For those readers who weren't alive (or old enough) to experience the 1960s, this week we had somewhat of a history lesson, packaged as a Democratic debate. Now, part of why this happened is that the Democratic presidential campaign has entered into a "convince the minority voters" phase, since the upcoming two states to vote have a lot of Latino (Nevada) and African-American (South Carolina) voters. So there was quite a bit of attention spent on the Civil Rights era, which will continue right up to Super Tuesday, at the very least. We keep waiting for Bernie Sanders (or a moderator, for that matter) to bring up the term "Goldwater Girl" in a Hillary Clinton question, and last night would have been a dandy opportunity. But PBS held a much more "polite" debate, meaning lots of softball questions and ignoring any unseemly discomfort for the candidates (at least, for the most part).

Read Complete Article »

Appropriately, for the week which will also contain the Super Bowl, the first state to weigh in on the presidential election was decided (for Democrats) by a coin-toss. Or, to be accurate, seven of them. With tied caucuses in seven precincts, tossing a coin determined the winner between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Clinton won six coin-tosses, Sanders only one. Because of this, Clinton claimed a razor-edge victory in the whole state. To put it plainly, she got lucky. If the coin tosses had been a little less lopsided, Bernie would have had the opportunity to claim victory. Such is life, and such is the political process in Iowa.

Read Complete Article »

Maybe I'm just loopy from staying up late to watch the Iowa returns trickle in, but this morning I had a pretty radical idea, after reading a statistic that several pundits pointed out in their post-caucus articles. Jeb Bush apparently spent $14 million in Iowa to receive a little over 5,200 votes. According to many pundits today, that works out to roughly $2,800 spent per actual vote (it's actually under $2,700 when you run the numbers, but whatever). Which caused my epiphany -- why not just hand that cash over to the voters themselves, and eliminate all the middlemen?

Read Complete Article »

That headline is a joke only bridge players will get, so our apologies to everyone else. It refers, of course, to last night's Republican presidential debate, which Donald Trump refused to participate in. But even with no Trump on the stage last night, he seems to have (once again) proved that political gravity simply doesn't apply to him. In fact, we have serious doubts that we'll see Trump at any future debates -- after all, if he can blow them off with impunity, why would he subject himself to them in the first place?

Read Complete Article »

Honestly, how often is it that you get to write such a great headline? In a week that also included a Sarah Palin speech that dominated the news cycle (to say nothing of the late-night comic cycle), writing such snarky headlines is just icing on the cake, really. Good times... yes, good times indeed for Democrats watching the horrorshow that is the Republican presidential nomination process.

Read Complete Article »

So we had the fourth Democratic debate last night, and I suppose we should all be thankful that Debbie Wasserman Schultz didn't somehow manage to schedule it to compete with one of football's playoff games. I wouldn't be surprised if the debate had a pretty low viewership, appearing as it did on a Sunday night during a three-day weekend, but those who did manage to catch it saw a much more high-spirited contest between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton than we've previously seen.

Read Complete Article »

In every 1950s "gang rumble" genre film, there comes a point where the fighting gets more serious. This is, literally, where the knives come out. I begin with this image because, metaphorically, that's exactly where we are in the 2016 presidential campaign. The fight's getting a lot more serious, and there is bound to be some blood on the floor afterwards.

Read Complete Article »

The sixth Republican debate will happen tonight, for those keeping score. Technically, though, that should read "debates," as there will be two debates airing this evening, as there have been in the previous five GOP matchups. Which really begs the question of how long we're going to even bother holding double debates, when the contest has quite obviously narrowed to include only viable candidates. At some point, the secondary debate is going to be seen as so pointless (and so devoid of an actual viewing audience) that it will be eliminated altogether. Hopefully, at any rate. After having watched most of these, for me that time could easily be now -- but then again, I'm not a television executive.

Read Complete Article »

Every so often, I write what I call a "blue-sky" article, just for fun. This is where you sit back in your chair, allow your eyes to unfocus, and ponder a far-fetched "What if...?" scenario, because you've got nothing better to write about that particular day. And I'll fully admit it -- the more outlandish a proposition you begin with, the more fun such an article is to write. Very occasionally, though, one of these scenarios actually becomes reality. This, of course, allows you to bask in the special pundit's glow of looking downright prescient. Much more commonly, though, the far-fetched remains unreal and never comes to pass, and the outlandish article you wrote predicting it remains (hopefully) forgotten. This is all just an introduction to me revisiting one of those columns, which I wrote last August. It was cheekily titled: "Sanders Versus Trump Would Be Fun."

Read Complete Article »

That sub-headline may take the prize for the most bizarre we've ever offered up, although it'd have to beat the current champion -- which is, of course: "The Corpse-Like Stench Of Washington's Giant Misshapen Penis." That's pretty tough to beat, if truth be told.

Read Complete Article »