The Bush League Candidate !

Editor-In-Chic: Nia Langley 

Jeb bush is cooked, done, terminated, finished; it’s time for the little brother to hedge his bets and call it quits. In a newly released national poll by CBS and The New York Times, the former governor of Florida is tied for fourth place with Carly Fiorina, with a meager seven percent of possible voters giving him their stamp of approval. After beginning what was called a “low energy” summer, he has yet to find his footing in the GOP race. Many had perceived him to be the front-runner with the most staying power and resources to run away with the nomination. Yet he has seemed lackluster, careless, and downright disappointing, especially considering the field of visitors who have topped him in this Republican primary. 

First is the newest front-runner, Ben Carson, the former neurosurgeon who has not had a day of governing experience in his life.  Second is Donald Trump, the outspoken egotistical billionaire who seems to be running just so he can put this job on his resume. Then there is the copy-cat Marco Rubio, the first-term senator who is running the pseudo Republican version of the Obama 2008 campaign and is the former understudy of Mr. Bush. Next is Carly Fiorina, the former businesswoman and CEO of Hewlett-Packard, under whose watch more than 30,000 workers lost their jobs while her salary tripled. So why hasn’t Jeb Bush been able to remain one of the top tier candidates?

Well, for starters, the uphill battle for the nomination begins with the name Bush. Now, I wholeheartedly believe that the sins of the father, and brother in this case, should not fall unto the younger Bush. Yet as a political tactician, it does not make sense for him to defend his brother on issues regarding the Iraqi war, no matter how admirable it may be. Jeb needs to realize that his brother is not running for president, he is! Distancing himself does not necessarily mean throwing his brother under the bus; what is better is shifting his tone one the issue in a more positive direction, reassuring the American people that he will not make the same decisions that his father and brother made. Name recognition was made a big deal way before the campaign season began, but it really does not help Mr. Bush that the name across the partisan aisle is Clinton. If by nothing less than a miracle he gets the nomination, in a presidential name-war of Clinton v. Bush, Clinton wins 10 out 10.

The next problem Bush has encountered this primary season is the juggernaut named Donald Trump. Since announcing his candidacy in June, Trump wasted no time in attacking the then front-runner Bush. This, in retrospect, was a brilliant move by Trump because if you want to be the king of the playground you find the biggest kid there and punch him in the mouth. From that moment on, Jeb should have prepared for a 12-round fight with a K.O. finish. Instead, he held timid and waited for the judges to gift wrap this decision for him. His lackadaisical approach to Trump’s low-energy comment and completely disrespectful comments about his wife should have ignited a fire in Bush, yet he stayed the same course and let those punches connect without throwing a counter of his own. That will not work with a “candidate” like Trump; you have to show some backbone and at the very least try and hit back. The plan going into the campaign changes the moment a wildcard jumps in. Granted, Bush has been throwing jabs lately, but it is a bit late to show up to the fight now. Trump and Carson both have double digit leads in all three major primary states, while Bush stands on the precipice of relegation.

 

The final problem is Mr. Bush doesn’t take advantage of the free media given to him, more specifically debates and interviews on the cable news networks. Those are the perfect opportunities for Mr. Bush to show the American people exactly who he is, not only as a candidate, but as a person as well. So far throughout the campaign, he has yet to show some personality; something that his brother, former President Bush, had no problem with. All the other candidates have been trying to gain the small air-time they can get their hands on, especially with Donald Trump taking most of the attention. So it is important that, when given an opportunity, he take full advantage of it and make it a memorable one. Mr. Bush has not, which makes me question if he has the right team in place to take his candidacy any further. Unfortunately the low-energy adjective placed on Mr. Bush has been spot on. This was proven especially so last night after a more than embarrassing third debate performance. If he does not get his act together soon, he is going to be looking on the outside in, throwing support behind the Republican nominee, which at this point is definitely not him. Barring something drastic to get his numbers up, he is going to lose in a dramatic and embarrassing fashion. Good luck, Mr. Bush; may the odds be ever in your favor.

~ Consigliere  

Democratic Primary Debate Review

Writer: Brandon Parrish
Editor-in-Chic: Nia Langley 

I am a Democrat, and after this debate, I am still unclear on who to vote for. Social media is telling me Bernie Sanders is the best candidate, but I disagree. Hillary shares my views, and her experiences would serve us well in Washington; but in my gut, she seems untrustworthy. Governor O’Malley was rather impressive, but his record in Baltimore disturbs me. Senator Webb and Governor Chafee, unfortunately, did not get enough speaking time to even make a fair assessment.
I have an issue with Bernie Sanders not because he is a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist, but primarily because of his opinion on big banks.

It seems as if there is a misconception on the cause of the great recession. All the cards began to fall during the mortgage crisis. We all know the government failed to regulate the purchase of subprime mortgages by the banks, mainly investment banks. Banks were buying these mortgages with a reckless abandon, over-leveraging themselves to the point where they had not raised enough capital to ensure their solvency. So when Americans began to default on their mortgage, the income stream for the banks began to wither away right along with their solvency. But, had it not been for the big banks, we would be in a different position than we are in now. Remember, JPMorgan Chase, one of the big commercial banks, bailed out Bear Stearns, an investment bank, with some help from the federal government; this action gave the markets confidence in the financial system. However, when Lehman Brothers, an investment bank, filed for bankruptcy, the financial system began a downward spiral. Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch and Countrywide, Wells Fargo bought Wachovia, J.P. Morgan bought Bear Stearns, and the U.S. Treasury took control of AIG. So the argument can be made that the banks are bigger because of the aversion of a complete financial meltdown.  I love Bernie Sanders' ideas, but whether you believe me or not, they are radical and they would not see the light of day in Congress.

What we really needed to hear was the plan the candidates had to combat the gridlock in the government. It is time that we buckle down and accept the hard truth; that there are things that we want as Democrats that we are not going to get, in order to achieve things that we really need to get done. There are positions that we need not move an inch on and positions that we may need to compromise on in order to get things like a living wage, income equality, gun control, extended paid maternity leave for women, and universal healthcare. And while I am on the subject of gridlock, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the political apathy among us Democrats. We cannot afford to only wake up when it is time to elect a president. When President Obama was elected in 2008, we enjoyed huge majorities in both houses of Congress. The healthcare law was passed, the auto industry was saved, Wall Street reform passed, and equal pay for equal work passed; but 2 years later, we lost the majority we enjoyed in the House and the filibuster-proof majority we enjoyed in the Senate. We got more seats back in 2012 when we re-elected President Obama, but Democrats were slaughtered in the 2014 midterm elections. Why you ask? Because Democrats did not turn out to vote, mainly millennials. Yes, the presidential elections matter, however, our state, local, and congressional elections matter just as much if not more.

What seems apparent from the debate is Hillary’s vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq still haunts her and will haunt her for the duration of this presidential season. With the nuclear deal with Iran, ongoing civil war in Syria, and Putin’s bully swag, that vote can be seen as an indicator of the future of President Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy. Also remember that Clinton advised for the raid on Osama bin Laden, advocated to arm the Syrian rebels, and also wanted to institute a no-fly zone. All of this combined with the terrorist attacks in Benghazi damages Clinton’s campaign. However, according to what was said in the debates, all the Democrats, with Senator Webb as an exception, seem to be weak on foreign policy. Granted, I do not believe foreign policy gravitas will be a factor in democratic politics, but it will matter when it is time to govern.

Before I sum everything up, I need to address the African American community’s relationship with the Democratic Party. I love the fact that a majority of the candidates during the debates said black lives matter. But talk is very cheap. I may get in trouble for this later in life but this is just how I feel; blacks have been blindly loyal to the Democratic Party since the FDR’s New Deal. Yes, since the New Deal, blacks have progressed through society but that is not enough. Why you ask? Because our schools are still subpar. About a fifth of black people are unemployed and half of the 80% of us who are working are underemployed. It is 2015 and we watch movies from the 70s and 80s that make fun of police brutality against black people and it is still relevant. Our neighborhoods still look like they are straight out of the third world but we run to the polls with our blindfolds on while democrats whisper sweet nothings in our ears. They advocate for the use of body cameras as if that will make a difference.  Bernie Sanders talked about a political revolution that needs to place in America. But a faction of that revolution needs to be black people who stand up to the politicians who pander just to get our vote. We need to demand that our leaders work to transform the hood into safe, economic hubs of opportunity and discourage law enforcement from even feeling comfortable drawing a gun on anyone who is unarmed. And if we do not see an effort to legislate our demands, we will start a movement that will rival the Protestant Reformation and make sure they could not get elected to be their child’s parent!

Taking everything into account, the Democratic debate was substantial and constructive. Compared to the Republican debates, the Democrats portrayed maturity and gravity. Governor O’Malley with all of his pathos gained the most ground, and I believe he emerges with the most momentum, but not a victory. This debate, like the entire primary, is Hillary Clinton’s to lose. And she did not lose. She was very presidential in this debate. But as one of my good friends said, “Bernie is so convincing"; and convincing he was. He was talking directly to every working-class Democrat watching the debate. He came out victorious because of his passion and clarity; but Hillary proved she is presidential material. I can say this primary season will be one for the ages.

~Consigliere

Marco Rubio: The Pathos Kid !

Editor-In-Chic: Nia Langley
http://nialangleyspeaks.blogspot.com/