in california would have deadlocked that election and thrown it to the house of representatives. in two other cases, a dramatic shift in intraparty power led to significant defections on the losing side. in 1964, when republican conservatives succeeded in nominating a divisive champion of their cause in barry goldwater, liberal republicans (there were such things back then) like new york governor nelson rockefeller, michigan governor george romney and others refused to endorse the nominee. more shockingly, the new york herald-tribune, the semi-official voice of the gop establishment, endorsed lyndon johnson<u+2014>the first democrat it had supported, ever. with his party split, goldwater went down in flames. eight years later, when a deeply divided democratic party nominated anti-war hero george mcgovern, george meany led the afl-cio to a position of neutrality between mcgovern and richard nixon<u+2014>the first time labor had refused to back a democrat for president. prominent democrats like former texas governor john connally openly backed nixon, while countless others, disempowered by the emergence of <u+201c>new democrats,<u+201d> simply sat on their hands. the divided democrats lost in a landslide. would a trump nomination be another example of such a power shift? yes, although not a shift in an ideological sense. it would represent a more radical kind of shift, with power moving from party officials and office-holders to deeply alienated voters and to their media tribunes. (rush limbaugh, sean hannity, mark levin, ann coulter and laura ingraham have not exactly endorsed trump, but they have been vocal in defending him and in assailing those who have branded trump unacceptable.) it would undermine the thesis of a highly influential book, <u+201c>the party decides,<u+201d> which argues that the preferences of party insiders is still critical to the outcome of a nomination contest. this possibility, in turn, has provoked strong feelings about trump from some <u+201c>old school<u+201d> republicans. says one self-described <u+201c>structural, sycophantic republican<u+201d> who has been involved at high levels of gop campaigns for decades: <u+201c>hillary would be bad for the country<u+2014>he<u+2019>d be worse.<u+201d> a battle over ideology or influence, however, explains only one kind of defection from party ranks. the other<u+2014>one that would hold particular peril for trump-as-republican-nominee<u+2014>arises from a belief that a chosen candidate is simply unfit, by character or temperament, to hold office. and on at least one occasion, a prominent politician sacrificed his electoral chances out of that belief. in 1986, former senator adlai stevenson iii had every reason to believe he would be following his father's footsteps into the illinois governor<u+2019>s mansion. four years earlier, the democrat had lost a race for that office by fewer than 5,000 highly disputed votes. but in 1986, his easy primary win in march was overshadowed by what happened elsewhere on the ballot: two followers of lyndon larouche, a cultish, conspiracy-minded demagogue, won the democratic nominations for lieutenant governor and secretary of state. stevenson was so horrified by the thought of placing larouche<u+2019>s acolytes in positions of political power that he bolted the party line, running instead as an independent. he lost decisively. (sen. alan dixon, who remained on the democratic line, easily won reelection.) republicans faced a similar issue in 1991, when former klansman david duke made it into the gubernatorial runoff in louisiana. while he proclaimed himself a republican, he was roundly rejected by the party at every level<u+2014>the outgoing gop governor endorsed former governor edwin edwards<u+2014>and duke lost overwhelmingly to edwards. (it<u+2019>s a campaign best remembered for the bumper sticker touting the ethically challenged edwards: <u+201c>vote for the crook<u+2014>it<u+2019>s important.<u+201d>) it<u+2019>s this example that perhaps offers the best parallel to what trump would face as the nominee. if you want to see the most sulfurous assaults on trump, don<u+2019>t look to the editorial pages of the new york times or the comments of msnbc personalities; look instead to the most prominent media voices in the conservative world: national review, the weekly standard, commentary and the columns of george will and others. in part, they deplore his deviations from the conservative canon; deviations that former reagan aide and onetime fcc chairman dennis patrick summarizes this way: <u+201c>many of my colleagues from the reagan administration would have a hard time pulling the lever for trump. we weren<u+2019>t just republicans, we were conservatives. it is very difficult to square any principled theory of conservative governance with much of what trump says." but it<u+2019>s more, much more than policy that has stirred the ire on the right: it<u+2019>s the vulgarity, the fusion of ignorance and arrogance, the narcissism, the dissembling on matters great and small. the composite portrait of trump painted by these outlets<u+2014>leavened only by a grudging acknowledgment that he<u+2019>s touched on legitimate concerns about immigration and terror<u+2014>makes the idea of handing over the nuclear codes to trump unsettling. and it makes the idea of embracing him as the alternative to hillary clinton somewhere between a reach and a lunge. what a trump nomination represents, then, is a victory that leaves significant slices of the party unwilling or unable to accept the outcome. whether he<u+2019>s seen as an ideological heretic for his views on trade, taxes and government power or as a demagogue whose clownish bluster and casual bigotry make him temperamentally unfit for office, the odds on massive defections are very high. but what kind of defections? based on the folks i<u+2019>ve talked with, it could take different forms. one is a simple, quiet step away from any work on behalf of the top of the ticket. that<u+2019>s what the self-described <u+201c>structural, sycophantic republican<u+201d><u+2014>will do. while he fervently hopes trump will meet the fate of past front-runners like [rudy] giuliani and [newt] gingrich, he says that in the event of trump<u+2019>s victory, <u+201c>i would put all my heart, soul and energy into saving the senate. i<u+2019>d work to turn out votes so that [kelly] ayotte and [pat] toomey and [ron] johnson survive. in the end, every republican, every conservative, knows what a disaster it would be to have clinton as president. so the key is to make sure the checks and balances were in place.<u+201d> others, however, can envision much more radical outcomes. dan schnur spent a lifetime in the vineyards of the republican party, working in the reagan and bush presidential campaigns and serving as communications director for the california republican party. he<u+2019>s now an independent and heads the unruh institute of politics at usc. he argues <u+201c>a trump nomination would virtually guarantee a third-party campaign from a more traditional republican candidate.<u+201d> why a republican? the short answer is to save the party over the long term. <u+201c>it's impossible to conceive that republican leaders would simply forfeit their party to him,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>even without the formal party apparatus, they'd need to fly their flag behind an alternative, if only to keep the gop brand somewhat viable for the future. otherwise, it would be toxic for a long, long time.<u+201d> romney strategist stu stevens, who still believes trump will fade<u+2014>indeed, that <u+201c>he will not win a single primary<u+201d><u+2014>nonetheless agrees that a trump nomination would trigger a <u+201c>very strong third-party effort.<u+201d> and rob stutzman, another veteran of california republican politics<u+2014>he helped spearhead the 2003 recall that put arnold schwarzenegger in the governor<u+2019>s mansion<u+2014>foresees a third party emerging, both as a safe harbor for disaffected gop voters and to help other republican candidates. <u+201c>i think a third candidate would be very likely on many state ballots,<u+201d> he says. <u+201c>first of all, i think most gop voters would want an alternative to vote for out of conscience. but trump would also be devastating to the party and other gop candidates. a solid conservative third candidate would give options to senators like ayotte, johnson and [mark] kirk to run with someone else and still be opposed to hillary. in fact, i think it<u+2019>s plausible such a candidate could beat trump in many states.<u+201d> any candidate attempting a third-party bid would confront serious obstacles, such as getting on state ballots late in the election calendar. as for down-ballot campaigns, most state laws prohibit candidates from running on multiple lines; so a senate or congressional candidate who wanted to avoid association with trump would have to abandon the gop line to re-run with an independent presidential contender. the stevenson example shows that leaving a major party line is fraught with peril<u+2014>although the write-in triumph of alaska sen. lisa murkowski in 2010 suggests that it can sometimes succeed. the very fact that serious political thinkers are contemplating such a possibility demonstrates that when republicans look at the perils posed by a third-party bid from donald trump, they may be looking in the wrong direction. it<u+2019>s not trump the defector that could trigger the biggest threat to the party, but trump the nominee.

will the gop mount a third-party challenge to 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

1.0

0.0

15.0

52.0

8.0

12269.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

812.0

1.0

0.0

232.0

0.0

92.0

20.0

19.0

12.0

25.0

13.0

28.0

13.0

47.0

58.0

61.0

814.0

233.0

92.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

impossible, you say? in this crazy year, what<u+2019>s impossible? against trump and sanders, bloomberg could win. here<u+2019>s how. bloomberg decided to run back in march of 2016 only when he saw that trump and sanders were on track to be nominated by the republicans and democrats. he viewed both as dangerous men who would wreck the country. and bloomberg saw a path. he thought voters would eventually see that he had been a highly successful mayor of a city larger than all but a handful of states and was far more fit for high office than either of them. he would run as an unprecedented blend of insider and outsider<u+2014>representing elites but smashing the two-party status quo that voters despised. the journey began in mid-winter. after trump plastered the field in new hampshire on feb. 9 and won by double digits on feb. 20 in south carolina, republicans proved powerless to resist his hostile takeover of their party. with his opposition divided, trump edged ted cruz in home state texas on march 1, and then, on march 15, marco rubio in home state florida and john kasich in ohio, all but eliminating all three. by then the die was cast on the republican side, though americans and millions watching around the world still had to slap themselves to prove they weren<u+2019>t dreaming. democrats suddenly had to do the same in their party. sanders won 60 percent of the vote in the new hampshire primary, romping not just with young liberals but even older moderate women who were supposed to be hillary<u+2019>s base. clinton prevailed in the nevada caucuses by five points on feb. 20, but sanders showed surprising strength outside his base with latino voters. when hillary won by a much smaller margin than expected in south carolina on feb. 27, it showed that bernie would also avoid being overwhelmed by pro-hillary african-american voters in the big industrial states. after nevada and south carolina, party leaders breathed a sigh of relief thinking hillary was home safe, but that<u+2019>s always the moment with the clintons when new voter doubts about them set in. hillary is best when she<u+2019>s in trouble and worst when sitting on a lead. she underperformed badly on super tuesday, losing massachusetts by a big margin (she had trailed there in the polls for weeks) and, shockingly, texas, where the state<u+2019>s longstanding populist tradition returned with a vengeance. on march 8, sanders carried michigan, which had gone for jesse jackson in 1988. that gave him momentum the following week to come close in hillary<u+2019>s home state of illinois and to carry ohio, where he reminded democrats of their populist senator, sherrod brown, though brown supported hillary. bloomberg easily won all three of the fall debates. he was far more knowledgeable than trump, who continued his pattern of not preparing on issues. when trump predictably tried to belittle bloomberg, he failed badly. bloomberg was no <u+201c>loser<u+201d> in the only way trump ever kept score. and the fear arguments fell flat with a mayor who had rebuilt new york after the 9/11 attacks. meanwhile, bloomberg schooled sanders on how to create jobs and make the economy grow, eviscerating his plans as unaffordable and leading to tax increases on the middle class.

here<u+2019>s how michael bloomberg becomes 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

46.0

8.0

3199.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

186.0

1.0

0.0

65.0

0.0

23.0

12.0

11.0

6.0

11.0

8.0

15.0

11.0

10.0

23.0

20.0

189.0

66.0

23.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

charleston, s.c. <u+2014> jeb bush says he's not reducing his presidential campaign, he is simply<u+00a0>refocusing it with an eye toward the early caucus and primary states. "we've<u+00a0>made<u+00a0>an adjustment in our campaign," bush said saturday before conducting a town hall in the pivotal state of south carolina. "that's what leaders do." stumping the palmetto state a day after his campaign announced staff reductions and pay cuts, bush dismissed critics who said<u+00a0>the changes reflect a struggling campaign that is losing ground to any number of rivals. "blah, blah, blah," bush said. "that's my answer <u+2014> blah, blah, blah." the cuts came after a slide in polls that now show the former florida governor well behind donald trump, ben carson<u+00a0>and other republican candidates, creating some unrest among bush donors. in response, bush cited a number of candidates who have held early leads in republican contests and then faded, a list that ranges from herman cain to rudy giuliani. john mccain, meanwhile, rallied from internal campaign troubles to win the 2008 republican presidential nomination. "october is not when you elect people," bush said before hosting a town hall at a catholic<u+00a0>high school in charleston. "it's february, and then you move into march." bush said his efforts now focus on four contests in february: the iowa caucuses, the new hampshire primary, the south carolina primary<u+00a0>and the nevada caucuses. he said he is also taking aim at a march 1 group of primaries, including key southern states like georgia and texas. "we have a campaign that is<u+00a0>designed to win," bush said. "and i'm<u+00a0>going to win." in discussing his campaign changes, bush<u+00a0>also talked about the changing<u+00a0>nature of the republican race. he cited a<u+00a0>"new phenomenon" of candidates who have risen in the polls without any previous political experience, an apparent reference to donald trump and ben carson. he described them as<u+00a0>"the frontrunners right now" who will be "held to account, just like all of us will." later saturday morning, bush again<u+00a0>referred to the early republican<u+00a0>contests during the town hall hosted by sen.<u+00a0>tim scott, r-s.c., talking up the importance of south carolina in the primary process on several occasions.<u+00a0>"the february states are important," bush said. scott <u+2014> who has not yet endorsed in the primary <u+2014> said after the town hall<u+00a0>he doesn't think<u+00a0>bush's campaign<u+00a0>changes will hurt him in south carolina. the senator<u+00a0>compared the<u+00a0>slim-down to the diet that bush himself<u+00a0>used to lose weight. "i think he's doing the paleo diet to his campaign," scott said. also appearing at the town hall: u.s.<u+00a0>rep. trey gowdy, r-s.c.,<u+00a0>two days after chairing a hearing in which democratic front-runner hillary clinton testified about the 2012 terrorist attack on a u.s. facility in benghazi, libya. "i don't know what y'all were doing thursday," gowdy told the supportive crowd. "i had a rough thursday." democrats have accused gowdy of conducting a partisan investigation designed to target clinton's presidential campaign.<u+00a0>bush and scott praised the south carolina congressman for seeking the truth about the attack that killed four americans, including the u.s. ambassador to libya. "i've been in the limelight myself a few times," bush said. "and it's not easy."

jeb bush says he is making campaign 'adjustment'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

48.0

8.0

3255.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

238.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

0.0

11.0

6.0

4.0

8.0

3.0

6.0

4.0

12.0

10.0

14.0

244.0

61.0

11.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

can the president rewrite federal laws? can he alter their meaning? can he change their effect? these are legitimate questions in an era in which we have an unpopular progressive democratic president who has boasted that he can govern without congress by using his phone and his pen, and a mostly newly elected largely conservative republican congress with its own ideas about big government. these are not hypothetical questions. in 2012, president obama signed executive orders that essentially said to about 1.7 million unlawfully present immigrants who arrived in the u.s. before their 16th birthdays and who are not yet 31 years of age that if they complied with certain conditions that he made up out of thin air they will not be deported. in 2014, the president signed additional executive orders that essentially made the same offer to about 4.7 million unlawfully present immigrants, without the age limits that he had made up out of thin air. a federal court enjoined enforcement of the 2014 orders last month. last week, the federal communications commission -- the bureaucrats appointed by the president who regulate broadcast radio and television -- decreed that it has the authority to regulate the internet, even though federal courts have twice ruled that it does not. also last week, the federal bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives, whose director is appointed by the president, proposed regulations that would outlaw the only mass-produced bullets that can be fired from an ar-15 rifle. this rifle has been the target of the left for many years because it looks like a military weapon; yet it is a lawful and safe civilian rifle commonly owned by many americans. this week, the president<u+2019>s press secretary told reporters that the president is seriously thinking of signing executive orders intended to raise taxes on corporations by directing the irs to redefine tax terminology so as to increase corporate tax burdens. he must have forgotten that those additional taxes would be paid by either the shareholders or the customers of those corporations, and those shareholders and customers elected a congress they had every right to expect would be writing the tax laws. he has eviscerated that right. what<u+2019>s going on here? what<u+2019>s going on is the exercise of authoritarian impulses by a desperate president terrified of powerlessness and irrelevance, the constitution be damned. i say <u+201c>damned<u+201d> because when the president writes laws, whether under the guise of administrative regulations or executive orders, he is effectively damning the constitution by usurping the powers of congress. the constitution could not be clearer. article i, section 1 begins, <u+201c>all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states.<u+201d> obama actually asked congress to write the laws he is now purporting to write, and congress declined, and so he does so at his peril. in 1952, president truman seized america<u+2019>s closed steel mills because steel workers went on strike and the military needed hardware to fight the korean war. he initially asked congress for authorization to do this, and congress declined to give it to him; so he seized the mills anyway. his seizure was challenged by youngstown sheet & tube co., then a huge operator of steel mills. in a famous supreme court decision, the court enjoined the president from operating the mills. youngstown is not a novel or arcane case. the concurring opinion by justice robert jackson articulating the truism that when the president acts in defiance of congress he operates at his lowest ebb of constitutional power and can be enjoined by the courts unless he is in an area uniquely immune from congressional authority is among the most highly regarded and frequently cited concurring opinions in modern court history. it reminds the president and the lawyers who advise him that the constitution imposes limits on executive power. the president<u+2019>s oath of office underscores those limits. it requires that he enforce the laws faithfully. the reason james madison insisted on using the word <u+201c>faithfully<u+201d> in the presidential oath and putting the oath itself into the constitution was to instill in presidents the realization that they may need to enforce laws with which they disagree -- even laws they hate. but obama rejects the youngstown decision and the madisonian logic. here is a president who claims he can kill americans without due process, spy on americans without individualized probable cause, start wars on his own, borrow money on his own, regulate the internet, ban lawful guns, tell illegal immigrants how to avoid the consequences of federal law, and now raise taxes on his own. one of the safeguards built into the constitution is the separation of powers: congress writes the laws, the president enforces the laws, and the courts interpret them. the purpose of this separation is to prevent the accumulation of too much power in the hands of too few -- a valid fear when the constitution was written and a valid fear today. when the president effectively writes the laws, congress is effectively neutered. yet, the reason we have the separation of powers is not to protect congress, but to protect all individuals from the loss of personal liberty. under obama, that loss has been vast. will congress and the courts do anything about it? andrew p. napolitano, a former judge of the superior court of new jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at fox news channel.

our president and the constitution: barack obama has gone rogue

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

63.0

8.0

5496.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

377.0

1.0

0.0

132.0

1.0

0.0

62.0

14.0

10.0

6.0

22.0

4.0

11.0

4.0

25.0

30.0

33.0

381.0

133.0

63.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

sorry, but sanders doesn<u+2019>t think like mainstream black voters. the tell is cornel west. he hates obama. we do not. iowa and new hampshire had their turns in the spotlight, and nevada comes this saturday. and a week after that, my state, south carolina, will host its own democratic primary. compared to those first two states, ours is highly diverse. battle ground, trial phase<u+2014>call it what you will<u+2014>south carolina, once a crucible of the civil rights movement and barack obama<u+2019>s surge, can help vet the candidate best aligned with the black community. bernie sanders is not that candidate<u+2014>not next to hillary clinton. from his bouts with the president to the laws he contested to the company he keeps, sanders raises alarm bells for obama supporters, especially those from the african-american community. back in 2012, while still a proud independent, sanders took a page from the republican playbook and called for a primary challenge to obama<u+2019>s presidency. his aim: to contrast <u+201c>a progressive agenda as opposed to what obama is doing,<u+201d> as if to say affordable health care and safe cities are not <u+201c>progressive<u+201d> enough goals. the democrats i know would disagree. that anti-obama jab followed an earlier resistance to the affordable care act, now considered president obama<u+2019>s greatest legacy. back in 2009, coming from the far left wing, sanders held out on voting <u+201c>yes,<u+201d> hoping instead for an impossible ideal. over 200,000 south carolinians now have quality, affordable health insurance through obamacare. if sanders fulfills his campaign promise and starts those talks from a blank slate, then he risks undoing years of progress. improving health care matters greatly to our community. it<u+2019>s no secret that african americans die earlier than whites and suffer in larger numbers from diseases like diabetes and heart disease. we also die twice as often from gun violence. in charleston county alone, blacks accounted for 29 percent of the population in 2014 but claimed 78 percent of gun violence deaths. we demand equality where our lives are at stake, and on that note sanders has a mixed record on gun safety, having opposed reforms that obama now pushes. the vermont senator once voted for legislation that allowed the charleston shooter to buy a gun despite a clerical error<u+2014>the now-infamous <u+201c>charleston loophole.<u+201d> more recently, he voted down legislation meant to shield gun makers from victim lawsuits. when president obama last month refused to back <u+201c>any candidate, even in my own party, who does not support common-sense gun reform,<u+201d> he may well have been referring to sanders. in what perhaps struck the candidate as an act of solidarity, sanders also chose cornel west as liaison to south carolina<u+2019>s black voters. as the washington post puts it, west serves as sanders<u+2019>s <u+201c>controversial traveling companion<u+201d> and <u+201c>has been highly critical of president obama.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s an understatement. cornel west hates president obama. he once called the president <u+201c>a brown-faced clinton,<u+201d> <u+201c>a rockefeller republican in blackface,<u+201d> and a <u+201c>counterfeit<u+201d> progressive. my own father, cleveland sellers, was a real civil rights-era activist, as were jesse jackson and rev. joseph a. darby. all of them are alive and well with deep south carolina roots and could have been surrogates for sen. sanders. so of all the black leaders sanders could have chosen, why west? west is a scholar, sure, but his views are extreme, and they clash with much of the pro-obama black community. bernie sanders means well, and his calls for income equality rightly resonate with democratic voters. but certain issues<u+2014>gun violence and health care among them<u+2014>and certain viewpoints<u+2014>cornel west<u+2019>s not among them<u+2014>appeal specifically to most african americans. my vote goes to someone who supports president obama and intends to wholly and ambitiously build on his legacy. that someone is not bernie sanders.

south carolina black voters not feelin<u+2019> the bern

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

48.0

8.0

3882.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

213.0

1.0

0.0

53.0

0.0

29.0

15.0

8.0

3.0

10.0

9.0

11.0

4.0

18.0

26.0

29.0

215.0

54.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump, the actual republican candidate for president, now endorsed by his party leaders, openly said he wants to exclude someone from a government job because of his race and ethnicity. as the wall street journal reported on thursday, trump said he wants to disqualify the federal judge overseeing the trump university case because of his "mexican heritage" and membership in a latino lawyers association: mr. trump said u.s. district judge gonzalo curiel had "an absolute conflict" in presiding over the litigation given that he was "of mexican heritage" and a member of a latino lawyers' association. mr. trump said the background of the judge, who was born in indiana to mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern u.s. border. "i'm building a wall. it's an inherent conflict of interest," mr. trump said. this is pure racism. there's no subtlety, no dog whistle, no coded language. somehow this isn't too surprising. trump is, after all, the presidential candidate who launched his campaign by calling mexican immigrants criminals and "rapists," and he proposed banning all muslims from entering the us. and with this latest remark, trump is just turning the thinly veiled subtext into text. he had already previously brought up curiel's mexican heritage, suggesting that there was a conflict of interest because of it but not saying it quite so explicitly. reading this, it's hard for me, a hispanic american, to avoid feeling a little personally insulted. this suggests that trump would probably dismiss my opinion <u+2014> indeed, this article <u+2014> because of my name. yet millions of americans <u+2014> and a major political party <u+2014> want him to be president, despite his clear racism. maybe the media plays a role here. after all, instead of calling it like it is, cbs news, msnbc, the washington post, and the new york times have called trump's comments about curiel "racially charged" and "racially tinged," the weasel words the media typically uses to describe racism. it makes one wonder: what would it take for them to finally call trump or his remarks just plainly racist? if claiming a qualified, vetted judge shouldn't be able to do his job because of his race and ethnicity isn't racist, then what the hell is? perhaps the problem is hispanic people are vastly underrepresented in media. as the journalism organization asne found, racial minorities make up less than 13 percent of the field <u+2014> despite making up about 38 percent of the total us population. that might make it harder for a lot of journalists to see just how racist trump's remarks are. if that's the case, maybe it would be helpful for the predominant white journalists in the field to consider: if president barack obama or president marco rubio said all white people should be banned from acting as judge in a court case against him, would that be considered racist? and how is that any different from what trump is doing? there should be no doubt about it now: donald trump is racist. he wants to exclude people from government jobs because of their race and ethnicity. that is the literal definition of racism. the media shouldn't shy away from pointing that out, and the people supporting trump should know that's exactly what they're supporting.

donald trump is blatantly racist <u+2014> and the media is too scared to call him out on it

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

84.0

8.0

3317.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

273.0

2.0

0.0

70.0

1.0

0.0

34.0

6.0

4.0

10.0

7.0

8.0

6.0

17.0

12.0

23.0

280.0

72.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president barack obama is proposing a new strategy in the fight against isis, saying the battle against the islamic state will not be quick. in fact, he says it could take decades. during a rare visit to the pentagon, obama laid out his revamped strategy, saying the fight against the islamic state will require more than just weapons. "no amount of military force will end the terror that is isil unless it's matched by a broader effort, political and economic," he said. the president said coalition forces will go after the heart of isis, but he did not call for more bombing or more troops, announcing instead a shift in focus to counter the terror group's public relations tactics. obama pointed to a string of isis defeats in the region due to airstrikes targeting the group's supply lines. but he said more needs to be done to recruit and train syrians for the fight on the ground. when it comes to lone wolf terrorists in america inspired by isis, the president admitted they're harder to detect, saying u.s. national security must remain vigilant. obama pointed to increased efforts to counter isis's propaganda that's spreading worldwide via social media. "we also have to acknowledge that isil has been particularly effective at reaching out to and recruiting vulnerable people around the world, including here in the united states," he said. while the fight against isis will be long, the president said he's confident the terrorists won't win. but republicans remain skeptical, saying obama's plan doesn't go far enough. "a speech isn't a strategy," said cory fritz, spokesman for house speaker john boehner, r-ohio. "at no point in his remarks did president obama indicate he's doing anything to change course and actually build the broad, overarching plan that's needed to take on these savage terrorists and win." rep. jason chaffetz, r-utah, said the president "doesn't have a strategy." "i didn't sense that he had a rock solid strategy on how to deal with this and defeat it," chaffetz said.

obama: battle against isis could take decades

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

45.0

8.0

2022.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

156.0

0.0

39.0

0.0

16.0

5.0

4.0

1.0

9.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

11.0

10.0

20.0

159.0

39.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

he trusts no one, and places a premium on revenge. ("if you do not get even, you are just a schmuck!") he treats every decision he makes "like a lover," sometimes thinking with his head, other times with other parts of his body, because it reminds him to "keep in touch with my basic impulses." and to make creative choices, he writes: "i try to step back and remember my first shallow reaction. the day i realized it can be smart to be shallow was, for me, a deep experience." this is donald j. trump as he sees himself and the world. cnn scoured thousands of pages of books, speeches, profiles and television interview transcripts from the past three decades to stitch together a portrait based entirely on the republican presidential front-runner's own words. taken together, his words offer further insight into the leadership style of the billionaire-turned-politician, whose extraordinary candidacy has simultaneously electrified and repulsed large swaths of the electorate. trump authored more than a dozen books about his experiences in the business world that shaped this outlook -- most of them self-help treatises with titles including the 1987 best-seller "the art of the deal," 2004's "think like a billionaire: everything you need to know about success, real estate, and life," and 2007's "think big." trump himself has shared his story in detail. some recurrent themes in his writings include strength, success, self-confidence, distrust and revenge. he has often written and spoken about what he sees as the decline of the united states, a bedrock theme of his presidential campaign. "the world is a vicious and brutal place, he wrote in "think big." "even your friends are out to get you: they want your job, they want your house, they want your money, they want your wife, and they even want your dog.'' "when people wrong you, go after those people, because it is a good feeling and because other people will see you doing it," he writes. "i always get even." 'if i had been the son of a coal miner' trump's life story, in the broadest of brush strokes, goes like this: he was born the son of wealthy new york real-estate developer fred c. trump. he went to a private military academy in high school, attended fordham for two years, then the wharton school of finance from which he graduated. while his father did business in brooklyn and queens, trump set off to make his mark in manhattan. he became fabulously wealthy (think penthouse, helicopter, yacht, private plane) in the real estate boom of the '80s, then nearly lost it all when the boom went bust. he has since rebounded to the tune <u+2014> he says <u+2014> of a personal fortune of $10 billion. (forbes estimates his net worth at $4.5 billion). as he has run his empire and ascended as a mega star on reality tv, trump has often been accused of being a bully, which he denies. he does, however, acknowledge being a "very assertive, aggressive kid." when he was in elementary school he formed the opinion that his music teacher didn't know much about music. so, trump punched him in the face, he wrote in 1987's "the art of the deal." "in the second grade i actually gave a teacher a black eye," he wrote. "i'm not proud of that, but it's clear evidence that even early on i had a tendency to stand up and make my opinions known in a very forceful way. the difference now is that i like to use my brain instead of my fists." (he adds that he "almost got expelled" over the incident.) the elder trump completed his project and liked it so much that he glued the blocks together. it was a self-admiration that would carry over into his real life as a builder. in "think big," he writes of the emotional reaction he has when arriving to work at trump tower. "i love to see the crowds of people oohing and aahing at the stunning marble and the breathtaking 80-foot waterfall," he wrote. "in truth i am dazzled as much by my own creations as are the tourists and glamour hounds that flock to trump tower ... or any of my other properties." the mutual admiration of his work, trump wrote, makes him feel "a little closer to them even though we've never met." the billionaire developer has long felt a kinship with blue-collar workers -- and he believes the feeling is reciprocated. there is without question an aspirational nature to his candidacy, and blue-collar workers have shown up at the polls in droves to support his bid for the republican nomination <u+2014> often expressing admiration for his success and a belief that his financial wealth will free him from the influence of special interests if he makes it to the white house. "rich men are less likely to like me," trump told playboy in a 1990 interview, "but the working man likes me because he knows i worked hard and didn't inherit what i've built." trump acknowledges he was born wealthy <u+2014> he grew up in a 23-room house in the jamaica estates section of queens <u+2014> and that his father loaned him money to begin his own business. but he stresses that he set himself apart when he headed to manhattan and began building skyscrapers instead of affordable rental units. "i often say that i'm a member of the lucky sperm club," he wrote in 2009's "think like a champion." "but did it give me a natural talent? i don't think so. it gave me an advantage that i deliberately chose to develop into an advantage." there is an "it" factor people like him are born with, trump has said. to explain what he meant by "it," trump, the son of a multi-millionaire, evoked the plight of mine workers with black lung disease in the interview with playboy. "if i had been the son of a coal miner i would have left the damn mines," said trump, then 43. "but most people don't have the imagination<u+2014>or whatever <u+2014> to leave their mine." "they don't have 'it,' " he said. trump seems most self-critical when writing about the near collapse of his real-estate empire in 1990. "in the early 90s i was in a ton of debt. i had gone from the smartest guy in town to a complete zero," he wrote in 2007's "think big." "i went from being a super genius to a moron." he recalled walking down the street one day with his then-wife, marla maples, and reflecting on his situation. he pointed to a nearby man. "that beggar over there is worth $900 million more than i am," he wrote. "what do you mean?" maples asked. "because i'm $900 million in debt," he replied, "and at least he has money in his pocket." he attributed his fall not only to the revision of the tax code by congress in 1986 <u+2014> which he said destroyed "just about any incentive anyone might have for investing in real estate" <u+2014> but also to his own complacency. "you just get a feeling of invincibility," he said, reflecting on his downward spiral in that book. "you let down your guard. you don't work as hard. then things start to go in the wrong direction." trump, who has written that he sleeps three-to-four hours a night so he can devote as much time as possible to his work, does not dwell on his misfortune on the campaign trail, except to establish the depths from which he re-emerged. he threatened to sue a washington post reporter who wrote about the bankruptcy of the taj mahal, one of his casinos in atlantic city, according to an interview with that reporter on npr's "fresh air." trump also reacted indignantly to a question about his bankruptcies during cnn's september debate last year, insisting that he merely took advantage of u.s. laws to help his business. back on top in the mid-2000s, trump wrote "think big," which shows the evolution of his management style and his values as a leader. "do not trust anyone," reads one chapter subheading. "i used to say, 'go out and get the best people, and trust them.' over the years i have seen too many shenanigans, and now i say, 'get the best people and don't trust them.'" another maxim in trump's world is revenge. "i always get even," he writes in a chapter dedicated to the subject. "she was a nobody in her government job and going nowhere," trump wrote of the unnamed woman. "i decided to make her into somebody." under his mentoring, trump wrote, the woman became powerful in real estate and bought a beautiful home. when trump was under intense financial pressure in the early '90s, he asked the woman to make a phone call to "an extremely close friend of hers who held a powerful position at a big bank who would have done what she asked." so trump "got rid of her," he wrote. "she ended up losing her home. her husband, who was only in it for the money, walked out on her and i was glad," he continued. "over the years many people have called asking for a recommendation for her. i only give her bad recommendations. ...this woman was very disloyal, and now i go out of my way to make her life miserable." trump punctuated the anecdote with several bullet points at the end of the chapter, including: "when somebody screws you, screw them back in spades" and "go for the jugular so that people watching will not want to mess with you." that approach was shaped by his own travails in business in the early 1990s as he watched his empire collapse around him. "i believe in an eye for an eye <u+2014> like the old testament says," he wrote in "the art of the comeback." "some of the people who forgot to lift a finger when i needed them, when i was down, they need my help now, and i'm screwing them against the wall. i'm doing a number.... and i'm having so much fun." while trump's writings and statements are geared primarily toward the business world, he has routinely weighed in on politics over the years. favorite themes are the need for national strength and restoring america's stature abroad, which he says has been diminishing for decades. in the playboy interview, he referred to the 1989 pro-democracy movement in beijing's tiananmen square in which some 10,000 government troops killed an unknown number of protestors. "when the students poured into tiananmen square, the chinese government almost blew it," trump said. "then they were vicious. they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. our country is right now perceived as weak ... as being spit on by the rest of the world." in "think big," he criticized then-secretary of state condoleezza rice as a smiling, waving lightweight who is no match for the murderous dictators she was dispatched to deal with. "condi rice just goes over there to get her picture taken," trump wrote. trump states without equivocation that he could accomplish a feat that has eluded politicians for decades: "i could negotiate peace in the middle east -- very few other people could," he wrote in "think big." aside from a brief flirtation with the idea of a presidential bid in 2000, however, trump has spent most of his years in the spotlight denying or downplaying such aspirations. "i think i'm almost too honest to be a politician," he told cnn in 1997. "i'm too forthright. i'm too <u+2014> i think i'm too honest," he said, "but i do believe i'm too forthright to be a politician."

how donald trump sees himself

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

29.0

8.0

11023.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

746.0

1.0

0.0

306.0

0.0

87.0

24.0

28.0

18.0

24.0

31.0

23.0

15.0

43.0

41.0

70.0

747.0

307.0

87.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president<u+00a0>barack obama<u+2018>s budget for next year, released monday, is filled with ideas, programs and proposals with prospects for adoption by the new republican-controlled congress that range from dismal to zero. it may seem illogical to direct hopes for agreement toward one of the most far-reaching and politically fraught proposals on the president<u+2019>s wish list, but, in fact, there are two big forces that can pry open the door to at least a serious bipartisan discussion on corporate tax reform this year. the first is inversions and the second is infrastructure.

why the gop could take obama<u+2019>s corporate tax proposal seriously

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

63.0

8.0

566.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

36.0

1.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

6.0

4.0

38.0

9.0

4.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton turned to animal impersonations monday as the former secretary of state ramped up her effort to secure victory over surging vermont sen. bernie sanders in this saturday's nevada caucuses. speaking before a crowd in reno, clinton described how she would like to fact-check various republican claims. he began her story with a recollection of a political ad that aired on the radio in arkansas. the ad featured a dog that the announcer claimed would bark any time a candidate said an untrue statement. "we need to get that dog and follow him around and every time they say these things, like, 'oh the great recession was caused by too much regulation," clinton said before yelping, "arf! arf! arf! arf!" to general applause. clinton and her opponent, vermont sen. bernie sanders, have criss-crossed the silver state in recent days. on sunday, they wound up at opposite ends of a pew in the same las vegas church. sanders' ground game is catching up to the clinton machine as well. the so-called democratic socialist's campaign<u+00a0>has over 100 staffers on the ground and has more than doubled its paid staff here since last month, along with spending double on his television spots compared to clinton - $2.93 million to clinton<u+2019>s $1.46 million. adding to the uncertainty is a relative lack of polling coupled with a sense of the momentum being behind sanders in the wake of his thumping victory over clinton in last week's new hampshire primary. showing the importance her team has placed on saturday's caucuses, clinton skipped a campaign event in florida, sending her husband, former president bill clinton, to stump in her stead. as in iowa and new hampshire, sanders has publicly pinned his hopes in nevada to voter turnout. "everything in my political gut tells me that we have the momentum here in this state," he told a rally in las vegas sunday, "and if people come out in large numbers on caucus day, we<u+2019>re going to win." it is possible to win the nevada caucuses, but lose the all-important battle for democratic national convention delegates. that's exactly what happened to clinton in 2008 against then-senator barack obama. the clinton campaign may not have helped its cause in nevada with comments made last week by campaign spokesman brian fallon in which he compared nevada to the more racially and ethnically homogenous iowa and new hampshire. "there<u+2019>s an important hispanic element to the democratic caucus in nevada," fallon said. "but it<u+2019>s still a state that is 80 percent white voters. you have a caucus-style format, and [sanders will] have the momentum coming out of new hampshire presumably, so there<u+2019>s a lot of reasons he should do well." that remark reportedly angered allies of senate minority leader harry reid, with one telling politico that reid had "pushed hard to move nevada near the front of the primary calendar precisely because of its diversity."

hillary clinton plays literal attack dog in effort to shore up nevada

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

69.0

8.0

2938.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

198.0

0.0

52.0

1.0

0.0

19.0

8.0

4.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

16.0

11.0

19.0

202.0

52.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

top republicans joined with president obama and other democrats tuesday in sharply condemning donald trump<u+2019>s reaction to the nightclub massacre in orlando, decrying his anti-muslim rhetoric and his questioning of obama<u+2019>s allegiances as divisive and out of step with america<u+2019>s values. trump <u+2014> who just a week ago signaled an intent to snap his campaign into a more measured tone for the general election <u+2014> showed no sign of backing down from his suggestions that obama was somehow connected to or sympathetic with terrorists, telling the associated press that the president <u+201c>continues to prioritize our enemy<u+201d> over americans. in separate appearances, both obama and his potential successor, likely democratic nominee hillary clinton, blasted trump<u+2019>s proposal to ban foreign muslims from the united states as dangerous and contrary to the nation<u+2019>s traditions. a visibly angry obama also dismissed trump<u+2019>s repeated demands for him to use the term <u+201c>radical islam<u+201d> when speaking about the orlando shootings and other attacks. <u+201c>calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away,<u+201d> obama said. <u+201c>this is a political distraction.<u+201d> clinton described trump<u+2019>s response to orlando as rife with <u+201c>conspiracy theories<u+201d> and <u+201c>pathological self-congratulations.<u+201d> the remarkable bipartisan outcry over trump<u+2019>s positions <u+2014> coming at a moment of national mourning after the deadliest mass shooting in u.s. history <u+2014> set off a new wave of alarm within the gop over whether the real estate mogul<u+2019>s promised pivot to the general election would ever materialize. the rift also highlighted the enduring tensions between establishment figures who want to be more inclusive and the bulk of the party, which backs trump<u+2019>s proposed muslim ban and has rallied around him as the presumptive nominee. [orlando gunman<u+2019>s wife under scrutiny in struggle to piece together motives] some of trump<u+2019>s most ardent backers defended his response to the orlando attack, saying drastic measures were needed to keep the nation safe. but most republicans on capitol hill tried to distance themselves from trump<u+2019>s comments following the terrorist attack on a gay nightclub in orlando that killed at least 49 people. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell (ky.) refused to respond to questions about trump at his weekly news conference. house speaker paul d. ryan (wis.) denounced trump for trying to rally support for his anti-muslim policies, while others castigated trump for the accusations he has lobbed at obama. <u+201c>i do not think a muslim ban is in our country<u+2019>s interest,<u+201d> ryan told reporters. <u+201c>i do not think it is reflective of our principles, not just as a party but as a country.<u+201d> he called for <u+201c>a security test, not a religious test<u+201d> for immigrants. in a speech monday, trump had reiterated his calls for such a ban and expanded its potential reach to include any country with <u+201c>a history<u+201d> of terrorism against the united states and its allies. he blamed the orlando attack <u+2014> which authorities say was carried out by a man born in america to afghan parents <u+2014> in part on a system that <u+201c>allowed his family to come here.<u+201d> at a rally tuesday night in greensboro, n.c., trump attacked obama for criticizing him and defended barring foreign muslims. <u+201c>once again we<u+2019>ve seen that political correctness is deadly,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>and just so you understand: i have many muslim friends,<u+201d> he added at one point. <u+201c>there doesn<u+2019>t seem to be assimilation. we don<u+2019>t know what<u+2019>s going on.<u+201d> senate foreign relations committee chairman bob corker (r-tenn.), who has praised trump at times for his willingness to shake up politics and recently met with the mogul, expressed serious unease tuesday with how trump responded to a national tragedy. <u+201c>traditionally, it is a time when people rally around our country, and it<u+2019>s obviously not what<u+2019>s occurred, and it<u+2019>s very disappointing,<u+201d> corker said. sen. lindsey o. graham (r-s.c.), a leading national security hawk, said he had <u+201c>run out of adjectives<u+201d> for trump. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t think he has the judgment or the temperament, the experience to deal with what we are facing,<u+201d> said graham, who does not currently support the mogul. graham, like other republicans, took issue with trump<u+2019>s apparent suggestions in monday interviews that obama may identify with the radical muslim terrorists. obama <u+201c>either is not tough, not smart, or he<u+2019>s got something else in mind,<u+201d> trump told fox news. trump expanded on that tuesday, saying in an emailed response to questions from the associated press: <u+201c>president obama claims to know our enemy, and yet he continues to prioritize our enemy over our allies and, for that matter, the american people.<u+201d> graham said that trump <u+201c>seems to be suggesting that the president is one of <u+2018>them.<u+2019> i find that highly offensive. i find that whole line of reasoning way off base. my problems with president obama are his policy choices.<u+201d> sen. ron johnson (r-wis.), who faces a challenging reelection bid, also called trump<u+2019>s insinuations about obama <u+201c>offensive.<u+201d> speaking after meeting with his national security council, obama dismissed trump<u+2019>s many calls for him to change the way he talks about terrorism. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s the key, they tell us. we can<u+2019>t get isil unless we call them <u+2018>radical islamists,<u+2019> <u+201d> obama said, referring to the islamic state militant group. <u+201c>what exactly would using this label accomplish? what exactly would it change? would it make isil less committed to trying to kill americans? would it bring in more allies? is there a military strategy that is served by this? the answer is: none of the above.<u+201d> at a campaign event in pittsburgh, clinton excoriated trump and challenged republicans to repudiate him. clinton said trump failed to demonstrate an ability to deliver a <u+201c>calm, collected and dignified response<u+201d> to the orlando attack. <u+201c>instead, yesterday morning, just one day after the massacre, he went on tv and suggested that president obama is on the side of the terrorists,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>just think about that. even in a time of divided politics, this is way beyond anything that should be said by someone running for president.<u+201d> trump has also said obama should <u+201c>resign<u+201d> because of his refusal to utter the words <u+201c>radical islamic terrorism.<u+201d> but one of the mogul<u+2019>s top backers on capitol hill said trump doesn<u+2019>t expect that to happen. <u+201c>what i think trump<u+2019>s saying is: you need to get in the game and start leading, or get out of here,<u+201d> said sen. jeff sessions (r-ala.). <u+201c>that<u+2019>s just his way of expressing it. and i think people understood that. he doesn<u+2019>t expect president obama to resign, but he<u+2019>s saying you can<u+2019>t do this job effectively if you don<u+2019>t understand the nature of the threat we face.<u+201d> sessions said there was no discussion at a 90-minute senate gop lunch of trump specifically; instead it focused on terrorism. rep. adam kinzinger (r-ill.), an air national guard major and leading house gop voice on national security issues, broke sharply with trump. <u+201c>i guess i appreciate mr. trump<u+2019>s fieriness in talking about it, but you don<u+2019>t do it by alienating the very people that we need, and those are moderate muslims,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>we have to use the folks that frankly are not radicalized, which is the vast majority of muslims, to win this war.<u+201d> nationally, 64 percent of republican voters said in a recent washington post-abc news poll that they approve of trump<u+2019>s muslim ban <u+2014> as did 45 percent of independents <u+2014> while 26 percent of democrats said they approve. last week, trump delivered a subdued speech that celebrated his primary wins and looked ahead to a matchup with clinton. his campaign told allies that trump was strategizing for a new phase of the campaign. but by this week <u+2014> after a series of fiery rallies in which he called out enemies by name and then his response to orlando <u+2014> many republicans were left scratching their heads. lanhee chen, a gop foreign policy expert who served as policy director on mitt romney<u+2019>s 2012 campaign, called trump<u+2019>s monday speech a <u+201c>huge wasted opportunity.<u+201d> <u+201c>what he has said overall about foreign policy is very troubling,<u+201d> said chen, who said he has many issues with the mogul but does not consider himself part of the <u+201c>never trump<u+201d> wing of the gop. chen said trump needs to <u+201c>start defining what his presidency would look like<u+201d> in <u+201c>more than just a few sound bites.<u+201d> but he added: <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not holding my breath.<u+201d> david nakamura and paul kane in washington, abby phillip in pittsburgh and jenna johnson in greensboro, n.c., contributed to this report.

top republicans join obama in condemning trump<u+2019>s words

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

54.0

8.0

8478.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

608.0

0.0

138.0

0.0

71.0

18.0

13.0

10.0

24.0

10.0

15.0

10.0

36.0

46.0

612.0

138.0

71.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

several republicans eyeing presidential bids in 2016 are tackling policy questions not typically identified as conservative priorities, including wage stagnation and aid for the poor, an early bid to address a political weakness that helped sink the party<u+2019>s last white house nominee. florida sen. marco rubio devoted his new book, <u+201c>american dreams,<u+201d> to revamping programs for the poor and middle class. ohio gov. john kasich will use his inaugural address monday to renew his call to help <u+201c>people in the shadows.<u+201d> and former...

gop hopefuls<u+2019> 2016 theme has a new pitch

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

40.0

8.0

528.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

44.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

3.0

46.0

10.0

5.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with less than two weeks to go, the race for the white house has narrowed as hillary clinton now has a three-point advantage over donald trump. that<u+2019>s within the margin of error of the national fox news poll of likely voters. clinton is ahead of trump by 44-41 percent. <u+00a0>another one-in-ten back a third-party candidate and four percent are undecided. <u+00a0>last week she was up by six points (45-39 percent) and before that by seven (45-38 percent). the poll, released wednesday, finds clinton leads 49-44 percent in the head-to-head matchup. <u+00a0>that 5-point advantage is at the edge of the error margin. <u+00a0>she was up 7 a week ago (49-42 percent). click here to read the full poll results. trump is helped by increased backing among independents and greater strength of support: 68 percent of those backing trump support him <u+201c>strongly,<u+201d> compared to 61 percent for clinton. independents favor trump over clinton by 13 points (41-28 percent). <u+00a0>he had a 7-point advantage last week, and two weeks ago they were tied at 35 percent each. <u+00a0>third-party candidates play a role here, as gary johnson (14 percent) and jill stein (7 percent) receive the combined support of more than one-in-five independents. in the four-way race, trump leads among whites (+14 points) and men (+5), although his best groups remain white evangelical christians (+56) and whites without a college degree (+28). clinton has commanding leads among blacks (+77 points), unmarried women (+27), voters under 30 (+18), and women (+10). <u+00a0>first-time voters are also more likely to back her (+16). the candidates garner almost equal backing among the party faithful: <u+00a0>83 percent of democrats back clinton, while 81 percent of republicans support trump. <u+201c>to be competitive, trump needs to consolidate support among republicans and carry independents,<u+201d> says republican pollster daron shaw. <u+00a0><u+201c>that<u+2019>s where he<u+2019>s made in-roads in the last week, mostly by focusing his attention on the economy and obamacare.<u+201d> <u+00a0> shaw conducts the fox news poll with democratic counterpart chris anderson. trump<u+2019>s substantive strength is the economy. <u+00a0>he<u+2019>s trusted over clinton by four points, yet that<u+2019>s the only issue where he bests her. <u+00a0>more trust clinton to handle foreign policy (+15 points), immigration (+3), and terrorism (+3). who would voters put across the table with russian president vladimir putin? <u+00a0>more trust clinton to negotiate with putin by 3 points (47-44 percent among registered voters). <u+00a0>that<u+2019>s down from a 13-point lead on this measure in april (53-40 percent). all in all, likely voters don<u+2019>t think trump is up to the task: <u+00a0>less than half think he<u+2019>s qualified to be president (46 percent) and even fewer feel he has the temperament to serve effectively (36 percent). <u+00a0>plus, over half lack confidence in his judgment in a crisis (56 percent). clinton trounces trump on each of those measures: <u+00a0>64 percent believe she<u+2019>s qualified, 62 percent say she has the temperament, and 56 percent are confident in her judgment. plus, clinton continues to receive more positive personal ratings. <u+00a0>she has a net negative rating of eight points (45 favorable vs. 53 unfavorable), while trump is underwater by 14 (42 favorable vs. 56 unfavorable). <u+00a0>in addition, when undecided voters and those backing third-party candidates are combined, 26 percent have a favorable view of clinton vs. 18 percent for trump. yet despite trump<u+2019>s weaknesses on traits, it<u+2019>s still a tight race. <u+00a0>that<u+2019>s because, at least in part, lots of folks prioritize issues when deciding their vote. <u+00a0>by a 59-28 percent margin, more say their decision is about the issues as opposed to the character of the candidates. <u+00a0>those backing trump are more likely to be voting on issues than character by a wide 57-point margin (73-16 percent). <u+00a0>for clinton supporters, the choice is more about issues by 12 points (47-35 percent). compared to 2008, this is a more character driven election. <u+00a0>at that time, voters said issues were more important than personal qualities by a 71-14 percent margin. "the bottom hasn't fallen out for trump and clinton hasn't pulled away, but the race isn<u+2019>t as close as the 3-point lead suggests,<u+201d> says anderson. <u+00a0><u+201c>trump needs a solid majority of undecided voters and wavering supporters of third-party candidates, and that<u+2019>s extremely unlikely since most of them think he lacks the judgment, temperament, and qualifications to be president." there are a couple of areas where the two are about evenly matched. <u+00a0>first, 52 percent feel clinton <u+201c>stands up<u+201d> for people like them, and 49 percent feel that way about trump. also on their honesty -- or lack thereof: <u+00a0>a record-low 30 percent of likely voters think clinton is honest and trustworthy, while 34 percent say trump is. here are five additional takeaways from the poll. - 63 percent of trump<u+2019>s supporters believe things in the united states generally favor <u+201c>other people,<u+201d> rather than people like them. <u+00a0>forty-four percent of clinton<u+2019>s supporters feel that way. - twice as many voters expect clinton to win as think trump will (64-26 percent). <u+00a0>fully 86 percent of democrats think clinton will win, while 49 percent of republicans think trump will. - trump supporters (34 percent) are more than three times as likely as clinton supporters (10 percent) to say they won<u+2019>t accept the election outcome if their candidate loses. <u+00a0>eighty-eight percent of clinton supporters say they<u+2019>ll accept the outcome, up from 74 percent in september. - the generic congressional ballot test is also tight: <u+00a0>47 percent back the democratic candidate in their congressional district, while 45 percent support the republican. <u+00a0>among those backing the gop congressional candidate, 79 percent go for trump in the four-way presidential race. <u+00a0>clinton gets 82 percent of those backing the democratic candidate. <u+201c>models suggest a 2-point democratic advantage on the generic ballot would result in a gain of about 11 seats in the house and 4 in the senate,<u+201d> says shaw. <u+00a0><u+201c>that means the gop would retain an edge of about 20 seats in the house, while the senate would be very much up for grabs.<u+201d> - the political parties are about evenly matched in popularity among likely voters. <u+00a0>the democratic party has a net positive rating of four points (51 percent favorable vs. 47 percent unfavorable). <u+00a0>the republican party has a net negative rating by just one point (48 percent favorable vs. 49 percent unfavorable). the fox news poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 1,309 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of anderson robbins research (d) and shaw & company research (r) from october 22-25, 2016.<u+00a0> the survey includes results among 1,221 likely voters.<u+00a0> the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points for results among both registered and likely voters.

poll: clinton leads trump by three points

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

41.0

8.0

6828.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

368.0

0.0

105.0

0.0

37.0

5.0

9.0

3.0

6.0

8.0

9.0

7.0

31.0

14.0

37.0

370.0

105.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as the constitutional convention of 1787 ended, ben franklin walked out of philadelphia<u+2019>s independence hall to find an anxious crowd. according to a diary entry recorded by james mchenry, a signatory to the constitution, a woman from philadelphia was the first to speak to franklin. "well, doctor,<u+201d> she asked, <u+201c>what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" "a republic,<u+201d> franklin famously replied. <u+201c>if you can keep it." perhaps we cannot. this reads like hyperbole. but is it? consider, for a moment, the knife<u+2019>s edge on which the republic rests. the election is 24 hours away. as i write this, donald trump is 1.8 points behind hillary clinton in the realclearpolitics polling average. and here is what we know of donald trump. he is a man who routinely praises dictators. of vladimir putin, trump said, "he's running his country, and at least he's a leader, unlike what we have in this country." of kim jong un, trump said, "you've got to give him credit. he goes in, he takes over, and he's the boss. it's incredible." of saddam hussein, trump said, "he killed terrorists. he did that so good. they didn't read them the rights." it<u+2019>s not just that trump admires authoritarians; it<u+2019>s that the thing he admires about them is their authoritarianism <u+2014> their ability to dispense with niceties like a free press, due process, and political opposition. trump has promised <u+2014> in public, and repeatedly <u+2014> to bring this hammer to american governance. he stood in a nationally televised debate and vowed to jail his opponent if elected. he has proposed strengthening libel laws to make it easier to cow the press and antitrust laws to punish jeff bezos and amazon for the washington post<u+2019>s coverage of his candidacy. in a recent speech at gettysburg meant to preview his first 100 days in office, trump said he would sue all of the women who accused him of sexual assault. during rallies, trump has exhorted his followers to assault protestors, and has promised to pay their legal fees if their thuggery leads to arrest. he has warned that the only way he could lose the election would be if it is rigged, and has suggested he may refuse to concede. and all this ignores his more basic flaws. he is cruel, lazy, and reckless. he knows nothing of policy and has not bothered to find anything out. he is easily baited, reliant on sycophants, and prone to conspiracy theories. he is a bigot who slimed an american-born judge for his mexican heritage and a misogynist who boasted that his celebrity gave him license to commit sexual assault. he has cast doubt on america<u+2019>s commitment to the nato alliance and offhandedly encouraged saudi arabia and japan to build nuclear weapons. his business is rife with conflicts of interest, and his campaign has been amateurish and poorly managed. here is the compliment i can pay donald trump, and i pay it with real gratitude: he never hid who he was. perhaps he lacked the self-control, or the self-awareness. whatever the reason, he never obscured his authoritarian tendencies, his will to power, his sexism, his greed, his dishonesty, his racism, his thirst for vengeance. and he is still only 1.8 points behind. it is likely, though not certain, that hillary clinton will win on tuesday. but even if she does, here is what must be said of american politics in 2016: we came within inches of electing donald j. trump president of the united states of america. we did this even knowing exactly what he stood for, exactly what he had threatened to do, exactly what kind of man he was. a narrow trump loss is another way of saying a near trump win. a 3-point victory for clinton implies that if trump were merely a bit more self-disciplined, if he had not bragged about sexual assault while wearing a microphone, if his opponent<u+2019>s pneumonia had lingered a bit longer, america would be ruled by a cruel narcissist with authoritarian ambitions. it will mean that if unemployment were a few percentage points higher, if the man who murdered two police officers last week had been brown rather than white, if trump<u+2019>s odd-bedfellows alliance of russian hackers and angry fbi agents had been a bit more effective, trump would have won. perhaps, on tuesday, we will dodge the bullet. but we will still need to understand how we came to be standing in front of a gun. there is a comforting and popular explanation for trump<u+2019>s rise: he is the product of an extraordinary period of economic pain, demographic anxiety, and elite backlash. this argument holds that the condition of the country <u+2014> or at least the condition of trump<u+2019>s supporters <u+2014> is catastrophic, and trump<u+2019>s rise is a response to the suffering. this is reassuring; it makes trump into a kind of political natural disaster, a hurricane that relied on a rare alignment of winds and rains and warmth, a combination that occurs once in lifetime and can be forgotten once it<u+2019>s been survived. but there is nothing in polls of national attitudes, or indicators of economic health, that reveals this moment as uniquely fertile for the rise of a strongman. in 1992, when pat buchanan ran for president on a trump-like platform, unemployment was higher, consumer confidence was lower, and americans reported themselves more dissatisfied with the state of the country. but buchanan lost handily. and as we have learned more about trump<u+2019>s supporters, and have come to understand more about the year in which he rose, these explanations have grown more and more strained. the belief that trump is a predictable reaction to acute economic duress crumbled before the finding that his primary voters had a median household income of $72,000 <u+2014> well above both the national average and that of clinton supporters. the idea that trumpism arose as a response to a stalled economy collapsed as america experienced its longest sustained run of private sector job growth, and the highest single-year jump in median incomes, in modern history. the idea that trump was a reaction to failed trade deals and heavy competition from immigrants slammed into data showing support for him showed no relationship to lost manufacturing jobs and was strongest in areas without immigrant labor. the idea that trump is a reaction to historic disgust with american elites is at war with president barack obama<u+2019>s approval ratings, which have risen above 50 percent and now match ronald reagan<u+2019>s at this point in his presidency. the reality is that the patterns of trumpism, the trends of the us economy, and the polls measuring the american mood have stubbornly refused to fit the comforting theory that this is an extraordinary candidacy that could only emerge in an extraordinary moment. indeed, if this were a period as thick with economic pain and anti-establishment sentiment as the pundits pretend, trump<u+2019>s victory would likely be assured. once you appreciate that fact, the lesson of trumpism becomes much scarier: we are more vulnerable than we thought to reactionary strongmen. it can happen here. to americans of another era <u+2014> particularly the founding era <u+2014> it would seem bizarre that we are reaching so far, and straining so hard, to explain the popular appeal of a charismatic demagogue. as former bush speechwriter michael gerson wrote: the american political system is structured the way it is in part due to the founders<u+2019> fear of demagogues. it<u+2019>s a reason why the american presidency is so weak, why the executive is checked by other branches, why the senate<u+2019>s members were originally selected by state legislators. it is a credit to the long success of our political institutions that we think dangerous men can only win elections in far-off lands. and so it is the weakening of those institutions that demands our attention now. donald trump<u+2019>s nearness to the presidency rests on two separate accomplishments <u+2014> or, if you prefer, two separate institutional failures <u+2014> that are often conflated. the first is his victory in the republican party<u+2019>s presidential primaries. the second is his consolidation of elite republicans, and of the republican-leaning electorate. trump won the gop primaries with 13.8 million votes. the distance between those 13.8 million voters and the more than 60 million votes he is expected to receive tomorrow is vast, and was far from assured. in 1972, for instance, george mcgovern won the democratic primary even though much of the democratic party viewed him with suspicion and even fear. major democratic interest groups, like the afl-cio, refused to endorse him in the general election, and top democrats, including former governors of florida, texas, and virginia, organized <u+201c>democrats for nixon.<u+201d> mcgovern went on to lose with less than 40 percent of the vote, a dismal showing driven by democrats who abandoned a nominee they considered unacceptable. a similar path was possible for trump. elites within the republican party viewed him with horror. his primary opponents spoke of him in apocalyptic terms. ted cruz called trump a "pathological liar," "utterly amoral," and "a narcissist at a level i don't think this country's ever seen." rick perry said trump<u+2019>s candidacy was "a cancer on conservatism, and it must be clearly diagnosed, excised, and discarded." rand paul said trump is "a delusional narcissist and an orange-faced windbag. a speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president." marco rubio called him <u+201c>dangerous,<u+201d> and warned that we should not hand "the nuclear codes of the united states to an erratic individual." and then every single one of those republicans endorsed trump. ted cruz told americans to vote for the pathological liar. rick perry urged people to elect the cancer on conservatism. rand paul backed the delusional narcissist. marco rubio campaigned to hand the nuclear codes of the united states to an erratic individual. the list goes on. paul ryan, the republican speaker of the house of representatives, has endorsed trump, as has mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader, and reince priebus, the head of the republican national committee. mike pence, the governor of indiana, commiserated with dan senor, a former bush appointee, over the fact that trump was <u+201c>unacceptable<u+201d> <u+2014> and then became his vice president. with this kind of elite consolidation, it<u+2019>s little wonder that trump has managed to consolidate republican-leaning voters behind him. the final nbc/wsj poll of the election found that 82 percent of likely republican voters were supporting trump <u+2014> precisely matching the 82 percent of likely democratic voters supporting clinton. trump did not get mcgoverned. there are two analyses that must be made of this. the first is moral. there are many republicans who honestly believe trump will make a good, or at least adequate, president; their endorsement of his candidacy is perfectly honorable, even if i think it wrongheaded. but many of the republicans mentioned here believe trump is a threat to world peace and to fundamental norms, values, and institutions of american democracy; their endorsements of his candidacy will stain the rest of their careers, and if he is elected, and if the worst comes to pass, they will be remembered by history for their abandonment of country. the second analysis that must be made is structural. and, believe it or not, that<u+2019>s where things get scary. political scientist julia azari has written the single most important sentence for understanding both trump<u+2019>s rise and this dangerous era in american politics: <u+201c>the defining characteristic of our moment is that parties are weak while partisanship is strong.<u+201d> here is the problem, in short: parties, and particularly the republican party, can no longer control whom they nominate. but once they nominate someone <u+2014> once they nominate anyone <u+2014> that person is guaranteed the support of both the party<u+2019>s elites and its voters. unlike in mcgovern<u+2019>s day, when ticket splitting was common, any candidate able to win his party<u+2019>s presidential primaries can now count on his party<u+2019>s support, and so has a damn good chance of winning the presidency. political parties, and political party primaries, were traditionally bulwarks against demagogues rising in american politics <u+2014> they were controlled by gatekeepers who acted as checks against charismatic demagogues. donald trump would never have made it through the convention horse-trading that used to drive nominations; he would never have survived a process that required support from party officials. but in recent decades, we have slowly destroyed the ability of party officials to drive party primaries. what<u+2019>s more, we have come to see party officials exercising influence as fundamentally illegitimate. <u+201c>political scientists think of parties as the fundamental building blocks of democracy, and people think of them as the impediment to democracy,<u+201d> says hans noel, a political scientist at georgetown university. <u+201c>in other systems, you wouldn<u+2019>t even have primaries <u+2014> the whole thing would happen at a party convention. but here, when the dnc makes choices that influence the outcome of a primary, that looks undemocratic.<u+201d> the results have been stark. the reigning political science theory of primaries going into this election was known as <u+201c>the party decides,<u+201d> and it stated, basically, that party elites controlled primary outcomes by driving money, media attention, and endorsements. no single idea has been as decisively wrecked by 2016 as that one. and when you examine the reasons for its failure, you see they are unlikely to end with trump. money turned out to be much less important to winning primaries than anyone thought <u+2014> just ask jeb bush, who spent $130 million only to be humiliated, even as trump spent almost nothing to win. moreover, the internet keeps making it easier to fundraise off an energized base <u+2014> a dynamic that is empowering high-enthusiasm outsider candidates like bernie sanders and ted cruz and weakening party establishments and the big-dollar donors they control. similarly, parties used to drive media attention by signaling to reporters which candidates to take seriously. but that process, too, has been democratized <u+2014> social media makes it easy to communicate with supporters directly and made it more valuable for audience-hungry media outlets to cover the candidates with intense fan bases that send stories viral across facebook or reddit. that, again, favors exciting outsiders with enthusiastic supporters over vetted establishment grinds. but the primary resource party officials have when influencing primary elections is the trust of voters. that<u+2019>s why endorsements are important, and have traditionally been predictive of the eventual winner: they represent party officials using the credibility they have built with their voters to persuade them of whom to vote for. trump didn<u+2019>t have any republican endorsements to speak of until he had already won a slew of primaries. but the void of official support arguably helping him <u+2014> it was proof that he really was untouched and untainted by the unpopular gop establishment. this represented the republican party failing at the most basic job of a political party: helping its voters make good decisions. the gop<u+2019>s elites have so totally lost the faith of their base that their efforts to persuade republican voters were ignored at best and counterproductive at worst. but this also presents a puzzle: if partisans have lost so much faith in their party establishments, then why are they so much likelier to back whomever their party nominates? the answer, in short, is fear and loathing of the other party. since 1964, the american national election studies have been asking republicans and democrats to describe their feelings toward the other party on a scale that runs from cold and negative to warm and positive. in 1964, 31 percent of republicans had cold, negative feelings toward the democratic party, and 32 percent of democrats had cold, negative feelings toward the republican party. by 2012, that had risen to 77 percent of republicans and 78 percent of democrats. today, fully 45 percent of republicans, and 41 percent of democrats, believe the other party<u+2019>s policies <u+201c>threaten the nation<u+2019>s well-being.<u+201d> this fear is strongest among the most politically involved. which makes sense: you're more likely to take an active interest in american politics if you think the stakes are high. but that means the people driving american politics <u+2014> and particularly the people driving low-turnout party primaries <u+2014> have the most apocalyptic view of the other side. this is driven by the reality that the two parties have grown more ideologically distant from each other, and so the stakes of elections really have grown larger. in 1994, 34 percent of republicans were more liberal than the median democrat, and 30 percent of democrats were more conservative than the median republican. today only 8 percent of republicans are more liberal than the median democrat, and only 6 percent of democrats are more conservative than the median republican. and polarization begets polarization. the angrier and more fearful partisans are, the more of a market there is for media that makes them yet angrier and yet more fearful. it is no accident that the ceo of breitbart news, a hyper-ideological conservative media outlet that specializes in scaring the hell out of its audience, is leading trump<u+2019>s campaign. one reason trump has been able to consolidate republican support is that republican-leaning media has convinced itself, and its base, that the alternative to trump is a criminal who belongs in jail. this offers a rationale for voting republican even if you don<u+2019>t particularly like your candidate: a majority of trump voters say they are voting against clinton rather than for trump. this raises the possibility that trump<u+2019>s support from republicans is merely an artifact of clinton<u+2019>s unpopularity. i<u+2019>m skeptical. before they had convinced themselves clinton is a criminal, many republicans <u+2014> led by trump <u+2014> convinced themselves obama was born in kenya and constitutionally ineligible to serve as president. and while those attacks were driving obama<u+2019>s popularity down, clinton<u+2019>s numbers were so high that it became fashionable to speculate over whether obama needed to replace joe biden with clinton to win reelection. clinton<u+2019>s weaknesses are real, but her unpopularity among republicans is structural <u+2014> her four percent approval rating among republicans isn<u+2019>t so far off from the six percent obama registered at the end of the 2012 election. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve got this online media where the profits are driven by controversy and clicks,<u+201d> sarah rumpf, a former breitbart writer, told vox. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s just an activism problem in general, where it<u+2019>s easier to fundraise and easier to get members when you can declare an emergency, when you can declare a crisis, when you can identify an enemy.<u+201d> this helps explain the unified party support for donald trump. republican officeholders are terrified that if they don<u+2019>t support him, or are seen as in any way contributing to clinton<u+2019>s election, they<u+2019>ll face the wrath of their conservative base and be defeated in the primary challenges that the tea party used to such devastating effect in 2010 and 2012. paul ryan got a taste of this after distancing himself from trump after the release of the access hollywood tape: his popularity plummeted, and a majority of republicans said they preferred to see trump representing the party than ryan. so here, then, is the key failure point in modern american politics, and observing it in action requires looking no further than the republican party: voters<u+2019> dislike of their own party has broken the primary process, but fear of the opposition has guaranteed unified party support to the nominee. that means whoever manages to win a flawed competition dominated by the angriest, most terrified partisans ends within spitting distance of the presidency. party primaries were traditionally bulwarks against demagogues rising in american politics. now they are the method by which they will rise. <u+201c>the thing i keep coming back to is the muslim ban,<u+201d> says msnbc<u+2019>s chris hayes. <u+201c>that was an actual policy he called for while running for president, and if you switched in jews for muslims, it was immediately clear what it was. and it wasn<u+2019>t disqualifying. to me, that was so, so upsetting.<u+201d> hayes is the author of the book twilight of the elites, and he has spent a lot of time thinking about elite failures. and there were elite failures that led to trump: the anger left over from the iraq war, and from the financial crisis, is certainly part of his rise. but the other problem with elites this year is harder to talk about: they were underpowered. <u+201c>the gatekeepers have been extraordinarily diminished,<u+201d> hayes says. <u+201c>the best example of this, to me, is the newspaper editorial page. it<u+2019>s the ultimate old-school gatekeeper. i find it so remarkable that the columbus dispatch, usa today, all these gatekeepers have come to the proper, correct conclusion on trump, and said, <u+2018>no fucking way!<u+2019> but no one cares. they don<u+2019>t control the gate. they can lock the gate and someone can walk around it three feet down the fence.<u+201d> elites are often blamed for trump<u+2019>s rise <u+2014> he is said to be the backlash to their failures, their corruption, their obliviousness, their self-dealing, their cosmopolitanism, their condescension. all that may be true, but past moments in american politics have also featured angry voters, out-of-touch elites, and social problems. those moments, however, featured political and media gatekeepers with more power, and so trump-like candidates were destroyed in primaries, or at conventions, or by a press that paid them little mind. now, however, traditional gatekeepers have neither the power nor the cultural capital to stop trump-like candidates. and in the republican party, where the collapse of institutional authority is most severe and most dangerous, the aftermath of a trump loss will further weaken the party<u+2019>s center, as trump<u+2019>s supporters turn on the elites whose tepid backing, they will argue, doomed their candidate. sean hannity, for instance, has already called paul ryan a <u+201c>saboteur,<u+201d> and breitbart published an article headlined <u+201c>he<u+2019>s with her: inside paul ryan<u+2019>s months-long campaign to elect hillary clinton president.<u+2019><u+201d> it is hard to see how the republican party<u+2019>s core institutions or top officials emerge strengthened if trump loses narrowly, and it is likely that they will be effectively replaced, co-opted, or hollowed out if he wins. meanwhile, the social conditions that led to trump <u+2014> the rapid browning of america foremost among them <u+2014> will persist and even accelerate. already, nonwhites make up a majority of children under 3 years old. the country is on a fast path to becoming majority minority, and many white male voters will continue to perceive this change as a loss in both status and political power, which, in some ways, it is. eventually, these conditions will run into a recession that brings with it much sharper economic pain. this is not to say republicans will always, or even routinely, nominate candidates as dangerous as trump. much had to go wrong for him to be nominated. but having been nominated, much will have to go right for the country not to elect him, and more will have to go right for it to not elect someone like him in the future. the lesson of this unnerving year is that less can be taken for granted than we thought <u+2014> the american people are not immune to demagogues, and the american political system is too weakened to reliably stop them. america, like all the world<u+2019>s other countries, is vulnerable to catastrophic political failure. it can happen here. trump will likely lose on tuesday. but if he loses, it will be because he is a crude, undisciplined demagogue. the world also produces clever, disciplined demagogues. and they are the ones who truly threaten republics.

donald trump<u+2019>s success reveals a frightening weakness in american 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

14.0

75.0

8.0

23883.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

1721.0

0.0

477.0

0.0

271.0

54.0

39.0

65.0

33.0

50.0

31.0

94.0

120.0

118.0

1726.0

477.0

271.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama is expected to deliver the fourth veto of his presidency after congress passed legislation thursday overturning new union election rules which labor groups believe could help boost membership but business groups say will leave employers at a disadvantage during organizing drives. opponents of the new rules, issued last year by the national labor relations board and set to take effect next month, refer to them as allowing "ambush elections," because they could allow a representation election to take place in less than two weeks after an official petition is filed. under current rules, those elections can take place no sooner than 25 days after filing, and often take place considerably later than that. the u.s. chamber of commerce, for instance, said the rules would "stack the deck against employers" and "virtually eliminate employers' opportunities to communicate their views, stifling a full and robust debate among employees about unionization." the nlrb, however, said the new rules represent a long-delayed update to union election procedures, one "designed to remove unnecessary barriers to the fair and expeditious resolution of representation questions" by streamlining procedures and allowing for modern electronic communications instead of paper-based filings. major labor groups strongly support the changes. afl-cio president richard trumka called them "modest but important reforms" that would "help reduce delay in the process and make it easier for workers to vote on forming a union in a timely manner." "too often, lengthy and unnecessary litigation over minor issues bogs down the election process and prevents workers from getting the vote they want," trumka said in december. the senate approved the bill<u+00a0>this month, 53 to 46, on a party-line vote that had republicans in favor of overturning the rules and democrats opposed. the house voted thursday, also largely along party lines, 232 to 186. the obama administration indicated march 3 that the president is likely to veto the bill, saying the new rules will help "level the playing field for workers so they can more freely choose to make their voice heard." the bill comes to obama's desk amid tensions with labor groups over his pursuit of fast-track trade authority to complete the sweeping trans-pacific partnership trade accords. should obama use<u+00a0>the veto, it would be his second since republicans took control of the u.s. senate. last month, he vetoed a bill mandating approval of the keystone xl pipeline; the senate came five votes short of overriding the veto.

congress moves to kill union election rules, setting up new obama veto

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

70.0

8.0

2578.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

151.0

0.0

45.0

0.0

16.0

7.0

3.0

6.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

16.0

11.0

21.0

155.0

45.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a couple of weeks ago in this space i pushed back against assertions by fivethirtyeight number-cruncher harry enten that gary johnson's polls have been "trending downwards," indicating that "voters may be moving away from third-party options." well, today enten is back with an interesting piece headlined "gary johnson isn't fading." while noting what we have been warning you about here for years<u+2014>third-party candidates typically see their crest of polling support halved by election day, according to gallup<u+2014>enten explains that johnson's numbers have so far not followed this pattern. in fact, the libertarian may have already weathered the most difficult part of the calendar: "most third-party candidates didn't lose that much support between late summer and election day," enten writes. "besides john anderson in 1980, no candidate ended up finishing more than 3 percentage points below where they were polling in late august. the average drop-off is about 2 percentage points." so how does johnson's 9 percent stack up at this point in the campaign against other third-party candidates since world war ii? according to numbers compiled by enten here, fourth place, behind ross perot in 1992 (20 percent then, finished at 19), george wallace in '68 (17/14), and anderson in '80 (14/7). he's just a tick above perot in '96 (8/8), behind which nobody comes close (sorry, libertarians!). because of his staying power, fivethirtyeight has adjusted its predictions for johnson's final vote upward, to 7.1 percent. but what about the debates, i hear you ask. well, while #teamgov and its supporters are touting this new qunnipiac poll showing 62 percent of americans think the libertarian should be in next month's televised showdown, that and a glass of water will get you a drink. as enten notes, johnson may not be fading, but he's also not particularly rising, either, and there's a whole lotta real estate between 9 and the required 15 percent. the l.p. ticket did reach a new high this week in the quinnipiac poll (10 percent, up from 8 percent in june), and tied previous highs in polls by nbc news/survey monkey (11 percent), rasmussen reports (9 percent), and reuters/ipsos (7 percent), but at this advanced date, ties go to the loser. looking for a glimmer of hope? here's one intriguing gap in the numerical record. of the commission on presidential debates' determinative big five polls, in which johnson has been averaging 10 percent instead of 9, none of them have produced results in the last three weeks. beginning any minute now, we should have a much clearer idea whether the libertarians are rising in the polls that actually matter.

gary johnson avoids typical third-party fade; best polling since perot in <u+2018>92

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

77.0

8.0

2656.0

0.0

1.0

6.0

0.0

169.0

0.0

44.0

0.0

8.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

175.0

44.0

8.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as the democratic presidential contest reaches the third state, what began as a coronation is now an exciting dead heat. yet by one measure, bernie sanders is <u+00ad>already a clear winner. regardless of whether the senator from vermont captures the actual nomination, he has won the future of the democratic party. sanders is demolishing the last remnants of the old order, as represented by hillary clinton and her split-the-difference triangulation. it is sanders, not she, who is the true heir of the radical politics of barack obama. calling a paradigm shift is like forecasting a recession <u+2014> predict it often enough and you<u+2019>ll eventually be right. yet the developments unfolding before our eyes suggest the democratic party is undergoing a massive change. and a 74-year-old socialist is the architect. a major piece of evidence is the enormous youth vote he attracts. in iowa and new hampshire, he beat clinton by about 70 points <u+2014> 84 percent to 15 percent <u+2014> among voters under age 30. and despite the nasty demands by madeleine albright and gloria steinem that women must support clinton, sanders got 82 percent of the young female vote. by contrast, obama in the 2008 primaries typically beat clinton among young people by about 20 points. with studies showing that most people stay in their first political party for many years, the young, ultra-liberal voters who turned out for obama, and who are being joined by the sanders wave, could dominate the party for a generation. click to read goodwin<u+2019>s full column in the new york post. michael goodwin is a fox news contributor and new york post columnist.

bernie has already won the future of the democratic party

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

57.0

8.0

1614.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

96.0

2.0

0.0

33.0

0.0

10.0

7.0

6.0

3.0

6.0

7.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

17.0

98.0

35.0

10.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

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

how planned parenthood could shut down the government

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

53.0

8.0

69.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

fentale, ethiopia <u+2014><u+00a0>sitting in the blistering sun as she cradles her 2-month-old baby, genet tamisat is one of hundreds of mothers waiting to have their children checked for malnutrition, as ethiopia faces its worst drought in decades. <u+201c>i have nothing to eat at home. i can<u+2019>t even buy maize by myself,<u+201d> said tamisat, who also has a 4-year-old son.<u+00a0><u+201c>people can look at us and think we<u+2019>re ok, but we are in great danger. we have nothing.<u+201d> despite the crisis confronting tamisat and millions of other ethiopians lacking food and drinking water, a world caught up in strife is paying insufficient attention to their plight, because it is distracted by other urgent needs. the government and the united nations are trying to raise $1.4 billion to feed 10.2 million ethiopians, but only half has come through<u+00a0>so far, as the wars in syria and yemen plus the migrant crisis dominate the news. <u+201c>fundraising for this response has been very slow," said chege ngugi, national director of the charity<u+00a0>childfund ethiopia. "my priority is to support the efforts of the government of ethiopia to save lives, but we<u+2019>re not reaching everybody.<u+201d> a<u+00a0>strong el nino has blocked two consecutive rainy seasons that normally nourish crops that<u+00a0>feed 85%<u+00a0>of the country. the drought has forced the government to find additional<u+00a0>food aid from<u+00a0>the united states and other donors. the u.s.<u+00a0>agency for international development dispatched an response team to ethiopia to provide emergency assistance that includes nearly<u+00a0>$4 million in corn and wheat seeds for more than 200,000 families. here in the oromia region, which includes central<u+00a0>ethiopia,<u+00a0>the<u+00a0>land is arid<u+00a0>as far as the eye can see. animal carcasses <u+2014><u+00a0>some fresh, some old <u+2014><u+00a0>are scattered across patches of dusty earth. humanitarian needs in this<u+00a0>horn of africa country have tripled since the start of 2015 as the situation deteriorates. malnutrition rates in the worst-affected areas have surpassed 20%<u+00a0><u+2014><u+00a0>higher than the world health organization<u+2019>s emergency threshold of 15%, said challiss mcdonough, regional spokeswoman for the u.n.'s<u+00a0>world food programme. this year, the food program will help more than 2<u+00a0>million children, pregnant women and breast-feeding mothers<u+00a0>suffering<u+00a0>from<u+00a0>moderate acute malnutrition. the u.n.<u+2019>s children<u+2019>s fund, unicef, estimates that almost 500,000 children need treatment for severe acute malnutrition. <u+201c>even with interventions, the situation is getting worse,<u+201d> said eyoel lemma, who works at childfund ethiopia<u+00a0>in fentale. he said childfund, with help from the u.n., also provides supplementary food and malnutrition treatment to children under age 5. but that becomes a major difficulty as<u+00a0>families migrate to different areas looking for water and pasture for their livestock, as well as to find jobs. as a result, many people miss<u+00a0>out on the food rationing programs. one woman on the move is haso bultum, 27. after hours of walking in the sun across barren mountains, she reached a rural health care facility here in fentale with her malnourished<u+00a0>9-month-old twins. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s very hard. i<u+2019>ve had no sleep, because we<u+2019>re trying to find some food for our cattle,<u+201d> she said.<u+00a0><u+201c>to save ourselves we<u+2019>re constantly moving.<u+201d> while ethiopia has the fastest growing economy in the world and has lifted millions of citizens out of poverty, the reality is that<u+00a0>80%<u+00a0>of ethiopians are still dependent on agriculture. mcdonough from the world fund programme warned<u+00a0>that her<u+00a0>organization could run out of food within two months. <u+201c>we have been calling for urgent funding for months now, and still have only about a quarter of the resources that we need for the next six months. unless we receive significant new funding very soon, we could start running out of food for relief assistance by may,<u+201d><u+00a0>mcdonough said. samuel ferfu, manager of the children<u+2019>s and family charitable organization in fentale, said another major issue is<u+00a0>the lack of access to water.<u+00a0>almost 6 million people need emergency water, according to unicef. <u+201c>there<u+2019>s no water at all <u+2014><u+00a0>the river is dry,<u+201d> he said.<u+00a0><u+201c>no water makes sanitation impossible, and as a result, the prevalence of disease will increase.<u+201d> for the time being, ethiopians are praying that rain will reach the worst-affected areas, but flooding is a serious risk after a lengthy drought. <u+201c>soon the rain will come, and people<u+2019>s worries will be flooding. but they have nothing except their homes to lose.<u+00a0>they<u+2019>ve already lost all their animals and crops,<u+201d> said lemma from childfund ethiopia. for tamisat, 27,<u+00a0>and her young children, talk of rain in the coming months is a false hope. <u+201c>we have no water and no food," she said,<u+00a0>wiping sweat off her forehead.<u+00a0>"i don<u+2019>t know what is coming for the future, but i have no hope about the rain.<u+201d>

world overlooks ethiopia drought crisis that is leaving millions hungry

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

71.0

8.0

4738.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

333.0

0.0

89.0

0.0

35.0

7.0

15.0

5.0

16.0

11.0

14.0

9.0

16.0

30.0

341.0

89.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

over the course of just a few days last week, tom cotton (r-ark.) went from relatively anonymous freshman senator to what seemed like the tip of every tongue in washington -- <u+00a0>thanks to the letter he wrote and got 46 fellow republicans to join, warning the ruling iranian regime to be wary of negotiating a nuclear deal with president obama. but here's a fun fact: cotton made his big splash before even giving his first speech on the senate floor. that occasion came late monday, when cotton delivered his "maiden speech," which is typically given after a period of silence and as a statement of principles or objectives rather than a comment on the partisan issue of the day. cotton's address has gotten a lot less attention than his iran letter, and that is not surprising: where the letter was terse and seemingly calculated to influence the multiparty nuclear negotiations now underway, the half-hour speech was dense, rich in historical references, and calibrated to further establish cotton as the republican party's young leading light on foreign affairs and defense -- positioning him to assume the mantle now worn by elders like john mccain (r-ariz.) and lindsey graham (r-s.c.). "an alarm should be sounding in our ears," cotton said. "our enemies, sensing weakness and hence opportunity, have become steadily more aggressive. our allies, uncertain of our commitment and capability, have begun to conclude that they must look out for themselves, even where it is unhelpful to stability and order. our military, suffering from years of neglect, has seen its relative strength decline to historic levels." the speech contained numerous references to winston churchill and cotton compared the current foreign policy moment to the prelude to world war ii. he articulated a litany of national security threats, ranging from iran to north korea to russia, but the speech was notable for the hard line it took on a question now threatening to divide capitol hill republicans as they try to write a 2017 budget: is it more important to control federal spending or strengthen the national defense? cotton was clear: america must have "such hegemonic strength that no sane adversary would ever imagine challenging the united states. 'good enough' is not and will never be good enough." <u+00a0>that strength, he said, should come at whatever the necessary costs. while the budget must be slashed, it should not be balanced on the backs of the military. <u+201c>our enemies and allies alike must know that aggressors will pay an unspeakable price for challenging the united states," cotton said. "the best way to impose that price is global military dominance.<u+201d> an excerpt from his full speech: trying to balance the budget through defense cuts is both counterproductive and impossible. first, the threats we face will eventually catch up with us, as they did on sept. 11, and we will have no choice but to increase our defense budget. when we do, it will cost more to achieve the same end state of readiness and modernization than it would have without the intervening cuts. this was the lesson we learned in the 1980s after the severe cuts to defense in the 1970s. second, we need a healthy, growing economy to generate the government revenue necessary to fund our military and balance the budget. in our globalized world, our domestic prosperity depends heavily on the world economy, which, of course, requires stability and order. who provides that stability and order? the u.s. military.

tom cotton calls for <u+2018>global military dominance<u+2019> in maiden senate speech

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

3487.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

230.0

0.0

67.0

1.0

0.0

33.0

5.0

12.0

4.0

13.0

8.0

4.0

8.0

24.0

22.0

35.0

235.0

67.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with just five weeks of campaigning left, hillary clinton and donald trump are scrambling to win over female voters in america<u+2019>s suburbs as well-educated white women have emerged as perhaps the presidential campaign<u+2019>s most pivotal swing voting group. the democratic and republican nominees and their surrogates are making direct appeals to female voters in campaign appearances in the suburbs of north carolina, ohio, pennsylvania and other battleground states; in television ads on channels such as bravo and shows such as <u+201c>dancing with the stars<u+201d>; and on facebook, where people<u+2019>s feeds inundate them with campaign commentary. but polls and focus groups, as well as interviews with women here in the battleground state of new hampshire, show that trump <u+2014> who spent the past week haranguing a latina former beauty queen over her weight <u+2014> has a considerable challenge with many female voters. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s very clear that trump is doing extremely well among white non-college-educated men .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. but white women with a college degree is a huge impediment to getting where he needs to be,<u+201d> said whit ayres, a veteran republican pollster. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not sure what he can do about it given all the comments he<u+2019>s made about women over the last 15 months.<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s troubles were evident here in nashua, a commuter exurb of boston, where six women in a knitting circle were lounging on the couches and armchairs of a yarn shop the other day talking about <u+2014> what else? <u+2014> trump. they were republicans, democrats and independents, all of them moms <u+2014> and all of them ready to give him a permanent timeout. <u+201c>you just want to smack him,<u+201d> said pam harrison, 56, who voted for republican mitt romney four years ago. watching trump debate reminded kristen schwartz, 40, of dinner-table conversations with her in-laws: <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not polite to interrupt people, but if you stop to breathe or think about your point, they just talk over you and the conversation just gets louder and louder and louder.<u+201d> in an unnerving campaign season, what keeps their anxieties in check is the belief of sandy zielie, 46, the shop<u+2019>s owner: <u+201c>women are going to save this country this election.<u+201d> female voters may not save the country in the way the knitters of nashua would like, but they almost certainly will swing the election. clinton and trump are targeting many intersecting groups and subgroups of swing voters, but strategists for both campaigns said white women with college degrees are at the top of their lists. [trump<u+2019>s bad week is a <u+2018>nightmare<u+2019> for the gop] trump<u+2019>s temperament has been a flash point since he entered the race, especially among women. so it was that many of clinton<u+2019>s surgical strikes against trump in their first debate were designed to sow fresh doubts, especially when clinton recounted how he had shamed venezuelan-born alicia machado, the 1996 miss universe pageant winner, for gaining weight. the controversy continued for days, as trump lashed out at machado, including maligning her in an erratic series of tweets starting at 3:20<u+00a0>a.m. friday. the miss universe episode has not gone over well with the female voters he needs to win over. <u+201c>i have always voted republican, but i don<u+2019>t feel like i could vote for trump this year,<u+201d> rosanna koehlert, 58, a college graduate and housewife, said as she shopped the other day in merrimack, n.h. <u+201c>he shouldn<u+2019>t be making fun of people and making them self-conscious about the way they look. that<u+2019>s not what a president should be.<u+201d> the modest lead clinton has held in national and state polls can be attributed to her outsized advantage among white women with college degrees. four years ago, romney carried this demographic over president obama, 52<u+00a0>percent to 46<u+00a0>percent, according to exit polls. yet trump is losing it badly <u+2014> 32<u+00a0>percent to clinton<u+2019>s 57<u+00a0>percent in a late september washington post-abc news poll of likely voters. among white women without college degrees, however, trump leads clinton 52<u+00a0>percent to 40<u+00a0>percent. the two candidates are virtually tied among white women overall: 46<u+00a0>percent for clinton and 44<u+00a0>percent for trump, according to the post-abc survey. for clinton, who would make history as the nation<u+2019>s first female president, winning a larger share of white women voters than obama did could help her offset any relative erosion in support from young voters, for instance. it also could balance any rise in turnout among white men for trump, a group with which he enjoys an over 2-to-1 lead. <u+201c>everything<u+2019>s about swing voters,<u+201d> said a senior clinton campaign official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss campaign strategy. <u+201c>we know that white suburban women are critical for both parties .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. and the lowest hanging fruit for expansion among that group is more likely to be college-educated white women.<u+201d> meanwhile, trump is trying to squeeze as many votes as he can from whites generally <u+2014> including a subgroup with which he is quite unpopular, college-educated women <u+2014> to offset losses among blacks, latinos and other minorities. <u+201c>some women have already gone into their respective corners, and they will support clinton or trump and not move,<u+201d> said kellyanne conway, trump<u+2019>s campaign manager and pollster. <u+201c>but the persuadables are swinging back and forth because they know there<u+2019>s always more to learn, more to see, more to know.<u+201d> margie omero, a democratic pollster who closely studies the political attitudes of female voters, said women have been cool to trump<u+2019>s candidacy for several reasons. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not just about the toxic language he uses towards all the various women he knows publicly, but it<u+2019>s also his lack of fluency on policy, his lack of understanding about caregiving,<u+201d> omero said. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s clearly not his comfort zone. he<u+2019>s got this very harsh tone, in general, that a lot of women respond very badly to.<u+201d> for months now, clinton<u+2019>s advertisements have used trump<u+2019>s own words to undermine his character. the spots have been aimed at women and evoke visceral responses. one of the campaign<u+2019>s most recent ads, called <u+201c>mirrors,<u+201d> depicts girls looking at their reflections as trump is heard talking crudely about women<u+2019>s bodies. clinton is laboring to persuade voters who identify as <u+201c>moderate,<u+201d> regardless of their party affiliation. in 2012, moderates made up 41<u+00a0>percent of the electorate, and obama won them 56<u+00a0>percent to romney<u+2019>s 41<u+00a0>percent, exit polls show. many moderates live in suburban areas, and although they cross over into many demographic groups, the clinton campaign<u+2019>s private data suggest they hold similar values and beliefs. <u+201c>there are threads here that make these groups very important to winning the presidency,<u+201d> said the clinton campaign official, saying they support same-sex marriage, prioritize climate change and education, and recoil against candidates seen as sexist or bigoted. to repair his image among moderates, trump has enlisted his elder daughter, who rates as one of his most effective surrogates according to the campaign<u+2019>s internal research. ivanka, 34 <u+2014> who has three small children and is an entrepreneur and an executive in her father<u+2019>s real estate company <u+2014> helped trump craft a child-care policy, which they rolled out together last month in a philadelphia suburb. ivanka stars in a new ad, her first of the general election, in which she says that her father <u+201c>understands the needs of a modern workforce<u+201d> and is committed to changing <u+201c>outdated labor laws<u+201d> to support women with children. the spot, called <u+201c>motherhood,<u+201d> will air this week nationally and in swing states on women-focused cable channels, including lifetime, bravo and own (the oprah winfrey network), as well as on network prime-time shows including <u+201c>dancing with the stars,<u+201d> <u+201c>grey<u+2019>s anatomy<u+201d> and <u+201c>the voice.<u+201d> [ivanka trump stars in new campaign ad to help her father appeal to women] trump<u+2019>s women-focused ad campaign will continue with a second spot, called <u+201c>childcare,<u+201d> that casts trump as a champion of affordability and fairness for middle-class families, conway said. this is partly an attempt to change the subject from trump<u+2019>s temperament and character, and to tell voters that he is more of a change agent than clinton. <u+201c>if this election is about hillary clinton and is fought on the issues, donald trump wins,<u+201d> conway said. she ticked through the issues she wants trump to focus on in the final weeks: security (not only terrorism, but also opioid abuse), affordability, fairness and ethics. conway said the trump campaign recently analyzed the advertising of clinton and her super-pac allies and found that the two issues discussed the least were education and health care. <u+201c>i said, <u+2018>bingo! that<u+2019>s what we<u+2019>ll talk about every day <u+2014> health care and education,<u+2019><u+201d> conway said. <u+201c>she says she<u+2019>s been <u+2018>fighting for women and children,<u+2019> but where<u+2019>s the product? where<u+2019>s the deliverable? why do so many women live in poverty? why do so many women not have health insurance?<u+201d> it may be difficult for female voters to tune everything else out, however. lisa faust, 45, one of the knitters here in nashua, was trained as a chemical engineer and is raising a son with down syndrome. she can<u+2019>t stop thinking about the time trump mocked a disabled journalist. <u+201c>what<u+2019>s distressing to me is that trump has made it socially acceptable to embrace bigotry and racism,<u+201d> faust said. <u+201c>how do you say to an 11-year-old child, <u+2018>that<u+2019>s not acceptable behavior,<u+2019> but the leader of our country thinks it<u+2019>s acceptable? that really gets to me.<u+201d> emily guskin in washington contributed to this report.

trump has a challenge with white women: <u+2018>you just want to smack him<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

5.0

68.0

8.0

9502.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

593.0

1.0

0.0

169.0

2.0

0.0

84.0

18.0

24.0

11.0

16.0

21.0

16.0

13.0

42.0

35.0

59.0

598.0

170.0

86.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

his wife, melania, and 10-year-old son, barron, will likely join him after barron finishes the school year this spring.

rubio surges back to electrify south carolina

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

119.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

12.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

15.0

5.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

one might have expected the great whitebread hope to be a little better prepared <u+2014> or at least be politically skilled enough <u+2014> not to come right out and say, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m going to punt on that one.<u+201d> it was amateur hour, to say the least. still, he may have been more skilled than people gave him credit for. walker showed that he understands the republican base far better than the likes of george will, who said on fox news last week that press questions about evolution are <u+201c>a standard way of trying to embarrass republicans <u+2026> we should be able to come to terms with the fact when asked about evolution you say yes. and if one syllable of one word is not enough say paleontology. everything says evolution is a fact. get over it.<u+201d> the sad fact is that polling shows fewer and fewer republicans believe in evolution. <u+201c>evolution has become the religion of the elite. it<u+2019>s a religion to the [level of] fanaticism of what they would say was the people at the scopes monkey trial, the christians waving their bibles who were not really thinking through the facts, they were just outraged because it was against god<u+2019>s law. the truth of the matter is that the evolutionists like george will, waving their evolutionary theory, have become as rabid and unreasoned as what they accuse the scopes monkey religionists of doing to darwin during that time. it has become a religion. science has disproven so much of evolution<u+2026>. these guys are wrong, scott walker is right.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s unclear to what she<u+2019>s referring when she asserts that science has disproved evolution but it<u+2019>s a clever idea that explains how scott walker<u+2019>s follow-up comments on twitter might make sense to the creationist base of the gop: but what<u+2019>s politically important here isn<u+2019>t the science vs. faith issue.<u+00a0> it<u+2019>s what rios says about elitism. laura ingraham explained it best in her 2004 book<u+00a0><u+201c>shut up and sing<u+201d>: it was southern religiosity that led to one of the most vicious literary assaults on any single group in american history. h.l. mencken became a hero to generations of elites through his newspaper reporting on the <u+201c>scopes monkey trial.<u+201d> uninterested in the subtleties of the debate over evolution <u+2014> completely indifferent to the concerns of those who felt their traditional religious teaching to be in danger from teachers who despised them and their culture <u+2014> mencken gleefully seized upon the case to mock and ridicule everything he could find in the south. we owe the popularization of the phrase <u+201c>white trash<u+201d> to mencken. he also coined the phrase <u+201c>bible belt<u+201d> to describe the <u+201c>bigoted<u+201d> south. in true elite fashion, mencken approved of the elitist antebellum south of the slaveholders but couldn<u+2019>t stand the postwar south, where power had devolved to the despised white trash<u+2026> believing in evolution, therefore, is an outgrowth of reverse racism against salt-of-the-earth white southerners and a sign of liberal solidarity with the elite antebellum slaveholders. you have to give her credit for pulling that bizarre rationale for rejecting evolution together. after all, it<u+2019>s not really religion that holds the gop base together, it<u+2019>s a sense of victimization. and this thesis weaves a number of important strands into a colorful if ahistorical tapestry. it presents a bit of a problem for conservative leaders, however. as you can see from rios<u+2019> unhappiness at george will<u+2019>s forthright support for evolution, people who actually believe in science (as it<u+2019>s understood by scientists anyway) are considered traitors to the cause. and most of them are less willing than will to buck the victimization creed.<u+00a0>george w. bush famously equivocated<u+00a0>by saying <u+201c>the jury is still out,<u+201d> adding, <u+201c>i<u+2019>d make it a goal to make sure that local folks got to make the decision as to whether or not they said creationism has been a part of our history and whether or not people ought to be exposed to different theories as to how the world was formed.<u+201d> a few years back ben adler at the new republic<u+00a0>quizzed a group of leading conservative intellectuals<u+00a0>and commentators about evolution, and their fevered dance of denial was worthy of katy perry<u+2019>s <u+00a0>dancing shark troupe at the 2015 super bowl. here are a few examples: whether he personally believes in evolution: <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t discuss personal opinions. <u+2026> i<u+2019>m familiar with what<u+2019>s obviously true about it as well as what<u+2019>s problematic. <u+2026> i<u+2019>m not a scientist. <u+2026> it<u+2019>s like me asking you whether you believe in the big bang.<u+201d> how evolution should be taught in public schools: <u+201c>i managed to have my children go through the fairfax, virginia schools without ever looking at one of their science textbooks.<u+201d> whether he personally believes in evolution: <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve never understood how an eye evolves.<u+201d> what he thinks of intelligent design: <u+201c>put me down for the intelligent design people.<u+201d> how evolution should be taught in public schools: <u+201c>the real problem here is that you shouldn<u+2019>t have government-run schools. <u+2026> given that we have to spend all our time crushing the capital gains tax i don<u+2019>t have much time for this issue.<u+201d> whether he personally believes in evolution: <u+201c>i do believe in evolution.<u+201d> what he thinks of intelligent design: <u+201c>if intelligent design means that evolution occurs under some divine guidance, i believe that.<u+201d> how evolution should be taught in public schools: <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t believe that anything that offends nine-tenths of the american public should be taught in public schools. <u+2026> christianity is the faith of nine-tenths of the american public. <u+2026> i don<u+2019>t believe that public schools should embark on teaching anything that offends christian principle.<u+201d> whether he personally believes in evolution: <u+201c>it<u+2019>s impossible to answer that question with a simple yes or no.<u+201d> whether he personally believes in evolution: <u+201c>do i believe in absolute evolution? no. i don<u+2019>t believe that evolution can explain the creation of matter. <u+2026> do i believe in darwinian evolution? the answer is no.<u+201d> <u+2026> <u+201c>evolution [has] been so powerful a theory in western history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and often a malevolent force<u+2013>it<u+2019>s been used by non-christians and anti-christians to justify polices which have been horrendous. i do believe that every american student should be introduced to the idea and its effects on society. but i don<u+2019>t think it ought to be taught as fact. it ought to be taught as theory. <u+2026> how do you answer a kid who says, <u+2018>where did we all come from?<u+2019> do you say, <u+2018>we all evolved<u+2019>? i think that<u+2019>s a theory. <u+2026> now the biblical story of creation should be taught to children, not as dogma but every child should know first of all the famous biblical stories because they have had a tremendous influence as well. <u+2026> i don<u+2019>t think it should be taught as religion to kids who don<u+2019>t wanna learn it. <u+2026> i think in biology that honest teachers gotta say, <u+2018>look the universe exhibits, betrays the idea that there is a first mover, that there is intelligent design.<u+2019> <u+2026> you should leave the teaching of religion to a voluntary classes in my judgment and only those who wish to attend.<u+201d> if a republican politician wants to go straight to the right-wing heart on this issue he would say what presidential hopeful<u+00a0>mike huckabee said<u+00a0>with just the right amount of smug insider wingnut humor: <u+201c>if you want to believe that you and your family came from apes, that<u+2019>s fine. i<u+2019>ll accept that. i just don<u+2019>t happen to think that i did.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s the kind of statement that will elicit cheers from your gop base and make the likes of laura ingraham applaud wildly. unfortunately, it won<u+2019>t carry much beyond mencken<u+2019>s loathed bible belt or right-wing radio.it needs to be massaged into something much more anodyne with a dog whistle embedded within it. and once he was briefed by his handlers, walker toed the required line quite well. it<u+2019>s a sign of his familiarity with social conservative language that he understands, if nobody in the punditocracy does, that it<u+2019>s better to <u+201c>punt<u+201d> than get it wrong. he knows he<u+2019>ll never get past iowa if he does.

gop still party of stupid: scott walker, fox news and why 2016 hopefuls must appease wingnut base on evolution

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

110.0

8.0

7947.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

572.0

0.0

157.0

0.0

84.0

11.0

20.0

10.0

16.0

15.0

17.0

8.0

43.0

31.0

53.0

577.0

157.0

84.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

texas sen. ted cruz<u+2019>s popularity among republicans has plummeted in recent months and now more of them have negative views of him than positive ones, according to gallup data released monday. the proportion of republicans and republican-leaning independents who view cruz favorably has dropped to 39% <u+2014><u+00a0>down from 61% in january <u+2014><u+00a0>and the share who view him unfavorably has skyrocketed, going from 15% in january to 45% now. <u+201c>republicans' views of cruz are now the worst in gallup's history of tracking the texas senator,<u+201d> gallup editor frank newport said. the data comes as cruz has made several moves to try to shore up support for his campaign and stop donald trump from winning enough delegates to clinch the republican presidential nomination. he and ohio gov. john kasich had tried to make a deal so cruz could take on trump one-on-one in tuesday<u+2019>s indiana primary. that appears to have fallen apart. he named carly fiorina as his running mate last week, even though he hasn<u+2019>t clinched the nomination and it is mathematically impossible for him to do so on the first ballot at the republican national convention. cruz said<u+00a0>this week that he nevertheless intends to go the distance,<u+00a0>"as long as we have a viable path to victory." here<u+2019>s what<u+2019>s happened to his popularity ratings in the gallup polling: <u+201c>after a holding period of sorts in march and early april, cruz's image began to deteriorate significantly in the last two weeks, with his positive and negative lines crossing in the middle of last week,<u+201d> newport said. at the same time, trump<u+2019>s popularity among republicans surged in recent weeks, with the amount who view him favorably<u+00a0>growing from 53% to 59% and the share who view him negatively<u+00a0>shrinking from 41% to 35%. of course, both still have popularity problems with the general electorate <u+2014><u+00a0>29% more people have<u+00a0>a negative view of trump than a positive one and 25% more view cruz negatively<u+00a0>than positively.

ted cruz popularity among republicans takes a serious nosedive: gallup

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

8.0

1934.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

122.0

0.0

37.0

1.0

0.0

15.0

0.0

7.0

2.0

4.0

3.0

10.0

4.0

14.0

127.0

37.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

trump<u+2019>s victory has been followed by talk in gop circles of repealing obamacare and getting the economy back on track. cbn<u+2019>s jennifer wishon and economist steve moore addressed these issues and more on the 700 club. president-elect donald trump met with president barack obama at the white house thursday in what turned out to be a cordial first step in the transfer of power. <u+201c>we talked about foreign policy, we talked about domestic policy,<u+201d> the president told reporters following the 90-minute meeting, adding that it's important for the country to come together to face the challenges ahead. trump, for his part, said he looks forward to being with the president "many, many more times." cbn's david brody and jenna browder talk to protesters outside the white house thursday. (audio begins at 1:30) the meeting came as thousands of anti-trump protestors hit the streets wednesday, from new york to philadelphia to chicago and los angeles, to express their anger over trump's surprising victory. one protestor expressed the shock and disbelief of many clinton supporters when she said, "something horrific and unbelievable has happened." but trump promised to be a president for all americans. "to all republicans and democrats and independents across this nation, i say it is time for us to come together as one united people," trump said in his victory speech wednesday morning. obama also called for americans to come together, saying, "it is no secret that the president-elect and i have some pretty significant differences. we are now all rooting for his success in uniting and leading the country." although many world leaders also expressed support for trump, europeans who watched the election closely and expected a certain clinton victory were still trying to come to grips with the results.<u+00a0> french president francois hollande said trump's victory "opens a period of uncertainty." much more certain is trump's agenda for his first 100 days.<u+00a0> a top priority is to repeal and replace obamacare. "believe me, we'll get rid of that," trump warned when he was on the campaign trail. "i've been saying it for years." <u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0> <u+00a0> trump has also promised middle class families a 35 percent tax cut, although the tax foundation, which has reviewed the plan, said it would actually cut taxes for several income levels. <u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0> <u+00a0> trump has also vowed to build a wall on the border with mexico, and to make it a lot tougher for persons from terror-related countries to enter the u.s., saying, "radical islamic terror is right around the corner. we have to be so tough, so smart, so vigilant." <u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0><u+00a0> <u+00a0> the president-elect is also eager to fill the empty seat on the supreme court, which has been vacant since justice antonin scalia's death in february, with a conservative justice -- and he could get more chances to appoint justices. wall street quickly adjusted to the idea of a trump presidency.<u+00a0> after an initial sell-off, stocks posted strong gains. meanwhile, president-elect trump has a lot on his plate, and a lot to talk about when he meets with president obama.

presidential transition of power begins amid nationwide protests

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

64.0

8.0

3204.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

198.0

0.0

49.0

1.0

0.0

20.0

6.0

14.0

2.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

6.0

19.0

12.0

20.0

206.0

49.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

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

are democrats crippling obamacare?

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

34.0

8.0

117.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

12.0

1.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

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

gop contenders prep for loud, ugly holiday season

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

49.0

8.0

117.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

2.0

11.0

1.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

work can be a four-letter word in our culture. pundits demagogue against successful businesses, and demonize the one-percent as <u+201c>financial parasites<u+201d> said to be profiting unfairly. charitable and non-profit work is extolled often as a better way to help a community. but in truth, if you want to change the world, consider starting a business that makes a tangible contribution to the lives of the people around you. it<u+2019>s interesting that in the bible so many of the greatest leaders had a day job. jesus was a carpenter; luke a doctor; moses a shepherd; deborah a judge; paul a tentmaker <u+2013> the list goes on. while the bible does describe duties for people of faith who are in church work, the larger message of scripture is that <u+201c>whatever you do, in word or deed, do as unto the lord.<u+201d> among the community of believers and in our current modern day culture, a prejudice has developed against mainstream secular work as a way to make a significant contribution to a community. this attitude ignores the very real impact that a good paying job has on a person, a family, the community and even the world at large. with americans spending an average of 47 hours a week at work, it<u+2019>s time to consider whether a better way to change the world is to make it better at work. one reason that people may be dreaming of non-profit work is that so many don<u+2019>t like their jobs. most people <u+2013> 8 out of 10 in fact <u+2013> hate their jobs, and may be dreaming of a different kind of life, according to deloitte<u+2019>s shift index survey. if that is even partially accurate, it<u+2019>s easy to understand how people can dream of a life of doing something good for others that feels more worthwhile than dealing with a curmudgeon for a boss. even as job creation has dramatically declined, with a 38-year low in the labor force participation rate, an increasing number of people have chosen to join the non-profit world. <u+201c>from 2001 to 2011, the number of nonprofits in the united states grew 25 percent while the number of for-profit businesses rose by half of 1 percent, according to the most recent figures compiled by the urban institute,<u+201d> noted the new york times. in fact, according to the national center for charitable statistics, more than 1.5 million nonprofit organizations of all kinds are registered in the united states. still, most people spend their days in for-profit companies, as non-profits employ 10 percent of the workforce in 2010, accounting for about five percent of gross domestic product. "since 9/11, there's been more of a -- i don't mean this to sound pejorative -- knee-jerk reaction to start a new charity whenever something goes wrong <u+2026> (however) very few of these charities are going to last," said chuck mclean, vice president of research for guidestar, which tracks nonprofit activity. frankly, non-profit and ministry jobs are still work, with all the ups and downs of employment. many in charitable efforts find it<u+2019>s not as glamorous at it might look from the outside. consider the ultimate job from the non-profit world, the local pastor. a fuller institute project that began in 1998 and picked up in 1998 by the francis a. schaeffer institute of church leadership development took a look at how pastors were handling the pressures of caring for a hurting community. with more than 18 years of data to consider, research found that 70 percent were so stressed they often considered leaving the ministry, while 35 to 40 percent actually did give up after about five years. no matter the profession, one way that you can practically care for people is to create jobs in an environment that cares for and values people, both customers, vendors and employees. it<u+2019>s fascinating that today the most popular fast-food chain comes from a company that does not hide its family values while making sure every customer gets a good meal. consider the rise of the humble chicken sandwich at chick-fil-a, a high quality product in an enjoyable environment, in a company that cares for its employees. and importantly, those with a job have the means to contribute time and money. sometimes called tentmakers, referencing the apostle paul who supported himself with his skill, volunteers who financially support themselves with outside employment are invaluable for cash-strapped charities. those with means make a huge difference. consider luke 8, where we learn about some wealthy women who contributed to jesus<u+2019> ministry on earth <u+201c>out of their private means.<u+201d> good jobs, with a steady income, empower americans to be the most charitable people in world. according to the national philanthropic trust, almost 96 percent of american households donate to charity, giving an average of more than $2,900. in fact, even as the economy has been stagnant, americans increased their giving 7.1 percent from 2013 to 2014, the last figures available. given the pressing needs of the world, a profitable company that provides a lifetime of opportunity for employees, excellent service for the community, and a source of income that can allow employers and employees alike to contribute to the needs around them is world changing. a good job provides the means to give back, remembering the instructions in in deuteronomy 16:17, <u+201c>each of you must bring a gift in proportion to the way the lord your god has blessed you.<u+201d> robert dickie iii is president of crown, a non-profit dedicated to helping people create long term plans for personal financial, career, and business success. he is the author of the newly release book, "the leap - launching your full-time career in our part-time economy." (moody publishers january 6, 2015). follow him on twitter@robertdickie.

work: it's not a four letter word, it's a world-changing vocation

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

65.0

8.0

5663.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

375.0

0.0

81.0

2.0

0.0

69.0

8.0

22.0

5.0

8.0

21.0

7.0

43.0

12.0

56.0

380.0

81.0

71.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

sure, bevin is better on the campaign trail than he was during his failed attempt to oust sen. mitch mcconnell in 2014. but as a recent piece about the race in the atlantic made clear, he still isn<u+2019>t good. and while the voters of kentucky are undoubtedly conservative, a look-over of bevin<u+2019>s political history reveals a man on the wrong side of the line separating <u+201c>hyper-conservative<u+201d> from <u+201c>radical fringe.<u+201d> but he won, anyway. and despite what pre-election polls suggested, the outcome wasn<u+2019>t even close. this raises myriad questions for the democratic party, both in kentucky and the nation as a whole. most of those questions will center on the party<u+2019>s get-out-the-vote apparatus, which increasingly seems to be useless for any election in which barack obama isn<u+2019>t a candidate. in general, i chalk that up to the decline of organized labor. but kentucky was never exactly michigan. (in fact, the state is something of an outlier recently when it comes to the nation<u+2019>s larger de-unionization trend.) regardless of unions<u+2019> strength, though, democrats had hoped that policy successes would inspire their constituents to come out and vote. specifically, they hoped that bevin<u+2019>s vow to dismantle the affordable care act in kentucky (as much as he can, that is) would inspire the hundreds of thousands of kentuckians who<u+2019>ve benefited to vote for its protection. by almost any metric, after all, kynect <u+2014> what they call the aca in kentucky <u+2014> has been an inspirational success. democrats hoped voters would reward the party for successfully implementing such a major policy. but from today<u+2019>s vantage, it<u+2019>s painfully obvious that they didn<u+2019>t. and that<u+2019>s not just a problem in the bluegrass state <u+2014> it<u+2019>s a problem for all democrats. because one of the foundational assumptions behind kynect, the aca, and much of the entire democratic party agenda is that good policy makes for good politics. in kentucky, at least, it didn<u+2019>t. what does <u+201c>good policy = good politics<u+201d> mean? it basically means that an effective program can survive, even if it<u+2019>s unpopular at the outset. those who benefit, the theory goes, will eventually become a constituency (if they aren<u+2019>t already) and will organize to preserve it. think of social security or medicare: they weren<u+2019>t necessarily super-popular when they were first implemented, but once people started relying on them, they became the so-called third rail of american politics. but as left-wing critics of the democratic consensus have long argued, there<u+2019>s a problem with analogizing the aca and social security. one of the programs is universal <u+2014> everyone puts in; everyone takes out <u+2014> and the other isn<u+2019>t. and this isn<u+2019>t incidental. it<u+2019>s the reason why so many tea party types will rail against <u+201c>handouts<u+201d> but cherish their medicare. it<u+2019>s because they believe they<u+2019>re simply receiving what they<u+2019>re owed (they aren<u+2019>t) and that the benefits go to them instead of good-for-nothing moochers. there are plenty of people in kentucky right now who are better off because of the aca. but many of them are beneficiaries of the law<u+2019>s medicaid expansion (which bevin has promised to change, if not revoke) and thus lack political influence. and the rest? as far as many of them know, it<u+2019>s not the aca or <u+201c>obamacare<u+201d> that they now rely on. it<u+2019>s kynect. and bevin didn<u+2019>t campaign against kynect. he campaigned against obamacare. kentucky democrats got the policy right, in other words; but it never paid political dividends. in fairness, it<u+2019>s too early to say the debate is over. if bevin tries to make good on his promises and is greeted with a backlash, he may trim his sails or abandon the initiative. still, it<u+2019>s not like democrats didn<u+2019>t spend much of the campaign warning about bevin<u+2019>s plans for health care in kentucky. they did <u+2014> a lot. it didn<u+2019>t make a difference.

the meaning of matt bevin: why his victory undermines a major democratic party theory

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

85.0

8.0

3796.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

254.0

3.0

0.0

80.0

0.0

54.0

6.0

15.0

3.0

5.0

10.0

7.0

20.0

14.0

29.0

261.0

83.0

54.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

nearly 300k new jobs in february; unemployment dips to 5.5 percent the u.s. economy added 295,000 jobs last month, according to the labor department's monthly survey, and the unemployment rate dropped to 5.5 percent. the latest strong data beat expectations and follow a robust jump the previous month <u+2014> a sign that the nation's economy is finally picking up steam. economists had predicted the economy would add 240,000 jobs in february and that the unemployment rate would notch back down to 5.6 percent, where it stood for december. the slight increase in the rate last month was attributed to strong growth in the labor force. the average workweek for nonfarm payrolls was 34.6 hours, a figure that has held steady for five months. the average hourly wage rose 3 cents, to $24.78. as npr's john ydstie reported this morning ahead of this morning's release by the department's bureau of labor statistics, the report for january "was stellar on almost every count. it revealed a monthly average for job growth of 336,000 over the previous three months, and it showed strong wage gains after years of disappointing growth." for february, the labor department says more jobs were added in food services and drinking places, professional and business services, construction, health care and in transportation and warehousing. the latest report comes as the federal reserve has signaled that it is likely to raise interest rates, possibly as soon as june, based on the generally more robust u.s. economy and concerns about inflation pressures. today's reports shows 51,000 new jobs last month in professional and business services and 29,000 new jobs in construction. transportation and warehousing added 19,000 jobs, and the retail sector gained 32,000. over the past year, construction and retail have collectively gained about 320,000 jobs. reuters reports from london: "the dollar hit an 11-year high against major currencies on friday as investors bet the monthly u.s. jobs report would increase the chances of rate hikes, even as the european central bank embarks on a 1 trillion euro bond-buying campaign."

nearly 300k new jobs in february; unemployment dips to 5.5 percent

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

66.0

8.0

2119.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

103.0

0.0

32.0

0.0

5.0

2.0

4.0

1.0

3.0

9.0

6.0

16.0

106.0

32.0

5.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

six months ago, senator mike lee and i offered a variety of ideas on how to reform america's tax code to be both pro-growth and pro-family. our goal was to slash rates, shrink the irs, create jobs, grow wages, and empower parents all at the same time. since offering these ideas, i have gathered input from americans of all economic backgrounds and engaged in discussions with leaders across the conservative movement to form a complete, pro-growth, pro-family tax reform agenda for the 21st century. my plan is a significant departure from the old school tax reform ideas that so often come out of washington. first, on the individual side, my plan reduces the number of brackets from seven to three: 15%, 25%, and 35%. the plan eliminates all exemptions and deductions, except for a charitable contribution deduction and a reformed home mortgage interest deduction.<u+00a0> taxpayers will instead receive a personal tax credit that phases out for higher-income americans.<u+00a0> this greatly simplified code will cut taxes for the vast majority of people. second, my plan cuts rates for all businesses <u+2013> large and small <u+2013> to no higher than 25%, which would finally make us competitive again with the rest of the developed world. my plan recognizes that big businesses shouldn<u+2019>t get a larger tax cut than small businesses, which are the main drivers of economic growth. to further spur job creation, i will end federal taxation of business investment by allowing for immediate expensing. i will also shift to a territorial tax system, thus ending the double-taxation of profits earned abroad for both businesses and individuals. furthermore, my plan eliminates the double-taxation on saving and investment income. it provides a transition period during which we will move to a 0% tax rate on dividends and capital gains, which is a forward-looking way to benefit millions of everyday savers across all income levels. my plan also eliminates the death tax, finally putting an end to one of the irs's most insulting practices. a critical component of my plan is tax relief for middle-class parents. by providing a new child tax credit of up to $2,500, which phases out for wealthier americans, we can ease the extraordinary financial burdens of parenthood. while some well-respected voices oppose this tax relief, i remain adamant that empowering struggling families should be a priority for any modern reform plan. i know from firsthand experience how expensive it is to raise children in the 21st century, and i believe our tax code should support parents rather than drain their budgets. my reforms will target some of the highest costs facing families today. as part of my efforts to repeal and replace obamacare, i will reform the tax treatment of health care to reduce costs and promote individual ownership of health insurance. i will consolidate all higher education tax incentives into one simple provision that will help millions of americans pursue higher education. i will also promote an individual and corporate tax credit to finance school choice. i believe one of the greatest threats to family life today is that too many americans have to give up being with loved ones in times of great need in order to avoid losing their jobs. i will begin to solve this problem by providing a limited 25% non-refundable tax credit to any business that offers between four and twelve weeks of paid leave to workers with qualifying family or medical issues <u+2013> for example, a newborn child in need of care, an elderly parent with declining health, a personal health crisis, or a spouse<u+2019>s deployment. my tax reform plan is designed to advance america's two most important goals in this century: a growing, opportunity-rich economy and strong, financially-secure families. everyone in politics claims to support these goals, yet i can already hear the establishment voices saying my modern approach to tax reform is all wrong. they will say the tax code of the 20th century will continue to work in the 21st. they will say we can continue to raise taxes and increase spending without long-term consequences. they will say that to protect your job we need to raise your boss<u+2019> taxes <u+2013> or that for you to climb up the economic ladder we have to pull someone else down. i disagree. i believe everyone can benefit from a pro-growth and pro-family tax reform plan.<u+00a0> i believe by cutting taxes and simplifying the tax code, we will grow our economy and create more taxpayers rather than more taxes. i believe the plan i<u+2019>ve offered is a vital step toward creating high-paying modern jobs, fostering more opportunity for more americans, and making the 21st century a new american century. republican marco rubio represents florida in the u.s. senate. he is a member of the senate committee on commerce, science and transportation and was a candidate for the republican nomination for president in 2016.

rubio: my pro-family, pro-growth tax reform plan for the 21st century

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

69.0

8.0

4886.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

380.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

0.0

34.0

8.0

17.0

5.0

11.0

13.0

12.0

6.0

22.0

20.0

42.0

383.0

61.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with nine weeks until election day, donald trump is within striking distance in the upper midwest, but hillary clinton<u+2019>s strength in many battlegrounds and some traditional republican strongholds gives her a big electoral college advantage, according to a 50-state washington post-surveymonkey poll. the survey of all 50 states is the largest sample ever undertaken by the post, which joined with surveymonkey and its online polling resources to produce the results. the state-by-state numbers are based on responses from more than 74,000 registered voters during the period of aug. 9 to sept. 1. the individual state samples vary in size from about 550 to more than 5,000, allowing greater opportunities than typical surveys to look at different groups within the population and compare them from state to state. [how the post-surveymonkey poll was conducted] the massive survey highlights a critical weakness in trump<u+2019>s candidacy <u+2014> an unprecedented deficit for a republican among college-educated white voters, especially women. white college graduates have been loyal republican voters in recent elections, but trump is behind clinton with this group across much of the country, including in some solidly red states. the 50-state findings come at a time when the average national margin between clinton and trump has narrowed. what once was a clinton lead nationally of eight to 10 points shortly after the party conventions ended a month ago is now about four points, according to the realclearpolitics polling average. a number of battleground states also have tightened, according to surveys released from other organizations in recent days. the post-surveymonkey results are consistent with many of those findings, but not in all cases. trump<u+2019>s support in the midwest, where the electorates are generally older and whiter, appears stronger and offers the possibility of gains in places democrats carried recently. he has small edges in two expected battlegrounds <u+2014> ohio and iowa <u+2014> and is close in wisconsin, pennsylvania and michigan, each of which democrats have won in six consecutive elections. at the same time, however, trump is struggling in places republicans have won consistently and that he must hold to have any hope of winning. these states include arizona and georgia, as well as texas <u+2014> the biggest surprise in the 50-state results. the texas results, which are based on a sample of more than 5,000 people, show a dead heat, with clinton ahead by one percentage point. clinton also leads by fewer than four points in colorado and florida and is tied with trump in north carolina. in colorado, other polls have shown a larger clinton lead. in mississippi, trump<u+2019>s lead is just two points, though it<u+2019>s doubtful that the gop nominee is in much danger there. in a two-way competition between the major-party candidates, clinton leads by four points or more in 20 states plus the district of columbia. together they add up to 244<u+00a0>electoral votes, 26 shy of the 270 needed to win. trump leads by at least four points in 20 states as well, but those add up to just 126<u+00a0>electoral votes. in the 10 remaining states, which hold 168 electoral votes, neither candidate has a lead of four percentage points or better. a series of four-way ballot tests that include libertarian party nominee gary johnson and green party nominee jill stein project a somewhat narrower clinton advantage, with more states showing margins of fewer than four points between the two major-party candidates. but even here, at the labor day weekend turn toward the nov.<u+00a0>8 balloting, the pressure is on trump to make up even more ground than he has in recent weeks if he hopes to win the white house. the poll finds johnson is poised to garner significant support. he is currently receiving at least 15<u+00a0>percent support in 15<u+00a0>states. the libertarian<u+2019>s support peaks at 25<u+00a0>percent in new mexico, where he served two terms as governor. he is only four points shy of trump<u+2019>s 29<u+00a0>percent standing there. his support in utah is 23<u+00a0>percent, and in colorado and iowa it is 16 percent. stein has less support in the poll, peaking at 10<u+00a0>percent in vermont and receiving at least 7<u+00a0>percent support in 10 states. overall, the results reflect trump<u+2019>s strategy of maximizing support in older, whiter midwestern states where his anti-free-trade message and appeals to national identity generally find more fertile ground. but his struggles elsewhere, including places that have long supported republicans, illustrate the challenges of that strategy in more diverse states where his stances on immigration and some other positions have turned off democrats, independents and many republicans. to win the election, trump must quickly consolidate the republican vote. with prominent republicans declaring they will not support trump and some even announcing they will back clinton, this represents a major challenge for the gop nominee. in the post-surveymonkey poll, clinton is winning 90<u+00a0>percent or more of the democratic vote in 32<u+00a0>states, while trump is at or above that level in just 13. as expected, the clinton-trump contest has split the electorate along racial lines. their bases of support are mirror images: on average, clinton does 31<u+00a0>points better among nonwhite voters than whites, and trump does 31<u+00a0>points better among white voters than nonwhites. the electorate is also divided along lines of gender and education, in many cases to a greater extent than in recent elections. averaging across all 50 states, clinton does 14<u+00a0>points better among women than men, and trump does 16<u+00a0>points better among men than women. clinton is winning among women in 34<u+00a0>states, and she<u+2019>s close in six others. trump leads among men in 38<u+00a0>states, is tied in six and trails in the other six. it is among college-educated voters, however, where trump faces his biggest hurdle. in 2012, white voters with college degrees supported republican nominee mitt romney over president obama by 56-42 percent. romney won with 59<u+00a0>percent among white men with college degrees and with 52<u+00a0>percent among white women with college degrees. so far in this campaign, clinton has dramatically changed that equation. among white college graduates, clinton leads trump in 31 of the 50<u+00a0>states, and the two are about even in six others. trump leads among college-educated whites in just 13 states, all safe republican states in recent elections. across 49 states where the poll interviewed at least 100 white college-educated women, clinton leads trump with this group in 38<u+00a0>states and by double-digit margins in 37. averaging across all states, clinton leads by 23<u+00a0>points among white women with college degrees. trump<u+2019>s base among white voters without a college degree remains strong and substantial. he leads clinton in 43 of the 50 states, and the two are roughly even in five others. she leads among white voters without a college degree in just one state: vermont. overall, clinton does 19<u+00a0>points better among white college graduates than whites without degrees while trump does 18<u+00a0>points better among whites without degrees than whites with college educations, on average. trump<u+2019>s challenge in the states that remain close will be to produce significant turnout among white, non-college voters to offset those clinton margins, but it<u+2019>s far from clear that there are enough of them to be decisive. absent that, the gop nominee must find a way to appeal to these college-educated voters during the final weeks of the campaign. trump<u+2019>s strength across some of the states in the midwest is one potential bright spot for the republican nominee. clinton<u+2019>s biggest lead among the contested states in that region is in pennsylvania, where her margin is just four points. in wisconsin and michigan, she leads by a nominal two points, while trump leads by four points in iowa and three<u+00a0>points in ohio. recent polls by other organizations have indicated that wisconsin has tightened over the past month. a recent suffolk university poll in michigan shows clinton leading by seven<u+00a0>points, and the realclearpolitics average in ohio shows clinton ahead by three points. overall, among the quintet of ohio, michigan, wisconsin, iowa and pennsylvania, michigan has been the democrats<u+2019> most reliable of the group, always one of the 15 best-performing democratic states over the past five elections. the rocky mountain west is another area of fierce competition. the post-surveymonkey poll shows colorado closer than other polls there, with clinton leading by just two points and the race tied when johnson and stein are included. meanwhile, clinton and trump are roughly even in arizona. in nevada, clinton enjoys a lead of five<u+00a0>points in head-to-head competition with trump but by just three<u+00a0>points in a four-way test. of all the states, texas provided the most unexpected result. the lone star state has been a conservative republican bastion for the past four decades. in 2012, president obama lost the state by 16<u+00a0>points. for democrats, it has been among the 10<u+00a0>to<u+00a0>15 worst-performing states in the past four elections. the post-surveymonkey poll of texas shows a dead heat with clinton at 46<u+00a0>percent and trump at 45<u+00a0>percent. democrats have long claimed that changing demographics would make the state competitive in national elections, but probably not for several more cycles. a comparison of the current survey with the 2008 texas exit poll (there was no exit poll there in 2012) points to reasons the race appears close right now. trump is performing worse than 2008 gop nominee john mccain among both whites and hispanics, while clinton is doing slightly better than obama. among men, trump is doing slightly worse than mccain did eight years ago. the bigger difference is among women. mccain won a narrow majority of women in texas while trump is currently below 40<u+00a0>percent. that<u+2019>s not to say texas is turning blue in 2016. given its history, it probably will back trump in november and possibly by a comfortable margin. but at this stage, the fact that it is close at all is one more surprise in a surprising year.

a new 50-state poll shows exactly why clinton holds the advantage over 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

4.0

76.0

8.0

10076.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

637.0

1.0

0.0

153.0

0.0

86.0

4.0

20.0

5.0

9.0

14.0

10.0

13.0

30.0

19.0

45.0

638.0

154.0

86.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

#memeoftheweek: trump asked 'the gays,' and got answers after last week's mass shooting that killed 49 people at pulse, a gay nightclub in orlando, politicians of all stripes have been speaking out about the lgbtq community <u+2014> arguing what should be done to protect them, speaking to the importance of their safe spaces, and pledging commitment to their needs. presumptive gop presidential nominee donald trump, per usual, seems to have made the most waves with his words. on monday, one day after the attack, trump spoke as an ally of the community. "a radical islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub not only because he wanted to kill americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation," trump said. he then called the attack a "strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation," as cnn reported, saying it was an "assault" on people's ability to "love who they want and express their identity." but by wednesday, the tone had shifted. while trump seemed to still be showing sympathy to gays and lesbians, the delivery was off for many watching <u+2014> his talk shifted from support for the community to boastful pride. "the lgbt community, the gay community, the lesbian community <u+2014> they are so much in favor of what i've been saying over the last three or four days," trump said during a campaign stop in atlanta on wednesday, defending his tough talk on limiting muslim immigration and fighting isis. "ask the gays what they think and what they do, in, not only saudi arabia, but many of these countries, and then you tell me <u+2014> who's your friend, donald trump or hillary clinton?" we're not even going to touch the fact that he used "the" in a strange way with those words, a thing he's done before when referencing other minority groups, like the latinos, or the blacks. what stood out most, besides that precariously placed definite article, was the question: "ask the gays." well, the gays answered. it was an exercise in gay gif (and vines, and stills) magic. some were just beyond words. even hillary clinton got in on the fun, with one simple word. there was a certain power on display in all the tweets, and in the lgbtq community's ability to not just speak for itself, but to find humor in a painful week, when politicians could be seen as using gays and lesbians as political props. but there is also a more serious undercurrent to #askthegays <u+2014> how, why, and how quickly an entire group can become political footballs in moments of such distress. to be fair, both clinton's and trump's records on lgbtq issues are up for debate. trump has spoken less disparagingly of gays and lesbians than he has of other minority and affinity groups, though he has opposed issues like same-sex marriage. he has said he would allow transgender people to use any bathroom at trump tower, but also argued that states should be allowed to decide their own policies concerning bathrooms for transgender individuals. hillary clinton has gained the endorsement of most major lgbtq organizations, and has campaigned with her support of same-sex marriage and transgender rights. but she did not always support same-sex marriage, and has made some missteps with the lgbtq community before <u+2014> most recently during the funeral of nancy reagan, when she argued that reagan had helped advance the nation's conversation on aids. (nancy reagan's husband was actually silent on aids for years.) still, clinton seems to have the advantage <u+2014> in a may gallup poll, 54 percent of those who identify as lgbt view clinton as favorable while only 18 percent view trump as such. there is much to unpack in the way lgbtq people have been both marginalized, co-opted, and embraced in just a matter of days since a physical safe space was taken from the community. but, in a way, #askthegays was able to create a safe space online in a week where it might have been particularly hard to find those spaces in the real world or our political discourse.

#memeoftheweek: trump asked 'the gays,' and got answers

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

14.0

55.0

8.0

3981.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

245.0

2.0

0.0

76.0

0.0

43.0

10.0

7.0

4.0

9.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

12.0

15.0

28.0

247.0

78.0

43.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hillary clinton was seen to help stabilize her faltering campaign tuesday night with a debate performance that left little doubt she has a solid grip on the democratic presidential race -- and may have sent a strong message to joe biden that time is running out if he envisions jumping in. the democratic front-runner and her closest competitor, vermont sen. bernie sanders, dominated the debate stage in las vegas, relegating the other low-polling candidates to footnote status. but with the most to lose tuesday night, the clinton camp seemed to come out of the debate revitalized, with aides calling it the "best day" of their campaign. "i think things have stabilized," clinton pollster joel benenson said. that claim will be put to the test in the coming weeks. the vice president continues to mull a 2016 bid, and the debate had been viewed by analysts as a significant factor in that ultimate decision. biden watched the debate tuesday night from afar, at the naval observatory residence -- and time will tell whether he thinks there's still room for him. on wednesday,<u+00a0>biden said only that all the candidates did a good job and he's "proud of all of them." in comparison with the donald trump-dominated gop debates, the lead-off showdown in las vegas tuesday night was a relatively cordial affair for the democrats, with the lively disputes centering on policy differences and not personal put-downs. but clinton was the clear lightning rod, challenged early and often on her shifting positions - while also hitting back and trying to position herself as a practical progressive with every bit as much credibility with the base as candidates like sen. bernie sanders. "i'm not taking a backseat to anybody on my values, my principles and the results that i get," clinton said, describing herself as a "progressive who likes to get things done." the front-runner, who has faced an insurgent challenge from her left in sanders' campaign, was visibly ready to tangle tuesday with him and the three other candidates on stage at the cnn-facebook debate. while sanders railed against a "casino capitalist process," clinton warned against abandoning the system that built america's middle class. and clinton sparred with sanders and others as they questioned her call for a no-fly zone in syria, and criticized her 2002 support, as a senator, for use of force in iraq, a decision she's since called a mistake. former rhode island sen. lincoln chafee called it a "poor decision" and said he did his "homework" when he opposed that measure. clinton, in her defense, noted that president obama asked her to be secretary of state because "he valued my judgment." when former maryland gov. martin o'malley suggested lawmakers were overtaken by "war fever," clinton quipped: "i am in the middle here - lots of things coming from all directions." she then tweaked o'malley by thanking him for endorsing her in 2008. while clinton and sanders sparred at times, the vermont senator mostly avoided aggressively attacking clinton on stage. when clinton was pressed on her personal email scandal, sanders even jumped to her defense. in one of the more memorable moments of the night, sanders said: "i think the secretary is right. ... the american people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails." clinton said, "me too." she thanked him and shook his hand. chafee, though, added that "credibility is an issue." the exchange came after clinton responded to a question on the email scandal by saying she's taken responsibility for it and acknowledged it was a mistake. she quickly pivoted to challenging the work of the congressional benghazi committee, calling it "basically an arm of the republican national committee." the former secretary of state was also challenged on her policy flips by moderator anderson cooper, who asked if she will say anything to get elected. "i've been very consistent over the course of my entire life," clinton responded. but she said "like most human beings," she has absorbed new information. clinton was specifically challenged for opposing the pacific-nation trade deal she once supported as secretary of state. though she once called it the "gold standard," she said tuesday the deal "didn't meet my standard." she said she couldn't tell voters it would raise their wages. clinton, though, tried to turn the tables on her rivals, and took a crack at sanders' record on gun control. asked if the vermont senator is tough enough on gun violence, clinton said, "no, not at all" and urged the country to stand up against the nra. she criticized him for voting for a 2005 bill giving gun manufacturers immunity from lawsuits. after sanders described that bill as complicated, she said, "it wasn't that complicated to me." sanders responded, "all the shouting in the world" is not going to end the violence. he said the country needs to reach a consensus, and stressed that rural states view gun laws differently than other states. throughout the debate, former virginia sen. jim webb, the fifth candidate on stage, struggled to elbow his way into the conversation. he stressed his military experience and push for criminal justice reform and other issues while in the senate. toward the end of the debate, webb challenged sanders for his big-spending proposals "bernie, i don't think the revolution's gonna come," he said, adding he doesn't think congress would pay for a lot of his plans. webb, chafee and o'malley are all averaging at or below 1 percent in the polls nationally, according to realclearpolitics.

clinton debate performance enough to keep biden on sidelines?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

61.0

8.0

5574.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

373.0

0.0

130.0

0.0

40.0

12.0

10.0

6.0

19.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

22.0

21.0

31.0

377.0

130.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) conservatives at the values voter summit cheered friday morning when they learned that house speaker john boehner was retiring. friday afternoon, they cheered again when someone suggested the next establishment republican to lose his job should be senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. "here's what i say in response to speaker boehner stepping down. mitch mcconnell, it is now your turn," louisiana gov. and gop presidential candidate bobby jindal said to raucous applause. after the news of boehner's resignation, arizona rep. matt salmon told reporters he had texted his fellow conservative friend, sen. mike lee, r-utah, with the simple message: "the next guy in the crosshairs is probably mcconnell." the kentucky republican has never been the favorite of tea party-aligned conservatives. his budget deals with the obama administration -- most notably the december 2012 agreement with vice president joe biden averting the so-called fiscal cliff -- haven't endeared him to the base who say he gives up too much. he has declined to get rid of the senate filibuster in order to block the iran nuclear deal, and critics say he surrendered the fight over federal funding for planned parenthood by declaring early on that he would actively seek to avoid a government shutdown. but mcconnell likely isn't going anywhere. while talk radio may call for his head, there are no signs of a true in-house groundswell against him. making things more difficult for a would-be insurgent, the senate leader is elected only by his or her conference, meaning it would be harder to get the critical mass needed to unseat him. that doesn't mean conservatives will be silent -- mcconnell epitomizes the republican establishment in washington that several of the top gop presidential candidates such as donald trump, ben carson and carly fiorina are running against. seventy-two percent of republican primary voters said they are dissatisfied with the ability of boehner and mcconnell to achieve their party's goals, according to a new nbc news/wall street journal poll. and 36 percent wanted them immediately removed from their leadership positions. jindal's other big applause line at the values voter summit regarding boehner: "that's one down, that's 434 more to go." mcconnell's office declined to comment, but referred cnn to the second-ranking senate republican, john cornyn. "as someone who's in constant contact with our members, it's clear leader mcconnell has overwhelming support within the conference," cornyn said. rep. bill flores, r-texas, said many house gop members were frustrated with senate republicans for not pushing a more conservative agenda and taking up bills the house passed. "in my view the speaker fell on his sword for all of congress, and i hope the senate starts to get things done." to reporters, salmon aimed his frustration at the filibuster and the 60-vote threshold that democrats have used to block house gop initiatives. "a lot of the problem that we're engaged in is because the senate doesn't take any action on anything," salmon said. "and there is nothing that any presidential candidate on our side says that will ever be realized as long as the modern day filibuster is enacted the way it is today." mcconnell has been tested before from the right. he defeated tea party challenger matt bevin in a contentious 2014 republican kentucky senate primary. and in july, sen. ted cruz, r-texas, tore into mcconnell in a rare personal attack on the senate floor, accusing the majority leader of lying. cruz said mcconnell had promised he had not cut a deal to allow a vote on the export-import bank, an institution cruz believes is corrupt. "if he was telling us the truth that there was no deal, why would he do what he just did?" cruz asked. "we now know that when the majority leader looks us in the eyes and makes an explicit commitment that he is willing to say things that he knows are false." cruz's attacks, however, may only have served to remind conservatives about how powerful mcconnell is. several influential republican senators chastised cruz after the incident. "squabbling and sanctimony may be tolerated in other venues -- or perhaps on the campaign trail," hatch said, "but they have no place among colleagues in the united states senate."

is mitch mcconnell next?

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

24.0

8.0

4304.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

271.0

0.0

86.0

1.0

0.0

36.0

10.0

9.0

6.0

11.0

7.0

8.0

27.0

22.0

30.0

273.0

86.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) the white house is making clear that president barack obama will defy republicans in congress and on the campaign trail who want him to leave the momentous task of nominating a new supreme court justice to the next administration. "this is not the first time that republicans have come out with a lot of bluster, only to have reality ultimately sink in," white house deputy press secretary eric schultz told reporters monday. schultz pointed to previous white house victories over the gop-led congress -- raising the debt limit, implementing the iran nuclear deal and reauthorizing the export-import bank -- and said history shows "republicans fell back when their positions aren't tenable." washington is in tumult after the sudden death of justice antonin scalia, which left a turbulent white house race transformed, a lame-duck president back at the center of the political storm and senate republican leaders juggling an electoral hand grenade. after the shock of scalia's passing and the swift eruption of a bitter partisan feud over his replacement, obama and his gop adversaries are digging in for a showdown. schultz emphasized obama's plans to nominate a successor to scalia and said it's the senate's job to fulfill its constitutional duty to consider that nominee. "there are no caveats. the constitution does not include exemptions for election years or for the president's last term in office. there's no exemption for when a vacancy could tip the balance of the court," schultz said. but he said obama won't select a nominee immediately. "the president will take the time and rigor this process deserves before selecting a nominee. i would not anticipate an announcement this week, especially given that the senate is out of recess," schultz said monday. "but as soon as the senate returns, the president was very clear that he's going to fulfill his constitutional responsibility to nominate a successor to justice scalia." that position ensures a titanic fight over scalia's replacement, placing obama on a collision course with republicans while thickening the plot of an election that now leaves the white house, the senate and the nation's top court up for grabs. gop presidential candidates are leading the charge in the battle over a replacement for scalia, a beloved icon for conservatives who was found dead at the age of 79 at a resort in west texas on saturday. they are warning that since an appointment could remake the court for a generation as key legal battles over abortion rights, affirmative action and campaign finance loom, it should be put off until next year. "this is for the people to decide," texas sen. ted cruz said at a rally in south carolina on monday. "i intend to make 2016 a referendum on the u.s. supreme court." republican senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has already warned obama not to try to fill the vacancy on the court, saying it should be up to a new president to weigh in once voters have spoken in november. mcconnell must navigate a treacherous political moment and decide whether a republican maneuver to block a confirmation process could benefit his party at the polls or risk driving up democratic turnout in november and put his grip on the senate at risk. senate minority leader harry reid and several other democrats want obama to choose a supreme court nominee who would inflict maximum political pain on republicans because he or she would be very difficult for the gop to oppose, according to two democratic sources. in other words, some influential senate democrats want obama to choose a nominee who republicans would ordinarily support but are only opposing now because it's an election year. this, they believe, would allow them to paint the gop as intransigent and well outside of the mainstream, undermining the senate gop's election-year argument that they are committed to governing in a bipartisan manner. going this route, they believe, would increasingly ratchet up pressure on at-risk republicans who are facing tough reelections, energize the democratic base and potentially flip the senate if the gop stands in their way and denies a popular nominee a vote. reid spoke with white house chief of staff denis mcdonough shortly after scalia's death, according to a source familiar with the call. it's unclear who specifically reid wants in the post. some democrats point to appellate judge sri srinivasan, who would be the first justice of south asian descent serving on the court and was confirmed to his current post by a 97-0 vote in 2013. "i think the president, past is prologue, will nominate someone who is in the mainstream," sen. chuck schumer, d-new york, the likely incoming democratic leader, said sunday. but several other democrats are also pointing to other potential groundbreaking choices and candidates who don't hold judicial posts, including sens. amy klobuchar, d-minnesota and cory booker, d-new jersey. the sudden political crisis also put one group of republicans -- swing-state senators whose seats could dictate whether the gop can hang on to the chamber in november -- in a difficult position. privately, senior democratic officials told cnn that there's little chance of obama's nominee winning confirmation unless these endangered gopers break ranks. one vulnerable incumbent, sen. mark kirk of illinois, would not say if they wanted the senate to deny obama's nominee a vote. sen. joe manchin, a centrist democrat from west virginia, who often votes with republicans, wants the senate to act on a nominee when the president puts one forward, an aide to the senator told cnn. but several others made clear they stood with republican leaders who believe that the issue could invigorate conservative turnout in november. "i strongly agree that the american people should decide the future direction of the supreme court by their votes for president and the majority party in the u.s. senate," sen. ron johnson of wisconsin, a vulnerable incumbent, said in an email to cnn. and in a statement, sen. kelly ayotte, a new hampshire republican facing a competitive reelection fight in 2016, said the senate should not confirm a supreme court nominee until a new president is elected. "we're in the midst of a consequential presidential election year," ayotte said, "and americans deserve an opportunity to weigh in given the significant implications this nomination could have for the supreme court and our country for decades to come." on monday, sen. pat toomey of pennsylvania became the fourth of five swing-state republicans to back mcconnell's strategy. "we should honor justice scalia's legacy, and we should put off a decision on his replacement until the newly-elected president can make his or her choice," toomey said in a statement. sen. rob portman, an ohio republican up for re-election this year, also said monday he thought the future president should nominate scalia's replacement. "whether the next president is a republican or democrat, i will judge any nominee on the merits, as i always have," portman said in a statement.

washington digs in for supreme court fight

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

42.0

8.0

7099.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

517.0

0.0

128.0

0.0

53.0

22.0

7.0

24.0

7.0

14.0

13.0

31.0

39.0

46.0

523.0

128.0

53.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in a wide-ranging discussion, trump also said he disapproved of russian president vladimir putin's actions in eastern ukraine, called for a renegotiation of the paris climate accord, and said he would dismantle most of the dodd-frank financial regulations if he is elected president. the presumptive republican nominee declined to share details of his plans to deal with north korea, but a meeting with kim would mark a major shift in u.s. policy towards the isolated nation. "i would speak to him, i would have no problem speaking to him," trump said of kim. "at the same time i would put a lot of pressure on china because economically we have tremendous power over china," he said in the half-hour interview at his trump tower office in manhattan. china is pyongyang's only major diplomatic and economic supporter. trump said the united states is treated unfairly in the paris climate accord, which prescribes reductions in carbon emissions by more than 170 countries. a renegotiation of the pact would be a major setback for what was hailed as the first truly global climate accord, committing both rich and poor nations to reining in the rise in greenhouse gas emissions blamed for warming the planet. turning to the economy, trump said he planned to release a detailed policy platform in two weeks. he said it would dismantle nearly all of dodd-frank, a package of financial reforms put in place after the 2007-2008 financial crisis. "i would say it'll be close to a dismantling of dodd-frank. dodd-frank is a very negative force, which has developed a very bad name," trump said. the new york billionaire also said he perceived a dangerous financial bubble within the tech startup industry. he said tech companies were attaining high valuations without ever making money. trump also said he eventually wants a republican to head the u.s. federal reserve, but said he is "not an enemy" of current chair janet yellen. "i'm not a person that thinks janet yellen is doing a bad job. i happen to be a low-interest rate person unless inflation rears its ugly head, which can happen at some point," he said, adding that inflation "doesn't seem like it's happening any time soon."

trump willing to meet n.korea's kim, wants to renegotiate paris climate accord

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

78.0

8.0

2189.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

180.0

0.0

34.0

0.0

10.0

5.0

3.0

7.0

4.0

6.0

4.0

14.0

13.0

16.0

187.0

34.0

10.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on the one hand, i find it weird that george stephanopoulos<u+00a0>donated $75,000 to the clinton foundation. he should have known how it would look. on the other hand, look is really the operative word there. it's not as if stephanopoulos's ties to the clintons were some kind of closely guarded secret: stephanopoulos worked on bill clinton's 1992 campaign for president. he was communications director in clinton's white house. the sudden realization that stephanopoulos might be, in his heart of hearts, sympathetic toward the clintons is a bit odd. it's easier to see what's going on here when you realize stephanopoulos wasn't the only media figure to donate to the clinton foundation. dylan byers reports that the hyper-conservative newsmax gave more than a million dollars. so did james murdoch <u+2014> yes, he's one of those murdochs <u+2014> and the news corporation foundation, the murdoch family's philanthropy, threw in at least another $500,000. but no one much cares about those donations because no one really thinks newsmax or fox news are going to end up biased toward the clintons. they care about stephanopoulos's donation because they think stephanopoulos is<u+00a0>already biased toward the clintons, and this just proves it. but the attacks on stephanopoulos are getting the possible scandal almost exactly backward. stephanopoulos, murdoch, newsmax, and all the other clinton donors weren't donating to the clinton foundation because they're biased toward the clintons; they were donating to the clinton foundation because they want the clintons to be biased toward them. after all, if you're a powerful media figure trying to help out the clintons on the sly, the last thing you want to do is publicly donate $75,000 to them so everyone thinks you're in their pocket. but if you're a powerful media figure <u+2014> or a giant corporation <u+2014> who wants to keep good relations with the clintons, maybe you do want to make that donation. bill clinton, after all, was watching those donations carefully, and he was grateful to the people and institutions that stepped up to support a project he cared about. it's hard to remember now, but clinton managed, for a moment, to depoliticize his foundation pretty effectively. at the time stephanopoulos made his contribution, supporting clinton's charity was almost as bipartisan as supporting<u+00a0>simpson-bowles. this was a moment when<u+00a0>mitt romney and<u+00a0>donald trump were also supporting the clinton foundation, after all. but that speaks to the deeper corruption of the clinton foundation, which became, to all appearances, a way for pretty much anyone to buy some goodwill with the clintons. look at the other names on byers's list of media or media-related companies that donated to the clinton foundation: carlos slim, thomson reuters, bloomberg l.p., time warner, aol, hbo, twitter, google. these titans and institutions weren't donating to clinton foundation just because they liked the clintons <u+2014> they were donating to the clinton foundation because they wanted the clintons to like them. which is all to say that while it was a mistake for stephanopoulos to donate to the clinton foundation, it didn't change much: he's either biased toward the clintons in a way that affects his coverage, or he isn't, and that would have been true with or without his contribution. the more worrying question is whether the clintons are biased toward the people and companies who give millions of dollars to their foundation.

the attacks on george stephanopoulos are getting the problem backward

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

69.0

8.0

3452.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

211.0

2.0

0.0

84.0

0.0

35.0

2.0

6.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

3.0

15.0

10.0

21.0

212.0

86.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

chris wallace has got his work cut out for him. the fox news anchor has a rare opportunity as the moderator of tonight<u+2019>s third and final debate here in las vegas. but it comes at an especially tumultuous time in the campaign. i have no doubt about wallace<u+2019>s ability to ask fair, probing questions of both donald trump and hillary clinton. well before i came to fox, i believed that he was one of the toughest interviewers in the business. he has a wealth of experience to draw upon, including his previous stints at nbc and abc, going back to his coverage of the reagan white house. third debates usually matter less than the first two. the candidates have usually thrown their best stuff at each other and wind up recycling many of their attacks. but this is not most campaigns. wallace told me after he became the first fox journalist tapped to moderate a general-election debate that he<u+2019>d have to wait in writing most of the questions to see what was covered in the first two faceoffs. turns out a whole lot has happened since st. louis. the final encounter comes as trump is denying allegations of sexual misconduct by nine women, and whether they are telling the truth or not, this changes the environment more drastically than trump merely boasting about groping women on a tape he has dismissed as locker-room talk. and trump has been increasingly at war with paul ryan, talking and tweeting about voter fraud, and accusing the media of rigging the election. the debate also comes as a near-daily drip of disclosures from wikileaks <u+2013> and newly released fbi files from her email investigation -- causes more damage to the clinton campaign. this goes beyond embarrassing comments and coziness with journalists to collusion with the state department (including talk of a quid pro quo in exchange for changing the secret designation for some of the emails sent from clinton<u+2019>s private server). these stories hang like a shadow over the las vegas strip. but while i assume that wallace will deal with those stories fairly early, he also has the responsibility of tackling trade, terrorism, taxes and other issues that affect hundreds of millions of americans. these subjects are too important to get short shrift in favor of the more scandalous and salacious stuff. this is the last time for trump and clinton to make their case before a mass audience when it comes to persuading voters, but also in attacking their opponents and fending off the broadsides that come their way. beyond the zingers and tough exchanges, the debates always come down to which candidate can make more americans feel comfortable with the prospect of him or her siting in the oval office and acting as their champion. the polls show that questionable temperament is trump<u+2019>s greatest liability and dishonesty is clinton<u+2019>s biggest albatross. no matter what he does, if the past is any indication, wallace will draw criticism from partisans on both sides. but as he told me, he is there to facilitate a debate between two people, one of whom will be the next president. chris would be perfectly satisfied if no one is talking about him after las vegas. 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.

fight night in las vegas: high stakes for trump, clinton and chris wallace

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

74.0

8.0

3373.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

243.0

0.0

76.0

0.0

24.0

10.0

11.0

7.0

9.0

5.0

9.0

4.0

19.0

22.0

27.0

249.0

76.0

24.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) on tuesday, students went to classes as they usually do. football players intended to take the field in preparation for their game against brigham young university on saturday. but something was very different at the university of missouri campus. students on tuesday woke up to what protesters call a small but important victory: a weeks-long protest movement that ousted both the university president and the school's chancellor. african-american students at missouri have long complained of a mealy-mouthed response by school leaders in dealing with racism on the overwhelmingly white columbia campus. black student leaders have conveyed their displeasure over students openly using racial slurs and other incidents. "this is just a beginning in dismantling systems of oppression in higher education, specifically the um system," said marshall allen, a member of the protest group concerned student 1950. the speed of wolfe's resignation shocked many. as late as sunday, wolfe didn't sound like a man who planned to leave his job, putting out a statement expressing a desire to have an "ongoing dialogue to address these very complex, societal issues." but the tide had already turned against him saturday night, when about 30 black members of the missouri tigers football team declared in a tweet that they wouldn't play until wolfe was gone. by sunday, more members of the team, black and white, and head coach gary pinkel publicly backed the players, and the media started paying attention. by monday morning, student groups were calling for walkouts and some faculty offered protesting students their support. the calls for his resignation grew louder. so wolfe -- who had presided over the university system, which includes the main university of missouri campus in columbia, along with the university of missouri-st. louis, university of missouri-kansas city and missouri university of science and technology -- stepped down, saying he took "full responsibility for the inaction that has occurred" and urged the university community to listen to each other's problems. "it is my belief we stopped listening to each other; we didn't respond or react," he said. "use my resignation to heal and start talking again." students, faculty and staff converged on the carnahan quad after wolfe's announcement. there, they linked arms and swayed side to side, singing, "we shall overcome." though the protesting students and some faculty say racial problems on campus go back decades, the current crisis took flight back in september, when student government president payton head took to facebook to complain about bigotry and anti-homosexual and anti-transgender attitudes at the school after people riding in the back of a pickup truck screamed racial slurs at him. "for those of you who wonder why i'm always talking about the importance of inclusion and respect, it's because i've experienced moments like this multiple times at this university, making me not feel included here," he wrote. in early october, a drunken white student disrupted the legion of black collegians, an african-american student group, while the group prepped for homecoming and used a racial slur when he was asked to leave. later that month, concerned student 1950 -- named for the year african-american students were first admitted to the university -- issued a list of demands, including an apology from wolfe, his removal from office and a more comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum overseen by minority students and faculty. l'damian washington, a former wide receiver on the football team, said that he was happy the team was able to add leverage to butler's hunger strike and that the protest wasn't just about missouri or being black. it was about discrimination in all forms everywhere, he said. "only a minority knows what it feels like to be a minority on campus," he said. it's difficult to put yourself in others' shoes, he said, explaining that even though he and butler are black, his experience -- as a football player -- on campus was different from butler's. a statement from head coach pinkel and missouri athletic director mack rhoades, released after wolfe's announcement, said football activities would resume tuesday. the two men addressed the media monday afternoon. "there's no playbook. there's no script for what all of us have been dealing with. and i think, certainly, it's been also a great learning experience for everyone involved," said rhoades. "as we move forward, it's paramount as a campus and a community that this not divide us, but rather bring us together to listen, to grow, to understand and to create positive change," the athletic director said. if the tigers had failed to take the field saturday against the brigham young university cougars at kansas city's arrowhead stadium, the home of the nfl's chiefs, the team would have been forced to pay a cancellation fee of $1 million, according to a copy of the contract published in the kansas city star earlier this year. "our team's excited about getting going again and playing, and we're looking forward to our game against byu this weekend," pinkel told reporters, saying he got involved because he supports his players and because butler's life was "on the line." "my support of my players had nothing to do with anyone losing their job. with something like this, football became secondary," pinkel said. "i just know my players were suffering and they felt awful, and again, i'm like their dad, and i'm going to help them in any way i can." the university of missouri's columbia campus has a population of 35,000 students. the undergraduate student body is about 79% white, while african-americans make up roughly 8% of undergraduates. the school's faculty is also more 70% white with black representation of just over 3%, according to the university.

university of missouri protests: 'just a beginning'

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

51.0

8.0

5879.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

419.0

0.0

109.0

1.0

0.0

56.0

9.0

20.0

7.0

10.0

12.0

4.0

24.0

25.0

40.0

427.0

109.0

57.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as many have already observed, one of the big questions that will help decide whether hillary clinton wins the white house next year is this: can clinton turn out the coalition that helped power barack obama<u+2019>s 2008 and 2012 wins at the same levels that the president did? a new poll by veteran democratic pollster stan greenberg, to be released later this morning, illustrates the challenge clinton faces. the new poll, which was commissioned by women<u+2019>s voices women vote action fund and conducted by greenberg quinlan rosner, shows that members of the rising american electorate <u+2014> minorities, millennials, and single women <u+2014> are significantly less tuned in to next year<u+2019>s election than gop-aligned voter groups are. the poll has some good news for democrats. the survey, which was taken in four key battleground states <u+2014> colorado, florida, ohio, and wisconsin <u+2014> suggests that in those states, the demographics do favor dems. that<u+2019>s because the poll finds that rae voter groups <u+2014> who helped drive obama<u+2019>s wins <u+2014> now make up a <u+201c>majority or near majority of the vote<u+201d> in all those states. the poll also finds dems leading in senate races in two of those states and tied in two others. but members of the rae are insufficiently engaged in next year<u+2019>s election when compared to republican-aligned voter groups: unmarried women, minorities, and particularly millennials are less interested in next year<u+2019>s voting than seniors, conservatives, and white non-college men are. non-college women <u+2014> a group the clinton camp is reportedly eyeing as a way to expand on the obama coalition <u+2014> are also less interested. <u+201c>unmarried women are a key dynamic in american politics,<u+201d> page gardner, the president of women<u+2019>s voices women vote action fund, tells me. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s clear that the party or candidate who can increase turnout of unmarried women and the other segments of the rising american electorate will be well-positioned for victory in 2016.<u+201d> now, obviously there is a very long way to go, and plenty of time for these voter groups to get more engaged. if clinton wins the democratic nomination, and the prospect of electing the first female president seems increasingly within reach, you could see engagement kicking in much more substantially. (it will be interesting to see how non-college, unmarried, minority and millennial women respond.) but greenberg<u+2019>s pollsters are sounding the alarm now, warning that democrats need to take more steps to tailor their message towards boosting the interest level among these voters. as stan greenberg outlines in his new book, america ascendant, the key to engaging these voters is two-fold. it isn<u+2019>t enough to simply outline bold economic policies to deal with college affordability, child care (universal pre-k), workplace flexibility (paid family and sick leave), and so forth, though those things are crucial. what<u+2019>s also required to engage these groups, greenberg argues, is a reform agenda geared to reducing the influence of the wealthy, the lobbyists, and the special interests over our politics. today<u+2019>s new poll suggests the same. the basic problem outlined by greenberg (and noted by other dem pollsters) is that, even if democratic economic policies are broadly popular, this isn<u+2019>t enough on its own, because many americans don<u+2019>t believe government can or will actually deliver on those policies. greenberg writes: <u+201c>when voters hear the reform narrative first, they are dramatically more open to the middle-class economic narrative that calls for government activism in response to america<u+2019>s problems.<u+201d> thus, it<u+2019>s not an accident that clinton, in addition to embracing a robust economic agenda, has also stressed campaign finance and voting access reform. her campaign knows engaging these voter groups on obama-like levels is crucial to her white house hopes, and seems to share in greenberg<u+2019>s analysis. * it<u+2019>s on!!! ted cruz versus marco rubio: bloomberg reports that ted cruz is carefully escalating the attacks on marco rubio, now that both are roughly tied in national polls. cruz is making the case that he is a real conservative, while rubio is competing in the <u+201c>moderate<u+201d> lane. but: as i noted on friday, the gop race could shape up as a battle between cuban-americans over who is more anti-<u+201c>amnesty.<u+201d> * are dems broadening the senate map? politico takes a look at the senate map and finds signs that democrats may be putting unexpected states in play: but dem chances of winning in places like north carolina and indiana may not be as great as expected. still, dems only have to flip four seats out of the above seven if they win the white house. * a big push for automatic voter registration: the new york times reports that a group called ivote, which is headed by former aides to barack obama and bill clinton, is pushing a national bill that would require states to make voter registration automatic with the issue of driver<u+2019>s licenses. that<u+2019>s not going anywhere. but: it<u+2019>s another reminder of the long-term importance for democrats of regaining ground on the level of the states. * americans don<u+2019>t think government works for them: a los angeles times poll released over the weekend showed a fascinating disconnect: americans say by roughly 60-40 that <u+201c>unfairness in the economic system that favors the wealthy<u+201d> is a bigger problem than <u+201c>over-regulation of the free market that interferes with growth.<u+201d> but only one in 10 say the federal government <u+201c>increases opportunities for people like me,<u+201d> while half say government <u+201c>gets in the way.<u+201d> this <u+2014> majorities see an unfair economy, but most don<u+2019>t believe government can do anything about it for them <u+2014> perhaps confirms the problem laid out in the lead item. (though generic <u+201c>government<u+201d> always polls badly.) * a deep dive into hillary<u+2019>s emails:<u+00a0> hillary clinton has claimed that <u+201c>90 to 95 percent<u+201d> of her work related emails are <u+201c>in the state department system.<u+201d> glenn kessler does a very deep dive into the controversy over this statement and what is really true and what isn<u+2019>t, concluding that it is <u+201c>not unreasonable<u+201d> for her to claim that most those emails might be in the state department<u+2019>s system, but that it is wrong for her to definitively declare this to be so. the upshot is that these emails were sent over state department servers, because they were sent to other state employees with .gov accounts, but the department has not made any official determination of how many of them have been captured. * why is mortality rising among whites? with a new paper showing rising mortality rates among middle aged whites, paul krugman knocks down the conservative explanation that faults the left for eroding traditional values: krugman also suggests that many of these americans may be feeling betrayed by the american dream, though he concedes economic explanations may not account for what<u+2019>s happening. * and we<u+2019>ve hit another grim climate milestone: nothing to see here, folks: which gives me another excuse to link to my new feature on the current state of gop climate skepticism.

here<u+2019>s hillary clinton<u+2019>s big 2016 challenge, in one chart

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

57.0

8.0

7016.0

0.0

3.0

4.0

0.0

467.0

1.0

0.0

112.0

0.0

52.0

13.0

18.0

6.0

12.0

17.0

15.0

10.0

34.0

28.0

51.0

471.0

113.0

52.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the cellphone video shows zambrano-montes, a mexican national, running away from cops after allegedly throwing rocks at police officers and cars, according to the new york times. at one point, zambrano-montes turns around, and police open fire, killing him. investigators said police shot at the unarmed man 17 times, hitting him five to six times. police arrested zambrano-montes for assaulting an officer in january 2014, according to the times. police said he had thrown objects at them and tried to grab an officer's gun. he pleaded guilty in june. family members told the times that zambrano-montes was unemployed in recent months. they said he was increasingly depressed and disoriented after he fell from a ladder at an apple orchard and broke both his wrists. in january, he was caught in a house fire that destroyed his belongings. "what i know is that he was alone, that his wife had left him, that he couldn't see his daughters," pedro farias, his 32-year-old cousin, told the times. "i don't know what his reasons were" for throwing rocks at police, "but i know all of this affected him." among the similarities between ferguson, missouri, and pasco are racial disparities between the city's residents and local government. pasco is nearly 56 percent hispanic, but its local government isn't representative of the city's racial makeup, the new york times reported: the same was true in ferguson following the august 9 police shooting of michael brown. the st. louis suburb is 67 percent black, but at the time of the brown shooting the mayor and police chief were white, just one of six city council members was black, zero school board members were black, and only three out of 53 commissioned police officers were black, according to the los angeles times. the zambrano-montes shooting fanned tensions between the local hispanic community and city government. hundreds of protesters marched in the week following zambrano-montes' death, with some voicing concerns that their own children could be killed by police. in response, the pasco police department claimed it's working to recruit more hispanic officers. similar protests, now under the banner of "black lives matter," came about following several police killings of black boys and men in 2014. in ferguson, former police officer darren wilson fatally shot brown, an unarmed 18-year-old. in ohio, police killed 22-year-old john crawford and 12-year-old tamir rice in two separate shootings after mistaking toy guns for actual weapons. in new york city, nypd officer daniel pantaleo killed eric garner by putting the unarmed 43-year-old black man in a chokehold. the most reliable data on police shootings, gathered by the fbi through local and state agencies, is extremely limited <u+2014> to the point that some criminal justice experts disavow analyzing it altogether <u+2014> since it's based on voluntary self-reporting. but the data is especially limited for hispanic victims of police shootings. samuel walker, a retired criminal justice professor from the university of nebraska at omaha, said there's no research on how many hispanic victims are left out of police shooting data, but he has reason to believe they're undercounted. walker pointed out that other parts of the criminal justice system sometimes classify hispanic people as white, likely overestimating the number of non-hispanic white people shot and killed by police and underestimating hispanic victims. in many cases, determinations of race and ethnicity are made by low-level officials, potentially leading to even more errors based on perceptions and prejudices regarding race. florida, the state with the third largest hispanic population, is entirely excluded from the fbi's national tally of police shootings, further skewing the numbers. "in short," walker wrote in an email, "we have no reliable data on hispanic/latino people shot and killed by the police." two supreme court decisions in the 1980s, tennessee vs. garner and<u+00a0>graham v. connor, set the legal framework for determining when deadly force by cops is reasonable. constitutionally, "police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances," david klinger, a university of missouri-st. louis professor who studies law enforcement officers' use of force, said in august. the first circumstance is "to protect their life or the life of another innocent party" <u+2014> referred to as the "defense-of-life" standard by police departments. the second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect poses a dangerous threat to others. the logic behind the second circumstance, klinger explained, comes from tennessee vs. garner. that case involved a pair of police officers who shot a 15-year-old boy as he fled from a burglary. (he'd stolen $10 and a purse from a house.) the court ruled that cops couldn't shoot every felon who tried to escape. but, as klinger said, "they basically say that the job of a cop is to protect people from violence, and if you've got a violent person who's fleeing, you can shoot them to stop their flight." what matters is the officer's "objectively reasonable" belief that there is a threat the key to both of the legal standards <u+2014> defense-of-life and stopping a fleeing violent felon <u+2014> is that it doesn't matter whether there is an actual threat when force is used. instead, what matters is the officer's "objectively reasonable" belief that there is a threat. that standard comes from the other supreme court case that guides use-of-force decisions: graham v. connor. this was a civil lawsuit brought by a man who survived his encounter with police officers, but was treated roughly, had his face shoved into the hood of a car, and broke his foot <u+2014> all while suffering a diabetic attack. the court didn't rule on whether the officers' <u+00a0>actions had been justified, but said police couldn't justify their conduct solely based on whether their intentions were good. they had to demonstrate that their actions were "objectively reasonable," given the circumstances and compared to what other police officers might do. what's "objectively reasonable" changes as the circumstances change. "one can't just say, 'because i could use deadly force 10 seconds ago, that means i can use deadly force again now,'" walter katz, a california attorney who specializes in oversight of law enforcement agencies, said in august. in the case of zambrano-montes, the legal questions are whether he was actually fleeing after he turned around and whether he posed an imminent threat to the officers or others, which police could substantiate if he was throwing rocks at officers as they allege.

police shooting of antonio zambrano-montes in washington state could be the next ferguson

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

89.0

8.0

6688.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

477.0

1.0

0.0

138.0

0.0

41.0

25.0

11.0

10.0

39.0

3.0

17.0

5.0

22.0

40.0

30.0

483.0

139.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a nasty feud that escalated thursday between donald trump and his chief republican rival over their wives set off a new wave of alarm among establishment republicans, who fear that the gop front-runner would drive away female voters in a general-election fight with likely democratic nominee hillary clinton. trump<u+2019>s gender problem flared again this week as he and sen. ted cruz of texas traded insults while cruz<u+2019>s wife, heidi, became the target of vitriol on social media from trump and his supporters. at one point, the real estate mogul retweeted an unflattering image contrasting heidi cruz<u+2019>s appearance with his wife, melania, a retired model. <u+201c>the images are worth a thousand words,<u+201d> read the caption on the photo that trump retweeted to his 7.2 million followers. that message and others have prompted an outcry among republicans and democrats alike, while cruz said thursday that <u+201c>real men don<u+2019>t bully women.<u+201d> <u+201c>our spouses and our children are off-bounds,<u+201d> cruz told reporters while campaigning in dane, wis. <u+201c>it is not acceptable for a big, loud new york bully to attack my wife. it is not acceptable for him to make insults, to send nasty tweets.<u+201d> the altercation underscores the striking nastiness of the gop primary race and the uncomfortable gender politics surrounding trump, who has a long history of making incendiary remarks about women and their appearance. trump has shown little reluctance in attacking his female rivals <u+2014> or some of his rivals<u+2019> spouses <u+2014> in ways that strike many as sexist or demeaning, and many fear that the insults are a harbinger of the gutter rhetoric to come if he faces clinton in november. trump has called clinton <u+201c>very shrill,<u+201d> belittles her for a lack of stamina and energy, and late last year jabbed her and husband, bill clinton, for the latter<u+2019>s marital indiscretions while he was president. in another instance, trump said hillary clinton <u+201c>got schlonged<u+201d> in her 2008 primary fight against then-sen. barack obama. <u+201c>i have some very real concerns should he become the nominee. i think it would be catastrophic for our party,<u+201d> said gop strategist katie packer, who leads the our principles pac, an anti-trump super pac. <u+201c>half of the reason why i<u+2019>m fighting so hard to stop donald trump is because i think he<u+2019>s a walking, talking stereotype of a sexist misogynistic pig.<u+201d> polling shows trump sliding among women in recent months, hurting the gop<u+2019>s already shaky position with that demographic. trump<u+2019>s favorability numbers have decreased 10 points among women nationwide since november, to 23 percent, while his unfavorable number among women has jumped to 75 percent from 64 percent, according to a washington post-abc news poll taken this month. the changes among men have been less pronounced, with 37<u+00a0>percent now favorable and 59<u+00a0>percent unfavorable. in the states that have voted so far, trump received an average of 41<u+00a0>percent of the male vote and 34<u+00a0>percent of the female vote. the fight with cruz began earlier this week when make america awesome, an anti-trump super pac, circulated ads on facebook featuring a risque photograph of melania trump from a 15-year-old british gq photo shoot. it was part of a concerted push to diminish the billionaire among values voters in utah. [the gop <u+2014> and its big funders <u+2014> scramble to insulate congress from trump] <u+201c>meet melania trump. your next first lady. or, you could support ted cruz on tuesday,<u+201d> the ad read. trump, who went on to lose the utah caucuses, excoriated cruz and issued a threat via twitter: <u+201c>be careful, lyin<u+2019> ted, or i will spill the beans on your wife!<u+201d> trump <u+2014> who wrongly alleges that cruz was behind the ad <u+2014> defended the tweet wednesday on fox business network, saying it was a <u+201c>disgraceful<u+201d> and <u+201c>terrible thing<u+201d> that demeaned his wife, <u+201c>a<u+00a0>very, very successful model.<u+201d> then came wednesday night, when trump retweeted the unflattering image of heidi cruz, setting off a fresh series of condemnations. to trump<u+2019>s critics, the attacks on cruz are just the latest in a troubling pattern of reducing women to their physical appearance and disparaging them in exceptionally personal ways. exhibit a is the long-running on-again, off-again feud with fox news anchor megyn kelly, whom trump called <u+201c>crazy<u+201d> and <u+201c>average in so many ways<u+201d> in a series of tweets last week. fox news said the name-calling is part of a <u+201c>sick obsession<u+201d> that <u+201c>is beneath the dignity of a presidential candidate.<u+201d> sen. lindsey o. graham (r-s.c.), a former presidential candidate and an outspoken critic of trump, said thursday on msnbc, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m worried that young women think that the standard-bearer of the republican party believes that megyn kelly is a bimbo.<u+201d> gop strategists fear that trump clinching the nomination could present an opportunity for democrats, who are poised to choose the first female presidential nominee and who in past elections have accused republicans of waging a <u+201c>war on women<u+201d> over access to affordable women<u+2019>s health care, abortion rights and pay equity. trump<u+2019>s treatment and views of women have been a central issue throughout his presidential campaign. at the first gop debate, in august, trump berated kelly for asking him about past insults of women and singled out actress rosie o<u+2019>donnell as the specific woman he referred to as a <u+201c>fat pig.<u+201d> a month later, trump criticized the appearance of rival carly fiorina, the only woman who sought the gop nomination. <u+201c>look at that face,<u+201d> he told rolling stone magazine. <u+201c>can you imagine that, the face of our next president?<u+201d> marcy stech, communications director at emily<u+2019>s list, which has endorsed clinton, said <u+201c>the republican base might find this amusing, but the reality is that these are just the kinds of misogynistic and outrageous comments that will cause lasting damage with women voters.<u+201d> she added: <u+201c>we<u+2019>ll have plenty of opportunities to remind women voters of this moment even after today<u+2019>s news cycle has blown over.<u+201d> packer said trump<u+2019>s standing with female voters could also endanger the gop<u+2019>s hold on the senate or even the house. at the same time, packer said, she thinks the anti-trump movement could prevent the party from being branded by trump alone. <u+201c>hillary clinton is very, very vulnerable among this group of women that she needs to have as her base: independent women, and soft republican women. she<u+2019>s very vulnerable with them today,<u+201d> packer said. <u+201c>should we nominate donald trump, they will flock to her because they see him as someone who<u+2019>s repulsive. and it<u+2019>s not just about so-called <u+2018>women<u+2019>s issues,<u+2019> it<u+2019>s about how he values women and about how he<u+2019>s willing to make women feel to benefit himself.<u+201d> for months trump has defended himself against accusations of being offensive to women, saying that he hits all his challengers equally. he labeled former florida governor jeb bush <u+201c>low energy<u+201d> and sought to diminish sen. marco rubio of florida with the nickname <u+201c>little marco.<u+201d> <u+201c>i<u+2019>d hit you the same way,<u+201d> trump told nbc<u+2019>s chuck todd in february when pressed on the issue. <u+201c>i mean, you are the perfect one to ask that question <u+2014> you have been, you know, under fire from me for a long time, and you are far from a woman.<u+201d> <u+201c>i think there are some women <u+2014> there<u+2019>s one sitting right over there in the beautiful red dress. you see that woman over there? i have great respect for that woman over there,<u+201d> he said, as todd clarified to viewers that trump was talking about veteran reporter andrea mitchell. <u+201c>i have great respect for that woman,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>and i don<u+2019>t know that she knows i<u+2019>m talking about her. i<u+2019>m talking about you. i would never do that to you.<u+201d> emily guskin, abby phillip and david weigel contributed to this report.

donald trump can<u+2019>t stop saying nasty things about women. it could cost him.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

16.0

75.0

8.0

7653.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

502.0

1.0

0.0

132.0

1.0

0.0

49.0

34.0

16.0

28.0

10.0

19.0

13.0

25.0

50.0

43.0

507.0

133.0

50.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

i<u+2019>m not among those republicans who have <u+201c>evolved<u+201d> on the issue of gay rights. i didn<u+2019>t need to. i<u+2019>ve always been attracted to the gop message of more freedom and less government, but thought it hypocritical and counter to the core of our philosophy that republicans would not apply those tenets to gay rights. but of course i was often the black sheep in campaign meetings during the 1990s and 2000s. there goes mckinnon again. taking up for the gays. although <u+201c>gay<u+201d> wasn<u+2019>t the word that was used back then. politically, while it once helped political parties to use gay rights to divide and score political points (and the gop didn<u+2019>t have a monopoly on the issue; remember it was bill clinton who signed the defense of marriage act), the wedge issue has now lost its edge, even, i would argue, in the 2016 republican presidential primary. no republican can win the nomination without the support of the business community. and big business is now at odds with the social conservative faction of the republican party over gay and transgender equality <u+2014> and big business is winning. look at what<u+2019>s happened in four states dominated by the gop in the past year. weeks before the super bowl kickoff in 2014, the arizona legislature passed a bill allowing businesses to refuse service to gay customers. this <u+201c>religious freedom<u+201d> measure made it ok for business owners to kick customers out of their establishments if they opposed homosexuality on religious grounds. scores of corporate titans in the travel and tourism industry, together with the nfl, opposed the bill. gov. jan brewer vetoed it. in indiana this march, lawmakers tried to pass similar legislation, followed by a hell-hath-no-fury response led by eli lilly, salesforce and angie<u+2019>s list, which canceled a $40 million project planned for indianapolis. marriott<u+2019>s ceo said the legislation was <u+201c>pure idiocy from a business perspective.<u+201d> gov. mike pence modified the bill, but the damage was done. (the state has since hired a global pr firm to resuscitate its image following the brouhaha.) in arkansas, same story. seeing the firestorm that occurred in indiana, republican gov. asa hutchinson didn<u+2019>t sign the original bill that hit his desk after calls for him to veto it came from his own son, and from arkansas-based wal-mart, which said the bill ran counter to the company<u+2019>s values. in the end, the governor signed a less toxic, less controversial bill. and this week, texas became the latest to join the fray. the lone star state just wrapped its legislative session, which included two <u+201c>religious freedom<u+201d> constitutional amendments. learning from what happened in the above states, industry groups and major businesses went out pre-emptively <u+2014> let me say that again: pre-emptively <u+2014> before such bills made it too far in the legislature. the conservative state chamber of commerce, the texas association of business, took the lead. the amendments <u+201c>would devastate economic development, tourism and the convention business,<u+201d> said bill hammond, tab<u+2019>s ceo. <u+201c>one has to look no further than indiana to realize what a detriment this would be, and how hard it would be to sell texas to the rest of the country. the super bowl [in houston in 2017], the final four, all those things would be at risk in texas if this were to become part of our constitution.<u+201d> more than 250 texas companies <u+2014> american airlines, dell, texas instruments, dow chemical, the dallas mavericks <u+2014> went on record with a general pledge in support of treating gay and transgender texans fairly and equally under the law <u+2014> and that welcoming and inclusive communities are essential to their bottom line. both amendments in the texas legislature died a quick death. so: four states, same story and same result. if the <u+201c>religious freedom<u+201d> strategy can<u+2019>t work in texas <u+2014> the bastion of conservatism and beacon for business <u+2014> where can it work? it<u+2019>s not news this country has come a long way on lgbt rights. an evolution, a massive one, has taken place. culturally, we<u+2019>ve gone from taboo to tolerance, and in some cities, total embrace. elections are always about the future, never about the past. and so my advice to gop candidates is to recognize that since our society has largely moved on, and business has moved on, so should the party of abraham lincoln, who fought a civil war over civil rights. discrimination is now simply bad for the bottom line and bad for any brand, whether a company<u+2019>s or a state<u+2019>s. when it comes to recruitment and retention, the millennial generation, which will be 75 percent of the workforce by 2030, doesn<u+2019>t have much tolerance for anti-gay anything. in fact, it<u+2019>s become somewhat of a litmus test. 73 percent of millennials support lgbt nondiscrimination, according to public religion research institute. surely, they use it as one criterion when deciding where to work. most businesses now have their own internal nondiscrimination policies for lgbt employees, but they want to see their larger communities in which they operate adopt similar welcoming and inclusive policies. top talent is looking for both a great job and a great quality of life. to most folks, i would venture, that does not mean a city or state that looks the other way when discrimination happens. it<u+2019>s clear from the reaction of many of america<u+2019>s leading corporations, that big business wants to do the right thing for and by employees <u+2014> all of them. and most ceos of the fortune 500 are republicans. so, they are paving the way for more in our party to jump on board with gay rights. if it<u+2019>s good for business, it<u+2019>s generally good for the republican party. negative national headlines on religious freedom continue to fuel a negative image of the entire party. both in my private conversations with and in public (and private) polling, conservatives are moving ever closer to supporting full equity for lgbt americans. gallup<u+2019>s values and beliefs poll released last month showed a more than 20 percentage-point increase since 2001 in americans (63 percent) who believe <u+201c>gay and lesbian relations<u+201d> are <u+201c>morally acceptable<u+201d>. you don<u+2019>t get to a supermajority like that without republicans. even texas conservatives support protecting gay and transgender folks from employment discrimination. republicans, like the rest of americans, support nondiscrimination laws because most of us have gay family members, friends and co-workers and want to treat them as we would want to be treated. and having heard from moms and dads who want this great country to treat their gay child just like their straight child has been a powerful narrative. it really is all about family standing up for one another. most people believe equality under the law can and does work well alongside protecting religious freedom <u+2014> which must be and is protected, even cherished, in our constitution. shockingly, it<u+2019>s still legal in the united states of america, even as we may be on the brink of having marriage equality in all 50 states, to fire and evict gay and transgender folks <u+2014> and kick them out of a restaurant <u+2014> simply for being who they are. this is patently wrong and needs to be fixed. democrats and big business are at work fixing it, together. that would have been an odd pairing years ago. the gop position is untenable <u+2014> and out of step with one of its key constituencies. it<u+2019>s time to stand up to the social conservative wing and move into the future.

we republicans lost on gay rights. that<u+2019>s a good thing.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

15.0

55.0

8.0

7389.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

560.0

0.0

122.0

0.0

76.0

18.0

23.0

14.0

15.0

18.0

10.0

39.0

35.0

54.0

563.0

122.0

76.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington -- senate leaders announced tuesday that they've resolved a weeks-long standoff over a sex trafficking bill containing controversial anti-abortion language, clearing the way, at last, for u.s. attorney general nominee loretta lynch to get her confirmation vote. lynch has been waiting for more than five months for a confirmation vote. most recently, republican leaders tied the vote to passage of the trafficking bill. that bill has nothing to do with lynch, but as long as it wasn't moving, neither was lynch's confirmation. aides to sens. patty murray (d-wash.) and john cornyn (r-texas) have been working for weeks to break the impasse. as introduced, the bill would have collected fees from sex traffickers and put them into a new victims fund that would be subject to the hyde amendment, the federal provision that bars the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of rape and incest. democrats objected to the abortion language in general, but more so because the bill expanded the hyde amendment to include private funds. under the deal announced tuesday, the bill will create two funding streams. the first one flows from fines collected from sex traffickers, and would be used for survivor services excluding health care. this stream would not include hyde amendment restrictions. the second one would come from community health center funds that are already subject to the abortion limits. the deal lets both parties walk away with a solid talking point: democrats can celebrate that they prevented an expansion of hyde, while republicans can say they didn't cave on restricting abortion funds. "i<u+2019>m pleased that we were able to reach a deal that gets this done in a way that does not expand restrictions on women<u+2019>s health to non-taxpayer dollars or to new programs, and provides survivors with real dedicated funds for the support and services they need," murray said on the senate floor. a spokesman for senate majority leader mitch mcconnell (r-ky.) said he expects the senate to pass the sex trafficking bill on wednesday. from there, the senate will move to lynch's confirmation vote. mcconnell said the attorney general nominee should get a vote "in the next day or so." last week, president barack obama fumed that republicans have made lynch wait for so long, saying the delay is just "embarrassing." correction: this story previously misstated the nature of the survivor services that would benefit from the funding collected from sex trafficking fines under the legislation. those services would not include health care.

senate leaders announce deal on human trafficking bill, clearing path for loretta lynch vote

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

92.0

8.0

2571.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

137.0

0.0

45.0

0.0

17.0

10.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

5.0

16.0

19.0

141.0

45.0

17.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

while i understand this sentiment is coming from a place of concern, european jews should not leave out of fear and should push their leaders to defeat anti-semitism and radical islamist terrorism. that said, none of this is surprising. after all, we've recently witnessed murderous terrorist attacks on the jewish communities of copenhagen, denmark, and paris, attacks that have shaken an already fearful community to its core. each attack adds to the feelings of insecurity among european jews and adds more levels of necessary security. as a result of the intensified wave of anti-semitism and islamist terrorism, jews in europe are eschewing jewish identifying symbols and are afraid to attend prayers and to send their children to their jewish schools. this has led to an unprecedented desire to leave their home countries and flee to greater freedom and security. but seeing schools doubling as high-security facilities sends a message to our children -- who are the next generation of european jewry -- that their lives are in constant danger. of course, it is understandable and natural that the authorities choose to take heightened security measures to prevent further loss of life. but the fight must be taken to the perpetrators rather than allowing it to infringe further upon the everyday lives of the victims. if, in the words of european leaders, they would like the jews of europe to stay and not to emigrate, then they must find a way to return a semblance of normalcy to the everyday lives of jews across the continent. to defeat this bloody and belligerent strain of terrorism and the specter of radical islamism and jew-hatred, european authorities must be more proactive in hunting down terrorists before they act and not grant them a victory by further imposing restrictions on europe's jews. the threat is not country specific, so the response must be found in europe as a union. european nations need to immediately and urgently come together to form a pan-european authority to deal with anti-semitism and this new form of homegrown radical islamist terrorism, with significant resources tasked with finding concrete practical solutions. the first step that has to be taken is to bolster and improve intelligence-gathering and sharing across europe. the current system is neither efficient nor vigilant enough. many of the perpetrators of the recent massacres of jews were well-known to the police. many crossed borders, seemingly with little trouble, before and after they committed their bloody acts. police and law enforcement also need to be strengthened. this includes actively enforcing laws against incitement and anti-semitic speech and taking a firmer approach against those who promote hate and violence. enforcement authorities must enter and act within largely muslim areas where police might ordinarily be reluctant to enter additionally, new legislation to combat radical islamist terrorism and anti-semitism must be passed. the reality is that europe is dealing with a new threat using an infrastructure that was not built to deal with homegrown terrorists who run freely in europe and kill people seemingly at will. in short, european authorities have to change the current mode of action and move from a paradigm of almost pure defense onto the attack. our continent has known in the past how to deal with threats to our way of life, and as in the past, the best chance of victory is to be found in a continentwide unity of purpose. any weakness in a european-wide response to this new threat -- not just to jews, but also to the very essence that our union was built upon, like freedom of thought and speech -- will be exploited by the terrorists and their supporters. there are probably dozens of attacks at various stages of planning taking place in towns and cities across europe. it is not enough just to increase security at any possible target, because this policy alone is not working and cannot be a long term answer. it is time europe went on the offensive.

anti-semitism growing in europe

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

4013.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

281.0

0.0

63.0

1.0

0.0

54.0

18.0

14.0

7.0

29.0

9.0

13.0

7.0

20.0

30.0

27.0

286.0

63.0

55.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on march 23, 2010, president barack obama signed the patient protection and affordable care act, the 906-page health care reform law known as obamacare. it was, as a live microphone caught vice president joe biden exclaiming to his boss, a big deal, with biden memorably inserting an extra word for emphasis<u+2014>and for history<u+2014>between <u+201c>big<u+201d> and <u+201c>deal.<u+201d> obamacare would cover millions of the uninsured, a giant step toward the democratic dream of health care for all. it also included dozens of less prominent provisions to rein in the soaring cost and transform the dysfunctional delivery of american medicine. it was the kind of bfd that the most consequential presidencies are made of, even though it had squeaked through congress without any republican votes, and few americans truly understood what was in it. even fewer americans understood what was in the health care and education reconciliation act, the 55-page addendum that officially finalized obamacare. this was the strange legislative vehicle that democrats had jerry-rigged to drag reform around a republican filibuster. its substance was mostly an afterthought<u+2014>the new york times ran a dutiful story on page a16 after it passed<u+2014>but as obama noted when he signed it the next week at northern virginia community college, it included another bfd. <u+201c>what<u+2019>s gotten overlooked amid all the hoopla, all the drama of last week, is what<u+2019>s happened in education,<u+201d> he said. yes, education. tucked into the parliamentary maneuver that rescued his health care law was a similarly radical reform of the trillion-dollar student loan program. when biden<u+2019>s wife, jill, a professor at northern virginia, introduced obama that day, she called it <u+201c>another historic piece of legislation.<u+201d> the house republican leader, john boehner of ohio, complained that <u+201c>today, the president will sign not one, but two job-killing government takeovers.<u+201d> obamacare wasn<u+2019>t really a government takeover, but the student loan overhaul actually was; it yanked the program away from sallie mae and other private lenders that had raked in enormous fees without taking much risk. the bill then diverted the budget savings into a $36 billion expansion of pell grants for low-income undergraduates, plus an unheralded but extraordinary student-debt relief effort that is now quietly transferring the burden of college loans from struggling borrowers to taxpayers. it all added up to a revolution in how america finances higher education, completely overshadowed by the health care hoopla and drama. over the past seven years, americans have heard an awful lot about barack obama and his presidency, but the actual substance of his domestic policies and their impact on the country remain poorly understood. he has engineered quite a few quiet revolutions<u+2014>and some of his louder revolutions are shaking up the status quo in quiet ways. obama is often dinged for failing to deliver on the hope-and-change rhetoric that inspired so many voters during his ascent to the presidency. but a review of his record shows that the obama era has produced much more sweeping change than most of his supporters or detractors realize. it<u+2019>s true that obama failed to create the post-partisan political change he originally promised during his yes-we-can pursuit of the white house. washington remains as hyperpartisan and broken as ever. but he also promised dramatic policy change, vowing to reinvent america<u+2019>s approach to issues like health care, education, energy, climate and finance, and that promise he has kept. when you add up all the legislation from his frenetic first two years, when democrats controlled congress, and all the methodical executive actions from the past five years, after republicans blocked his legislative path, this has been a bfd of a presidency, a profound course correction engineered by relentless government activism. as a candidate, obama was often dismissed as a talker, a silver-tongued political savant with no real record of achievement. but ever since he took office during a raging economic crisis, he<u+2019>s turned out to be much more of a doer, an action-oriented policy grind who has often failed to communicate what he<u+2019>s done. what he<u+2019>s done is changing the way we produce and consume energy, the way doctors and hospitals treat us, the academic standards in our schools and the long-term fiscal trajectory of the nation. gays can now serve openly in the military, insurers can no longer deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions, credit card companies can no longer impose hidden fees and markets no longer believe the biggest banks are too big to fail. solar energy installations are up nearly 2,000 percent, and carbon emissions have dropped even though the economy is growing. even republicans like ted cruz and marco rubio, who hope to succeed obama and undo his achievements, have been complaining on the campaign trail that he<u+2019>s accomplished most of his agenda. <u+201c>the change is real,<u+201d> says ron klain, who served as biden<u+2019>s white house chief of staff, and later as obama<u+2019>s ebola czar. <u+201c>it would be nice if more people understood the change.<u+201d> in a conflict-obsessed media environment that is not exactly geared toward substantive policy analysis, obama<u+2019>s technocratic brand of change has tended to be more opaque than, say, donald trump<u+2019>s plan for a wall along the mexican border or bernie sanders<u+2019> promise of free college for all. at times, its complexity has camouflaged its ambition. at other times, its ambition hasn<u+2019>t lived up to obama<u+2019>s rhetoric; not everything has changed in the obama era. for example, he talked a big game about eliminating wasteful programs, but other than killing the f-22 fighter jet, an absurdly expensive presidential helicopter and a hopelessly captured bank regulatory agency called the office of thrift supervision, he hasn<u+2019>t done much of that. the most obvious thing obama hasn<u+2019>t done is usher in a new era of public enthusiasm for government action and the democratic party. he was reelected by a comfortable margin, but conservative republicans have taken back both houses of congress and made impressive gains in statehouses on his watch, riding a powerful wave of hostility to federal overreach. that political legacy could imperil some of obama<u+2019>s left-of-center policy legacy if a republican is elected to succeed him. it has already stymied gun control and immigration reform, while forcing obama to accept deep spending cuts he didn<u+2019>t want. but it<u+2019>s remarkable how often obama has gotten what he wanted, in many cases policies that democrats (and sometimes moderate republicans) have wanted for decades, and how often those policies have slipped under the radar.

the nation he built

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

19.0

8.0

6671.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

428.0

2.0

0.0

118.0

0.0

40.0

14.0

21.0

10.0

20.0

18.0

12.0

11.0

40.0

34.0

58.0

430.0

120.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president barack obama has pledged to appoint a replacement for supreme court justice antonin scalia, despite election-year opposition from republicans. scalia, 79, was found dead in his room the morning of feb. 13 while on a quail hunting trip at a west texas resort. he reportedly died in his sleep. tensions are rising over whether or not president obama should leave the appointment of scalia's replacement to his white house<u+00a0>successor. tessa dysart, a constitutional law professor at regent university, explains the complicated road ahead. meanwhile, the president's list of possible replacements for justice scalia has now been leaked to the media. it includes: srinivasan, 48, seems to be a popular choice at the moment.<u+00a0>he clerked for supreme court justice sandra day o'connor and has argued more than two dozen cases before the court as a deputy solicitor general. he was appointed unanimously to the d.c. appeals court.<u+00a0>when he was sworn into office, he placed his hand on bhagavad gita, a hindu holy book. if confirmed, would be the first hindu to serve on the high court. meanwhile, an npr article titled "does the supreme court need an evangelical justice?" raises the issue about the religious makeup of the court. a 2013 survey by the public religion research institute found that more than one in three (37 percent) u.s. adults say supreme court justices' religious beliefs shape their decisions on the bench "a lot." another 44 percent say religion influences justices just a little, while 15 percent said religious beliefs "have no influence." justice scalia, a devout catholic and a ronald reagan appointee, was one of the most conservative members of the bench and was known for his christian core.<u+00a0> his death brings the religious balance of the court into question. there are five roman catholics currently serving on the court (samuel alito, anthony kennedy, john roberts, sonia sotomayor, and clarence thomas) and three jews (stephen breyer, ruth bader ginsburg, and elena kagen). scalia's untimely death leaves conservatives without the 5-4 advantage they had on the court and has many wondering who will fill the void he leaves behind. with upcoming cases over abortion and religious liberty, the stakes are high. russell moore, president of the southern baptist ethics & religious liberty commission, acknowledged the gravity of scalia's loss and its timing. "his death comes at a time when so much hangs in the legal balance, especially on questions of religious freedom," moore told baptist press in written comments. "antonin scalia was more than a brilliant jurist," he said. "he was a man of conviction who stood, often alone, for the permanent things." so whether scalia is replaced by a jewish, catholic, or evangelical, etc., justice, many agree that scalia will be impossible to replace.

a hindu justice? why religion matters for the high 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

1.0

56.0

8.0

2836.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

221.0

1.0

0.0

57.0

0.0

19.0

6.0

12.0

3.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

24.0

14.0

31.0

228.0

58.0

19.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the u.s. supreme court on thursday handed the obama administration a major victory on health care, ruling 6-3 that nationwide subsidies called for in the affordable care act are legal. "congress passed the affordable care act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," the court's majority said in the opinion, which was written by chief justice john roberts. but they acknowledged that "petitioners' arguments about the plain meaning ... are strong." the majority opinion cited the law's "more than a few examples of inartful drafting," but added, "the context and structure of the act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase." roberts was joined by the court's liberal justices, ruth bader ginsburg, stephen breyer, sonia sotomayor and elena kagan, as well as by anthony kennedy. in his dissent, justice antonin scalia said: "we should start calling this law scotuscare," an apparent reference to the fact the supreme court has now saved the affordable care act twice. scalia called the majority's reading of the text "quite absurd, and the court's 21 pages of explanation make it no less so." as npr's nina totenberg reported in march, opponents of the law contended "that the text of the law does not authorize subsidies to make mandated insurance affordable in 34 states." at issue were six words in one section of the law. as nina pointed out: "those words stipulate that for people who cannot afford health coverage, subsidies are available through 'an exchange established by the state.' " she added: the court agreed thursday with the government's position. the decision comes three years after a bitterly divided high court upheld the affordable care act as constitutional by a 5-4 vote. president obama made a statement on the ruling late thursday morning, saying the affordable care act "is here to stay."

supreme court rules obamacare subsidies are legal

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

1910.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

108.0

0.0

44.0

0.0

14.0

6.0

7.0

3.0

2.0

5.0

4.0

1.0

18.0

7.0

24.0

112.0

44.0

14.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

on the day isis-related terrorists spread out across paris and killed more than one hundred people, barack obama claimed isis was <u+201c>contained.<u+201d> after the attacks, liberals actually tried to argue that the attacks in paris showed how successful barack obama had been because isis was having to lash out to get attention. yes, liberals actually argued this. earlier this year, while president obama still considered isis to be a junior varsity team, he said the greatest threat to humanity was global warming. at saturday night<u+2019>s democratic debate, bernie sanders reaffirmed that global warming was the greatest threat to humanity and was also the root cause of terrorism in the middle east. meanwhile, martin o<u+2019>malley said he still wanted to bring 60,000 syrian refugees into this country, though we now know some of those refugees were involved in the paris attack. the white house deputy national security advisor says<u+00a0>the importation of refugees will go ahead as planned. then there is hillary clinton. as john podhoretz<u+00a0>noted sunday, the former secretary of state<u+2019>s policy solutions amount to a jumble of contradictory platitudes: we must <u+201c>root out<u+201d> isis, she said, and implicitly criticized obama when she said it <u+201c>cannot be contained, it must be defeated.<u+201d> <u+00a0>at the same time, she said, <u+201c>it cannot be an american fight.<u+201d> however, <u+201c>american leadership is essential.<u+201d> and yet, she said, <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t think that the united states has the bulk of the responsibility.<u+201d> instead, and breathtakingly, she suggests the person who must take the lead is syria<u+2019>s dictator, himself responsible for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of his own people and the progenitor of the refugee crisis that is turning europe inside out: <u+201c>i really put that on [president bashar] assad and on the iraqis and on the region itself.<u+201d> these are children and we need grownups. the republican party rarely wins domestic policy elections. but when it comes to foreign policy, it turns out the american people want someone in the white house who is willing to kill bad guys while suffering no delusions. the democrats are infantile and delusional. they have reached a point where no evidence contrary to their world view will ever be allowed to pierce their bubble and get them to change their ways. barack obama and the democrats have no intention of protecting us or killing isis. they instead want to wreck our economy with global warming regulations. they think if we wind up having to become powerless tent dwellers like isis, maybe then they<u+2019>ll leave us alone. the united states needs adults leading it right now. erick erickson is a fox news contributor. he is host of "erick on the radio" and founder/editor of the resurgent. he is the founder of redstate.com. follow him on twitter @ewerickson.

to defeat isis we need grownups

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

7.0

31.0

8.0

2784.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

209.0

0.0

63.0

0.0

31.0

13.0

3.0

8.0

15.0

3.0

11.0

3.0

15.0

25.0

16.0

211.0

63.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in her standard stump speech, hillary rodham clinton talks about fighting income inequality, celebrating court rulings on gay marriage and health care, and, since the emanuel ame church massacre, toughening the nation<u+2019>s gun laws. that last component marks an important evolution in presidential politics. for at least the past several decades, democrats seeking national office have often been timid on the issue of guns for fear of alienating firearms owners. in 2008, after barack obama took heat for his gaffe about people who <u+201c>cling to guns or religion,<u+201d> he rarely mentioned guns again <u+2014> neither that year nor in his 2012 reelection campaign. but in a sign that the political environment on guns has shifted in the wake of recent mass shootings <u+2014> and of clinton<u+2019>s determination to stake out liberal ground in her primary race against insurgent sen. bernie sanders (i-vt.) <u+2014> clinton is not only initiating a debate about gun control but also vowing to fight the national rifle association. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m going to speak out against the uncontrollable use of guns in our country because i believe we can do better,<u+201d> clinton said tuesday in iowa city. a few days earlier, she said in hanover, n.h.: <u+201c>we have to take on the gun lobby. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. this is a controversial issue. i am well aware of that. but i think it is the height of irresponsibility not to talk about it.<u+201d> clinton<u+2019>s comments could stoke millions of politically active gun owners, and wayne lapierre, the nra<u+2019>s executive vice president, argued that the move was fraught with peril for her. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve been down this road before with the clintons,<u+201d> <u+00ad>la<u+00ad>pierre said through a spokesman. <u+201c>she needs to read her husband<u+2019>s book.<u+201d> in his memoir, <u+201c>my life,<u+201d> former president bill clinton suggested that his vice president, al gore, lost the 2000 presidential election in part because of backlash in states such as arkansas and tennessee over the clinton administration<u+2019>s 1995 ban on assault weapons, which has since expired. many democratic lawmakers also lost their elections after gun-control votes. the republican 2016 presidential candidates, in keeping with gop orthodoxy, have spoken out loudly against gun control. many gave speeches at the nra<u+2019>s spring convention and tout their high ratings from the group. mark glaze, a longtime gun-control advocate who until recently oversaw former new york mayor michael r. bloomberg<u+2019>s gun-control efforts, argued that hillary clinton should embrace her husband<u+2019>s record. <u+201c>the clintons pulled off the almost-impossible by giving us the background-check system and banning assault weapons,<u+201d> glaze said. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s something president obama wasn<u+2019>t able to do. their political interest lies in owning, rather than obscuring, that accomplishment.<u+201d> many democratic strategists said campaigning on guns is smart politics for hillary clinton both in the primary and, should she become the nominee, in the general election. gun control is one of the few issues on which clinton has a more left-leaning record than sanders, who represents a rural, pro-gun-rights state and has voted in the past for legislation to protect the firearms industry. although clinton has not attacked sanders by name, by invoking guns she makes an unspoken contrast. the issue also fits neatly into the overall narrative clinton is trying to present. she can stake out a bold stance on an issue that plays well with the liberal base while arguing that she would break through the partisan stalemate in washington. there are few issues more in<u+00ad>trac<u+00ad>table than guns. in 2013, after the massacre of 20 young children and six educators at an elementary school in <u+00ad>newtown, conn., a bipartisan compromise to expand background checks for firearm purchases failed to pass the senate despite overwhelming popular support and president obama<u+2019>s backing. clinton began talking about gun control in the days following last month<u+2019>s church shooting in charleston, s.c., and aides said she plans to keep it in her stump speech, although she has no immediate plans to unveil a detailed gun policy. <u+201c>this is an important issue, and she believes that we cannot let partisan gridlock prevent us from continuing to seek <u+00ad>common-sense safety measures,<u+201d> said clinton campaign spokesman brian fallon. despite his mixed voting record, sanders did support the 2013 background-check bill and <u+00ad>assault-weapons ban. and on the stump, he is trying to sound more forceful. he notes that <u+201c>guns in chicago and los angeles mean a very different thing than guns in vermont and new hampshire<u+201d> but says <u+2014> as he did two weeks ago in bow, n.h. <u+2014> that the next president must <u+201c>come forward with a common-sense proposal on guns.<u+201d> in the democratic field, former maryland governor martin o<u+2019>mal<u+00ad>ley has the strongest record in favor of gun control. he supported an assault-weapons ban as mayor of baltimore in the early 2000s and then signed one into law as governor in 2013, along with a suite of gun restrictions that stand as among the nation<u+2019>s toughest. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s the only person in the race who<u+2019>s led on this issue,<u+201d> said o<u+2019>malley spokeswoman haley morris. looking to the general election, some gun-control measures are popular, especially with the coalition of swing-state latinos, african americans, and young and suburban women the democratic nominee would need to win the white house. <u+201c>there is no more powerful force in an election than the suburban mother, and you don<u+2019>t find a lot of suburban mothers that are against some sort of common-sense gun control,<u+201d> said mo <u+00ad>elleithee, a former clinton adviser and democratic strategist who now directs the georgetown institute of politics and public service. other democrats argue that clinton has nothing to lose. sen. timothy m. kaine (d-va.) said the nra has become a <u+201c>paper tiger,<u+201d> noting the elections he<u+2019>s won despite the nra<u+2019>s vocal opposition. <u+201c>i think she has no illusion that even if she didn<u+2019>t say a word about guns, the nra would be out there blasting her to say she had a conspiratorial plan to work with the u.n. to take everybody<u+2019>s guns away, so why not go head-on on an issue that will improve safety,<u+201d> kaine said. a survey this year by the johns hopkins center for gun policy and research found that 89<u+00a0>percent favor requiring background checks for all gun sales, including 85<u+00a0>percent of gun owners. but polling is much more closely divided on other gun restrictions and does not account for the high intensity among gun-control opponents. david <u+201c>mudcat<u+201d> saunders, a democratic strategist based in conservative rural virginia, warned that clinton<u+2019>s focus on guns could taint the entire democratic ticket, including candidates for state and local offices. <u+201c>never in the history of the democratic party have they started a gun debate that didn<u+2019>t cost them numbers in the general election,<u+201d> said saunders, who supports the candidacy of former senator jim webb (d-va.). <u+201c>she<u+2019>s trying to get to the left of bernie, obviously, but i think it<u+2019>ll hurt her in the long run <u+2014> and it<u+2019>ll cost anybody on the down ticket in the south and in rural america.<u+201d> in her 2008 presidential campaign, clinton stayed nearly silent on guns. an exception was after obama<u+2019>s <u+201c>cling to guns<u+201d> comment surfaced, when she attacked him as being <u+201c>elitist<u+201d> and fondly recalled her father teaching her to shoot as a little girl at her grandfather<u+2019>s pennsylvania lake house. howard wolfson, for many years a top clinton aide before going to work for bloomberg, said clinton<u+2019>s avoidance of guns in 2008 should not be mistaken for a lack of interest in gun control. <u+201c>i started working for her back in 1999 and she talked about it back then,<u+201d> wolfson said. <u+201c>as a senator from new york, it was something that was important to her. i think in the wake of newtown and charleston, it<u+2019>s more resonant in our political culture.<u+201d> in recent months, clinton<u+2019>s speechwriters and policy staff have sought counsel from bloomberg<u+2019>s group, everytown for gun safety. erika soto lamb, <u+00ad>everytown<u+2019>s spokeswoman, said clinton<u+2019>s focus on the issue is <u+201c>striking.<u+201d> <u+201c>knowing how hard we tried in 2012 to get [republican nominee mitt] romney or obama to say something about guns,<u+201d> she said, <u+201c>it is a changed world now when hillary and other candidates are making it a part of their stump. this is the first presidential election when we<u+2019>ve seen proactive statements.<u+201d> jose delreal in iowa city and scott clement in washington contributed to this report.

hillary clinton<u+2019>s push on gun control marks a shift in presidential politics

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

76.0

8.0

8402.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

549.0

0.0

155.0

1.0

0.0

52.0

27.0

21.0

5.0

25.0

13.0

8.0

41.0

40.0

51.0

558.0

155.0

53.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

less than 24 hours after president barack obama aimed to set the tone for the country on a response to the threat of terrorism with an oval office address, trump only needed a press release to cause an uproar with his call for an outright ban on muslims entering the united states the billionaire businessman stood defiantly by his statement on tuesday morning, when he warned that failing to follow his plans would lead to another september 11-style terror attack on u.s. soil. "you're going to have many more world trade centers if you don't solve it -- many, many more and probably beyond the world trade center," trump told cnn's chris cuomo in a contentious interview on "new day." the episode is a microcosm of how the 2016 campaign has played out. trump has consistently forced candidates, state party chairs, senators and conservative pundits to respond to his actions and quotes, however outlandish and improbable. and in turn, they have all struggled with the question of how to deal with the bombastic real estate tycoon who has dominated state and national polls since the summer. trump's enduring ability to frame the terms of the debate for the gop continues to have party leaders fretting he will drive voters to hillary clinton, help down-ballot democrats and cause long-term damage to the republican brand. yet, unlike with past provocative statements, trump appears to have sparked a level of backlash from gop party leaders and his opponents that could be a tipping point for the willingness of fellow republicans to criticize him directly and openly. jeb bush called trump "unhinged." ted cruz said it wasn't his policy. and dick cheney, who previously said he would back the republican nominee even it was trump, said that monday's proposal "goes against everything we stand for and believe in." at a press conference on tuesday, house speaker paul ryan also slammed trump. "this is not conservatism," he said. "what was proposed yesterday is not what this party stands for." but trump has been here before -- his blustery statements only seem to have deepened his appeal to a subset of republican voters, leading to a frustrated party establishment. predictions of his demise have all proved to be premature. "as a conservative who truly cares about religious liberty, donald trump's bad idea and rhetoric send a shiver down my spine," south carolina gop chairman matt moore tweeted. "american exceptionalism means always defending our inalienable rights, not attacking them when it's politically convenient." moore did not answer a follow-up question about whether he thinks trump's comments are disqualifying and whether he would back him if he wins the nomination. trump's proposal, the latest in a string of provocative comments coming in the wake of the terrorist shooting that left 14 dead and 17 wounded in san bernardino, california, drew cheers and applause from a crowd monday in charleston, south carolina. "donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on," said trump reading from a statement his campaign sent out shortly before the rally. "we have no choice. we have no choice." reggie johnson, 38, who attended trump's charleston rally, agreed with the gop frontrunner. "i think it should be shut down for now until you find something, a better program in place," he said. "i mean this is a free country for what's that's worth but i think it does need to be shut down until they get a cap on things." republicans spent sunday night condemning obama's speech and his approach to combating terrorism. and they spent monday night talking about trump, who called for a religious test for who is admitted to the country right after obama said it was "our responsibility to reject" such a test. bush's super pac, right to rise, will begin running an ad called "desk" in iowa, new hampshire, south carolina and nevada, that calls trump "impulsive and reckless." while the ad doesn't specifically mention trump's proposal, bush supporters think he is best positioned to benefit from the shift to national security issues. "twenty-seven generals and admirals support jeb bush," the ad states. "because jeb has the experience and knowledge to protect your family." doug heye, a veteran gop strategist and former adviser to the iowa republican party, said trump's latest proposal would do more damage than some of his previous controversial comments. "there are going to be newspapers throughout the world that are going to read 'republican front-runner doesn't want muslims to visit america," said heye. "it will make it easier for democrats to portray the gop as hostile to any minority. ultimately, i think donald trump is the best asset hillary clinton has." clinton tweeted that trump's proposal was "reprehensible, prejudiced and divisive." huma abedin, clinton's campaign vice-chairwoman, sent out an e-mail to clinton supporters with the subject matter -- "i'm a proud muslim." "unfortunately, trump is leaning into the kind of fear of progress that very well could help him win the nomination," abedin wrote. "we have to be ready to stop him." heye encouraged gop contenders to condemn trump's remarks, suggesting they take a dismissive tone like bush did on twitter. he warned that trump's comments would be used to weaken the republican nominee --- even if it's not trump -- and will create challenges for republicans in down-ballot races. "everything about donald trump's campaign has hurt the party," heye said. "it hurts the party on a presidential level. it certainly hurts the party on a senate level as well." heye's remarks run counter to a strategy revealed in a leaked national republican senatorial committee that suggested one way to run with trump at the top of the ticket is to adopt his issues, if not his tone and rhetoric. senators were all over the map monday as they were asked about trump's proposal. some were happy to blast the gop front-runner, others, like iowa's joni ernst, wanted nothing to do with the question. ernst, who occupies an influential spot among iowa republicans walked away from repeated questions about whether she supported trump's call. "oh, i'm not going to comment on that," she said when asked by cnn about his comments. asked again, she replied: "i am not commenting on him." south carolina sen. tim scott, a first-term senator who has been hosting republican candidates at forums and will be on the ballot in 2016, suggested that trump's latest statements were simply par for the course. "a lot of hyperbolic language is used during campaign season," scott said in a statement to cnn. "we need to focus on serious solutions to address the real dangers presented by isis." sen. jeff sessions, an alabama republican who has advised trump on immigration policy and appeared onstage with him at a rally in alabama, didn't want to weigh in. "i've been pleased that he took a lot of my ideas in his immigration policy, but i have not endorsed mr. trump or anyone else," sessions said when asked about trump's comments. pressed on whether he would support trump's proposal, session's became quiet and stopped talking as he rushed to a senate elevator. sen. jim inhofe, an oklahoma republican, said that trump was wrong to call for a ban on all muslim travel to the u.s. "if he had changed instead of saying muslim and said radical islam, then i would agree with him. but i don't agree," inhofe said, noting that there's a big difference between banning travel for anyone identified as a "radical islamic terrorist" and all muslims. sen. john mccain, the party's 2008 nominee and a supporter of sen. lindsey graham's long-shot bid was clear: "it's just foolishness. it's been a long series of statements like this that have been just foolish." mccain and graham have been among the most critical of trump, but all to no avail. graham, for instance, trails trump in his home state of south carolina. and when trump seemed to suggest that mccain, a vietnam-era pow and the gop's 2008 nominee, was not a war hero, it didn't hurt his standing in the polls. opponents and party leaders seem to be in search of a referee who can credibly rebuke trump and block his path to the nomination. "is the rnc still moving forward with a fundraiser featuring trump? asking for a nation...." tweeted john weaver, a john kasich adviser. according to sean spicer, a spokesman for the rnc, trump won't be at a wednesday fundraiser in new york. but that decision was made well before trump's latest comments, according to spicer. spicer didn't respond to e-mails about trump's comments about muslims. in a 2013 autopsy, the rnc argued that to become a winning party at the presidential level, the party must be a more welcoming party and "stop talking to itself." but like no other candidate, trump knows his audience, repeatedly doubling down on statements that have brought criticism from party elders. his success highlights the competing factions of a leaderless party, searching for an identity. republicans sought to strip the conservative label from trump --- new hampshire gop leader jennifer horn, called his ideas "un-republican." cheney weighed in as well. "i think this whole notion that somehow we can just say no more muslims, just ban a whole religion, goes against everything we stand for and believe in," he said on hugh hewitt's radio show. "i mean, religious freedom has been a very important part of our history and where we came from." bill kristol, who tweeted that he has come to loathe trump for "soiling the robe of conservatism and dragging it through the dust," said in an email to cnn that the rnc is "pretty helpless in situations like this." but with trump's latest comments, he said that the stakes are now higher on trump's opponents, who by now have plenty of practice in criticizing him.

is gop ready to unite against trump for his muslim ban?

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

21.0

55.0

8.0

9950.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

643.0

1.0

0.0

171.0

1.0

0.0

57.0

27.0

15.0

27.0

15.0

19.0

13.0

48.0

50.0

63.0

649.0

172.0

58.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

#memeoftheweek: that article from the onion about mass shootings you might have seen the article by now: " 'no way to prevent this,' says only nation where this regularly happens." the onion, a satirical news site that runs fake news stories, has published a story with that headline three times over the last year and a half: this week after a shooter killed nine people at an oregon community college; in june of this year after a violent rampage in a black charleston church that also killed nine people; and last may, after a shooting at the university of california santa barbara that killed seven. the facts and dates surrounding the particular shooting change each time the story is republished, but key lines remain: the article's been shared thousands of times on social media, and some on twitter have taken notice of the piece's repackaging: the onion, in its satire, has done something most of the "mainstream media" has refused to do: say how they really feel about mass shootings in america, said dave cullen, a journalist who has covered mass shootings for years and wrote the new york times bestseller columbine. "i think what [the onion article's popularity] says is we look for the people who tell us the truth <u+2014> kind of the emperor's new clothes <u+2014> who see through the stuff, and don't just print the same old stuff, or do the same old stuff, or do the safe stuff <u+2014> the people who call us on our s - - -." cullen agreed that the onion article is #memeoftheweek-worthy, explaining, "the onion completely nails it. that [the article] resonates because they totally got it." cullen said another type of news satire has been doing the same thing <u+2014> saying what journalists are afraid to say <u+2014> for years. "i think it's the same reason that a lot of the media, about 10 years ago, were shocked and kind of disgusted and horrified that a lot of young people were getting their daily news from the daily show with jon stewart." not all of the onion's satirical coverage of mass shootings in america have gone over as well. after a shooting that killed 12 at washington navy yard in 2013, the website published a story with the headline: "location of newest mass shooting revealed. it's a navy yard, authorities confirm." one person tweeted, "this isn't funny." another called it "gross stupidity." of course, sometimes, there's no satire to praise or ridicule at all. some tragedies leave even the satirists are at a loss for words. after the charleston church massacre, jon stewart, instead of delivering a biting, satirical monologue on the daily show, started his comments after the shooting with the words, "i've got nothing." and the onion, after the sandy hook massacre, wrote an article with the headline, "f - - - everything, nation reports."

#memeoftheweek: that article from the onion about mass shootings

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

2767.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

188.0

2.0

0.0

62.0

0.0

23.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

11.0

5.0

6.0

3.0

10.0

15.0

193.0

64.0

23.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the iraqi army, backed by shiite, sunni, and iranian fighters, used artillery and airstrikes monday to begin an attack on the city of tikrit<u+2014>saddam hussein<u+2019>s hometown<u+2014>in a major effort to reclaim dispute areas of iraq from isis fighters. a force of some 27,000 was attacking areas outside the city, with ground troops and airstrikes by iraqi fighter jets, state tv reported monday. despite earlier reports touting the offensive, hours into the operation, iraq's military said it still hadn't entered tikrit, but militants have been dislodged from some areas outside the city. while some iraqi reports suggested the iraqi forces were being "supported by the iranian revolutionary guard corps on the ground" and u.s., french and iraqi air forces in the air, a pentagon spokesman said the u.s. military was not involved in monday<u+2019>s offensive. "we are not providing airpower to support the operation," col. steve warren told reporters in washington monday. warren also said that while the pentagon was aware of the operation, iraqi security forces had not requested air support from the u.s. military. tikrit, some 80 miles north of baghdad, fell into the hands of isis last summer along with the country's second-largest city of mosul, and other areas in its sunni heartland. the city, which has an estimated population of around 260,000 people, may be best known as the hometown of former iraqi dictator saddam hussein. any operation to take mosul from the islamic terror group likely would require iraq to seize tikrit first, as the town sits on the main road from baghdad.<u+00a0>u.s. military officials have said a coordinated military mission to retake mosul will likely begin in april or may and involve up to 25,000 iraqi troops. but they have cautioned that if the iraqis aren't ready, the timing could be delayed. past attempts to retake tikrit have failed, and iraqi authorities say they have not set a date to launch a major operation to recapture mosul. news of the offensive came hours after iraqi prime minister haider al-abadi called on sunni tribal fighters to abandon isis, warning that tikrit "will soon return to its people." al-abadi offered the sunnis what he called "the last chance", and promised them a pardon during a news conference in samarra, 60 miles north of baghdad. his office said he arrived in samarra to "supervise the operation to liberate tikrit from the terrorist gangs." "i call upon those who have been misled or committed a mistake to lay down arms and join their people and security forces in order to liberate their cities," al-abadi said. the iraqi military previously launched an operation in late june to try to wrest back control of tikrit, but that quickly stalled. other planned offensives by iraq's military, which collapsed under the initial isis blitz, also have failed to make up ground, though soldiers have taken back the nearby refinery town of beiji, backed by airstrikes from a u.s.-led coalition. al-abadi's comments appear to be targeting former members of iraq's outlawed baath party, loyalists to saddam hussein, who joined isis during its offensive, as well as other sunnis who were dissatisfied with baghdad's shiite-led government. the premier likely hopes to peel away some support from the terror group, especially as iraqis grow increasingly horrified by the extremists' mass killings and other atrocities. in february alone, violence across iraq killed at least 1,100 iraqis, including more than 600 civilians, the u.n. assistance mission in iraq said sunday. last year was the deadliest in iraq since its 2006-2007 sectarian bloodshed, with a total of 12,282 people killed and 23,126 wounded, according to the u.n. fox news' lucas tomlinson and the associated press contributed to this report.

iraqi forces reportedly begin attack to recapture tikrit from isis

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

6.0

66.0

8.0

3766.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

313.0

0.0

55.0

1.0

0.0

48.0

11.0

5.0

4.0

19.0

3.0

8.0

6.0

8.0

21.0

20.0

320.0

55.0

49.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump has long been at odds with our beleaguered leagues of fact-checkers, who regularly award him <u+201c>pants on fire,<u+201d> <u+201c>four pinocchios<u+201d> and other colorful rulings on his truthiness. yet somehow such definitive, unanimous debunking never seems to faze the republican presidential front-runner. and i think i<u+2019>ve discovered why. it<u+2019>s because trump <u+2014> like socrates, among other trailblazing truth-seekers throughout history <u+2014> has developed his own innovative method for fact-checking. rather than relying on stale, lamestream-media techniques such as gathering evidence, crunching numbers or consulting experts, he takes a different route: he goes online and sees whether random people agree with him. for example, he<u+2019>s lately been challenged on his claims of seeing tv footage of <u+201c>thousands and thousands<u+201d> of people in jersey city cheering when the twin towers came down. while fusty fact-checkers at the post and elsewhere have foolishly tried to find such footage, trump instead prefers a pioneering, twitter-based authentication method. <u+201c>why wouldn<u+2019>t it have taken place? i<u+2019>ve had hundreds of people call in and tweet in on twitter, saying they saw it, and i was 100 percent right,<u+201d> trump said sunday on nbc<u+2019>s <u+201c>meet the press.<u+201d> when host chuck todd protested that trump <u+201c>wouldn<u+2019>t make a business deal based on retweets,<u+201d> trump doubled down: <u+201c>by the hundreds they<u+2019>re calling, and they<u+2019>re tweeting.<u+201d> several days later, appearing on the <u+201c>alex jones show,<u+201d> trump again explained the value of his truth-seeking technique. <u+201c>so many people have called in, and on twitter, @realdonaldtrump, they<u+2019>re all tweeting, so i know it happened,<u+201d> trump said. reality may have a well-known liberal bias, but trump<u+2019>s twitter followers do not. nor do the conspiracy theory web sites from which trump also seems to glean much of his information and policy ideas. to be honest, this worldview <u+2014> and the corollary that everyone is entitled not only to their own opinions, but also to their own democratically determined facts <u+2014> never really occurred to me. sure, i occasionally use googlefight to check the more commonly used spelling of a word (e.g., <u+201c>demagogue<u+201d> beats <u+201c>demagog<u+201d>). but i<u+2019>ve never thought to use hordes of anonymous netizens as a sieve for the truth. [how donald trump courted the right-wing fringe to conquer the gop] i began to wonder: what<u+2019>s it like to navigate life as trump does? what<u+2019>s it like to learn about human existence via twitter, reddit message boards and the drudge report? to find out, i compiled a list of things you<u+2019>d learn were true if you fact-checked them solely by seeing whether strangers on the internet agreed with you. 1. you are a nazi. i am a nazi. donald trump and hillary clinton are both nazis. everyone on the internet is, eventually, a nazi, according to other people on the internet who disagree with them and who themselves become nazis if any conversation goes on long enough. 2. your spouse is definitely cheating on you. 3. you have cancer. several really, really rare forms of cancer. also lupus, mad cow disease, fibromyalgia, osteoporosis and a urinary tract infection. or maybe it<u+2019>s just a common cold? either way the ailment(s) can be cured by purchasing dietary supplements from a sketchy web site featuring testimonials from a person currently running for president. modern medicine is for losers. 4. some dress somewhere is the exact two colors that you think it is. 5. if only ron paul had been president, we would not have had the secret hyperinflation pandemic currently ravaging the nation. also, gold and bitcoins have been and will continue to be the safest places in which to store your life savings, excluding perhaps your mattress, a nigerian prince<u+2019>s bank account or your hollowed-out spare copy of <u+201c>atlas shrugged.<u+201d> 6. this one weird trick will help you lose belly fat. 7. you should be ashamed of yourself. you are a terrible parent, and also a terrible pet owner and friend, and un-american, and probably not even human. why would you do whatever you just admitted to doing, you jerk? 8. leonardo dicaprio got raped by a bear or something? 9. obama is a secret muslim. also maybe thomas jefferson was a secret muslim. as with nazism, pretty much everyone you dislike is a secret muslim. unless they already admit to being a muslim, in which case they<u+2019>re probably also a secret mexican who wants to steal your job. 10. if you don<u+2019>t forward this column to at least 10 people, you will have bad luck for the rest of your life. sheesh, it really is a scary world out there. i don<u+2019>t envy you, mr. trump.

you<u+2019>re a nazi, and other shocking truths according to trump<u+2019>s fact-checking 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

3.0

81.0

8.0

4578.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

281.0

2.0

0.0

74.0

0.0

42.0

13.0

10.0

11.0

15.0

9.0

13.0

8.0

25.0

35.0

285.0

76.0

42.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with just three months to go before the long national nightmare that is election 2016 transmogrifies into a either a hillary clinton or a donald trump presidency(!), let's take a late-summer moment to squeeze some lemonade from lemons. whatever happens in november, all of us who have political perspectives that are routinely discounted or dismissed by the republican-democratic duopoly should thank donald trump for creating a blueprint to power for us. pull yourself out of the news cycle that he has been so expert in dominating with a daily<u+2014>sometimes hourly<u+2014>spew of sensational utterings, proclamations, and half-baked policy plans: extreme vetting! mexican rapists! crooked hillary! when he's not creating outrage himself, he brings it in other people, such as when his supporters get egged at rallies or unflattering naked statues of the billionaire crop up in cities around the country. the simple fact is, as conservative commentator and finding mr. righteous author lisa de pasquale, writes, there has been much hand-wringing among the right on where republicans go now that trump has "destroyed" the party. they complain that the republican party has left them, while millions of trump voters and libertarians believe party leaders and professional pundits left them decades ago. regardless of whether the #nevertrump crowd has valid points, it is clear that trump has done libertarians a favor in busting the old guard of republican kingmakers. the old guard isn't mad that trump doesn't represent their principles, but that they no longer hold any power in picking the top of the ticket. the proof is that rather than get behind gary johnson, they'd rather trot out a candidate with zero name recognition or campaign infrastructure. beyond revealing the emptiness of the power bases in the existing republican party (and party members' absolute lack of interest in moving toward their ostensible principles of limited, smaller government), de pasquale argues that trump is the shape of better things to come: the trump campaign has been a battering ram for libertarians. in just over a year, trump has succeeded in what the libertarian party hasn't been able to do in the 35 years since it was conceived. not only has he upset traditional party politics, but he's also paved the way for non-traditional candidates. who needs stuffy party leaders and pundits when you have social media and 100% name recognition?... in the current political climate, personality, authenticity, and even celebrity reign. trump has shown that at least in the primaries, the absence of a traditional ground game and campaign budget can be overcome. libertarians have an advantage because we already know they're authentic by going against the dominant parties.... libertarians also have a good celebrity bench that could help them replicate the trump campaign. i wouldn't necessarily endorse famous libertarian vince vaughn for president (though i would endorse myself as first lady), but i would enthusiastically get on the peter thiel train. set aside policy disagreements libertarians have with trump. they should be thankful that trump has created a new path for national office. he built libertarian candidates a path to success and he paid for it. read the whole piece and start thinking: who are the agents of libertarian influence that can either transform the existing major parties and bring a bold new "free minds and free markets" sensibility to independent runs at all levels of government? better yet, who are the crossover figures that might do for the libertarian party what athletes such as joe namath did for the old afl by legitimizing an upstart league as a major force? it's a given that americans know nothing and care even less about history. that's certainly true when it comes to journalism generally and political journalism specifically. did you ever wonder just why every election is the most important one in our lives? the answer is only mysterious to dead-enders within those group and to journalists, both of whom have no sense of history and really think that everything is on the line every four years and that whatever happened 10, 20, or 30 years ago is irrelevant to understanding the current moment. for the most part, we have simply been repeating the same play over and over again, but to less-and-less-engaged audiences. as matt welch and i wrote in the declaration of independents: how libertarian politics can fix what's wrong with america, all the trends of the past 40 to 50 years show that americans have weaker and weaker ties to the republican and democratic parties, just as we do with all consumer brands. whatever post-war coalitions those parties once represented no longer exist. everything in american life is vastly different than it was in, say 1964, when the current identities of the gop and democrats were being formed. these parties are designed to groups of people that either no longer exist in the same numbers as they once did (private-sector union members and socially conservative christians, say) or who don't link issues the way they used to (what's the necessary connection between before for marriage equality and higer marginal tax rates?). yet most party leaders and media ignore the at-or-near-historic lows in voter identification with the democrats and republicans. they also act as if the ideologies and policy platforms of parties can't or don't change over time. the result is a conversation about politics that is less and less moored to basic reality. we need a new operating system for politics in the 21st century, but the people most invested in the current one don't want to migrate or upgrade to anything different. we need windows 10, but they're fine sticking with 3.1, thank you very much. trump's rise<u+2014>and the semi-successful insurgency of bernie sanders, too<u+2014>puts the lie to the idea that the power structure is capable of maintaining a status quo that serves fewer and fewer people. given his absolute lack of consistent, coherent policies and his radically backward-looking agenda (anti-trade and migration in an increasingly globalized world?!?), he is not the future of anything, but the last gasp of a 20th-century politics that, in one final push, was able to reduce at least one of the major parties to rubble. it's up to those of us who actually want a new operating system for american governance to determine what comes next.

why libertarians (and other 3rd parties) should thank 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

66.0

8.0

6427.0

0.0

5.0

3.0

0.0

440.0

1.0

0.0

113.0

0.0

62.0

11.0

14.0

5.0

12.0

11.0

6.0

27.0

25.0

41.0

443.0

114.0

62.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) the iran nuclear talks are progressing. but tough issues still remain. we could reach a deal. but we also might not. about 50-50. less than 50-50. it's all up in the air. those messages are just a slice of what top u.s. officials are saying publicly as they emerge from closed-door negotiations with their iranian counterparts, struggling to find a way to broker a lasting deal aimed at keeping iran from a nuclear weapon. but there's a method to the messaging madness as the obama administration is looking to reassure key constituencies in the u.s. while holding together an increasingly fractious coalition of countries joining them in the negotiations and also ratcheting up pressure on iran. "all of this is inevitably to some extent posturing, but it's also real and important in terms of setting the expectations for the negotiating parties," as well as setting the political context at home, said suzanne maloney, an iran expert at the washington-based brookings institution and a former state department iran policy adviser. skeptics in congress want to know the u.s. is taking a hard line and pressing for the best deal possible. international partners want to know the u.s. hasn't brought them to this point for nothing. and iran needs to know the u.s. won't concede certain points but is truly willing to walk away. "as i have said many times and as i discussed with president obama last night, we are not going to sit at the negotiating table forever," kerry said at a press conference thursday. but he also said the u.s. isn't pressed by time: "we shouldn't get up and leave simply because the clock strikes midnight." bold public statements that the u.s. is prepared to leave iran hanging at the negotiating table telegraph the message that tehran needs to budge on certain issues or it could find itself without the much-awaited sanctions relief it has chased for years. that's how sen. chris coons of delaware, a key democrat on the foreign relations committee, interpreted kerry's words. "my hunch is that what we're hearing here from secretary kerry is a determination to send a message to the iranian supreme leader: 'the deal that is on the table is the best deal you're going to get. you either need to accept it or we're going to walk away,'" coons said thursday on cnn. maloney said kerry and other officials' statements are a clear gambit to "influence iranian expectations and iranian decision-making" on the inside from the outside. "those theatrics were necessary," maloney said. but they also have another audience: restive members of congress who fear that the repeated deadline extensions are a sign that iran is gaining the upper hand and sticking to its demands while the u.s. caves. by passing the july 9 date that congress set for completing the deal and turning a copy over to congress, the administration now faces a congressional review period of 60 days rather than just 30. that's twice as much time for vocal opponents to tear the details of the deal apart and rally votes against the measure. so kerry and president barack obama have doubled down in recent weeks on their insistence that the u.s. is willing to walk away from talks altogether if iran won't relent on the final, crucial sticking points. "i will walk away from the negotiations if, in fact it's a bad deal," obama said last week from the white house. "if the tough decisions don't get made, we are absolutely prepared to call an end to this process," kerry stressed on thursday. that's giving some in congress hope that the obama administration is sticking to its guns. but it's not clear whether the more hardened skeptics are buying the administration's insistence that it is not flinching on key points, maloney said. "there's still frustration and an overwhelming skepticism toward the administration and its ability to hold a hard line with respect to iran," she said. the talking point of walking away from a deal also helps reinforce the administration's arguments that it has worked tirelessly to obtain a good deal and that it therefore got the best one possible -- should a deal be reached. and if there is no deal, the messaging will help to lower expectations. that's why obama told senate democrats this week that it's more likely that there won't be a deal. "he said in the course of the negotiations he's been more optimistic, less optimistic. and he said that the chances at this point are below 50-50," said sen. dick durbin of illinois, the no. 2 democrat in the senate. days later, though, kerry played the other side of expectations, telling reporters optimistically that the parties "resolved some of the things that were outstanding" and that "it's safe to say that we have made progress today." because ultimately, the u.s. needs to keep not just iran, but its partners, in the negotiations pressing full steam ahead at the negotiating table. the coalition of five world powers -- russia, china, germany, france and the uk -- negotiating alongside the u.s. is already showing signs of strain, as russia adopts a stance on relaxing sanctions more in line with iran's. in particular, the new iranian demand that the arms embargo on it be lifted has caused frustration for the u.s. while winning support from moscow. on thursday, russian foreign minister sergey lavrov indicated that his country was backing iran's bid to lift the arms embargo "as soon as possible." russia is a top supplier of weapons to iran. for that, americans also have a talking point. "under no circumstances should we relieve pressure on iran relative to ballistic missile capabilities and arms trafficking," chairman of the joint chiefs of staff gen. martin dempsey said this week on capitol hill.

understanding the u.s. talking points on iran

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

45.0

8.0

5744.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

430.0

1.0

0.0

110.0

0.0

44.0

9.0

15.0

5.0

7.0

10.0

6.0

5.0

27.0

19.0

36.0

434.0

111.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hillary clinton<u+2019>s victory speech in nevada on saturday was a lot more about <u+201c>we<u+201d> than<u+00a0><u+201c>i.<u+201d> in the past, mrs. clinton has talked a lot about herself: how she is qualified for the job. how her approach is best. her rival, sen.<u+00a0>bernie sanders, by contrast, has long talked about his quest for a political revolution as [<u+2026>]

hillary clinton pitches team effort to solve country<u+2019>s troubles, shows softer side

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

82.0

8.0

319.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

17.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

7.0

21.0

8.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

after he refused to be felled by his racist comments, incoherent policies, childish insults, a bizarre fixation on his hand size, and the vague threat of nuclear war, is it possible that republican voters are finally beginning to think twice about donald trump? all past attempts to predict the imminent collapse of trump<u+2019>s presidential campaign have failed. that being said, there are at least a few reasons to think the billionaire has finally reached a tipping point. several new polls show trump tanking nationally (though still in first place), while his negatives continue to rise. amid 36 hours of nonstop gaffes and terrifying pronouncements, trump suddenly looks poised to lose wisconsin next week, a delegate-rich, winner-take-all state that would have virtually ensured that he would win the nomination, but where he now trails ted cruz by as much as 10 points. perhaps most important, trump appears to be losing the so-called <u+201c>shadow primary<u+201d> to secure the state delegates who would decide the outcome of a potential contested convention. politico reports that while cruz and john kasich have been making inroads with critical party insiders, more than 100 delegates won by trump are prepared to ditch him after the first ballot in cleveland. if he can<u+2019>t win the republican nomination outright, it<u+2019>s looking more and more like trump will be forced to put up or shut up about his threats to run a third-party spoiler campaign. a lull in the g.o.p. primary calendar may have helped voters clarify their thoughts on the punchy billionaire. with no primary contests in the last week, national media outlets have focused relentlessly on trump<u+2019>s spate of truly awful statements in recent days, including a sustained barrage of unseemly insults aimed at cruz<u+2019>s wife, heidi, and his misogynistic defense of his campaign manager, who was charged tuesday for roughly grabbing a reporter. the following day, during a town hall event with msnbc<u+2019>s chris matthews, trump mused that he wouldn<u+2019>t rule out using nuclear weapons in europe. minutes later, under heated questioning, the republican front-runner suggested that there <u+201c>has to be some form of punishment<u+201d> for women who get illegal abortions<u+2014>a line that panicked party elites desperate to avoid another todd akin moment. but never let it be said that trump cannot learn from his mistakes. after losing in iowa to cruz and his disciplined ground game, trump managed to pull his operation together in new hampshire a week later, despite reports that the campaign was hopelessly disorganized. (<u+201c>we learned a lot about ground games in one week,<u+201d> trump boasted in his victory speech.) he has already launched an organized effort to sway delegates to his side, and might up the ante by offering things that cruz and kasich cannot: <u+201c>there are a lot of delegates who<u+2019>d like to ride on trump<u+2019>s plane,<u+201d> former trump operative roger stone told the new york times. <u+201c>there are a lot of delegates who<u+2019>d like to have a phone call from ivanka trump. we<u+2019>ll get to that phase.<u+201d>

is donald trump really, finally falling apart?

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

46.0

8.0

3017.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

200.0

0.0

50.0

0.0

12.0

8.0

11.0

8.0

13.0

4.0

8.0

15.0

21.0

22.0

203.0

50.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the growing rift between the united states and russia over concerns that moscow is employing its military to protect syria's embattled president appeared to widen friday when a russian official called for military cooperation with washington in order to avoid "unintended incidents." the comments were made after western intelligence sources told fox news that russia escalated its presence in the middle east country days after a secret moscow meeting in late july between iran's quds force commander -- their chief exporter of terror -- and russian president vladimir putin. officials who have monitored the build-up say they've seen more than 1,000 russian combatants -- some of them from the same plainclothes special forces units who were sent to crimea and ukraine. some of these russian troops are logistical specialists and needed for security at the expanding russian bases. president obama warned russia on friday against <u+201c>doubling down<u+201d> on sending support for syrian president bashar assad, calling the pursuit a "mistake." "but we are going to be engaging russia to let them know that you can't continue to double-down on a strategy that is doomed to failure," obama said at a maryland event. russia denies allegations that it is helping to build assad's military. moscow claimed its increased military presence is part of an international effort to help defeat the islamic state. russian foreign minister sergey lavrov called on world powers to join russia in that pursuit, arguing that syria<u+2019>s army is the most efficient force to fight extremists in the middle east. "you cannot defeat islamic state with air strikes only," lavrov said, a clear dig at the white house<u+2019>s strategy. "it's necessary to cooperate with ground troops and the syrian army is the most efficient and powerful ground force to fight the is." reuters reported that russia also called for military-to-military cooperation with the u.s. to avert "unintended incidents." moscow's recent support of assad has dampened u.s. hopes that moscow was tiring of the syrian president. syria has been gripped by civil war for more than four years, a conflict that has claimed more than 250,000 lives and created a vacuum for extremism to thrive. u.s. officials have been gauging russia<u+2019>s willingness to help restart a political process to remove assad from power. secretary of state john kerry has lashed out at russia<u+2019>s presence in syria, warning the recent buildup could lead to an escalation of the bloody conflict. despite the warnings from the u.s., lavrov said russia would continue to supply assad with weapons that he said will help defeat islamic state fighters. "i can only say, once again, that our servicemen and military experts are there to service russian military hardware, to assist the syrian army in using this hardware," he said at a news conference in moscow. "and we will continue to supply it to the syrian government in order to ensure its proper combat readiness in its fight against terrorism." click for more from reuters. the associated press contributed to this report.

russia warns us of <u+2018>unintended incidents<u+2019> over 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

1.0

52.0

8.0

3084.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

247.0

0.0

41.0

0.0

34.0

8.0

6.0

5.0

18.0

6.0

8.0

3.0

15.0

19.0

23.0

254.0

41.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the first great democratic debate of the 2016 race had many moments, but perhaps not for the casual viewer who had to be mystified how four old white guys ended up arrayed around clinton, from "block of granite" lincoln chafee on one end to an impressive if somewhat ominous looking and sounding guy on the other end who complained as if automatically about every question's timing and who made a vague reference to killing somebody. (if the curious got on google, they'd have discovered that former sen. james webb of virginia is the recipient of a navy cross for valor, among other decorations.) cnn's anderson cooper opened the proceedings with a fastball aimed at clinton's head -- "will you say anything to get elected?" -- and stayed with questions as lively as cooper and team could make them. but the collective weight of all those years of clinton's controversies and flip-flops -- plus former maryland gov. martin o'malley's speaking style that drained energy out of the auditorium -- made it slow going for all. as the debate began, my company, salem media group, announced that i'd be back as a panelist for the cnn-salem gop debates in december and march, and i am looking forward to those events, as the first one was high energy and filled with drama. i have nothing to do with any of the remaining democratic debates and feel for the moderators and panelists who are facing the broadcast equivalent of presiding over a parole hearing. clinton won the debate, for sure, but it was a false positive for -- as veteran radio talker and old friend tammy bruce put it on sean hannity's midnight television recap in which i and lefty leslie marshall participated -- she achieved dominance over a bag of rocks. (bruce, hannity and hewitt all declared in a rare burst of unbroken conservative applause for cnn that cooper had done a fine job trying to make the democrats answer interesting questions.) so clinton swept the pundit class, lost the focus groups to sanders and may have kept joe biden out of the pool. but she tried out answers on her national security-compromising server and her litany of half-truths or worse (kevin mccarthy! kevin mccarthy! kevin mccarthy!) that will not serve to help her at all come october 22 when she appears for hours and hours before the house select committee on benghazi to answer focused, precise questions from the lawyers, including experienced prosecutors, who make up the gop side of the committee such as trey gowdy, susan brooks, mike pompeo and peter roskam. committee democrats may try and throw themselves on the fire for clinton as sanders did, but it won't stop a patient prosecutor. answers will be had about clinton and her server and her deleted and recovered emails, the compromise of her server's security by foreign intelligence agencies as former acting cia director michael morell has contended , her voluminous correspondence with sid blumenthal about libyan security, etc. sanders is not the boss of the committee, the congress, the fbi, future debate panelists or participants or even voters. clinton did a happy dance tuesday night. it won't last.

hillary clinton's happy dance won't last

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

40.0

8.0

3123.0

0.0

3.0

2.0

0.0

188.0

0.0

50.0

0.0

29.0

2.0

9.0

2.0

8.0

9.0

5.0

2.0

18.0

10.0

26.0

190.0

50.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

indiana stands alone tuesday, the only state holding a presidential primary, but the presidential race in both parties could look very different wednesday morning. two weeks ago, cruz told an indiana crowd, "the state of indiana is going to play a pivotal role in this election ...<u+00a0>indiana<u+2019>s voice, indiana<u+2019>s megaphone to the country, will decide which path this party goes down, which path this country goes down.<u+201d> that statement was a few days before cruz had his clock cleaned in the "amtrak primaries," five northeastern states that donald trump swept. cruz won only two delegates while trump won more than 100. ohio gov. john kasich took the extraordinary step of dropping his campaign in indiana so that cruz could consolidate the "anti-trump" vote, and cruz took the extraordinary step of naming his running mate<u+00a0><u+2014> former presidential candidate carly fiorina <u+2014> despite trailing in the delegate race. but it is not clear those efforts have<u+00a0>helped much. an nbc news/wall street journal/marist poll released sunday gave trump a lead of 49%-34% over cruz. indiana offers 57 republican delegates, 30 statewide and three<u+00a0>each in nine congressional districts. all of those delegates are distributed on a winner-take-all basis. if trump wins all or most of them, the requiems for the cruz campaign will begin to roll in. hillary clinton has a lead of nearly 350 "pledged" delegates, and nearly 500 "superdelegates." combined, she is a little more than 200 delegates short of clinching the nomination; sanders is about 1,000 delegates short. so indiana can't clinch the nomination for clinton, but a win there can help her make the case that the race for the democratic nomination is basically over. a sanders victory in the hoosier state would be a bit of an embarrassment to clinton, but it would do nothing to change the fundamental math of the race. indiana has 83 democratic delegates at stake tuesday,<u+00a0>but since they are distributed proportionately, sanders cannot make a significant dent in clinton's delegate lead even with a win. nevertheless, sanders said sunday,<u+00a0>"it is virtually impossible for secretary clinton to reach the majority of convention delegates ... with pledged delegates alone. she will need superdelegates to take her over the top at the convention in philadelphia." sanders says he will continue to campaign through the remaining dozen states, and "we believe that we are in a very strong position to win many of these remaining contests." clinton has led sanders in all public polls in the state, with a lead ranging from 5 to 13 percentage points, but indiana is an open primary <u+2014> independents can vote in the democratic primary <u+2014> which has been helpful for sanders in other states where he has drawn support from new voters and non-democrats. indiana polls close early <u+2014> 6 p.m. <u+2014><u+00a0> but 6 p.m comes an hour later in the dozen western counties that are in the central time zone. nevertheless, it means we should have results before the 11<u+00a0>o'clock news.

what to watch for in the indiana primary

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

40.0

8.0

2987.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

190.0

1.0

0.0

52.0

0.0

14.0

1.0

9.0

1.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

11.0

5.0

19.0

194.0

53.0

14.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

be part of cnn's cop21 coverage: we'd like to hear from you on how climate change could affect your local community. upload your video here or tag #2degrees on twitter, facebook and instagram. (cnn) world leaders opened pivotal climate talks monday in paris saying the stakes are too high to end the conference without achieving a binding agreement to help slow the pace of global climate change. "a political moment like this may not come again," u.n. secretary-general ban ki-moon told leaders gathered for the conference. "we have never faced such a test. but neither have we encountered such great opportunity." the talks began with a moment of silence for victims of the november 13 terror attacks in paris, and the tragedy served as a touchstone for world leaders urging unity and action. "what greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than marshaling our best efforts to save it," president barack obama said in his speech. french president francois hollande noted that "never have the stakes been so high because this is about the future of the planet, the future of life." "and yet two weeks ago, here in paris itself, a group of fanatics was sowing the seeds of death in the streets," he said. speaking aboard the papal plane on his way back to rome, pope francis said that the time to do something was now or never. "we are on the brink. we are on the brink of a suicide, to use a strong word, and i am sure that most of those at the cop have this conscience, and want to do something," he said. obama told the conference that the united states recognizes its role in creating climate change and its role in solving the issue. but he said the agreement should be global in nature, assertive and flexible. "here in paris, let's secure an agreement that builds in ambition, where progress paves the way for regularly updated targets," he said. he also addressed economic issues associated with climate change, saying recent economic growth in the united states has come despite a lack of growth in carbon emissions, proving that climate advancements need not come at the expense of the economy or individual livelihoods. "that's what we seek in these next two weeks -- not simply an agreement to roll back the pollution we put into the skies, but an agreement that helps us lift people from poverty without condemning the next generation to a planet that is beyond its capacity to repair," he said. he also said developed countries must help island nations and others that have contributed little to climate change but are the first to be feeling its effects. "countries should be allowed to seek their own solutions, according to their national interest," he said. russian president vladimir putin called climate change "one of the greatest threats humanity is facing." "russia not only prevented the increase of greenhouse emissions, it has reduced them," he said, promising a 70% reduction in emissions from 1990 levels by 2030. indian prime minister narendra modi called for a "comprehensive, equitable and durable agreement that leads us to restore balance between humanity and nature." and german chancellor angela merkel reminded the leaders of the "billions of people pinning their hopes on what we do in paris." "let us do everything we can not to dash those hopes," she said. nevertheless, disappointed demonstrators turned out sunday, and brief clashes erupted with police at the place de la republique, where peaceful protesters had placed rows of shoes and name tags to represent the crowds not allowed to show up. paris police chief michel cadot said taking the candles and using them against police showed "an extreme lack of respect to those events." hollande called the clashes "scandalous." the french president said authorities knew "troubling elements" would arrive in paris for the talks, and that is why "these sorts of assemblies were banned and some were ordered to stay home." in many countries, people gathered to protest against human-made climate change sunday. there is a broad consensus among scientists that global warming is driven by human activity, foremost the burning of fossil fuels. a look at previous global climate change negotiations illustrates the challenge in achieving this year's goals, especially when it comes to the biggest greenhouse gas emitters. the united states did not ratify the kyoto protocol and dropped out of it completely in 2001. canada dumped it, too, and china, india and other developing countries were exempt from it.

cop21: 'never have the stakes been so high'

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

43.0

8.0

4534.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

291.0

1.0

0.0

89.0

0.0

40.0

8.0

10.0

6.0

12.0

7.0

3.0

21.0

13.0

31.0

292.0

90.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington -- hillary clinton responded to intense scrutiny over her email practices on wednesday, saying she has asked the state department to make available her private email during her tenure as secretary of state. "i want the public to see my email. i asked state to release them. they said they will review them for release as soon as possible," clinton wrote in a tweet posted late wednesday evening. a new york times report published monday evening set off a firestorm of criticism, and suggested clinton violated state department regulations by using a personal email account for government business, potentially shielding her correspondence from public inquiries like freedom of information act requests. her email account, clintonemail.com, was hosted by a server located at her home, and reportedly "became a symbol of status within the family<u+2019>s inner circle." clinton's advisers submitted some 50,000 pages of emails to the state department two months ago at the government's request, but critics maintained that using private email allowed clinton to pick and choose which documents to submit with no way to verify the process. a house panel investigating the 2012 terror attacks in benghazi, libya, on wednesday issued a subpoena for any and all of clinton's private emails related to the attack. the controversy threatens to derail clinton's likely presidential campaign launch, reportedly planned for this month or next. her way of addressing growing controversy -- in a tweet nearly 48 hours after it was first reported -- is likely to add to concerns over whether she is prepared to run a presidential campaign in today's hyper-media atmosphere. update: march 5, 8:45 a.m. -- the state department said thursday it would "take some time" to complete a review of the emails provided by clinton. "the state department will review for public release the emails provided by secretary clinton to the department, using a normal process that guides such releases. we will undertake this review as quickly as possible; given the sheer volume of the document set, this review will take some time to complete," department spokeswoman marie harf said in a statement.

hillary clinton responds to email controversy: 'i want the public to see my email'

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

82.0

8.0

2180.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

159.0

1.0

0.0

37.0

0.0

12.0

3.0

7.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

1.0

7.0

10.0

12.0

166.0

38.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

two months from election day, hillary clinton has a clear edge over donald trump in nearly every measure traditionally used to gauge success in presidential races. she's raising huge sums of money and flooding airwaves with television advertisements. a sophisticated data team with a history of winning white house contests is meticulously tracking voters in key battleground states. clinton also has multiple paths to the 270 electoral votes needed to win in november <u+2014> so many that she could lose ohio and florida and still become america's first female president. but trump's campaign believes there are pockets of voters eager to be persuaded not to back clinton. while trump squandered a summer's worth of opportunities to court those voters, his campaign heads into the fall suddenly confident in its ability to make up lost ground. trump aides were gleeful friday over the release of fbi notes regarding clinton's controversial email practices while secretary of state. his campaign plans to come out of the labor day weekend wielding the report as a warning about the democrat's judgment. getting trump to make that kind of consistent case against clinton has been a herculean task for much of the campaign. but advisers say he's more receptive to his new leadership team's more scripted approach, mostly because it's coincided with a tightening in the public polls he monitors obsessively. "there's a renewed focus on hillary clinton and her problems, which i think has been beneficial," said matt borges, the chairman of ohio's republican party. "he's got to sustain this for another couple weeks." still, trump aides acknowledge that the brash businessman needs to more to address his own shaky standing with voters. trump's campaign has spent no general election money on positive, biographical ads, despite having plenty of cash to do so. efforts to highlight a warmer side of the new york real estate developer at the gop convention were quickly overshadowed by flaps of his own making. he's also angered anew hispanics voters, a fast-growing segment of the electorate that republicans are desperate to draw from, by holding fast to his tough immigration policies. "he's running up against a population trend and a demographic reality," said steve schale, a florida-based democratic strategist. if trump can reshape the race, he'll need to do so quickly. early voting begins in some states this month. north carolinians can start submitting absentee ballots friday. in ohio <u+2014> a state no republican has won the white house without <u+2014> people can start voting on oct. 12, a week before the last of three presidential debates. both campaigns expect enormous audiences for the debates. clinton, who has been in intensive study sessions with her debate team in recent days, is sure to face higher expectations from voters. trump's political inexperience leaves him with a lower bar to clear. privately, republican leaders say it will take more than strong debates for their nominee to alter a race that appears to be leaning in clinton's favor. while trump publicly maintains support from numerous high-ranking gop officials, a striking number of discussions among republicans in washington often begin with an assumption that clinton will be president come january. trump advisers vigorously dispute that the race has slipped from their grasp. they contend most americans are just now tuning into the presidential campaign in a serious way. "we're very much on schedule to do what we need to do to turn out the vote for mr. trump," said bob paduchik, trump's ohio state director and one of the most experienced operatives on the republican's staff. paduchik said trump's efforts heading into the fall are focused primarily on rallying "disaffected democrats and independents." clinton's campaign has long argued that trump is overestimating the number of voters willing to switch from voting democratic in presidential election to republican. but clinton aides are monitoring movement toward a pair of third party candidates, libertarian gary johnson and the green party's jill stein. "there's no question you've got two candidates who are both underwater on their favorables right now," joel benenson, clinton's chief strategist and pollster, said by way of explaining the appeal of johnson and stein. "i think it's important as this gets closer that people understand the stakes and the importance of their vote." clinton and running mate tim kaine will have an all-star stable of democrats making that case on their behalf through the fall. president barack obama is expected to spend much of october campaigning for clinton, focusing in particular on increasing turnout among young people, blacks and college-educated whites. vice president joe biden will camp out in working class areas of ohio and pennsylvania. vermont sen. bernie sanders, clinton's vanquished primary rival, will be rallying the young voters and liberals who backed his campaign. trump will be largely on his own, with the exception of running mate mike pence and a few loyal supporters such as new jersey gov. chris christie and former new york city mayor rudy giuliani. in the battle for control of the senate, most republicans in competitive races have stayed away from trump. democrats now see a clear path to taking back control of the senate, with party leaders identifying illinois, indiana, wisconsin and pennsylvania as favorable opportunities to pick up seats. democrats are also confident that if clinton wins in some of the most contested state such as new hampshire, north carolina and nevada, she'll bring along the party's senate candidates. there are bright spots for republicans in the senate contests. sen. rob portman of ohio is running a campaign that mirrors clinton's more than trump's <u+2014> disciplined, well-funded, and heavily centered on data <u+2014> and appears on track to hold his seat, even if clinton carries the state in the presidential race.

clinton enters fall with key advantages in white house 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

3.0

59.0

8.0

5968.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

414.0

0.0

84.0

2.0

0.0

37.0

11.0

23.0

3.0

9.0

16.0

11.0

13.0

31.0

21.0

48.0

419.0

84.0

39.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

voting started in the wee hours of tuesday in new hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary. in dixville notch, residents did their traditional first voting just after midnight, bringing smiles to the faces of bernie sanders and john kasich. sanders swept hillary clinton in dixville notch, 4-0, while kasich topped donald trump, 3 votes to 2. in nearby millsfield, ted cruz won the republican vote over trump, 9-3. several other candidates got one vote apiece. clinton beat sanders, 2 votes to 1. in hart<u+2019>s location, population 43, kasich bested<u+00a0>trump again, 5 votes to 4, with chris christie gathering 2 votes. jeb bush, ben carson, and marco rubio got one vote each. sanders edged clinton, 12 votes to 7. mark stewart greenstein, who calls himself a <u+201c>liberty-leaning democrat,<u+201d> got 2 votes, the<u+00a0>union leader<u+00a0>reported. but the real deal starts as polls across the state open later<u+00a0>tuesday morning, and new hampshire has<u+00a0>a record of making history<u+00a0>in its primaries.<u+00a0>here's what to watch for: donald trump and bernie sanders have both been leading in the new hampshire polls by double-digit margins for months. they both crushed it in a statewide poll of 11,000 k-12 students in the state last week.<u+00a0>if either one of them loses the new hampshire primary, it will be the equivalent of a political earthquake. so the real eyes are on the second-place finishers, and in the republican race, perhaps third. on the democratic side, if hillary clinton can get sanders' margin of victory down below 10%, she can claim some success in challenging sanders on his home turf (he's from neighboring vermont). on the republican side, marco rubio, ted cruz, john kasich and jeb bush have all averaged between 10% and 15% in the polls. if one of them can break away from the pack and finish more than 5% (or so) ahead of the rest of the field, it will give them the opportunity to claim to be the standard-bearer for the<u+00a0>"not trump" lane of the party. if sanders and trump do not win by large margins, prepare for a bunch of hand-wringing from pollsters, who are already under fire for unanimously failing to predict ted cruz's iowa victory last week. there are a lot of good reasons to be skeptical of the polls <u+2014> there are a lot of candidates in the gop field so it is hard to narrow down the level of support among them; new hampshire voters notoriously make their decisions late in the race; and it can be very difficult to predict turnout for non-traditional candidates like trump and sanders. (here's a good podcast by pollsters margie omero and kristen anderson breaking down the iowa polls.) <u+00a0>still, for months polls have been the only real measure of who is up and who is down in the presidential race; those of us who cover politics for a living would feel better if the polls turned out to be right. there are more registered independent voters in new hampshire (390,000) than democrats (231,000)<u+00a0>and republicans (262,000), and under state law any voter can walk into a polling pace and choose a primary ballot for any party. so independent voters will have a dramatic impact on the outcome, and watching how these voters align in new hampshire might provide an interesting signal for which candidates could reach independents in november's general election. the new hampshire secretary of state is predicting more than 550,000 people will vote in the primaries tuesday, which would be historically high and good news for "outsider" candidates trump and sanders who draw a lot of support from new voters. keep in mind that new hampshire allows out-of-state college students to declare residency in the state and vote there, which is also good news for sanders, who is doing very well among young voters. weather should not be a significant factor:<u+00a0>it snowed in much of the state monday and more snow is forecast for tuesday, but not enough to keep these hearty new englanders at home. most polls close in new hampshire at 7 p.m. eastern; the iowa caucuses did not begin until 8 p.m. eastern. so we should have meaningful results before the 11 p.m.<u+00a0>news. results were not yet compete in iowa before the first candidate<u+00a0><u+2014> former arkansas governor mike huckabee<u+00a0><u+2014> dropped out of the<u+00a0>republican race, followed quickly former senator rick santorum<u+00a0>and sen. rand paul, and, on the democratic side, former maryland governor martin o'malley. elections have results, and candidates who did poorly in iowa like kasich, bush, chris christie, ben carson and carly fiorina will have a hard time continuing their campaigns if new hampshire gives them a second weak result.

what you need to know about the new hampshire primary

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

53.0

8.0

4563.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

279.0

1.0

0.0

73.0

0.0

24.0

5.0

17.0

2.0

7.0

6.0

8.0

22.0

11.0

24.0

281.0

74.0

24.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington (cnn) the cool, calm, clear thinking that kept the nato alliance intact as it weathered the cold war with the soviet union has been shattered. decades of careful diplomacy and nail-biting inaction during the potentially world-annihilating nuclear arms race of the 1950s, 60s and 70s appears to have been sacrificed in a few brief seconds by turkey. during the cuban missile crisis of 1962, the soviet invasion of afghanistan in 1979, the deployment of nuclear weapons in western europe in the 1980s and many other causes of strife, nato did not take on the soviet union or russia directly and moscow did not attack any nato country. heavy smoke has been seen in the area where the plane fell. heavy smoke has been seen in the area where the plane fell. the turkish government is strongly opposed to the syrian regime of bashar al-assad. russia, however, has backed assad, and has had warplanes active over syria. the turkish government is strongly opposed to the syrian regime of bashar al-assad. russia, however, has backed assad, and has had warplanes active over syria. the anadolu agency reported that a parachute was also seen leaving the jet before it crashed. the fate of the airman remains unclear. the anadolu agency reported that a parachute was also seen leaving the jet before it crashed. the fate of the airman remains unclear. turkey's semi-official anadolu agency cites turkish presidential sources in reporting that a russian su-24 was "hit within the framework of engagement rules." turkey's semi-official anadolu agency cites turkish presidential sources in reporting that a russian su-24 was "hit within the framework of engagement rules." the turkish military says it shot down the unidentified warplane, contending it repeatedly violated turkish airspace. the turkish military says it shot down the unidentified warplane, contending it repeatedly violated turkish airspace. a russian warplane goes down in syria's bayirbucak region, near the turkish border, on november 24, 2015. a russian warplane goes down in syria's bayirbucak region, near the turkish border, on november 24, 2015. that all changed when turkish air force jets shot down a russian bomber tuesday -- the first time a nato country has taken such action since 1952. back then nato -- a military alliance formed after world war ii by countries in north america and western europe that now has 28 member states committed to defending each other -- stood firmly as one. "as we have repeatedly made clear, we stand in solidarity with turkey and support the territorial integrity of our nato ally, turkey," he said. but, already, german and czech officials are expressing surprise at turkey's action -- taken after the russian plane was inside turkish airspace for 30 seconds or less, according to u.s. calculations. perhaps that seemed more possible this week, with both france and russia mourning losses from isis terror and when they were collectively trading their national tragedies for compromises to find a solution in syria. and erdogan has squandered it. the downing of the russian jet smacks of what erdogan's enemies accuse him of -- of aspirations to resurrect the ottoman empire -- and leaves him open to claims he is too soft on radical islamists. putin has gone further -- saying that erdogan, the head of state of a nato member, is siding with the terrorists. and that's why -- at first analysis -- this looks like a disaster, beyond the loss of life of one pilot and a would-be rescuer. it may also be a gain for putin. for all those years he has was trying to undermine nato unity, erdogan's hasty move has handed it to him on a plate. we may learn what led up to the strike, but the deed is done. erdogan's nato partners can now only look at him as a loose cannon, an unstable element in a very combustible situation. not a steady partner capable of calm nerve that saw the alliance last the cold war. erdogan has thrown the whole card table in the air. in turkey, as internationally, erdogan has a history of pushing his own agenda, whether it's against the tide or not. there's almost no freedom of the press there -- just ask the journalists locked up while covering the recent elections, in which erdogan's party did surprisingly well after a summer poll flop. conflict with kurdish people inside and outside turkey continues. turkey took no action against isis for a year and a half as the group advanced across the border in northern syria. even as the united states sees kurdish fighting groups as a hope to beat isis, turkey continues to attack them. to many in turkey, the prospect of an independent state for the kurds is seen as a greater threat than the religious extremism of isis. to much domestic acclaim, erdogan has moved turkey away from its secular past and resurrected islamism in turkish politics. indeed, erdogan appears to pin hopes on the more moderate muslim brotherhood of syria to thwart real radicals, but he could be getting played. and then there's taking on russia, which is also nominally targeting the common enemy of isis. putin may have dirty hands -- but so does erdogan.

nato and putin: downed russian bomber is big threat

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

18.0

51.0

8.0

5153.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

345.0

0.0

99.0

0.0

38.0

17.0

7.0

5.0

22.0

4.0

10.0

8.0

21.0

32.0

30.0

350.0

99.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

before he decided to run for office, trump<u+2019>s political donations were a cost of doing business, suggesting that his practice of politics was transactional, not ideological. he hosted fundraisers and invited politicians to weddings. <u+201c>i give to everybody. when they call, i give,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>and you know what? when i need something from them <u+2014> two years later, three years later <u+2014> i call them. they are there for me.<u+201d> trump and his major companies gave at least $3.1 million to local, state and federal candidates from both parties between 1995 and 2016, not including donations that may have flowed through the scores of limited-liability corporations that trump controlled. he donated to hillary clinton when she was running to be a u.s. senator from new york. asked if he voted for her, trump said: <u+201c>i never say who i<u+2019>m going to vote for.<u+201d> he did say in a separate interview, however, that his votes for president were consistently republican. although he said he lost respect for the younger president bush because of his handling of the war in iraq, which he later called a <u+201c>disaster,<u+201d> he said he voted for bush again in 2004 because he felt it was important to <u+201c>carry the republican line.<u+201d> recalling the 2004 vote, trump said he showed his distance from bush by not throwing fundraisers for him. trump<u+2019>s public statements sent mixed signals about his political leanings. in 2006, he told the new york times that sen. john mccain, who would become the 2008 republican presidential nominee, could not win because he advocated sending more troops to iraq. trump praised the future democratic nominee, then-sen. barack obama, for his <u+201c>wonderful qualities.<u+201d> nonetheless, trump contributed $3,600 to mccain during the 2008 campaign and said he voted for him. trump changed parties seven times between 1999 and 2012, starting when he left the gop to consider a run under the reform party banner. after registering as a democrat in 2001, he switched back to the republicans in 2003. he became a democrat again in 2005 and a republican in 2009. he chose not to be affiliated with any party in 2011. asked what he would say to critics who saw the constant party-switching as proof that he had no core beliefs, trump responded: <u+201c>i think it had to do more with practicality because if you<u+2019>re going to run for office, you would have had to make friends.<u+201d> then he returned to the gop in 2012, once again stoking speculation that he had his sights on the presidency.

donald trump's run: he was just the man he was waiting for

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

58.0

8.0

2463.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

167.0

3.0

0.0

63.0

1.0

0.0

20.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

7.0

15.0

170.0

66.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

not all the claims in the vice presidential debate stand up to scrutiny. a look at some of them and how they compare with the facts: republican mike pence: "the fact that under this past administration, we've almost doubled the national debt is atrocious.... hillary clinton and tim kaine want more of the same." the facts: as a share of the total u.s. economy, the national debt has gone up 35 percent; not a doubling. still, the debt has ballooned to $19.6 trillion. this largely reflected efforts by the obama administration to stop the great recession. would clinton similarly increase the debt? not according to an analysis by the independent committee for a responsible federal budget. the clinton plan with its tax increases would increase the gross debt -- both privately and publicly held-- by $450 billion over 10 years. mind you, that is on top of an $8.8 trillion increase already projected by the government under current law. as for donald trump, the committee says his tax-cut-heavy plan would increase the gross debt by $4.3 trillion --nearly 10 times more than clinton's plan would do. democrat tim kaine, on fighting the islamic state: "donald trump doesn't have a plan." the facts: clinton also doesn't have a plan that is materially different than what president barack obama is already doing. she's described a three-part strategy that involves crushing is "on its home turf" in the middle east, disrupting its infrastructure on the ground and online, and protecting america and its allies. all are current elements of the obama administration's strategy, so it's not clear what would change or if she would accelerate any portions of it. it's also the case that trump has not laid out a clear plan. pence, calling clinton the "architect of the obama administration's foreign policy," says the crisis in syria was the result of a "failed and weak foreign policy that hillary clinton helped lead." the facts: clinton, as secretary of state, actually pushed for increased u.s. intervention after syrian president bashar assad used chemical weapons against rebels. but obama is the commander in chief and nothing has swayed him thus far. whatever her failings might be on foreign policy, it's a stretch to accuse her of helping to lead a weak policy on syria. pence: "we've seen an economy stifled by more taxes, more regulation, a war on coal." the facts: the coal industry's woes don't come solely from onerous federal regulations. pence omitted the effects of steep competition from cheap natural gas. a string of major coal companies have filed for bankruptcy in recent years, including arch coal, alpha natural resources and peabody energy. layoffs and cutbacks have spread economic suffering through coal country in the appalachians and wyoming's powder river basin. by contrast, these are boom times for natural gas extraction, mostly due to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. still, the obama administration has implemented rules that aren't making the coal industry's life any easier. obama last year imposed a rule requiring coal-fired power plants to cut their carbon emissions as part of his effort to combat climate change. the rule has been suspended pending a legal challenge. obama also has halted new coal leases on federal lands until it completes a comprehensive review. pence, saying he's proud that "the state of indiana has balanced budgets." the facts: true, but that's not exactly to his credit as governor of indiana. a balanced budget is required by law, as it is in every state except vermont.

ap fact check: claims in the vp 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

4.0

0.0

20.0

38.0

8.0

3556.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

220.0

2.0

0.0

63.0

0.0

21.0

9.0

7.0

6.0

12.0

4.0

9.0

1.0

21.0

23.0

21.0

222.0

65.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

san jose, calif. <u+2014>protests outside<u+00a0>a donald trump rally in downtown san jose spun out of control thursday night when some demonstrators attacked<u+00a0>the candidate<u+2019>s supporters. protesters jumped on cars, pelted trump supporters with eggs and water balloons, snatched signs and stole <u+201c>make america great<u+201d> hats off supporters<u+2019> heads before burning the hats and snapping selfies with the charred remains. several people were caught on camera punching trump supporters. at least one attacker was arrested, according to cnn, although police did not release much information. <u+201c>the san jose police department made a few arrests tonight after the donald trump rally,<u+201d> police<u+00a0>said in a statement. <u+201c>as of this time, we do not have specific information on the arrests made. there has been no significant property damage reported. one officer was assaulted.<u+201d> in one video circulating widely on social media, two<u+00a0>protesters tried to protect a trump supporter as other protesters<u+00a0>attacked him and called him names. another video captured a female trump supporter taunting protesters before being surrounded and struck in the face with an egg and water balloons. police eventually cleared the protest, which they called an <u+201c>unlawful<u+00a0>assembly.<u+201d> the incidents<u+00a0>were the latest in a series of increasingly violent altercations between protesters, trump supporters and police at the presumptive republican nominee<u+2019>s campaign events. a week ago, it was albuquerque descending into chaos as the city was shaken by raucous riots and arrests outside a trump rally. a month earlier it was costa mesa, calif. thursday was san jose<u+2019>s turn to take center stage in what is quickly becoming a<u+00a0>traveling fiasco. before the event, the san jose police department issued a press release saying it <u+201c>recognizes and respects everyone<u+2019>s right to express their first amendment [rights], and we will do everything possible to ensure the event is safe for all attendees and surrounding neighborhoods.<u+201d> as the night unfolded, however, it became<u+00a0>clear that the chaos seen at trump campaign stops across the country had found its way to san jose. trump supporters were surrounded and, in several cases, attacked as they left the rally. in one incident captured on camera, a trump supporter was<u+00a0>struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. the attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt. <u+201c>i was walking out with a trump sign and he grabbed my trump sign, saying i was like a racist and stuff,<u+201d> the man told bystanders and local media. <u+201c>then he followed me, like, spit on me.<u+201d> the trump supporter said<u+00a0>all he had done was chant the candidate<u+2019>s name before trying to walk away. another trump supporter was also bloodied after being attacked, his shirt torn almost completely off his body. videos circulating on social media showed swirling, furious fights spilling from street corner to street corner, often with no police in sight. marcus dipaola, a freelance photographer following the trump campaign, posted video of someone getting punched<u+00a0>violently in the face. reached by phone thursday night,<u+00a0>dipaola said the sucker punch happened at 8:08 p.m. just outside<u+00a0>the convention center where the trump rally was held. <u+201c>it wasn<u+2019>t completely unprovoked,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>the guy with the flag was waving it<u+00a0>in front of the victim<u+2019>s face. the victim kind of pushed the flag out of the way and then walked quickly away. you saw what happened next.<u+201d> dipaola said he called 911 but was put on hold and so hung up. he said he told<u+00a0>one police officer about the beating but was told sjpd <u+201c>didn<u+2019>t have the manpower<u+201d> to intervene. <u+201c>morons,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>how do you not staff 911 for an event of this size?<u+201d> dipaola wasn<u+2019>t the only journalist to condemn the cops<u+2019> handling of the protest. many of the protesters were peaceful. some waved mexican flags in an apparent response to trump calling mexican immigrants <u+201c>rapists.<u+201d> according to the san jose mercury news, many of the protesters were latinos from east san jose opposed to what they saw as racism from the gop candidate. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re here to support latinos, black people; we<u+2019>re not rapists,<u+201d> cindy zurita, a 23-year-old student, told the mercury news as she held a sign reading:<u+00a0><u+201c>mr hate leave my state.<u+201d> abc reporter tom llamas, however, said<u+00a0>that some of the protesters were <u+201c>throwing up gang signs.<u+201d> <u+201c>there were [people]<u+00a0>who came to demonstrate & some who just wanted to brawl,<u+201d> he<u+00a0>tweeted, calling it <u+201c>the most violent demonstrations we<u+2019>ve seen.<u+201d> at times, protesters began to fight among themselves. in one instance, two female protesters pleaded for nonviolence while trying to protect a trump supporter from an angry crowd. despite their efforts, someone snatched the trump supporter<u+2019>s hat. a handful of<u+00a0>the bright red <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> hats were set on fire by protesters, who then snapped photos of the scene or hung the charred hats from street signs. some protesters said they were disappointed<u+00a0>to see violence<u+00a0>undermine their message. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s sad to see san jose representing like this,<u+201d> student martha garcia told the guardian. <u+201c>trump is the one igniting the hate. you can<u+2019>t fight fire with fire.<u+201d> perhaps the most jarring scene was that of a young female trump supporter being attacked by a crowd of protesters. in multiple videos of the incident, the woman initially appeared to be happily posing in her trump football jersey<u+00a0>in front of the mostly male protesters, some of whom can be heard whistling and shouting at her. then an anonymous arm rises over the crowd and tosses an<u+00a0>egg at the woman, striking her in the head<u+00a0>and eliciting howls and laughter from the crowd. a second later, a red water balloon bursts against the woman<u+2019>s arm. at first, the woman tries<u+00a0>to shrug off the attacks,<u+00a0>smiling while appearing to reach out toward the mexican flags that some protesters are waving. objects keep crashing into the convention center windows behind her, however, and protesters can be heard screaming expletives at her. suddenly, another projectile strikes her hard in the face. eventually, someone comes to help her and, after she indicates that she is having trouble seeing, she is ushered back inside the convention center. the<u+00a0>ugly scenes<u+00a0>of violence toward trump supporters thursday appeared to be the inverse of similar incidents earlier in the campaign in which<u+00a0>trump protesters, not supporters, were targeted. the sucker punch captured by<u+00a0>dipaola, for instance, echoed an incident in march when a 78-year-old trump supporter sucker-punched a protester at a rally in<u+00a0>fayetteville, n.c. [trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of tucson rally] hillary clinton and bernie sanders<u+2019>s campaigns both condemned the violence in san jose. john podesta, chairman of hillary clinton for america, tweeted that <u+201c>violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election.<u+201d> mike casca, sanders<u+2019>s rapid response director, tweeted that <u+201c>we cannot stop trump<u+2019>s violent rhetoric with violence <u+2014> only peaceful protest in a voting booth can do that.<u+201d> blame for the attacks<u+00a0>circulated almost as rapidly as images of the violence, with trump supporters accusing democrats and members of the media of having a double standard. many liberals, meanwhile, including the democratic mayor of san jose, suggested that trump<u+2019>s angry and divisive rhetoric made him at least partly responsible for the violence at his events. <u+201c>at some point donald trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,<u+201d> mayor sam liccardo told the associated press, praising the city<u+2019>s police<u+00a0>while adding that<u+00a0><u+201c>we<u+2019>re all still holding our breath to see the outcome of this dangerous and explosive situation.<u+201d> things inside the rally were<u+00a0>more subdued <u+2014> if only slightly. politico<u+00a0>reported that one of its journalists was removed from the rally for reporting at the event without the campaign<u+2019>s permission. trump,<u+00a0>meanwhile, was interrupted<u+00a0>a handful of times by protesters. responding to clinton<u+2019>s blistering attack on him earlier in the day, trump attacked her over her email controversy, going so far as to say <u+201c>hillary clinton has to go to jail.<u+201d> <u+201c>she does not look presidential <u+2014> that i can tell you,<u+201d> he said, according to bloomberg. <u+201c>this is not a president. four more years of this stuff and we<u+2019>re not going to have a country left.<u+201d>

ugly, bloody scenes in san jose as protesters attack trump supporters outside rally

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

83.0

8.0

8390.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

484.0

0.0

175.0

0.0

40.0

28.0

8.0

17.0

27.0

11.0

16.0

13.0

19.0

43.0

39.0

486.0

175.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president<u+00a0>enrique pe<u+00f1>a nieto has invited both donald trump and hillary clinton to meet in mexico. in a surprise move, mr. trump has accepted the offer, hours before he will give an immigration policy speech in arizona. republican presidential candidate donald trump steps off his plane after arriving for a campaign rally at crown arena in fayetteville, n.c. on tuesday, aug. 9, 2016. trump will fly to mexico wednesday on invitation of president enrique pe<u+00f1>a nieto. the republican presidential candidate is taking up mexican president enrique pe<u+00f1>a<u+00a0>nieto on an offer extended to both us presidential candidates by making a quick visit to mexico on wednesday, just hours before he is expected to a deliver major immigration speech in arizona. "i have accepted the invitation of president enrique pena nieto, of mexico, and look very much forward to meeting him...,"<u+00a0>said mr. trump in a twitter post on tuesday night. trump's ascent to the nomination owes much to his antagonism of the united states' southern neighbor: launching his campaign with remarks that belittled immigrants from mexico, and claiming that they have contributed to international humiliation for the us. "they're not sending us their best," he said in<u+00a0>his<u+00a0>june 2015 speech<u+00a0>announcing<u+00a0>that he was seeking the republican presidential bid.<u+00a0>"they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some, i assume, are good people<u+00a0>but i speak to border guards and they tell us what we're getting." "when do we beat mexico at the border?" he continued.<u+00a0>"they're laughing at us, at our stupidity. and now they're beating us economically. they are not our friend, believe me, but they're killing us economically." in march, mr. pe<u+00f1>a nieto<u+00a0>criticized trump's "strident" tone, likening his brand of populism to that of fascist leaders like adolf hitler and benito mussolini. he later told cnn that there was "no way"<u+00a0>that mexico would ever pay for the construction of a border wall, as trump has insisted it should. on tuesday, pe<u+00f1>a nieto<u+00a0>seemed to preempt criticisms over the invitation, writing on twitter that he believed in dialogue "to promote the interests of mexico in the world and, principally, to protect mexicans wherever they are." the purpose of the visit, he wrote, was to discuss bilateral relations <u+2013> a preferred topic for a president who has made attracting foreign investment a priority. his comments in march aside, the mexican president has been characteristically circumspect in his remarks about the us elections, describing them as a matter to be decided internally. "i have never made any remark or rating about any of the candidates today in the democratic competition of the united states," he said in july, according to local media. "any point or statement<u+00a0>that i have made has been taken out of context.... i have always expressed absolute respect for the process." in april, the christian science monitor noted that despite the vast expense and formidable array of practical obstacles involved in building walls along the border, politicians in the us continue to use the idea to soothe anxieties over immigration: the value of the wall, some experts say, is much more as a political idea than an actual structure. the border wall remains a powerful symbol for people on both sides of the immigration debate <u+2013> either as a sign of security taken seriously or of fear and misunderstanding run amok. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s something that has gained a lot of political value, the idea that you can wall the united states off from the rest of the rest of the world, particularly in this case, mexico,<u+201d> says rachel st. john, author of <u+201c>line in the sand: a history of the u.s.-mexico border.<u+201d> trump's visit comes as he appears to retreat from his earlier insistence that he would marshal a "deportation force" to expel all of the country<u+2019>s roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants. in recent meetings with hispanic supporters, the candidate suggested that he might be open to letting some of those people stay <u+2013> though his staff has appeared to contradict that in subsequent interviews. new jersey governor chris christie, a close trump adviser who visited pe<u+00f1>a nieto<u+00a0>in mexico city in 2014, was among those pushing the republican candidate to take the trip, a source close to the campaign told the associated press. this report contains material from the associated press.

why did mexico invite donald trump for a visit? (+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

56.0

8.0

4455.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

365.0

0.0

91.0

2.0

0.0

49.0

12.0

10.0

5.0

12.0

8.0

6.0

19.0

18.0

38.0

373.0

91.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

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

hillary is new and improved! take as directed.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

46.0

8.0

69.0

1.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump easily won the washington state primary on tuesday, but his victory was overshadowed by violence outside a rally in albuquerque, new mexico, where protesters smashed windows and threw rocks at police. with 73% of votes counted in washington, trump had won 76.2% of primary voters. john kasich and ted cruz, both of whom have dropped out of the race, had won 9.9.% and 10.1% respectively. trump<u+2019>s victory leaves him only needing a few dozen more delegates to reach the magic number of 1,237 required to cement the republican nomination. outside trump<u+2019>s rally in albuquerque, protests against the presumptive nominee turned nasty on tuesday night, with protesters overturning crowd control barriers and throwing rocks at police. there were early posts on social media reporting gunshots and tear gas, but the albuquerque police department said those were inaccurate. nonetheless, police horses were deployed to control the large crowd of protesters, and some reports showed pepper spray being used. the door to the convention center where trump was speaking was also smashed. more than an hour after trump had finished speaking and left for california, where he will campaign for the next few days in the run-up to the state<u+2019>s 7 june primary, hundreds of protesters still thronged the streets, waving mexican flags, lighting fires and chanting. trump is the only remaining candidate campaigning for the republican nomination, but kasich and cruz were also on the ballot in washington, having suspended their campaigns after the ballots were printed. dr ben carson was also on the ballot because he reportedly never officially submitted a withdrawal of his candidacy to the state. the state delegation, which was selected on saturday at the state convention in preparation for the primary, is composed almost entirely of supporters of cruz, whose supporters overwhelmed the state convention in pasco. despite this, the delegates are bound by state party rules to vote for trump on the first ballot at the national convention, us senate candidate and former chairman of the washington state republican party chris vance, who was at the convention, told the guardian. however, with seven upcoming primaries, including new jersey and california, trump is expected to easily overtake the delegate mark needed to win the nomination on the first ballot at the convention in cleveland in july, avoiding a contested convention. in a strange quirk of party politics, the democrats also held a presidential primary in washington on tuesday, but it didn<u+2019>t matter in the slightest because the democratic delegation from washington was already settled by a caucus in march, at which bernie sanders beat hillary clinton 73% to 27%. interestingly, in the democratic primary <u+2013> which was admittedly meaningless as it has no bearing on the number of delegates as opposed to the caucuses <u+2013> clinton won comfortably, 53.63% to 46.37%, implying that perhaps democratic voters want the primary season to be, finally, over with.

protests at donald trump rally overshadow washington primary win

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

64.0

8.0

3032.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

181.0

0.0

57.0

0.0

12.0

6.0

7.0

3.0

6.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

11.0

17.0

184.0

57.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

jindal, the republican governor of louisiana, referred to obama's comments as a "history lesson" that ignores "the issue right in front of his nose." "we will be happy to keep an eye out for runaway christians, but it would be nice if he would face the reality of the situation today," jindal said in a statement out friday. "the medieval christian threat is under control, mr. president. please deal with the radical islamic threat today." santorum, who ran for president in 2012 as well, rebuked obama for ignoring the threat of isis and criticizing people of faith. "today's remarks by the president were inappropriate and his choice of venue was insulting to every person of faith at a time when christians are being crucified, beheaded, and persecuted across the middle east," the former pennsylvania senator said in a statement. the comments, which were intended to illustrate the potential for religion to be used for both good and bad aims, drew fierce criticism from conservatives on thursday. and with santorum's decision to weigh in, could rapidly become fodder for attacks from potential 2016 contenders looking to burnish their credentials with the religious right. santorum went on to slam obama for misunderstanding the threat posed by the rise of islamic extremism, and accused him of tying modern christians to "the scourge in the middle east." "while christians of today are taught to live their lives as the reflection of christ's love, the radicals of isis use their holy texts as a rationale for violence," he said. "to insinuate modern christians <u+2014> the same christian faith that led the abolitionist movement, the civil rights movement, and global charitable efforts fighting disease and poverty <u+2014> cannot stand up against the scourge we see in the middle east is wrong." santorum also suggested that some muslims have only been opposed to isis' burning a jordanian pilot alive because they are opposed to the "tactic," not the actual murder itself. "some muslims...[have] sat quietly by as the islamic state uses brutal violence that is not antithetical to islam and only objects on tactics," he said. during the national prayer breakfast, obama didn't downplay the threat posed by isis, but instead made the case that "humanity has been grappling with" the tension between the good and bad deeds done in the name of religion for ages. "and lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of christ," he said. "in our home country, slavery and jim crow all too often was justified in the name of christ. michelle and i returned from india <u+2014> an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity <u+2014> but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs <u+2014> acts of intolerance that would have shocked gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation." but conservatives decried his comments as both further evidence of his poor grasp of the threats facing the nation, and insulting to christians. talk-radio host rush limbaugh said he insulted "the whole gamut of christians," and jim gilmore, the former gop governor of virginia, called the comments "the most offensive i've ever heard a president make in my lifetime," according to the new york times and catholic league president bill donohue <u+2014> a frequent critic of obama <u+2014> called the comments "insulting" and "pernicious" in a statement, and said obama was trying to "deflect guilt from muslim madmen."

obama takes fire for

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

20.0

8.0

3639.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

308.0

0.0

75.0

0.0

30.0

24.0

12.0

13.0

20.0

11.0

16.0

7.0

22.0

27.0

28.0

309.0

75.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

it's amazing to go back and watch bernie sanders's<u+00a0>presidential campaign announcement. nearly everything about sanders's campaign would change over the following 14 months <u+2014> except for the candidate himself. there are no introductions. sanders begins by pulling a crumpled piece of paper out of his pocket, before turning to a small scattering of reporters gathered around a makeshift podium. there's not a single sanders supporter in sight <u+2014> no banners, no<u+00a0>"bernie tees" or "feel the bern" pins or even as much as a cardboard sign. sanders speaks for about 10 minutes and answers a few questions before turning to walk back to the us capitol, alone. washington reporters chuckled. they knew that clinton would put on a slick show, and she did <u+2014> kicking off her bid on roosevelt island to 5,400 cheering supporters waving american flags, standing on a stage carved out to show her campaign logo. but over the course of the campaign, sanders would be the one routinely packing stadium-size rallies, drawing rallies of tens of thousands of people, and getting introduced by liberal icons like former labor secretary robert reich and actor danny glover. the substance of his message is almost exactly the same, but now there's someone <u+2014> millions of them, in fact <u+2014> eager to hear it. on tuesday, sanders is<u+00a0>widely expected to finally endorse clinton at a rally in new hampshire. his team can boast a number of accomplishments <u+2014> a radical new way to finance the modern presidential campaign; the mainstreaming of critical liberal policies;<u+00a0>runaway popularity with young voters <u+2014> but he is now shorn of the the outpouring of energy that powered his campaign for months. the end of sanders's movement, however, also marks the beginning of the debate over what it meant: was bernie just a typical left-wing insurgent who scared the centrist candidate? or did he light the spark of a "political revolution" <u+2014> and show the promise of a new kind of democratic politics? for bernie's closest allies, lefty academics, and other writers, the surging interest in sanders's campaign shows that he's more than a candidate of the left wing of the party. they see the massive growth of inequality in america as fundamentally reorienting our politics and think sanders is the candidate who most capitalized on that transformation. to them, sanders's run is not like bill bradley's in 2000 or howard dean's in 2004, but the start of something else altogether. in this interpretation, sanders's success is not principally the result of winning the democrats' left flank; it's the result of a populist rebellion that drew the masses to his cause. here's robert<u+00a0>reich, a prominent sanders ally and a public policy professor at the university of california berkeley: reich goes on to argue that sanders's rock star popularity is the result of his laser-like focus on challenging financial elites at every turn. you can disagree with this analysis, but there's certainly plenty of evidence for it <u+2014> including clinton's support among wealthier voters and sanders's runaway popularity in "coal country" states like west virginia. sanders denounced inequality with more ferocity than any other presidential candidate, and inequality really has skyrocketed in america over the past few decades. it's certainly theoretically possible he became the major beneficiary of that shift. sanders's allies see evidence for this thesis bubbling up at every corner of the campaign. the most obvious is the senator's shocking success at the ballot box. from starting at essentially zero in polling at the race's outset, sanders rocketed to within a few points of clinton's popularity among democrats, pulled in more than 9 million votes, and gave the prohibitive favorite a far greater scare than essentially anyone expected. as the nation's steve fraser says in one typical column, the idea of sanders's success as a reaction to widening financial inequality also appears to to explain donald trump's rise on the right: sanders's allies<u+00a0>see the democratic primary as a battle between the upper class and the middle/lower class everywhere they look: in clinton's reliance on wall street and six-figure donations over sanders's small donor army; in the mass turnout at his campaign rallies; and in the "corporate media" that has allegedly helped her over the organic social media that has driven his campaign. then there's the matter of sanders's polling numbers against donald trump. vox's matt yglesias lays out the case to be skeptical of these numbers here, but polling really has consistently shown sanders outperforming clinton in head-to-head matchups against trump. in a standard left-right framework, sanders running ahead of clinton<u+00a0>doesn't make any sense. but if you think politics has been spun on its head and should now be thought of primarily on an elite-populist axis, then maybe it does. but while some see sanders as a transformational figure, political scientists and mainstream pundits tend to see in his candidacy a largely unsurprising left-wing insurgency that <u+2014> like others before it <u+2014> has benefited from the dynamics of a democratic primary. as slate's jamelle bouie argues convincingly in a piece called "there is no bernie sanders movement," sanders really represents a faction of largely white ideological liberals <u+2014> not some populist uprising against the elites <u+2014> whose dissatisfaction with mainstream democrats we've seen demonstrated in nearly every recent presidential primary: moreover, we don't know how much sanders's velocity was the result of an unusually open democratic field. echoing bouie, boston college professor dave hopkins punctures the idea of a transformative "sanders movement" by noting that any candidate who ran against the compromised clintons would have a shot at winning over young voters in big numbers. "[sanders's] overwhelming margins among young voters might have been attenuated had he been facing a more conventional democratic opponent, or opponents, who could also claim to be a fresh political face and who remained free of the baggage left by the clintonist compromises of the 1990s and early 2000s," hopkins says. "if sanders were running against some combination of cory booker, chris murphy, and amy klobuchar, would voters under the age of 35 appear equally enthusiastic about the prospect of implementing socialism as the defining creed of the democratic party?" hopkins added that there's no reason to be assured that sanders's popularity with young voters <u+2014> he<u+00a0>outperformed even barack obama with voters under 30 <u+2014> will guarantee a long-term shift. "i know of no survey evidence that shows that the difference between younger and older democrats on substantive issues is anywhere near as large as the generation gap in support between clinton and sanders," he says, "which suggests to me that sanders<u+2019>s fairly remarkable appeal among the young is based on more than just policy." but perhaps the most damning rebuttal to the idea that sanders has ignited a new class-conscious politics is that he doesn't actually appear to be doing any better among poorer voters than clinton. back in april, vox's dara lind showed that sanders's campaign had failed to mobilize the poor it was explicitly designed to attract. and while some commentators have thought sanders has performed better with the white working class, political scientists have demonstrated that this is mostly an artifact of young people having less money. there's not much of any evidence for a brewing "political revolution" of a previously untapped underclass of voters, in other words. some have doubted that even sanders's young legions of supporters are genuinely committed to his policy ideas. in the new york times, vanderbilt's larry bartels and princeton's christopher achen<u+00a0>go as far as arguing that we can't even reasonably assume sanders's young supporters are backing his candidacy because they're more liberal than the rest of the party: sanders's campaign has the energy of the moment <u+2014> the mass mobilization of young people and, by extension, the ability to organize rallies that dwarf clinton's in size. it's an undeniably impressive accomplishment. but it's far from clear if it also represents the future of american politics.

bernie sanders is expected to endorse hillary clinton today. what did his movement mean?

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

88.0

8.0

8265.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

536.0

1.0

0.0

144.0

0.0

66.0

15.0

26.0

5.0

11.0

16.0

8.0

11.0

29.0

23.0

60.0

544.0

145.0

66.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

trump doubles down on mccain criticism, refusing to apologize veterans groups have added to the chorus of condemnation against donald trump <u+2014> much of it coming from within his own party <u+2014> following disparaging remarks the real-estate mogul and republican presidential candidate made about sen. john mccain's war record. and iraq and afghanistan veterans of america: as we reported previously, trump, attending a family leadership summit in ames, iowa, on saturday, lashed out at the arizona republican and former gop presidential nominee, who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in north vietnam after being shot down in 1967. "he was a war hero because he was captured," trump said. "i like people who weren't captured." fellow candidates, including former govs. jeb bush and rick perry and sen. marco rubio, have fired back at trump, with rubio saying on cnn sunday that the remarks were a "disqualifier" for the republican nomination. asked on abc's this week if he owed mccain an apology, trump answered: "no, not at all." "john mccain has failed," he said, citing the arizona senator's record on veterans' issues. "i believe that i will do far more for veterans than john mccain has done for many, many years, with all talk, no action. ... nothing gets done." and in his latest tweets and statements from his campaign, trump touts his record on veterans and demands that mccain apologize for calling those who attended a trump rally in phoenix last week "crazies."

trump doubles down on mccain criticism, refusing to apologize

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

61.0

8.0

1489.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

99.0

0.0

17.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

6.0

3.0

4.0

1.0

8.0

4.0

5.0

9.0

13.0

106.0

17.0

8.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

comments about recent events in baltimore after the death of freddie gray provide a glimpse at perhaps one of our greatest challenges <u+2014> perception. in this case, as in too many others involving police, perception seems to be black and white. <u+201c>i think that if you look at what<u+2019>s happened over the course of the last year, you<u+2019>ve just got to scratch your head,<u+201d> said house speaker john boehner (r) on nbc<u+2019>s <u+201c>meet the press,<u+201d> referring to the rash of fatal incidents involving police officers and african american males. <u+201c>i heard your call for <u+2018>no justice, no peace,<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> said baltimore city state<u+2019>s attorney marilyn mosby (d) to demonstrators in her city and around the country, as she announced charges against six police officers involved in the arrest of gray. to the youth of baltimore, she declared, <u+201c>our time is now!<u+201d> and urged peaceful demonstration. both comments made headlines. and both, though well intentioned, carried subliminal messages freighted with racial (not racist) undertones. boehner<u+2019>s overly cautious remark was as starkly white as his oxiclean-ed, hand-pressed shirts. a man more accustomed to golf courses and marble hallways than to gritty urban streets, he was plainly trying to acknowledge that we have a police and race problem in the united states. but he sounded like he<u+2019>d just landed on the planet. yes, quite head-scratching, all this police business. mosby<u+2019>s remarks, jubilantly received by the baltimore crowd, provoked high dudgeon elsewhere. some of the words used to describe her performance have included <u+201c>showboating,<u+201d> <u+201c>demagoguing<u+201d> and <u+201c>grandstanding.<u+201d> to some ears, mosby sounded as though the cops<u+2019> convictions were a fait accompli. that she found the evidence convincing enough to justify the charges may ultimately also justify her bravura. let<u+2019>s do keep in mind that gray<u+2019>s offense was making eye contact with an officer and running away. gray<u+2019>s voice box was crushed and his spine all but severed, according to his family. anyone who watched the video could see that gray was in terrible pain as he was led to the police van, where he was shackled and his pleas for help apparently ignored. that his life ended in pain and horror is not in dispute. but no less a legal luminary than alan dershowitz has taken issue with the charges, saying, <u+201c>there<u+2019>s no plausible, hypothetical, conceivable case for murder under the facts as we now know them.<u+201d> charges brought against the six officers included one count of second-degree murder, four counts of involuntary manslaughter, assault and misconduct in office. in other words, mosby threw everything she could against the six officers. many have asked: for justice? or to quell the passions of the streets? perhaps both. mosby surely calculated that announcing the charges as she did <u+2014> with a microphone in a public place <u+2014> would have a dramatic effect. (she declined to be interviewed for this column.) mosby also was speaking as a member of her community, long plagued with a history of police brutality, including last year<u+2019>s fatal beating of tyrone west. the medical examiner<u+2019>s report concluded that west died of a prior heart condition that was exacerbated by dehydration, the july heat and his police encounter. no charges were leveled against the police in that case. thus, from the perspective of many among baltimore<u+2019>s protesters, the current charges are long overdue. even so, one does worry that the six officers are paying not only for their role in gray<u+2019>s death, to whatever degree this is determined, but also for the cumulative sins of others. to the officers, the cheering and horn-honking following mosby<u+2019>s words must have sounded like the colosseum mob<u+2019>s cry for blood. to an older generation of americans, they were reminiscent of the reaction 20<u+00a0>years ago when a mostly black jury found o.j. simpson not guilty of murdering his ex-wife, nicole brown simpson, and her friend, ron goldman. whites: he totally did it. african americans: it<u+2019>s our turn, in so many words. this past week, whites across the united states spoke softly about the freddie gray case: <u+201c>thank god three of the cops were black.<u+201d> president obama, speaking after mosby leveled her charges, called for truth. how, indeed, do we get to it? in a diverse nation, we<u+2019>ll never all see things exactly the same way, nor would we want to, but we might at least strive to recognize our own biases and judge our own perceptions as harshly as we do others<u+2019>. read more from kathleen parker<u+2019>s archive, follow her on twitter or find her on facebook.

baltimore, race and matters of perception

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

41.0

8.0

4528.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

268.0

0.0

94.0

0.0

27.0

18.0

15.0

11.0

22.0

8.0

19.0

7.0

22.0

31.0

33.0

270.0

94.0

27.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the islamic faith isn<u+2019>t <u+201c>consistent<u+201d> with the u.s. constitution, and a muslim shouldn<u+2019>t be president, republican presidential candidate ben carson said. <u+201c>i would not advocate that we put a muslim in charge of this nation,<u+201d> carson said on nbc<u+2019>s 'meet the press' on sunday. late sunday, he doubled down on those comments in an interview with the hill. <u+201c>i do not believe sharia is consistent with the constitution of this country,<u+201d> carson told the hill. <u+201c>muslims feel that their religion is very much a part of your public life and what you do as a public official, and that<u+2019>s inconsistent with our principles and our constitution.<u+201d> editor's note: is ben carson your candidate for 2016? vote here. earlier, carson told nbc's chuck todd that the religious beliefs of a president would matter if his or her faith was inconsistent with u.s. values. his view contrasted with that of donald trump, the billionaire front-runner for the republican presidential nomination, who said on the program that a muslim as president is something that could happen in the future. trump said he knows many muslims who are <u+201c>fabulous,<u+201d> but there<u+2019>s <u+201c>a very severe problem<u+201d> with some muslims around the world -- comments he repeated on other sunday broadcasts. special: dr. ben carson's vision for america, see it <u+201c>this is the first i<u+2019>ve ever gotten into hot water for not saying anything,<u+201d> trump said. trump and carson both said they believe obama is a christian. story continues below video.

carson doubles down on 'muslim' comments: 'sharia inconsistent with constitution'

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

81.0

8.0

1494.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

126.0

0.0

27.0

2.0

0.0

16.0

2.0

5.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

2.0

7.0

4.0

8.0

135.0

27.0

18.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as democratic presidential candidates<u+00a0>begin to include<u+00a0>a debt-free college system as part of their respective campaigns, new jersey gov. and republican contender<u+00a0>chris christie thinks the push<u+00a0>is a <u+201c>typical liberal approach.<u+201d> christie stopped at iowa state university<u+00a0>thursday<u+00a0>to deliver his fourth most recent policy address. among his talking points were dealing with teachers<u+2019> unions and how to handle the increasing costs of college. <u+201c>that is a typical liberal approach. it is wrong,<u+201d> he said.<u+00a0><u+201c>if college graduates are going to reap the greater economic rewards and opportunities of earning a degree, then it seems fair for them to support the cost of the education they<u+2019>re receiving.<u+201d> christie spoke about his father joining the army in order to pay for college, because his father, at the time, couldn<u+2019>t afford to pay for his own education. he went to rutgers university after his service through<u+00a0>the g.i. bill. <u+201c>we all need to take personal responsibility to grasp the opportunities in higher education, but also one where we can get a leg up when we need it,<u+201d> christie said. rather than make higher education free for<u+00a0>students, christie instead proposed that congress support low-income students by continuing to fund aid programs. he noted that while supplemental education opportunity grants and perkins loans have declined, the availability of pell grants has<u+00a0>expanded.<u+00a0>but that may not be the case according to a march 2015<u+00a0>study by<u+00a0>the center on budget and policy priorities, which found pell grant funding is actually being cut. christie<u+00a0>also said there should be tax breaks for donors to higher education grant organizations and income-share agreements. this would allow a student to repay the private financing he or she<u+00a0>received for college with a percentage of his or her future income. what do you think? is a debt-free college realistic? how can students combat increasing costs of higher education?

chris christie says debt-free college is 'wrong'

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

48.0

8.0

1927.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

138.0

0.0

42.0

0.0

16.0

2.0

9.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

5.0

1.0

13.0

9.0

21.0

142.0

42.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) an employee at the prison where two convicted killers escaped over the weekend is being questioned as a possible accomplice, a law enforcement source briefed on the investigation told cnn. investigators on monday questioned the employee, a woman who worked with escaped convicts richard matt and david sweat, tailoring clothing at the clinton correctional facility in new york. the woman knows the two escapees "very well," the source said, though she has not been charged or arrested. the development comes after new york gov. andrew cuomo said inmates matt and sweat must have had help in carrying out the intricate plot. the pair, who were in side-by-side cells, used power tools to cut through the cells' steel walls and clambered through a maze of underground pipes, according to authorities. "they wouldn't have had the equipment on their own, that's for sure," cuomo told cnn of the convicted killers, who escaped sometime after they were last seen at bed check friday night. the two prisoners were in the "honor block" of the prison, meaning they were given certain liberties for good behavior, the law enforcement source said. for the most part they have a clean disciplinary record, according to records provided by a spokeswoman for the department of corrections. despite a $100,000 reward and a manhunt involving some 250 law enforcement officials, matt and sweat -- both serving lengthy sentences -- were still on the loose monday. "they could be literally anywhere," said maj. charles e. guess of the new york state police, which is leading the search. cuomo said residents of dannemora, where the prison is located, should feel safe because of the presence of hundreds of law enforcement officers there. still, students returned to schools monday amid heightened security after police thoroughly searched every building and bus, saranac central school district superintendent jonathan parks said in an email to parents. police officers were scheduled to be at every school throughout the day, he said. that's in part because of its remote location -- in the sparsely populated northeast corner of new york, about 25 miles from the canadian border. and also because it's in a region where wintry weather can persist more than half the year. the facility has 2,689 inmates, and two of its most notorious inhabitants were matt, 49, and sweat, 35. they apparently were last seen at 10:30 p.m. friday during a standing count -- head counts that are performed every two hours throughout the night when guards visually check to see whether inmates are in their bunks. the pair tricked the guards by arranging things in the bunks to look "like people were sleeping ... with these sweatshirt hoodies on," cuomo said. once they were out of their cells, they then followed a catwalk down an elaborate maze of pipes until they emerged from a manhole outside the prison walls. they evaded detection for some seven hours, until the inmate count at 5:30 a.m. saturday. along with the taunting sticky note, the pair also left a host of unanswered, and uncomfortable, questions for law enforcement. how did they get the power tools? how could they have known the layout of the bowels of the old prison? did they have help from the inside? cuomo, who toured the escape route and announced the $100,000 reward sunday, said it was possible the tools came from contractors working on the 170-year-old prison. authorities are also looking at civilian prison employees, he said. but he seemed to rule out the involvement of the prison's certified employees. "i'd be shocked if a guard was involved, and that's putting it mildly," he said. the danger the two men pose can't be overstated, officials said. sweat was serving a life sentence without parole in the killing of kevin tarsia, a sheriff's deputy, in 2002. matt was convicted on three counts of murder, three counts of kidnapping and two counts of robbery after he kidnapped a man and beat him to death in december 1997, state police said. he was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. "he has a history," said gabriel dibernardo, who led the investigation into the murder for which matt was convicted. "he broke out of jail before. he is a cunning individual, no question about it, and a vicious individual." sweat is white, 5 feet, 11 inches tall and weighs 165 pounds. he has brown hair, green eyes and tattoos on his left bicep and his right fingers. matt is white, 6 feet tall and weighs 210 pounds. he has black hair, hazel eyes and several tattoos: "mexico forever" on his back, a heart on his chest and left shoulder, and a marine corps insignia on his right shoulder. "these are dangerous people," cuomo said. "and they're nothing to be trifled with." matt is also well-known to mexican authorities. in 2007, he was extradited from mexico back to new york on a decade-old murder charge, documents show. with the facility's proximity to canada, and with matt's ties to mexico, authorities on both international borders have been alerted. officers used roadblocks and bloodhounds and went door to door in their search for the men. they scoured the woods and sifted through the dozens and dozens of tips that came in. but so far, no luck. they don't know if the pair is still together, had help on the outside, or if the men had access to a vehicle. jonathan gilliam, a former navy seal, fbi agent, air marshal and police officer, told cnn's "new day" on monday that the inmates might have been able to pull off part of the escape by themselves. but he said the presence of power tools and the complicated escape route suggest that they weren't working alone. "the combination of all those things is very worrisome for me because that spells help," he said. on sunday, the u.s. marshals service issued federal arrest warrants for the escapees. the warrants clear the way for the federal government to involve its considerable resources in the manhunt. "every resource available to us will be used in bringing these two men to justice," said william o'toole, a u.s. marshals service spokesman. "we're leaving no stone unturned," guess of the new york state police said sunday.

new york prison escape: worker questioned, source says

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

54.0

8.0

6176.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

376.0

0.0

146.0

0.0

51.0

10.0

8.0

20.0

8.0

11.0

6.0

25.0

24.0

29.0

379.0

146.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

veterans affairs secretary robert mcdonald on tuesday apologized for lying about serving in the special operations forces in a conversation with a homeless veteran that was caught on camera earlier this year. mcdonald made the claim in january while he was in los angeles as part of the va's effort to locate and house homeless veterans. during the tour, a homeless man told mcdonald that he had served in the special operations forces. "special forces? what years?" mcdonald responded. "i was in special forces." the exchange was broadcast on "the cbs evening news" jan. 30.<u+00a0>mcdonald's misstatement was first reported by the huffington post. mcdonald<u+00a0>graduated from the u.s. military academy at west point in 1975 and completed army ranger training before being assigned to the 82nd airborne division until his retirement in 1980. according to the huffington post, while mcdonald was formally recognized as a graduate of ranger school, he never actually served in a ranger battalion or other special operations unit. "i have no excuse," the website quoted mcdonald as saying in its report. "i was not in special forces." in a statement released monday by the va, mcdonald said: "while i was in los angeles, engaging a homeless individual to determine his veteran status, i asked the man where he had served in the military. he responded that he had served in special forces. i incorrectly stated that i had been in special forces. that was inaccurate and i apologize to anyone that was offended by my misstatement." at a news conference outside va offices on tuesday, mcdonald also told reporters he made the misstatement in a conversation with a homeless veteran he was trying "to connect with." mcdonald added: "i apologize for that. i have no excuse for it." the va secretary has drawn expressions of disappointment, but no demands for his resignation. "a lie is a lie," said michael helm, national commander of the american legion, the largest veterans service organization. "i can't believe people do this." mcdonald told the huffington post that he had "reacted spontaneously and ... wrongly" in response to the homeless man's claim. "as i thought about it later, i knew that this was wrong," mcdonald said of his false statement. republican lawmakers on tuesday were critical of mcdonald over the false claim, but indicated they want to keep the focus on reforming the department itself. house veterans affairs committee chairman jeff miller, r-fla., said he was "disappointed" in his comments. "after a rough couple of weeks that also included inflated claims of accountability at the department of veterans affairs, i hope sec. mcdonald will redouble his efforts to ensure his statements -- and those of all va officials -- are completely accurate. this is the only way the department can regain the trust of the veterans and taxpayers it is charged with serving," he said in a statement. rep. mike coffman, r-colo., called the misstatement an error but said "it doesn't dim the fact that he served honorably." he said: "we should all take him at his word and washington shouldn't spend the next two weeks arguing about it. the secretary has a job to do -- clean up the scandal-plagued va. this latest controversy shouldn't shift one iota of focus away from that long overdue task." the white house released a statement monday evening saying that it had accepted mcdonald's explanation. "secretary mcdonald has apologized for the misstatement and noted that he never intended to misrepresent his military service," the statement said. "we take him at his word and expect that this will not impact the important work he<u+2019>s doing to promote the health and well-being of our nation<u+2019>s veterans." after leaving the army, mcdonald went on to a successful corporate career, eventually becoming chairman, president, and ceo of proctor & gamble. he became va secretary this past july, as the agency was dealing with the fallout from the scandal of long patient wait times at va hospitals. click for more from the huffington post. the associated press contributed to this report.

va secretary robert mcdonald admits lying about special forces service, apologizes

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

82.0

8.0

4098.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

262.0

0.0

86.0

1.0

0.0

25.0

9.0

14.0

7.0

5.0

9.0

11.0

5.0

25.0

22.0

33.0

267.0

86.0

26.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

jeb bush's top challenge as a likely presidential candidate is to distance himself from his brother's policies. but he's not doing that, and in fact goes out of his way to defend him. as yet another general joins trump's team, what does the pick reveal? [update: this story was edited at<u+00a0>4 p.m. after mr. bush's thursday afternoon remarks on iraq.] this week, jeb bush<u+2019>s foremost problem as a likely presidential candidate went on full display: can the former florida governor get over his last name and his emotional personal tie to his brother, the ex-president? on thursday, after three days of botched replies to a simple question, mr. bush finally said what most everyone expected him to say in the first place. <u+201c>knowing what we now know, what would you have done? i would have not engaged. i would not have gone into iraq,<u+201d> bush said at a campaign stop in<u+00a0>tempe, ariz., according to the washington post. bush said he had had trouble with the question, because he didn<u+2019>t want to appear ungrateful for the sacrifices made by americans during the war. but the episode leaves lingering questions about bush<u+2019>s willingness to distance himself from his brother, former president george w. bush, in the younger bush<u+2019>s expected bid for president in 2016. republicans were baffled monday when mr. bush told megyn kelly on fox news that he would have authorized the 2003 iraq invasion, even given what we know now about the faulty intelligence. ted cruz, marco rubio, rand paul, chris christie, and john kasich <u+2013> all republicans running for president or considering it <u+2013> say they wouldn<u+2019>t have invaded.<u+00a0>democratic candidate hillary clinton says her <u+201c>yes<u+201d> vote as a senator was a mistake. the next day, on sean hannity<u+2019>s radio show, bush<u+00a0>walked back his comment. <u+201c>i interpreted the question wrong, i guess,<u+201d> he said. but when asked again, he demurred: <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know what that decision would have been. that<u+2019>s a hypothetical.<u+201d> <u+201c>that<u+2019>s a hypothetical<u+201d> is the all-purpose dodge any politician can deploy when he or she doesn<u+2019>t want to answer a question. and it made bush look unprepared. <u+201c>jeb should have been prepared to answer that question the second his brother stepped on marine one to leave the white house in 2009,<u+201d> says ford o<u+2019>connell, author of <u+201c>hail mary: the 10-step playbook for republican recovery.<u+201d> <u+201c>you get four or five mulligans on the presidential campaign trail, and he just used one of them up.<u+201d> the iraq war remains deeply unpopular with the american public; in june 2014, 75 percent of the us public said the iraq war was not worth the costs, according to a cbs news/new york times poll. the good news for bush is that most americans aren<u+2019>t yet paying close attention to the 2016 race. it<u+2019>s been 13 years since he last ran for office <u+2013> reelection as governor of florida <u+2013> and he<u+2019>s still getting his political sea legs back. though he<u+2019>s not expected to announce for president until mid-june, he<u+2019>s effectively already running. on wednesday, he said outright that he was running, then quickly reversed himself. at the heart of his campaign lies a paradox: the great blessing and the great burden of the bush name. his father<u+2019>s presidency (1989-1993) is remembered fondly by the general public, though anti-tax conservatives still remember his breaking of the <u+201c>no new taxes<u+201d> pledge. bush<u+2019>s brother<u+2019>s presidency <u+00a0>(2001-2009) gets lower marks. still, jeb bush benefits tremendously from the political network his family opens up for him. he could easily out-raise the rest of the gop field in the early going. he has also assembled an a-list team of advisers. but his brother<u+2019>s legacy poses a particular burden, not just iraq but also the economic crisis at the end of his tenure. and jeb appears unwilling to throw brother george under the bus. he even referred to his brother recently, at a private event, as an adviser on the middle east, a comment he didn<u+2019>t disown in his interview with ms. kelly. the real story, in fact, out of bush<u+2019>s interviews with kelly and mr. hannity may be that he seemed to go out of his way to defend his brother on iraq. <u+201c>news flash for the world,<u+201d> bush told kelly. <u+201c>if they<u+2019>re trying to find places where there<u+2019>s space between me and my brother, this may not be one of those.<u+201d> to hannity, bush said this: <u+201c>the simple fact is, mistakes were made, as they always are in life.<u+201d> george w. bush seems acutely aware of the liability he poses to his brother. last month, at an event in chicago, he practically gave jeb permission to disown his record. <u+201c>he doesn't need to defend me,<u+201d> the second president bush said, according to politico. he also acknowledged his mother<u+2019>s famous comment from 2013 <u+2013> <u+201c>haven<u+2019>t we had enough bushes?<u+201d> <u+2013> and said: <u+201c>that<u+2019>s why you won<u+2019>t see me out there<u+201d> on the campaign trail. if nothing else, it<u+2019>s already clear that jeb bush won<u+2019>t sail to the republican nomination as his father and brother did back in the day. the theory that he could clear the gop field by vacuuming up establishment money has already proved false. he leads (barely) in national polls of republican candidates, but hasn<u+2019>t broken out of the pack. in any case, it<u+2019>s too soon to put much stock in polls. on tuesday, bush advisers acknowledged that he is skipping the iowa straw poll on aug. 8, a beauty contest that contains no upside for him, as it favors candidates who appeal to the social conservative base of the iowa gop. that<u+2019>s a smart move, analysts say. bush<u+2019>s real challenge is to present himself as a republican of the future, not a man burdened by his family<u+2019>s past. with fresh faces like his former prot<u+00e9>g<u+00e9>, sen. marco rubio (r) of florida, and gov. scott walker (r) of wisconsin gaining positive notice in the early going, the battle is joined. but so far, bush is still stumbling over the past. some analysts suggest that bush may be playing a completely different game <u+2013> that he is just going to say what he thinks, stay true to his family, and let the chips fall where they may. perhaps this is his way of running <u+201c>joyfully,<u+201d> as he described his possible campaign in early 2014. <u+201c>let jeb be jeb<u+201d> is how bush adviser mike murphy described the philosophy to the new york times last december. perhaps this brand of political authenticity will catch hold among republican voters <u+2013> and along with it, some of the bush views that don<u+2019>t fit standard republican orthodoxy at the moment. among those are support for <u+201c>legalization<u+201d> of undocumented immigrants and the common core education reforms, as well as an unwillingness to sign anti-tax pledges. if bush somehow manages to bend the gop in his direction, he could represent the party<u+2019>s future. but that<u+2019>s a big <u+201c>if.<u+201d>

jeb bush and iraq: what price family loyalty? (+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

6.0

54.0

8.0

6636.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

432.0

0.0

177.0

0.0

33.0

7.0

16.0

6.0

9.0

13.0

12.0

8.0

38.0

25.0

51.0

437.0

177.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

house committee report finds secret service is 'an agency in crisis' the secret service is an agency "in crisis" and one that has had its weaknesses "exposed by a series of security failures at the white house, during presidential visits, and at the residences of other officials," according to a scathing report by the house oversight and government reform committee released thursday. the report was a bipartisan effort led by the committee's highest-ranking members, chairman jason chaffetz, r-utah, and rep. elijah cummings, d-md. it also suggested the agency reconsider its mission. the committee has been looking at the agency's shortcomings since a string of embarrassing security breakdowns involving the white house and the president became public in recent years. according to the report, there have been 143 security breaches or attempted breaches at secured facilities in the past decade. and of those, only 13 have resulted in jail time for the perpetrators, the committee found. investigators also found "morale is at an all-time low" within the secret service because of overworked personnel, shrinking budgets, a loss of confidence in top leadership and other factors. the investigation focused on a handful of security breaches dating back to november 2011. that's when several shots were fired from a semiautomatic rifle at the white house, but it wasn't discovered for four days, until a housekeeper stumbled upon broken glass and cement debris on the floor. another lapse was the much-publicized prostitution scandal involving secret service personnel in cartagena, colombia, in 2012. the report also chronicles a monthlong period in 2014 in which there were six security breakdowns, beginning with a sept. 16 incident. it involved an armed security guard with a history of violence whom the obama's security detail allowed to ride an elevator with the president in atlanta. eleven days later, a man "posing as a member of congress at a congressional black caucus awards dinner" managed to sneak backstage unnoticed by agents at an awards gala and speak to the president, according to the report. the report adds that in yet another breach in october of last year, a woman was able to gain unauthorized access to a backstage entrance, this time at a congressional hispanic caucus institute event. julia pierson, the director of the secret service at the time, resigned in october 2014 amid the string of breaches. the security lapses are not limited to the white house or to the president's security detail. the report cites an april 2013 breach when four adults slipped into the backyard of the vice president's residence to go fishing. the intrusion was discovered only after a neighbor saw the group and alerted the agency. the oversight committee recommended changes to the agency, including immediately hiring more personnel, and suggested the next president consider a previous proposal of searching outside the secret service for the agency's next director. additionally, the committee suggested the obama administration conduct an interagency review of the scope of the secret service's duties, to determine what "missions can be shed."

house committee report finds secret service is 'an agency in crisis'

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

68.0

8.0

3176.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

226.0

0.0

65.0

1.0

0.0

36.0

7.0

10.0

3.0

13.0

5.0

8.0

3.0

17.0

26.0

18.0

234.0

65.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the president-elect hasn't made clear how he will avoid conflicts between his vast empire and his official duties.

history class becomes a debate on 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

41.0

8.0

114.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

10.0

1.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

3.0

14.0

5.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump continues to lead his rivals nationally in the contest for the republican presidential nomination. but his hold on the gop electorate has weakened since the primary season began, and the party is now deeply divided over his candidacy, according to a new washington post-abc news poll. trump maintains the support of 34<u+00a0>percent of registered republicans and republican-leaning independents, compared with 25<u+00a0>percent for sen. ted cruz of texas, 18<u+00a0>percent for sen. marco rubio of florida and 13<u+00a0>percent for ohio gov. john kasich. trump<u+2019>s margin over cruz has narrowed from 16<u+00a0>points in january to nine today. as a succession of republican candidates quit the race, cruz<u+2019>s position has ticked up four points since january, rubio<u+2019>s has risen by seven and kasich<u+2019>s has grown by 11. trump<u+2019>s has dipped by three points, within the poll<u+2019>s margin of sampling error. in the democratic race, former secretary of state hillary clinton still leads sen. bernie sanders of vermont, but her national margin is the smallest in a post-abc poll since the beginning of the campaign. the new poll shows clinton as the favorite of 49<u+00a0>percent of registered democrats and democratic-leaning independents compared with sanders, whose support is at 42<u+00a0>percent. that seven-point lead for clinton compares with her 19-point advantage in january. that trump is a polarizing figure within the republican party is no surprise, and it<u+2019>s typified by the opposition among establishment and other republicans that has intensified over the past few weeks. only a bare majority (51<u+00a0>percent) of republicans or republican-leaning independents say they would be satisfied with the new york billionaire as their nominee, a noticeably smaller percentage than for cruz (65<u+00a0>percent) or rubio (62<u+00a0>percent), with kasich in between at 56<u+00a0>percent. favorable ratings also indicate an increasingly tenuous standing within the party. in early january, republicans clearly gave trump more favorable than unfavorable reviews, 60<u+00a0>percent to 39<u+00a0>percent. that has narrowed to a 53-46 margin, with negative marks at their highest level in post-abc polling since trump entered the race. his positive ratings also trail cruz<u+2019>s 64<u+00a0>percent and rubio<u+2019>s 63<u+00a0>percent. the post-abc poll finds that more than half of republicans and gop-leaning independents think trump is dishonest, does not understand their problems, lacks the right experience, and does not have the right personality and temperament to be an effective president. by contrast, more than 6<u+00a0>in 10 republicans say cruz is honest, empathetic, and has the right temperament and experience; similar shares say rubio has the first three qualities, while half say he has the right experience. in a hypothetical head-to-head test of strength between trump and cruz, republicans say they prefer the senator by 54 percent to 41<u+00a0>percent. rubio is a narrower favorite in a one-on-one test against trump, with an edge of 51 percent to 45 percent. the survey did not test a trump-kasich face-off. the poll was conducted over a weekend in which cruz won contests in kansas and maine, trump won in louisiana and kentucky, and rubio won in puerto rico. on tuesday, republicans are voting in michigan, mississippi, idaho and hawaii. next tuesday <u+2014> the first day states can award delegates on a winner-take-all basis <u+2014> there will be contests in florida, ohio, illinois, missouri and north carolina. by the end of that day, more than half of the 2,472 convention delegates will have been awarded. it is likely that, after those march 15 contests, republicans will have the clearest sense yet of trump<u+2019>s overall strength and of the viability of his challengers. cruz<u+2019>s string of recent victories, including in his home state of texas a week ago, have elevated him as the leading rival to trump. if rubio and kasich don<u+2019>t win their home states, they will face pressure to quit the race. many now predict that the republican contest will not be resolved before the national convention in july. but even many republicans who say they would not be satisfied with trump as the nominee appear uneasy about the efforts of party leaders to prevent him from winning. about half of all republicans who are dissatisfied or only <u+201c>somewhat satisfied<u+201d> with trump nonetheless oppose efforts by party leaders to prevent him from becoming the nominee. there is considerable talk now about a possible floor fight at the convention, should trump arrive with the most delegates but lacking the 1,237 needed for a first-ballot victory. about 42<u+00a0>percent of republican voters support other candidates and say that in such a situation, the party should pick another nominee. but 53 percent either support trump or say that leading the delegate count, even if short of an outright majority, should guarantee victory. among all americans, trump has a more negative image by far compared to cruz, rubio or clinton. two in 3 adults say they have an unfavorable impression of trump, who has drawn controversy in recent months for attacks on illegal immigrants from mexico, sen. john mccain of arizona, fox news anchor megyn kelly, a disabled reporter and muslims, among other targets. none of the three other candidates tested <u+2014> clinton, cruz and rubio <u+2014> had a net positive image, but all were viewed more favorably than trump. among all adults, 52<u+00a0>percent say they see clinton unfavorably, 51<u+00a0>percent see cruz negatively and 45<u+00a0>percent have a negative impression of rubio. clinton and rubio have the least-negative image overall. the new post-abc survey shows a huge gender gap in support for trump<u+2019>s candidacy. he leads among republican men with 44<u+00a0>percent, a roughly 2-1 margin over second-place cruz. among republican women, though, he is the favorite of just 24<u+00a0>percent. in january, his support among gop women stood at 37 percent, compared to 15 percent for cruz. trump also has lost ground against cruz among very conservative republicans and among those with incomes less than $50,000. matched against his remaining rivals, trump continues to perform slightly better among republicans without college degrees than among those who are university graduates, although he has an edge with both groups. he has a wider lead among voters younger than 50 than with older voters. among white evangelical christians, trump narrowly trails cruz, but among non-evangelicals and white catholics, his lead is almost 2 to 1. matched directly against cruz, though, trump loses voters with or without college degrees, voters who see themselves as working class and middle class, and those with higher or lower incomes. trump also loses conservatives against cruz, especially those who say they are <u+201c>very conservative,<u+201d> while the two tie among moderate and liberal republicans. overall, americans remain deeply pessimistic about the federal government. two in 3 offer negative reactions, including about a fifth who describe themselves as angry. trump has tapped into that mood <u+2014> the more dissatisfied that people are with the federal government, the more likely they are to support his candidacy. a similarly strong majority sees the political system today as dysfunctional, even slightly more so than in the fall. trump does best among those who feel most strongly about the way the system works. more americans by far say they favor someone with experience in the system as the next president, rather than someone from outside the political establishment. republicans, though, tilt more toward an outsider. among those who want someone from the outside, trump has the support of nearly half. among those looking for someone with experience, trump runs fourth behind cruz, rubio and kasich. a similar pattern holds for two of trump<u+2019>s most controversial ideas <u+2014> deporting all of the roughly 11<u+00a0>million illegal immigrants living in the united states and temporarily banning muslims from entering the country as a security precaution. overall, americans oppose both proposals, though more republicans favor than oppose them. trump has big leads among those who support such policies, but those leads disappear among those who do not. the post-abc poll was conducted march 3 to 6 among a random national sample of 1,000 adults reached on land-line and cellular phones. the margin of sampling error for overall results is plus or minus 3.5<u+00a0>percentage points.

poll: trump leads gop race nationally but with weaker hold on the party

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

9.0

71.0

8.0

8332.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

497.0

1.0

0.0

124.0

1.0

0.0

66.0

7.0

11.0

8.0

11.0

12.0

13.0

8.0

27.0

26.0

47.0

499.0

125.0

67.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

jesse matthew jr., a former hospital worker, was indicted monday on a count of first-degree murder in the abduction and killing of hannah graham, a university of virginia student, who was missing for weeks before her body was discovered, law enforcement officials said tuesday. albemarle county prosecutor denise lunsford said that the state will not seek the death penalty, and that graham's family has been informed about the state's decision. lunsford declined to say why matthew was not charged with the higher count of capital murder. the abduction and first-degree murder charges are punishable by up to life in prison. matthew, 33, was already charged with abduction with intent to defile the 18-year-old. police have said forensic evidence also links matthew to the 2009 disappearance and death of 20-year-old virginia tech student morgan harrington, whose body also was found in the county. lunsford said "there are no pending charges" against matthew in the harrington case. "the simple fact is the case involving hannah graham was ready to be charged first," she said. graham vanished after a night out with friends sept. 12. according to police, she left an off-campus party alone and texted a friend saying she was lost. in surveillance video, she can be seen walking unsteadily and even running at times, past a pub and a service station and then onto a seven-block strip of bars, restaurants and shops. another video captured her leaving a restaurant with matthew, who had an arm around her. graham's disappearance prompted a month-long search involving thousands of volunteers as well as police. it ended when searchers found her remains oct. 18 in rural albemarle county, roughly six miles from the hayfield where harrington's body was found in january 2010. harrington disappeared while attending a metallica concert at u.va in october 2009. her t-shirt was later found on a nearby tree limb. after police named matthew a person of interest in graham's disappearance, he fled and was later apprehended on a beach in texas. he was charged with abduction with intent to defile, a felony that empowered police to swab his cheek for a dna sample. that sample connected matthew to a 2005 sexual assault in fairfax county, according to authorities. he has pleaded not guilty in that case. the dna evidence in the fairfax sexual assault, in turn, linked matthew to the harrington case. matthew previously had been accused of raping students at liberty university and christopher newport university in 2002 an <u+00a0>2003. matthew had played football at both schools. the cases were dropped after the women declined to press charges. matthew's first court appearance on the newest charges in the harrington case is scheduled for feb. 18, lunsford said. he will appear by video link from fairfax county, where he is in jail awaiting trial in the 2005 rape case. the associated press contributed to this report

jesse matthew charged in hannah graham's murder; da will not pursue death penalty

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

81.0

8.0

2925.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

170.0

1.0

0.0

63.0

0.0

15.0

14.0

10.0

7.0

22.0

6.0

18.0

8.0

12.0

23.0

11.0

172.0

64.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

it came two days after the announcement of the nuclear agreement with iran, yet little mention was made on july 16 of the 70th anniversary of the first nuclear explosion, near alamogordo, n.m. the anniversary underscored that the agreement attempts to thwart proliferation of technology seven decades old. nuclear-weapons technology has become markedly more sophisticated since 1945. but not so sophisticated that nations with sufficient money and determination cannot master or acquire it. iran<u+2019>s determination is probably related to the united states<u+2019> demonstration, in iraq and libya, of the perils of not having nuclear weapons. critics who think more severe sanctions are achievable and would break iran<u+2019>s determination must answer this: when have sanctions caused a large nation to surrender what it considers a vital national security interest? critics have, however, amply demonstrated two things: first, the agreement comprehensively abandons president obama<u+2019>s original goal of dismantling the infrastructure of iran<u+2019>s nuclear weapons program. second, as the administration became more yielding with iran, it became more dishonest with its own citizens. for example, john kerry says we never sought <u+201c>anywhere, anytime<u+201d> inspections. but on april 6, ben rhodes, obama<u+2019>s deputy national security adviser, said the agreement would include <u+201c>anywhere, anytime<u+201d> inspections. kerry<u+2019>s co-negotiator, wendy sherman, breezily dismissed <u+201c>anywhere, anytime<u+201d> as <u+201c>something that became popular rhetoric.<u+201d> it <u+201c>became<u+201d>? this is disgraceful. verification depends on u.s. intelligence capabilities, which failed in 2003 (iraq<u+2019>s supposed possession of wmds), in 1968 (north vietnam<u+2019>s tet offensive) and in 1941 (pearl harbor). as reuel marc gerecht says in <u+201c>how will we know? the coming iran intelligence failure<u+201d> [the weekly standard, july 27], <u+201c>the cia has a nearly flawless record of failing to predict foreign countries<u+2019> going nuclear (great britain and france don<u+2019>t count).<u+201d> during the 1960 presidential campaign, john kennedy cited <u+201c>indications<u+201d> that by 1964 there would be <u+201c>10, 15 or 20<u+201d> nuclear powers. as president, he said that by 1975 there might be 15 or 20. nonproliferation efforts have succeeded but cannot completely succeed forever. it is a law of arms control: agreements are impossible until they are unimportant. the u.s.-soviet strategic arms control <u+201c>process<u+201d> was an arena of maneuvering for military advantage, until the soviet union died of anemia. might the agreement with iran buy sufficient time for iran to undergo regime modification? although kerry speaks of the agreement <u+201c>guaranteeing<u+201d> that iran will not become a nuclear power, it will. but what will iran be like 15 years hence? since 1972, u.s. policy toward china has been a worthy but disappointing two-part wager. one part is that involving china in world trade will temper its unruly international ambitions. the second is that economic growth, generated by the moral and institutional infrastructure of markets, will weaken the sinews of authoritarianism. the obama administration<u+2019>s comparable wager is that the iranian regime will be subverted by domestic restiveness. the median age in iran is 29.5 (in the united states, 37.7; in the european union, 42.2). more than 60 percent of iran<u+2019>s university students, and approximately 70 percent of medical students, are women. ferment is real. in 1951, hannah arendt, a refugee from hitler<u+2019>s germany, argued bleakly (in <u+201c>the origins of totalitarianism<u+201d>) that tyrannies wielding modern instruments of social control (bureaucracies, mass communications) could achieve permanence by conscripting the citizenry<u+2019>s consciousness, thereby suffocating social change. the 1956 hungarian revolution changed her mind: no government can control human nature or <u+201c>all channels of communication.<u+201d> today<u+2019>s technologies make nations, including iran, porous to outside influences; intellectual autarky is impossible. the best that can be said for the iran agreement is that by somewhat protracting iran<u+2019>s path to a weapon it buys time for constructive churning in iran. although this is a thin reed on which to lean hopes, the reed is as real as iran<u+2019>s nuclear ambitions are apparently nonnegotiable. the best reason for rejecting the agreement is to rebuke obama<u+2019>s long record of aggressive disdain for congress <u+2014> recess appointments when the senate was not in recess, rewriting and circumventing statutes, etc. obama<u+2019>s intellectual pedigree runs to woodrow wilson, the first presidential disparager of the separation of powers. like wilson, obama ignores the constitutional etiquette of respecting even rivalrous institutions. the iran agreement should be a treaty; it should not have been submitted first to the united nations as a studied insult to congress. wilson said that rejecting the versailles treaty would <u+201c>break the heart of the world.<u+201d> the senate, no member of which had been invited to accompany wilson to the paris peace conference, proceeded to break his heart. obama deserves a lesson in the cost of wilsonian arrogance. knowing little history, obama makes bad history. read more from george f. will<u+2019>s archive or follow him on facebook.

with iran deal, obama makes bad history

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

39.0

8.0

5174.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

393.0

1.0

0.0

74.0

1.0

0.0

45.0

14.0

15.0

13.0

16.0

6.0

13.0

8.0

31.0

26.0

40.0

396.0

75.0

46.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a defiant kentucky county clerk, who has been ordered to face a federal judge on thursday in a hearing about her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, says she won't resign. <u+201c>some people have said i should resign, but i have done my job well,<u+201d> rowan county clerk kim davis said in a statement posted to the website of the lawfirm that represents her, liberty counsel. <u+201c>i never imagined a day like this would come, where i would be asked to violate a central teaching of scripture and of jesus himself regarding marriage,<u+201d> davis said in the statement. <u+201c>to issue a marriage license which conflicts with god<u+2019>s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. it is not a light issue for me. it is a heaven or hell decision. for me it is a decision of obedience.<u+201d> davis' office has steadfastly denied marriage licenses since the supreme court legalized gay marriage this summer, and that practice continued tuesday morning when at least two same-sex couples were denied as davis invoked "god's authority." rowan county attorney cecil watkins says the federal court alerted him later tuesday morning that a hearing was scheduled for 11 a.m. thursday in ashland. watkins says clerk kim davis is summonsed to attend, along with all the deputy clerks who work in her office. after davis initially stopped issuing marriage licenses, two gay couples and two straight couples sued her. a federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, an appeals court upheld that decision and the supreme court on monday declined to intervene in the case, seemingly leaving davis with no legal ground to stand on. but davis has refused to issue the licenses, saying her deeply held christian beliefs don't let her endorse gay marriages. as an elected official, davis can't be fired. any impeachment of her would have to wait until the legislature's regular session next year or could come during a costly special session. <u+201c>i have received death threats from people who do not know me,<u+201d> davis said in the statement. <u+201c>i harbor nothing against them. i was elected by the people to serve as the county clerk. i intend to continue to serve the people of rowan county, but i cannot violate my conscience.<u+201d> on tuesday, davis asked david moore and david ermold, a couple who has been rejected four times by her office, to leave. they refused, surrounded by reporters and cameras. "we're not leaving until we have a license," ermold said. "then you're going to have a long day," davis told him. from the back of the room, davis' supporters said: "praise the lord! ... stand your ground." other activists shouted that davis is a bigot and told her: "do your job." on tuesday morning, shortly after davis' remarks, the sheriff's office cleared the county office of those gathered to support both sides of the issue. the two groups lined up on either side of the courthouse entrance to chant at each other. davis' supporters told her to "stand firm," while gay-rights activists shouted "do your job." the rejected couples' supporters called the american civil liberties union, which filed the lawsuit on their behalf. they asked that their attorneys file to have davis held in contempt. randy smith, leading the group supporting davis, said he knows following their instruction to "stand firm" might mean davis goes to jail. "but at the end of the day, we have to stand before god, which has higher authority than the supreme court," he said. ermold hugged moore, his partner of 17 years, and they cried and swayed as they left the clerk's office. davis' supporters marched by, chanting. "i feel sad, i feel devastated," ermold said. "i feel like i've been humiliated on such a national level, i can't even comprehend it." the associated press contributed to this report.

kentucky clerk still won't issue same-sex marriage licenses

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

3812.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

271.0

0.0

81.0

0.0

25.0

11.0

13.0

7.0

13.0

10.0

9.0

5.0

30.0

19.0

29.0

276.0

81.0

25.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

witnesses are saying the gunman in thursday's mass shooting in oregon asked students if they were christians before murdering them. but they're also talking about student and army vet chris mintz, who they say charged straight at the shooter. thirty-year-old mintz is recovering from surgery after chris harper mercer shot him seven times. witnesses said mintz told other students to run, then charged straight for the gunman. "he actually ran back towards the building where the shooting was and he ran back into the building and i don't know what happened to him," witness hannah miles said. mercer wounded six others and killed nine people. the father of a wounded victim told cnn that mercer reportedly ordered students to stand up and asked if they were christians. "and they would stand up and he said, 'good, because you're a christian, you're going to see god in just about one second. and then he shot and killed them," cnn's stacy boylan said. thursday night, family and friends of victims mourned the tragedy and their loss. "this doesn't happen in roseberg," a local resident said. "this is small town america -<u+00a0> it's not supposed to happen here but it happens." **are shootings like this one a sign of the end times? click play to watch cbn chaplain joel palser answer that question. he explains how the church can be a light during dark times. .the community of roseberg is grappling with the enormity of the tragedy which has raised all kinds of questions. why would the gunman have wanted to know the faith of the people he was about to shoot? and what was his motive? a profile of the suspect is beginning to emerge as authorities search for a motive. on myspace, mercer posted a photo of himself with a rifle and other photos glorifying the irish republican army. on another website he described himself as a conservative republican who's not religious but spiritual. neighbors at his apartment complex say he was as shy, reserved and familiar with guns. investigators don't believe he had a criminal history and said he may have been a student at the college. "he was just silent. he didn't really speak much. if you approached him, he kind of seemed hesitant," one neighbor said. "he had no friends. he was just kind of like off to himself," another one said. on one internet site, called spiritual passions, he described himself as "not religious, but spiritual." he didn't like "organized religion" and said, "i'm looking for someone to share my beliefs." he used similar language online when he said he was looking for a woman who was "pagan, wiccan, not religious, but spiritual." within hours of the shooting, president barack obama called a press conference to demand new gun laws, saying that gun violence is "something we should politicize." "somehow this has become routine," obama said in a white house briefing thursday. "the reporting is routine, my response here at this podium ends up being routine, the conversation in the aftermath of it -- we've become numb to this." the fbi and other law enforcement officials are now combing through mercer's emails and online activity trying to figure out a motive.

ore. gunman asked victims if they were christians

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

49.0

8.0

3158.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

243.0

1.0

0.0

83.0

1.0

0.0

32.0

11.0

8.0

2.0

16.0

6.0

8.0

1.0

15.0

16.0

248.0

84.0

33.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the problem with most discussions of political polarization is that they reach quickly for technical causes and solutions. our politics are polarized, we are told, because of gerrymandered districts, the rise of opinionated media sources and party primaries closed off to independents or voters in the other party. there<u+2019>s nothing wrong with thinking about such things, but all the mechanical fixes in the world will not overcome a brute fact about the united states in 2015: we really do have profound disagreements with each other that are intellectual, moral, partisan and ideological. because the facts are clear on this, it<u+2019>s always important to note that our polarization is asymmetric: republicans are much more conservative as a group (close to two-thirds of them) than democrats are liberal (about one-third). still, if our divisions are intellectually rooted, who has ideas that might bring us together? one name comes to mind when you try to think of someone who managed to live on both sides of the ideological divide and still keep his own thinking coherent. the late daniel patrick moynihan worked for both john kennedy and richard nixon. he opposed the vietnam war but was not wild about anti-war protesters. he was often called a neoconservative but thought of himself as a liberal. he was a democratic senator from new york for 24 years and managed to get votes from just about everybody. in his last reelection race in 1994 <u+2014> a bad year for democrats <u+2014> he won by 14 points. how did he do this? the question is interesting enough that two volumes were published recently to try to explain the matter. in his gem of a book, <u+201c>the professor and the president,<u+201d> stephen hess, who worked for moynihan (and is my brookings institution colleague), tells the story of the unlikely nixon-moynihan political courtship. and moynihan was an interesting enough thinker that greg weiner, a political philosopher himself, treats him as one in <u+201c>american burke: the uncommon liberalism of daniel patrick moynihan.<u+201d> weiner<u+2019>s notion is that moynihan was undoubtedly a liberal <u+201c>through and through<u+201d> because he <u+201c>believed in government as an agent of social improvement<u+201d> and thought it capable of doing large and important things. but he shared with edmund burke, often seen as the founder of modern conservatism, a skepticism about grand schemes for <u+201c>wholesale social transformation<u+201d> and a belief in limits. <u+201c>both were conserving reformers who valued traditional systems of authority, most primarily the family,<u+201d> weiner writes, and both <u+201c>interpreted politics in terms of the observable and the concrete rather than the metaphysical and the abstract.<u+201d> weiner argues, and i am inclined to agree, that one reason we miss moynihan, who died in 2003, is because we have a need for more burkean liberals and more burkean conservatives. they would share a concern for evidence, an understanding of the limits of human reason, a skepticism about our ability to transform <u+201c>complex social systems<u+201d> and a belief that we can always make things better but will never make them perfect. from these shared assumptions, they could then argue about such matters as how much social generosity to expect from government. moynihan<u+2019>s burkean nature no doubt made it easier for the lifelong democrat to work for a republican president. hess shows how he was also a brilliant inside player who knew how to get around bureaucratic and human obstacles <u+2014> and how he appealed to nixon. moynihan made him laugh, which wasn<u+2019>t a common thing in that white house, and also acted as a tutor, which flattered the sometimes-insecure nixon by taking his intellectual curiosity seriously. hess details the still astonishing story of how moynihan got nixon to propose a truly radical innovation, a guaranteed annual income for all americans. the family assistance plan was killed in congress because it was too liberal for republicans and not generous enough for democrats. but it was, in its way, a classic burkean program. instead of creating intricate and expensive new services for the poor, moynihan proposed to give them what they definitely needed more of, which was money. as a skeptic about technical solutions to polarization, i certainly won<u+2019>t propose that all americans study their burke and their moynihan. but as an antidote to the tendency these days toward the-sky-is-falling rhetoric, we could usefully remember this very burkean warning from moynihan: <u+201c>when situations of considerable but not impossible difficulty are described in apocalyptic terms, responses tend to be erratic, even convulsive.<u+201d> as moynihan would never say: chill. read more from e.j. dionne<u+2019>s archive, follow him on twitter or subscribe to his updates on facebook.

why we miss the unpolarizing pat moynihan

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

41.0

8.0

4722.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

335.0

1.0

0.0

81.0

0.0

38.0

11.0

14.0

4.0

11.0

12.0

11.0

7.0

27.0

23.0

44.0

339.0

82.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

it<u+2019>s over. donald trump, a man utterly unfit for the position by temperament, values and policy preferences, will be the republican nominee for president. he will run against hillary clinton, who is easily the lesser evil but is trailed by clouds of scandal and misconduct and whose party<u+2019>s left wing poses its own threats to liberties of speech, religion, enterprise and association. it is time for a third candidate, and probably for a third party. some people will dismiss this notion as absurd. however, only those prescient enough to have forecast trump<u+2019>s success have the standing to certify impossibilities. if the trump candidacy has blown up every other aspect of political conventional wisdom, why not this one? even if a third candidacy still yielded a clinton victory, it would be worthwhile. it would, first, deny the clinton campaign the illusion of a mandate from american voters who would have, en masse, turned out to reject trump. if nothing else, a strong third-candidate vote would send her a message to govern from the center, rather than in deference to her party<u+2019>s increasingly powerful left wing. a third candidate could lay the groundwork for a new political party. the republican party may right itself after this moral disaster, led by men and women of the caliber of house speaker paul d. ryan (wis.). but the sad truth is that although the speaker has the qualities of a statesman, two of his republican predecessors have indicated that they would vote for trump without qualms, while a third is too preoccupied with his upcoming jail term to say much of anything. the republican presidential defeat that likely impends will reflect an entirely appropriate national revulsion at the gop candidate, whose personal record of chicanery and wild rhetoric of bigotry, misogyny and misplaced belligerence are without parallel in the modern history of either major party. it is entirely conceivable that the damage done will be permanent. and in any case, the party of lincoln is sick. the influence on it of ranting reality-television players, talk-show hucksters and monomaniacs of various stripes may not recede. the temper that led a supposedly responsible party of governance to repeatedly attempt to shut down the government may, in turn, shut it out of executive power for a long time. a new, center-right party may be necessary <u+2014> we cannot yet tell. if it is, the outlines of its platform are easy to anticipate: reverence for the constitution; serious grappling with the domestic problems associated with economic opportunity for all, education and affordable health care; and commitment to the internationalist tradition of the post-world war<u+00a0>ii consensus. it would advocate a federal government that can energetically do the things it should, but would limit the role of unaccountable regulators and bureaucrats and push to states and local governments every function that is not clearly a duty of the federal government. above all, it would be committed to liberty in every sphere of personal and public life. a third candidate <u+2014> and if it comes to that, a third party <u+2014> must be led by a politician. the great republic does not require a man on horseback to rescue it, despite the arguments that some have made for drafting a retired general. senior military officers usually make dreadful politicians, and besides, politics is an art <u+2014> a respectable art, despite what too many americans think <u+2014> with unique skills and aptitudes. people with such skills exist, including mitt romney. the question is whether one of them will step forward. one of them should, for this final reason: to keep conservative consciences clean. to vote for clinton is to sacrifice standards and endorse policies and conduct no conservative should; not to vote at all is an escape, not a civic deed. admittedly, this may be a losing cause. but a losing cause is not necessarily a futile one. john quincy adams fighting slavery in the 1830s and 1840s and wendell willkie running on an internationalist platform in 1940 proved that. a trump candidacy is a disgrace and has indeed already damaged us at home and abroad, but the longer-term question is larger than one demagogue, dangerous though he is. it is whether the cause of free, limited and constitutional government will have someone to speak for it and to represent it now and for decades to come. the hour is late, the task is urgent, and the cause is great. let us hope that some politicians will summon the courage that their country requires, and act.

trump<u+2019>s impending nomination means it<u+2019>s time for a third party

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

62.0

8.0

4532.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

330.0

0.0

66.0

1.0

0.0

56.0

17.0

21.0

14.0

17.0

10.0

17.0

13.0

31.0

35.0

43.0

339.0

66.0

57.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in obscure data tables buried deep in its 2016 budget proposal, the obama administration revealed this week that its student loan program had a $21.8 billion shortfall last year, apparently the largest ever recorded for any government credit program. the main cause of the shortfall was president barack obama<u+2019>s recent efforts to provide relief for borrowers drowning in student debt, reforms that have already begun to reduce loan payments to the government. for more than two decades, budget analysts have recalculated the projected costs of about 120 credit programs every year, but they have never lowered their expectations of repayments this dramatically. the $21.8 billion revision<u+2014>larger than the annual budget for nasa, or the interior department and epa combined<u+2014>will be tacked onto the federal deficit. <u+201c>wow,<u+201d> marveled steve ellis, vice president of taxpayers for common sense. <u+201c>whether or not it<u+2019>s good policy to help borrowers with their payments, it<u+2019>s obviously costly for taxpayers.<u+201d> the 40 million americans with student loans are now saddled with more than $1.2 trillion in outstanding debt. and with higher education costs rising much faster than inflation, the already massive program has been growing at a spectacular clip; direct government loans alone increased 44 percent over the last two years despite an aura of austerity in washington. the obama administration has tried to ease the burden for some borrowers by reducing their payments to 10 percent of their income and forgiving their loans after 20 years; this year, the education department plans to make all borrowers eligible for that <u+201c>pay-as-you-earn<u+201d> relief. student loan defaults increased somewhat last year, but the department says the primary drivers of the unprecedented <u+201c>re-estimate<u+201d><u+2014>budget-wonk jargon for the update of expected loan costs<u+2014>were obama<u+2019>s policy changes, the recent ones as well as the upcoming ones. and because of a quirk in the budget process for credit programs, the department can add the $21.8 billion to the deficit automatically, without seeking appropriations or even approval from congress. that<u+2019>s a big quasi-bailout, increasing the deficit nearly 5 percent. the white house budget office was unaware of any larger re-estimates since the current scoring rules for credit programs went into effect in 1992. as a january politico magazine feature on the government<u+2019>s unusual credit portfolio reported, the federal housing administration has stuck more than $75 billion worth of similar re-estimates onto uncle sam<u+2019>s tab over the last two decades, most of them after the recent housing bust led to a cascade of fha-backed mortgage defaults. but it<u+2019>s never had a one-year shortfall quite as drastic as this. it<u+2019>s not yet clear whether this will be a hefty one-time revision, or a harbinger of oceans of red ink as millions more borrowers get relief on their payments to the government. several reports by barclays capital have warned that obama<u+2019>s generosity to borrowers could leave the student loan program as much as $250 billion in the hole over the next decade. and behind closed doors, officials in the white house budget office and the treasury department have criticized the education department<u+2019>s loan models as overly optimistic, with some officials pushing internally for third-party audits. but administration officials said there<u+2019>s no reason to think this year<u+2019>s shortfall will recur. they believe that their budgets going forward will accurately reflect their new efforts to help borrowers limit their payments, that pay-as-you-earn will be <u+201c>baked into the cake.<u+201d> historically, re-estimates for the better and for the worse have tended to cancel each other out across the government. in fact, this year, the government<u+2019>s credit portfolio increased to $3.3 trillion, larger than any u.s. bank<u+2019>s, but the re-estimates for all the programs besides student loans netted out to less than $1 billion. the administration argues that even the $21.8 billion student loan shortfall is a relative pittance for the education department<u+2019>s $740 billion book of direct loans, the second-largest government credit portfolio after fha mortgage guarantees. <u+201c>any re-estimate should be considered in this context,<u+201d> says white house office of management and budget spokeswoman emily cain.

the college loan bombshell hidden in the budget

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

47.0

8.0

4301.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

267.0

3.0

0.0

82.0

0.0

47.0

1.0

12.0

3.0

7.0

6.0

7.0

19.0

16.0

27.0

269.0

85.0

47.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

how predictive are iowa and new hampshire? iowa and new hampshire get a lot of attention, but their records in picking presidents, let alone nominees, is spotty (as you can see from the chart above). but that doesn't mean the states don't matter. they have been effective at weeding the field of candidates, and they're about momentum for those later states. plus, in the last 40 years, just one person has gone on to win the presidency after losing both iowa and new hampshire <u+2014> bill clinton. here's how the predictability of the states breaks down by party: new hampshire has been better at picking nominees for republicans. since 1976: <u+2014> two became president: ronald reagan and george h.w. bush. iowa, on the other hand, has picked: here's the thing, though: no republican has become the nominee in the last 40 years without winning either iowa or new hampshire. iowa has been slightly better than new hampshire at picking nominees on democratic side. in fact, since 1976: <u+2014> a whopping six eventual nominees have won iowa, including the last three (barack obama, john kerry and al gore). <u+2014> two iowa democratic winners have become president <u+2014> jimmy carter and barack obama. <u+2014> five nominees over that same time ... <u+2014> just one became president <u+2014> carter. <u+2014> bill clinton, george h.w. bush and ronald reagan all lost iowa but went on to win the presidency. <u+2014> bill clinton didn't win either iowa or new hampshire in 1992, but was still declared "the comeback kid" after his second-place finish in the new hampshire. <u+2014> the person who led the longest in iowa in the crowded republican field in 2015, according to the realclearpolitics average of polls, was ... wisconsin gov. scott walker. he led for six months, from february to august, before dropping out of the race after a series of missteps. <u+2014> if donald trump wins both iowa and new hampshire, it would be the first time a non-incumbent republican has done so in 40 years.

how predictive are iowa and new hampshire?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

42.0

8.0

1938.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

135.0

0.0

31.0

0.0

9.0

2.0

4.0

3.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

6.0

4.0

7.0

139.0

31.0

9.0

na