Joining today's show are Katty Kay, Jeremy Peters, Eugene Robinson, Kasie Hunt, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, Keir Simmons, Harold Ford Jr., Mayor Bill de Blasio, Tom Brokaw, Mike Lupica, Rep. Matt Salmon, Sara Eisen and more. Tomorrow is halloween and 19 Dolphins lost their lives today in Taji, Japan. The cove is red from the blood of 19 striped dolphins. #DolphinProject...The pods are getting smaller but yhey are averaging about 15 killings and captures a week now.
George Bush Doesn’t Care About President Yeezy. George W. Bush doesn't have as much confidence in Kanye West to lead the free world as President Obama -- or Kanye, for that matter -- in fact, seems pretty comical to him. TMZ caught up with the former Prez in D.C. Thursday night to get his reaction to Kanye's early declaration for 2020 ... and his reaction is classic Dub-ya. "That's Pretty Damn Funny". In fairness, it's kind of a loaded question, considering Yeezy and Bush's history -- the whole hating black people thing after Hurricane Katrina. Fair to say, this is one vote Kanye does NOT have in the bag.
President Barack Obama and presidential hopeful (for him, not us) Donald Trump have both already weighed in on Kanye West’s 2020 bid for president, and now former president George W. Bush has also spoken his piece to TMZ — although “spoken” might be the wrong word, considering his only response is a derisive laugh. Kanye’s legendary “George Bush doesn’t care about black people” statement celebrated its 10th anniversary earlier this year, and it certainly seems like George Bush doesn’t care about President Yeezy now.
I have to say that Joe must have watched the movie 'Draft Day' because mentions the story about Joe Montana coming onto the field in that Super Bowl when he drove down it 96 yards for the game winning touchdown. Although I guess its a pretty well known story in itself but still, it is what Jeb Bush may need to get back into this race. Jeb Bush is a weird guy. He said something like 'memo to file' which I have no clue whatthat means, but that is in part what he said to a question about his campaign being on 'life support.' Jeb Bush insists campaign is ‘not on life support’ He emerges from the third Republican debate as a candidate in crisis, with supporters struggling to understand why he keeps underperforming and advisers promising a turnaround before it's too late.
Jeb Bush emerged from the third Republican debate as a candidate in crisis, with supporters struggling to understand why he keeps underperforming and advisers promising a turnaround before it’s too late. Campaigning in New Hampshire Thursday, Bush insisted his White House bid is “not on life support.”
Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush continues to deliver lackluster performances and lower-than-anticipated fundraising, disappointing expectations.
Still, advisers concede November will be his campaign’s most crucial period to date, a stark contrast to their previous assertions that Bush was best-positioned to outlast rivals in a long campaign. Millions of dollars in TV advertising must start yielding stronger poll numbers, advisers say, and Bush himself must find a way to stop being overshadowed by competitors in the large Republican field.
“The intensity is going to increase,” declared Sally Bradshaw, Bush’s senior adviser.
To some supporters, that may ring hollow on the heels of Bush’s lackluster performance in Wednesday night’s debate. Aides have spent weeks promising more forceful performances from the bookish former Florida governor, only to see him repeatedly fall flat.
The contrast between expectations and reality was particularly striking on the debate stage in Colorado. Bush appeared to land a sharp jab on friend and political mentee Marco Rubiobut was glaringly ill-prepared for Rubio’s sharp comeback and quickly faded into the background for the rest of the two-hour contest.
It was a painful moment for a candidate once seen as the Republican Party’s best hope for reclaiming the White House. And it deepened concerns about a campaign that less than a week ago was forced to drastically cut its payroll, travel costs and other expenses amid slower-than-expected fundraising.
“He was poorly served by whatever campaign adviser told him to go down that path with Marco,” said Brian Ballard, a major fundraiser for both Bush’s campaign and super PAC.
He also says that 'yeah, you saw it' when he was asked about whether he is having fun on the campaign trail. He is an odd guy that reminds me almost like Mitt Romny when it comes to that weird humor.
There have been no polls out yet that were taken after the debate this week and I agree with Joe here. If Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Chris Christie do NOT jump up from where they were before the debate, if I were them, I would throw up my arms asking what do I need to do to get some real attention here. Jeb's numbers were not bad before that debate and i am curious to know or see if he dips after it. I do not think that Jeb's campaign is on life support. There is a lot of primary to go and talk I have said it many times to talk to me in January next year. That is when it gets real.
You know what is funny to hear and read today? The NY Times Calls on Chris Christie to Drop Out of Presidential Race. Christie made a comment about the New York Times being biased and against him on the show yesterady. I wonder if that had anything to do with that article getting posted today.
In a scathing critique of the Republican presidential candidate, the New York Times calls on Chris Christie to exit the race. Stat.
"The point is that New Jersey is in trouble, and the governor is off pursuing a presidential run that's turned out to be nothing more than a vanity project," the editorial board wrote. "Mr. Christie's numbers are in the basement, and he's nearly out of campaign cash. This is his moment, all right: to go home and use the year left in his term to clean out the barn, as Speaker John Boehner would say."
The editorial comes the day after the third Republican debate where Christie is widely considered to have had a good debate performance, but he is struggling with low poll numbers in the crowded field. The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released earlier this month showed Christie receiving just 1 percent support.
Christie responded via Twitter, saying he's "not going anywhere."
Chris Christie
.@nytimes Can't read the article because I don't have a subscription, but I can tell you this - I am not going anywhere.
This editorial is the second local newspaper this week to denounce their local politician running for president. The Sun Sentinel wrote that Florida Senator Marco Rubio should resign from the senate because of missing nearly 50 percent of the votes and for saying he doesn't like his day job.
The Times critique of Christie is not new. The paper has long been critical of Christie, refusing to endorse him in both of his gubernatorial elections.
"While Mr. Christie talks tough to empty rooms in Des Moines, Trenton is running on autopilot. Take Mr. Christie's breakout moment, his response to Hurricane Sandy. Today, one-third of New Jersey residents hardest-hit by the storm say they are 'very dissatisfied' with the state's response so far; two-thirds say they feel 'forgotten,'" the Times wrote.
Christie's struggles at home run deep. The legislature overrode one of his vetoes for the first time.
Christie's campaign plans to fundraise off of the editorial by saying the times has shown "their true liberal bias." Leigh Ann Caldwell, Steve Kornacki and Kelly O'Donnell contributed to this post.
I think Steve Kornacki also hates Chris Christie for some reason. He has been relentless on him since Bridgegate broke whenever last year or two years ago. He basically broke many of the stories related to it.
GOP candidates plot debate revolt against RNC. Several Republican presidential campaigns are planning to hold a meeting in Washington, D.C., this Sunday to discuss plans for wresting more control of the debates from the Republican National Committee, CNN has confirmed.
The meeting, first reported by Politico, comes in the wake of Wednesday's night's CNBC primary debate, which has been widely criticized by the candidates. The RNC has not been invited to the meeting, reflecting the campaigns' frustrations with the committee's handling of the debate process.
Sources with knowledge of the meeting said the plan came about after a discussion between representatives from the Ben Carson and Bobby Jindal campaigns, who then brought in aides to Donald Trump and Lindsay Graham.
As of Thursday night, representatives from the Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, Carly Fiorina and Rick Santorum campaigns are also expected to attend the meeting, which is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Sunday. The Jeb Bush and Rand Paul's campaigns are tentative, while a spokesperson for Chris Christie confirmed that their team was not part of the discussions.
The campaigns' goal: Come up with a way to gain more control over a debate process that they see as unruly and ill-fitted to the interests of the Republican candidates.
Earlier on Thursday, Carson had told reporters that he would be demanding a new debate format and was reaching out to the other Republican candidates in an attempt to force changes in the next debate.
"We need a change of format," Carson said during a press conference in Lakewood, Colorado. "Debates are supposed to be to get to know the candidates, what is behind them. What it has turned into is a gotcha."
Donald Trump and Ben Carson at CNBC debate.
Wednesday night's two-hour long debate -- moderated by CNBC's Carl Quintanilla, John Harwood and Becky Quick -- was widely panned by Republican candidates and the RNC, all of whom complained about biased and shallow questions.
During the debate, Senator Cruz accused the moderators of trying to instigate a cage match. Trump slammed the "ridiculous questions," and Christie grew visibly irate at the moderators' decision to discuss fantasy football instead of other issues.
"Wait a second, we have $19 trillion in debt, we have people out of work, we have ISIS and al-Qaeda attacking us and we're talking about fantasy football?" Christie shouted. "Can we stop?"
The problem is that the candidates put themselves in these positions of it being a joke. They are just being put on the spot and called out on it. If they do not want to be asked these stupid questions, they should not say stupid things. Like when Trump makes comments about certain things like women and Rosie O'Donnell, he would not get called out on it. There are also too many candidates. Anderson Cooper only had to deal with 5 candidates. But again, there were no stupid questions inthe debate but then again, Anderson sure as hell asked some hard questions and he followed up greatly too.
Actually, that is also true what Katie Kay was saying about the debate this week. I forgot to mention that the TPP was also not even touched into this week and this was a debate about the economy. It was indeed astounding about how many questions were NOT asked on Wednesday night.
Domestically, there's a New Speaker of the House and It's Paul Ryan.
Republicans overwhelmingly elected Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as the 54th speaker of the House on Thursday morning. After a tumultuous month that began with the aborted candidacy of House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Ryan, the House GOP's budget guru and 2012 vice presidential nominee, received 236 votes from his caucus. Just nine Republicans voted for his challenger, Rep. Daniel Webster of Florida.
Russia's Syria intervention: One month in. The deployment of a Russian strike force of 34 combat jets and 21 helicopters showed how billions invested in the armed forces by President Vladimir Putin had paid off. Within days of arriving they were flying attack missions, and have now clocked up something like 1,000 of them.
President Putin wanted to show the world that he would bring a zeal to the battle against militancy in Syria that had been sorely lacking under the American-led coalition.
So, whereas the US-led air forces have averaged around six strikes per day during the past year (actually less during this last month) the Russians started with eight, were soon up to a couple of dozen, and have mounted as many as 94 strikes in a single day.
They've taken advantage of the close proximity of their Syrian base to the targets (sometimes just ten minutes' flying time away) to mount two or three missions per day with some aircraft, while a US jet travelling from the Gulf, refuelling multiple times, might fly two or three operational missions in a week.
Having advisers with the Syrian Army on its various fronts, the Russians have had no shortage of targets to prosecute (not initially anyway) because they have so many eyes in place. So Russia has rained down destruction, but to what end?
American officials' analysis and independent journalists, like the Bellingcat investigative website, come up with similar answers: that more than 90% of the bombs have been dropped in places held by groups other than the so-called Islamic State (IS). Of 60 Russian Defence Ministry strike videos with geo-location data examined by Bellingcat, only one was in an area where IS operates.
Russian officials have themselves been inconsistent about targeting. President Putin last week described the distinction between "moderate and immoderate" terrorists as, "playing with words".
While foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has, at times, suggested that elements of the Free Syrian Army (a loose-knit association of groups, many of which have been hit by Russian air attacks) could join in peace talks.
What an examination of the places actually hit shows is that they are heavily clustered around areas where the Syrian regime has sought to reverse recent losses and has, for the past fortnight, been launching ground offensives.
Russian forces in Syria
- 12 Su-25 ground-attack aircraft
- 12 Su-24 bombers
- 6 Su-34 strike fighters
- 4 Su-30 fighters
- 21 helicopters, including 16 Mi-24 attack helicopters
Most Russian strikes have therefore taken the form of "fire preparation" for pushes by the Syrian Army, or close air support once these operations have started.
Which rebels are there matters less than that they are dangerously close to regime heartlands and must be pushed back.
So if that's the way Russia picks its targets, are they accurate?
While almost all bombs or missiles dropped by the US-led coalition are precision guided (usually by laser or satellite), very few Russian ones are.
US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter has said that more than 80% of the Russian bombs are unguided or "dumb" bombs and this estimate tallies closely with independent observations of video footage.
Typically US "precision" bombs have a circular error probable (the radius around the aiming point in which 50% or more will fall) of eight-to-12 metres. With unguided or dumb bombs that increases to 50-100m.
Furthermore, the Russians have been dropping cluster munitions that western air forces would shun for their indiscriminate effect.
Even using precision weapons the US and its allies have killed an estimated 600 plus non-combatants in Syria and Iraq since August 2014 due to poor intelligence or weapons malfunction.
Using much less accurate weaponry, experts believe the rate at which the Russians are killing innocents is likely to be much higher, and of striking the right aiming points lower.
"Russian strikes are thankfully far from being precise," says Col Abdel Jabar al Okaidi a Free Syrian Army commander operating near Aleppo, "which is to our advantage".
Rebel groups and NGOs have claimed hundreds of civilian deaths and seven hospitals hit.
Enormous force
Russian counter-claims that no civilians have been killed and all missions have hit their targets are simply not credible. It's also obvious that their enemy will adapt and returns diminish.
"The targets will be increasingly different and complex," military analyst Col Mikhail Timoshenko acknowledged to Gazeta.Ru.
It may be that they are hitting so many targets, that even with less accuracy, they are doing more damage than the Americans.
Maybe, but we know that civilians living in the areas where these attacks have been most intense, are fleeing in droves
The UN says 120,000 were displaced from Aleppo, Hama, and Idlib provinces between 5 and 22 October: the places where most Russian strikes have taken place, where Syrian Army ground pushes have happened, and where all these people have fled are one and the same.
So far though the regime's gains have either been small (advances of several kilometres) or reversed by rebel counter-attacks.
Even an apparently successful push towards the encircled air base of Kweiris in Aleppo province (reportedly spearheaded by Iranians) has been reversed by an IS counter-attack.
Even if the Syrian Army achieves a breakthrough its strength has fallen due to desertion and the collapse of many units.
And it is open to question whether Assad's forces could hold on to any large-scale gains: they are simply stretched too thin.
Shortly before the strikes started Mr Putin told CBS News "there is no other solution to the Syrian crisis than strengthening the effective government structures" and agreed when it was put to him that he intended to save President Assad.
After one month of air attacks, we can see that Russia has tried to do precisely this: strengthen the Assad regime and its forces.
At the same time there is a cost, in terms of displaced or killed people. Russia's actions have ramped up the war, but so far with no resolution in sight.
In one month Russia has changed a great many calculations in the Middle East. It has deployed a military force to Syria swiftly, and it has brought enormous force to bear. But the human cost of this is becoming clearer.
China to end one-child policy and allow two.
China has decided to end its decades-long one-child policy, the state-run Xinhua news agency reports. Couples will now be allowed to have two children, it said, citing a statement from the Communist Party.
The controversial policy was introduced nationally in 1979, to slow the population growth rate.
It is estimated to have prevented about 400 million births. However concerns at China's ageing population led to pressure for change.
Couples who violated the one-child policy faced a variety of punishments, from fines and the loss of employment to forced abortions.
Over time, the policy has been relaxed in some provinces, as demographers and sociologists raised concerns about rising social costs and falling worker numbers.
The decision to allow families to have two children was designed "to improve the balanced development of population'' and to deal with an aging population, according to the statement from the Community Party's Central Committee carried by the official Xinhua News Agency (in Chinese) on Thursday.
Currently about 30% of China's population is over the age of 50. The total population of the country is around 1.36 billion.
The Communist Party began formally relaxing national rules two years ago, allowing couples in which at least one of the pair is an only child to have a second child.
China's one-child policy
- Introduced in 1979, the policy meant that many Chinese citizens - around a third, China claimed in 2007 - could not have a second child without incurring a fine
- In rural areas, families were allowed to have two children if the first was a girl
- Other exceptions included ethnic minorities and - since 2013 - couples where at least one was a single child
- Campaigners say the policy led to forced abortions, female infanticide, and the under-reporting of female births
- It was also implicated as a cause of China's gender imbalance
Correspondents say that despite the relaxation of the rules, many couples may opt to only have one child, as one-child families have become the social norm.
Critics say that even a two-child policy will not boost the birth rate enough, the BBC's John Sudworth reports.
And for those women who want more than two children, nor will it end the state's insistence on the right to control their fertility, he adds.
"As long as the quotas and system of surveillance remains, women still do not enjoy reproductive rights," Maya Wang of Human Rights Watch told AFP.
The following video just shown is very funny:
Donald Trump Says He Thinks Obama 'Hates Israel'. Fresh off his third debate, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump took a shot at President Obama, saying that he thinks the commander in chief "hates Israel."
Trump made the remarks before a crowd of 4,000 in Nevada –- his second trip to the state.
A person in the crowd shouted “Israel” trying to get Trump’s attention. “I heard the beautiful name of Israel,” Trump said. He vowed to protect the country, adding “Israel is safe with this one,” pointing to himself.
But he took a swipe at the president on the issue, saying that the Iran deal "is so bad for Israel, so dangerous."
"They [Israel] have a president who they actually think Obama hates Israel. I think he does..." Trump said, adding that he thinks Israel is "in such a massive amount of trouble. Because of the agreement.”
Trump also mentioned the election of Paul Ryan today, saying he hopes the new Speaker will be able to unify the house.
Trump heads back to New York Thursday and will be on the trail again Saturday in Virginia.
Bill de Blasio endorses Hillary Clinton.
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio endorsed Hillary Clinton for president on Friday. "She has said what she believes in. This is a very sharp progressive platform. I believe she will follow through on it," de Blasio said during an interview with MSNBC's "Morning Joe," adding that Clinton "has the ability to follow through on it."
De Blasio, a progressive champion and the former campaign manager for Clinton, had been holding back his endorsement of the former secretary of state for months. He argued that Clinton is best positioned of all the 2016 presidential candidates to successfully tackle income inequality in America.
"I'm supporting, I am endorsing Hillary Clinton enthusiastically because we have to take on income inequality. It is the issue of our time. We have to restore the middle class and Hillary Clinton knows how to do it, will get it done, and has a progressive platform that speaks to all the changes we need, including progressive taxation, including uplifting working [people]," de Blasio added.
His backing is a blow to Sen. Bernie Sanders, as both men hail from the progressive wing of the Democratic party and have focused intensely on issues related to poverty and income inequality.
Still, he praised the independent Vermont senator.
"Bernie Sanders has done something very good for this country," de Blasio said. "I think Hillary Clinton is the person to get it done best. But I want to be very clear: Bernie Sanders has the discussion in this country in a very productive way and I think we needed that." The New York mayor said he would also "absolutely" campaign for Clinton. Daniel Strauss and Gloria Pazmino contributed reporting.
And, Mets fans still believe as Citi Field readies for World Series spotlight. The last time the New York Mets played a World Series game at home, it was at Shea Stadium. Their manager was Bobby Valentine. Their ace was Mike Hampton. Their star was Mike Piazza. It was 2000, and the New York Yankees were in the visitors dugout.
Valentine and those players are long gone from Queens. Shea, a beloved dump, was torn down to make way for the more modern and comfortable Citi Field, which opened in 2009. Still, the uniqueness of the area remains.
Off in the near distance is Arthur Ashe Stadium, which houses the US Open tennis championships. Flying overhead are planes from LaGuardia Airport. And there is the sea of auto repair shops across the street, which the Mets' owners, the Wilpons, desperately want to get rid of -- but, as of yet, have been unsuccessful in forcing out.
So as the Mets return to the World Series, there is the imperfect, familiar feel of their home. The place has been spruced up a bit over the past 15 years, but it remains one of a kind.
Regardless of it all today and all week (long week), please stay in touch.
