“Pondering the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Pondering the Pundits”.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Bryce Covert: Whose American Dream Flies?
IN their campaigns for the Republican presidential nomination, both Donald J. Trump and Marco Rubio have said that the American dream is either dead or dying. But for the American people, the dream still holds sway. It’s a basic myth of our country: No matter where someone starts out, if he works hard enough he can climb to the top.
That’s part of why Mr. Trump, a candidate who has run on his own bountiful wealth, can attract such strong support among working-class voters, winning across a range of income levels in South Carolina, Nevada and a number of the Super Tuesday states.
His rival Mr. Rubio has a pitch and personal history that tell a different story about the American dream — one that hews closer to reality. [..]
It’s much more likely that an average voter will end up closer to Mr. Rubio’s situation. The average American has nearly $130,000 in debt, according to the consumer financial advice site NerdWallet, and about $15,000 of it comes from credit cards. In the third quarter of last year, about 93,000 people got a foreclosure notice.
On actual policy, Mr. Trump and Mr. Rubio genuflect equally to the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. So these differing stories of American opportunity create a telling distinction between them. Mr. Trump’s story is clearly far more compelling to Republican voters. He won seven states on Super Tuesday, as opposed to one for Mr. Rubio. We still desperately want to believe that the dream is within our grasp.
New York Times Editorial Board: What the Election Means for Reproductive Rights
The day after Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, Senator Ted Cruz released a campaign ad warning, “We’re just one Supreme Court justice away from losing” on abortion, among other issues. The ad showed Donald Trump, in a 1999 interview, saying he is “very pro-choice.”
Mr. Trump, who says he is now “staunchly pro-life,” hasn’t talked much about abortion at his rallies, preferring to focus on building a wall and banning Muslims from the country. But the vacancy on the court is a reminder that the next president will have great influence over the future of reproductive rights.
The Supreme Court, where a conservative majority would threaten Roe v. Wade, is only the beginning. The next president will also have the opportunity to shape the federal judiciary at lower levels. While the Supreme Court’s decision on Texas’ abortion restrictions this term may clarify what kinds of regulations states may impose, lower federal courts will still have a big role in determining how regulations are carried out.
Scott Lemieux: Women’s freedoms hang in the balance – but it’s the election that will decide their fate
On Wednesday, the US supreme court heard oral arguments in the most important abortion rights case to appear before it in more than two decades.
House Bill 2, the Texas anti-abortion law being challenged in Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt, would require most of the abortion clinics in the state to close. Passed by legislators who are not necessarily familiar with even the most basic facts of how abortions work, it represents the state of the art in using alleged protections of women’s health to deny them access to a safe medical procedure.
Were the case to be upheld, Roe v Wade would essentially be overruled, whether the court did so explicitly or not. With Antonin Scalia’s death, though, the court lost a conservative vote, and HB2 will likely not be upheld. It is likely, however, that the fate of the Texas law and the reproductive rights of American women will have to wait until after the presidential election in November to be decided.
Ali Gharib: Goodbye Ben Carson. Thanks for the laughs
The worst news of the election so far is that Ben Carson will drop out of the Republican primary race. Carson was the only candidate of either party who brought me unmitigated joy. He could scarcely begin to open his mouth before the corners of mine turned up. Before he was done speaking, I was guaranteed a deep belly laugh. If I was lucky, my eyes welled with tears of uncontrollable mirth.
But my joy was apparently not enough to propel Carson forward. After faltering yet again on Super Tuesday, finishing last or second-to-last in all the contests, the retired neurosurgeon said he would make a speech on Friday and ominously withdrew from Thursday’s debate.
“I do not see a political path forward,” Carson said. And even this brought a smile to my face, reminding me of another debate stage. It was just ahead of the New Hampshire primary, in early February, when Carson enacted perhaps the most awkward moment of a campaign loaded down with the weight of incredible awkwardness.
Nathan Schneider: Game over for Sanders? It needn’t be
On Tuesday night I attended a Democratic caucus in a ballroom at the University of Colorado Boulder, where hundreds of college students rallied for the man they hope will become the oldest president in history. Speeches for Hillary Clinton received polite applause, while any reference to Bernie Sanders caused a short period of rapture.
Those students helped Sanders win Colorado. But in most other Super Tuesday states, his bid for the Democratic nomination sputtered. I’m worried about what will become of the sense of possibility that this candidacy created – and the millions of young people who are done bowing to the dictates of capitalism. I’m worried about the fate – and the future – of the Bern.
All along, Sanders himself has promised a “political revolution,” not just a candidate. Yet what he has delivered, at least so far, is pretty much just a candidacy. As winning looks less likely for Sanders, the possibility of cascading disappointment is nigh.
Recent Comments