Three reasons why markets would love a President Hillary Clinton (Business Insider)
By Akin Oyedele
February 10, 2015
Business Insider
Greg Valliere at Potomac Research says Hillary Clinton, “has to be considered the favorite to win the presidency.”
And for the markets, Valliere thinks a Clinton presidency would be a positive.
“Our very early bottomline is that the markets could gladly live with her,” Valliere wrote in a note Tuesday.
Valliere gives three main reasons why:
A divided government is good for markets: Stocks rose over 200% when Bill Clinton was president. Hillary would have to deal with a Republican-controlled house – currently a 246 - 188 majority, and the GOP is likely to be in control until the next redistricting exercise in 2021.
She’ll avoid the “us-versus-them rhetoric” against Wall Street, with a more moderate approach to big business than President Obama.
She’s a crony capitalist, or someone who would develop a close relationship with businesses and give them incentives to invest in the economy. While some like senator Elizabeth Warren see this as a problem, it’s actually a plus for Clinton because she would look to market leaders for advice more than Obama has. Regulations on business would not be as tough as they are under Obama, if she wins.
And what’s more, Valliere adds that if the 2016 presidential race turns out to be Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush, markets will find either winner acceptable.
Axelrod: Hillary not a ‘healing figure’ (Washington Times)
By Dave Boyer
February 11, 2015
The Washington Times
Political adviser David Axelrod told Barack Obama prior to the 2008 Democratic presidential primary that rival Hillary Rodham Clinton was not a “healing figure” and would have difficulty convincing voters that she was as a candidate of the future.
Mr. Axelrod’s memoir, released Tuesday, includes a 12-page strategic memo written for Mr. Obama after Thanksgiving 2006, when the then-senator from Illinois was gearing up for his presidential campaign.
The Chicago adviser wrote: “Hillary... and her team have played this course many times before. They know every bunker, sand trap and the lay of the greens. And she has the best caddy in the business. But for all of her advantages, she is not a healing figure. ... The more she tries to moderate her image, the more she ... compounds her exposure as an opportunist.”
And in an observation that could have implications for Mrs. Clinton’s anticipated presidential bid in 2016, Mr. Axelrod wrote nearly 10 years ago: “After two decades of the Bush-Clinton saga, making herself the candidate of the future will be a challenge.”
Mr. Axelrod’s memoir, “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics,” was published Tuesday by Penguin Press.
In interviews promoting his book this week, Mr. Axelrod said Mrs. Clinton will need to run “like an insurgent” in 2016.
“She needs a very well-conceived message about where she wants to lead the country,” he said. “If she doesn’t have that, then it does become a problem. ....I think she has to approach this campaign like a challenger, not like a front-runner — like an insurgent.”
The Republican National Committee said Tuesday that Mrs. Clinton is behaving like someone “in hiding” as the 2016 campaign begins to heat up.
“She’s made a strategic decision that the only way to ensure she is the Democratic nominee is to make everyone think she’s inevitable,” said RNC spokesman Sean Spicer. “The last time she had to face voters and actually compete for the nomination, she lost to a newcomer. She doesn’t want to make the same mistake twice.”
The RNC said it will be keeping a tally “of just how secretive she’s been,” including:
Days since last press conference: 202
Days since she’s done an interview: 184
Days since she’s been in Iowa: 103
Days since she’s been in New Hampshire: 100
Days since she’s done an event that didn’t require significant speaking fees: 69
Dukakis: Hillary will be ‘16 nominee (The Hill)
By Kevin Cirilli
February 10, 2015
The Hill
Michael Dukakis, the 1988 Democratic presidential nominee, says Hillary Clinton is going to be the party’s 2016 standard-bearer — and he’s okay with that.
“Look, I consider myself part of that liberal base. I’m very comfortable with her as a candidate, as a nominee and as the president of the United States,” Dukakis said Monday on Fox Business Network’s “Cavuto.” “Hillary is going to be the nominee and I’d like to see as many of us as possible get behind that effort now.”
Many progressives have raised concerns about Clinton’s ties to Wall Street, a relationship they see as too cozy.
But Dukakis pushed back against that idea, suggesting that Clinton’s views are more skeptical of Wall Street than progressive critics would suggest. That being so, he asserted that she will likely not have to change those opinions to rebuff a primary challenge from the left.
“I don’t think she will be forced to vary her view dramatically. ... She’s a very progressive Democrat and one who’s not soft on the kinds of financial fooling around that virtually sucked the country dry,” Dukakis, a former governor of Massachusetts, told Fox Business Network.
Liberal groups such as Democracy For America and MoveOn.org are trying to move Clinton to the left and in some cases draft candidates such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who has insisted she’s not running.
“I don’t think these folks have anything to worry about and frankly — I’d feel a lot better if they were out organizing 200,000 precincts in this country and getting ready for what is going to be a very tough contest in 2016,” Dukakis told Fox Business Network.
Hillary Clinton to be in D.C. on same day as Bibi speech (Politico)
By Gabriel Dibenedetti
February 10, 2015
Politico
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu heads to Washington to deliver a controversial address to Congress on March 3, he won’t be the only big name in town who might soon be facing an election.
Hillary Clinton is also scheduled to be in the capital city on that day, to be honored by EMILY’s List, the group supporting female Democratic candidates.
Clinton’s spokesman did not respond to a question about whether the two plan to meet, but the convergence of the prime minister and former secretary of state brings together two of the most talked-about figures in politics, at a crucial time for both of them.
While Clinton’s all-but-certain 2016 campaign will be nearing its likely launch, Netanyahu’s speech will generate major attention after drawing condemnation from many Democrats who are critical of him and of House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation of the prime minister despite the White House’s disapproval.
Neither President Barack Obama, nor Vice President Joe Biden will attend the speech, which will address the Iran nuclear deal. Biden will be out of the country, Obama has ruled out meeting with Netanyahu just before Israel’s March 17 election. Secretary of State John Kerry is also expected to avoid seeing Netanyahu.
Clinton has repeatedly spoken about her role in Middle East policy since leaving the State Department in 2013, but she has not commented on Netanyahu’s upcoming address. Her Washington event is sure to draw the attention of many political observers, as it will be one of her first public events in months. The former senator and first lady has been busy building her campaign team.
And while Clinton is the presumptive front-runner for the Democratic nomination in 2016, a potential rival — Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders — grabbed headlines Monday by becoming the first senator to announce he would boycott the speech.
Word by word; New Chicago program aims to prevent achievement gap by teaching parents (Grand Forks Herald)
By Sara Neufeld
February 10, 2015
Grand Forks Herald
CHICAGO - On the third-floor hospital maternity ward at the University of Chicago Medical Center, Bionka Burkhalter had just given birth to her first child, a 7-pound, 4-ounce boy named Josiah. There was a knock on the door, and two women asked to give a presentation on how to build her baby’s brain. The 21-year-old single mother gave them her attention.
In the next 15 minutes, she heard about the importance of talking a lot to Josiah, whose thick dark hair poked out from under a swaddle blanket in a bassinet beside her bed. She heard about tuning into his cues and responding when he cries, and about giving him a chance to communicate back to her, even if just through eye contact.
Burkhalter is a test subject in one of many initiatives being piloted by the Thirty Million Words Project, which aims to prevent the achievement gap from starting with the power of parent-child talk - beginning at day one. In this intervention with newborns, mothers still in the hospital learn research-based parenting practices less commonly known in poor households.
There will soon be follow-up lessons at pediatric checkups.
This winter, Thirty Million Words is embarking on a major long-term study of a home-visiting program that teaches communication skills to parents of slightly older babies. Children will be trailed from about 15 months old through at least kindergarten.
Thirty Million Words was founded by University of Chicago pediatric surgeon Dana Suskind, who performs cochlear implant surgery on deaf children, allowing them to hear. Suskind was disturbed to discover that, after the same operation, some patients from poor families had more difficulty learning to speak than children from affluent homes. She became intrigued by a famous study finding that a hearing child born into poverty hears 30 million words fewer before age 4 than a middle-class peer.
This so-called “word gap” has been getting a lot of attention lately, thanks to Hillary Clinton making it a pre-campaign campaign of sorts. Her Too Small to Fail partnership has spurred a White House conference on the topic, public service announcements on Spanish-language Univision, and strategic dialogue on TV shows like “Orange Is the New Black” and “The Fosters.” The American Academy of Pediatrics released a policy in June asking its 62,000 member doctors to encourage parents to read to their babies daily. There are now text message campaigns to give parents talking reminders and tips.
Thirty Million Words has promising results from a small pilot home-visiting program, and the national buzz has helped catapult the organization into a rapid expansion in Chicago. Suskind and her 13-member staff, plus graduate student interns and volunteers, are trying several approaches to reach families while measuring impact for potential widespread replication.
These strategies do not simply involve the quantity of words spoken; they target parent-child relationships, in line with new research that the quality of communication matters most.
“Obviously, language can in itself be a key part of building a child’s brain, but the parent relationship really is the basis for all of child development,” said Suskind, 46, a widowed mother of three school-age kids who sits on the Too Small to Fail advisory council.
“We’re using the lever of parent talk to get into the parent-child relationship.” Language, though, can be quantified where relationships can’t. In the long-term study that began in December, babies will wear a device recording how many words adults say to them in a day and how many chances they get to respond.
Results will be collected for 200 children recruited from Early Head Start and other city programs. All families will receive six months of home visits, but parents won’t all learn about the same thing. Half in a control group will get lessons on nutrition. The other 100 will see the Thirty Million Words video curriculum, explaining scientifically backed communication skills.
Parents will be taught to weave back-and-forth conversation into daily activities, from diaper changing to cooking dinner, and to explain to children why they are being asked to do things, rather than just directing them. They’ll be urged to go on a “technology diet,” since children need human interaction; their brains don’t build connections with televisions and computers.
In partnership with the city of Chicago, Suskind’s team will follow all 200 children overtime to measure their kindergarten readiness.
Suskind also is in talks with the Chicago Children’s Museum to create targeted conversation points for the 400,000 children and parents who visit each year.
She is applying for a grant to train low-income parents to be ambassadors promoting the cause. (Her organization gets a mix of public and private funding.) “The ultimate answer is the whole society understanding how important parents are in their children’s development,” Suskind said. In low-income communities, “they’ve been told the opposite, that they’re not powerful.” Burkhalter, who holds a GED and lives with her mother on the South Side of Chicago, was one of 80 new moms who got the newborn presentation after giving birth at the University of Chicago in recent months.
Feedback from these women will be incorporated into a video to roll out this summer in the maternity wards of the hospitals at the University of Chicago and Northwestern University, shown when newborns have their hearing tested.
Similar videos are being developed to show parents on iPads while waiting to be seen at pediatric checkups.
Before her presentation began, Burkhalter filled out a survey. She checked “somewhat agree” to the statement, “How smart an infant will be depends mostly on their ‘natural’ intelligence at birth.” She then turned to Beth Suskind and Iara Fuenmayor Rivas, who led her through a 59-slide Power Point. Beth is Dana Suskind’s sister-inlaw and runs Thirty Million Words’ daily operation.
Despite having just been through 17 hours of labor, Burkhalter listened attentively as Beth Suskind explained that 85 percent of baby Josiah’s brain will develop in the next three years. Her talking, responding and caring for him will make his brain grow strong.
Every snuggle, every diaper change counts.
She debunked a common myth that infants can be spoiled with too much attention, explaining that their short-term memories are still developing for the first six months - so Josiah needs to be reminded that Mommy is there to comfort him when he’s upset.
“There are no perfect parents,” she said. “You’re teaching him he can count on you.” Asked for “brutally honest” feedback at the end of the presentation, Burkhalter didn’t have anything negative to say. She learned a lot. “I’m gonna talk to him when I’m changing his Pampers,” she said.
She then took the same survey again. Beside the statement “How smart an infant will be depends mostly on their ‘natural’ intelligence at birth,” she had a new answer: “Strongly disagree.”
Share with your friends: |