Steven Benen at MSNBC says Donald Trump is driving the debate so far in the GOP primary, and that's not a good thing for the GOP:
Jeb Bush is talking about Trump. Chris Christie is talking about Trump. Rick Perry is talking about Trump. Mitt Romney is talking about Trump, and he isn’t even a candidate.
Not to put too fine a point on the story, but when one person is effectively controlling the political news cycle and dictating one party’s conversation, it looks quite a bit like this.
And while it’s likely this won’t continue for the rest of 2015, we shouldn’t necessarily expect the chatter to disappear soon, either. Trump will continue to make outrageous comments, which will generate another round of stories, which will lead to more questions for his Republican rivals.
NPR's
Maria Liasson:
Trump, whose political persona is built around being outrageous, ended up reinforcing the most negative perceptions of Republicans. There was a huge backlash as companies like NASCAR, Univision, NBC and Macy's rushed to cut ties with him. [...]
But reaction from the Republican presidential candidates took weeks, and when it came did come, it was mixed — or late.
"There's an old saying about wrestling a pig — both of you get dirty, and the pig likes it," Schmidt said. "And there's something of that going on."
Schmidt weighed in last week when only Jeb Bush had weighed in, before other candidates came out late last week or over the weekend with their denouncements, or in one candidate's case, praise.
More on the day's top stories below the fold.
Janell Ross at The Washington Post:
There are more than a few possible reads on just why some candidates are willing to criticize Trump or divorce themselves from the ideas expressed in Trump’s announcement and others aren't. The candidates could be expressing sincere beliefs. Some may be searching for a way to draw in moderate Republican support. And others still may be more interested in picking up Trump’s supporters when his campaign experiences its seemingly inevitable crash.
Ali Elkin at Bloomberg:
Donald Trump, the presidential candidate who boasts velvety golf courses and glittery skyscrapers, now appears to have a super-PAC — in a post office box.
Make America Great Again PAC, which takes its name from the real estate mogul's presidential campaign slogan, filed paperwork last week with the Federal Election Commission. Trump's campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said the campaign has limited information about the super-PAC. Has Trump been trumped out of his own brand? Or is this an effort to provide some financial aid to the billionaire who has boasted that he will underwrite his own campaign for the Republican presidential nomination? His campaign manager couldn't say.
Newsweek's
Matthew Cooper:
A year ago if you played word association with the name “Donald Trump” you might reply “billionaire” or “luxury” or “hair.” Now it’s more likely “WTF,” which is either three words or an acronym depending on how you look at it. [...] I put in for an interview with the 69-year-old. (He’s actually the second oldest candidate on the GOP side which could explain the “get off my lawn” tenor of his remarks.) He got back to me after the article appeared. Our brief chat reinforced a few things. He’s not letting go of the Mexico thing, he’s impossibly vague and he’s an imperfect messenger, but a strong candidate.
Switching topics, at The Week,
Paul Waldman writes about 2016 and SCOTUS:
If Democrats care about their own agenda, they ought to be no less motivated to vote by the prospect of changes in the court.
That's for two reasons: the age of the justices, and the precariousness of the current majority. By January 2017, three of the justices (Ginsburg, Scalia, and Kennedy) will be in their 80's; another (Breyer) will be 78. While most of them seem vigorous enough, it would be strange if at least one or two didn't retire in the next president's term (the last three presidents each appointed two justices).
Susan Milligan at US News writes about the amazing US women's national soccer team:
Today's little girls and teenagers grew up with Title IX already well-established, and attended schools where girls' sports had to be given the same chance as boys'. They grew up watching not some beauty queen, but Mia Hamm, a key part of the teams that won the American women their first two titles in 1991 and 1999. They've seen female athletes perform extraordinary feats on ice, in the water and on the field. They are watching an unapologetically competitive woman make her second, very credible, bid for the presidency. Instead of having sporting event commercials feature such themes as the "Swedish Bikini Team," young females were able to see a phenomenally powerful and inspirational commercial by Nike, called "American Woman," featuring U.S. women's soccer players in their determined, sweaty glory.
Trump's beauty pageants may wither away because of stupid comments he made about a country and ethnic group. But the real threat to such events is not the musings of an uncouth real estate magnate. It's the modern meaning of "competition" to women and girls. And the USA women's soccer team, while well-deserving of congratulations for its stupendous World Cup win, should be recognized as well for what it has done for female empowerment.
On a final note,
Eugene Robinson at The Washington Post writes in support of Bernie Sanders and his impact on the Democratic primary:
Is Bernie Sanders the political reincarnation of Eugene McCarthy? I doubt it, but let’s hope he makes the Democratic presidential race interesting.
I don’t know if front-runner Hillary Clinton shares my wish, but she ought to. I’m not of the school that believes competition for competition’s sake is always a good thing. But Sanders has an appeal for younger, more liberal, more idealistic Democrats that Clinton presently lacks. If she competes for these voters — and learns to connect with them — she will have a much better chance of winning the White House.