Jeb Bush Fires Back at Trump, but Is Anyone Listening?
Despite the sizzling Summer of Trump, Jeb Bush and the rest of the Republican establishment still don’t get it.
Bush just released an 80-second video entitled “The Real Donald Trump”, as flagged by Mike Allen in his Politico Playbook note this morning, in a slick effort to attack Trump by using his own words against him. That’s a classic campaign tactic, of course, and the effort by the Bush campaign is aimed at painting the bombastic real estate mogul from New York as a fake conservative – someone whose core values and views are anathema to Republicans in Iowa, where the Real Clear Politics poll average puts Trump in the lead for the GOP Caucuses with 21.3 percent.
Related: Two New Polls Show Exactly Why Donald Trump Is Winning
Here’s a sampling from the video:
Talking to Tim Russert on Meet the Press, 1999:
- “I’ve lived in New York City and Manhattan all my life, so you know my views are a little bit different than if I lived in Iowa.”
- “I am very pro-choice. I am pro-choice in every respect.”
From a 1999 Fox News clip:
- “As far as single-payer [heathcare system], it works in Canada. It works incredibly well in Scotland.”
Talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN:
- Who would you like representing the United States in a deal with Iran? “I think Hillary would do a good job.”
- Do you identify more as a Democrat or a Republican? “Well, you’d be shocked if I said that in many cases I probably identify more as a Democrat.”
From a 2001 Fox News clip:
- “Hillary Clinton is a terrific woman. I’m a little biased because I’ve known her for years.”
Some of the clips are 15 years old or older and show Trump for what he was: a New Yorker with unremarkable New York liberal/centrist positions on a lot of issues.
Related: Fiorina PAC: CNN and GOP Are Conspiring Against Carly
The big question for Bush and other Republican politicians in the race is: Does it matter that much where Trump once stood or even where he now stands? If it doesn’t, that is going to make taking him down even more difficult.
What Trump is selling is unvarnished authenticity to an electorate tired of politicians who try to be all things to all people. You’re not going to catch Trump courting the gun crowd by saying he likes to hunt small varmints, like the patrician Mitt Romney did. Or donning a Rocky the Squirrel hat and riding around in a tank like Mike Dukakis did in 1988 to try to show he could be a credible commander-in-chief.
Mad-as-hell voters are sick of phoniness and goofy photo ops. When will the career politicians get that?
The 10 Worst States to Have a Baby
The birth rate in the U.S. is finally seeing an uptick after falling during the recession. Births tend to fall during hard economic times because having a baby and raising a child are expensive propositions.
Costs are not the same everywhere, though. Some states are better than others for family budgets, and health care quality varies widely from place to place.
A new report from WalletHub looks at the cost of delivering a baby in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, as well as overall health care quality and the general “baby-friendliness” of each state – a mix of variables including average birth weights, pollution levels and the availability of child care.
Mississippi ranks as the worst state to have a baby, despite having the lowest average infant-care costs in the nation. Unfortunately, the Magnolia State also has the highest rate of infant deaths and one of lowest numbers of pediatricians per capita.
Related: Which States Have the Most Unwanted Babies?
On the other end of the scale, Vermont ranks as the best state for having a baby. Vermont has both the highest number of pediatricians and the highest number of child centers per capita. But before packing your bags, it’s worth considering the frigid winters in the Green Mountain State and the amount of money you’ll need to spend on winter clothing and heat.
Here are the 10 worst and 10 best states for having a baby:
Top 10 Worst States to Have a Baby
1. Mississippi
- Budget Rank: 18
- Health Care Rank: 51
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 29
2. Pennsylvania
- Budget Rank: 37
- Health Care Rank: 36
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 51
3. West Virginia
- Budget Rank: 13
- Health Care Rank: 48
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 50
4. South Carolina
- Budget Rank: 22
- Health Care Rank: 43
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 49
5. Nevada
- Budget Rank: 39
- Health Care Rank: 35
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 46
6. New York
- Budget Rank: 46
- Health Care Rank: 12
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 47
7. Louisiana
- Budget Rank: 8
- Health Care Rank: 50
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 26
8. Georgia
- Budget Rank: 6
- Health Care Rank: 46
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 43
9. Alabama
- Budget Rank: 3
- Health Care Rank: 47
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 44
10. Arkansas
- Budget Rank: 12
- Health Care Rank: 49
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 37
Top 10 Best States to Have a Baby
1. Vermont
- Budget Ranks: 17
- Health Care Rank: 1
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 5
2. North Dakota
- Budget Rank: 10
- Health Care Rank: 14
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 10
3. Oregon
- Budget Rank: 38
- Health Care Rank: 2
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 14
4. Hawaii
- Budget Rank: 31
- Health Care Rank: 25
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 1
5. Minnesota
- Budget Rank: 32
- Health Care Rank: 5
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 12
6. Kentucky
- Budget Rank: 1
- Health Care Rank: 33
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 20
7. Maine
- Budget Rank: 25
- Health Care Rank: 10
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 15
8. Wyoming
- Budget Rank: 22
- Health Care Rank: 17
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 7
9. Iowa
- Budget Rank: 14
- Health Care Rank: 25
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 9
10. Alaska
- Budget Rank: 50
- Health Care Rank: 6
- Baby Friendly Environment Rank: 2
Top Reads From The Fiscal Times
- The 10 Worst States for Property Taxes
- Americans Are About to Get a Nice Fat Pay Raise
- You’re Richer Than You Think. Really.
Worried About a Recession? Here’s When the Next Slump Will Hit
The next recession may be coming sooner than you think.
Eleven of the 31 economists recently surveyed by Bloomberg believed the American recession would hit in 2018, and all but two of them expected the recession to begin within the next five years.
If the recession begins in 2018, the expansion would have lasted nine years, making it the second-longest period of growth in U.S. history after the decade-long expansion that ended when the tech bubble burst in 2001. This average postwar expansion averages about five years.
The recent turmoil in the stock market and the slowdown in China has more investors and analysts using the “R-word,” but the economists surveyed by Bloomberg think we have a bit of time. They pegged the chance of recession over the next 12 months to just 10 percent.
Related: Stocks Are Sending a Recession Warning
While economists talk about the next official recession, many average Americans feel like they’re still climbing out of the last one. In a data brief released last week, the National Employment Law Project found that wages have declined since 2009 for most U.S. workers, when factoring in cost of living increases.
A full jobs recovery is at least two years away, according to an analysis by economist Elise Gould with the Economic Policy Institute. “Wage growth needs to be stronger—and consistently strong for a solid spell—before we can call this a healthy economy,” she wrote in a recent blog post.
Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:
- This CEO Makes 1,951 Times More Than Most of His Workers
- Seven Reasons Why the Fed Won’t Hike Interest Rates
- $42 Million for 54 Recruits: U.S. Program to Train Syrian Rebels Is a Disaster