Mediaboss Marketing

Labeled an "elitist" by his rival Marine Le Pen, criticized for his first round victory celebrations, and then overshadowed in his home town by the far-right candidate, Macron has spent much of the past week on the back foot.

It's why he's not moving his furniture into the lyse Palace just yet -- instead taking a lesson from the 2016 US election, in which Hillary Clinton suffered a surprise defeat.

"That was almost certainly the mistake Hillary Clinton made," Emmanuel Macron told CNN's Melissa Bell on Thursday.

"I'm absolutely not playing that game. Right from the first day, that hasn't been the way I defended myself or how I fought."

Macron may have won the first round vote and have been endorsed by several of his rivals but the past week has brought new problems for the 39-year-old, who is seeking to become the nation's youngest leader since Napoleon.

First, it was his celebrations after winning the first round -- at an upmarket brasserie in Paris -- which caused consternation. The celebration led many to believe he had already declared himself President. He was accused of being out of touch with the public, playing perfectly into Le Pen's accusation that he remains part of the "elite."

"I am in the middle of employees who resist to wild globalization. I am not with the managers who eat petit fours," Le Pen said, according to BFMTV.

While she received cheers and posed for selfies, Macron faced a far more hostile reception when he entered the factory.

Macron stopped to talk to workers and answer questions while describing Le Pen's visit as a stunt.

And on Thursday, in an interview that aired on French national channel TF1, Macron -- a millionaire investment banker and former government minister -- bristled at the notion he's a candidate for France's elite.

"I am not the candidate for a little group or a kind of nomenclature," he said. " I am going to protect the middle classes and the most vulnerable in France.

"I have a policy for education, for labor. That is what is specific about my project. [It] speaks to the whole of France, the entirety of the country, the towns and the countryside, the farmers and the industrialists, the workers and the entrepreneurs."

He also made a point of differentiating himself from Le Pen, who has rallied supporters with an anti-European Union message.

While Le Pen has advocated taking France out of the EU and closing the country's borders, Macron has called for closer integration.

"I will not be against Berlin. I am with Berlin," he said. "We have differences. We have disagreements, but I will not tell the French today that I am going to defend their interests against Berlin."

"Europe is a construction: Ours. We decided to create Europe. We did it for our peace, for our prosperity, for our liberty."

While most polls have Macron well ahead going into the May 7 runoff he remains cautious.

He rejected accusations that he lacks the experience required for the job and says "there is no ideal age to become President of the Republic."

"Every day since the beginning of the campaign, I have never considered myself as the favorite," he said.

"The lack of experience is due to my age. I do not have the experience of politics but of the government, the private sector and the public service. I think it is important, Ms. Le Pen does not have that experience."

CNN's Vasco Cotovio, Melissa Bell, Judith Vonberg, Bryony Jones and Hilary Clarke contributed to this report.

See the original post:
Emmanuel Macron vows to avoid 'the mistake Hillary Clinton made' - CNN

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

[T]he Democratic Party is extremely weak and incapable of organizing people.

Sen. Bernard Sanders, April 3, 2017.

Finally, the Democrats admit it wasnt the Russians, James B. Comey or sexism that brought Hillary Clinton down. We are now told by journalists, leading Democrats, and even a former Democratic presidential candidate, that it was the inept dysfunction of the party itself, Hillary, and her abused and frightened team that has reduced them all to irrelevant, vapid political busybodies.

The poor sops. For such a long time, they told us they were beset by evil Russians, a dastardly FBI director, and that ubiquitously hideous misogyny. Such drama and international intrigue. But we now know the Democratic Partys woes are not, at all, akin to a James Bond movie. Alas, theyre more like the Gong Show.

The other week, Hillary Clinton made much of a book shes working on that, she attested, pins the blame for her failure on the Russians, Mr. Comey and sexism. Sadly, someone beat her to the real story and actually reports the truth of the matter.

In Shattered, authors Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes spoke with more than 100 people involved with the campaign, which they describe as miserable even before it started. In great detail, they describe a dysfunctional campaign, disconnected candidate, and campaign teams wracked by infighting.

In a review of the book, Entertainment Weekly noted, Although Shattered is filled with examples of bad decisions and mishandled crises, it posits the Clinton campaigns main failure was Hillarys inability to explain her motivation for seeking the presidency.

Oh, so it was her fault? Thats going to leave a mark. Unless, of course, Mr. Allen and Ms. Parnes are actually Russian agents. Or working for Mr. Comey. Or maybe they, too, are souped-up misogynists being paid by the Koch Brothers. Or something.

The blame game, however, is now so dead, even Sen. Bernard Sanders and new leftist leaders of the Democrats are admitting in public that the party is in trouble.

On CBS Face the Nation, Mr. Sanders was blunt: Well, I think what is clear to anyone who looks at where the Democratic Party today is, that the model of the Democratic Party is failing, he told host John Dickerson. Clearly, the Democratic Party has got to change. And, in my view, what it has got to become is a grass-roots party, a party which makes decisions from the bottom on up, a party which is more dependent on small donations than large donations, a party, John, that speaks to the pain of the working class in this country.

Fascinatingly, Mr. Sanders recognizes its the party itself that is the problem, but then inexplicably goes on about changing the decision-making process and how they get their money, still refusing to admit that after eight years, we didnt want any more of what liberals were selling.

The Democrats problem isnt cosmetic; rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic wouldnt have kept her from sinking. Mr. Sanders comments offer up a shocking revelation: The Democrats still dont understand what happened in 2016, and they have no idea how to adapt.

The issue isnt about bottom up decision-making, its the fact that they cant even begin to address the economic and national security issues that matter most to Americans. Mr. Sanders pandering about their party needing to speak to the pain of the working class of the country is also an insult.

It was the Democratic Party and then-President Barack Obama that inflicted that pain on every class of Americans. And yet here is Uncle Bernie trying to pretend the Democrats have been dropped onto Earth from Mars, really, really outraged about whoever it was that set this country on fire.

Rep. Keith Ellison, the deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, made his feelings clear about whos responsible for the destruction of the party itself. He blames Barack Obama. At a University of Minnesota event he noted, Barack Obama could have been a better party leader. Given that we lost a lot of statehouse seats, governorships, secretaries of state, his true legacy is in danger. I think he cant say that he wasnt part of those losses. Hes really good at getting himself elected. Your legacy is not a building that hes going to construct in Chicago housing his presidential papers.

Ouch.

Finally, someone in the party is admitting the obvious, even if it was cautiously stated: Mr. Obama destroyed the party while creating his own cult of personality. This is so obvious, Josh Earnest, Mr. Obamas former press secretary and now a contributor at MSNBC, said this: What Deputy Chairman Ellison just said is true. Barack Obama didnt run to be a party leader, he ran to be president of the United States.

But then Mr. Earnest admitted this disaster was on Mr. Obamas mind because, There are consequences for this deterioration of Democratic strength all across the country for the presidents legacy.

This was a perfect summation of the inept malevolence of Mr. Obama, the man. His enablers and sycophants admit that only Mr. Obama matters, and in their scramble to fundamentally transform America, he may have damaged the United States, but in true malignant, narcissistic fashion, his lasting legacy is the destruction of the Democratic Party.

With nary a Russian in sight.

Tammy Bruce, author and Fox News contributor, is a radio talk show host.

Originally posted here:
Hillary Clinton's failure was due to the Democrats - Washington Times

Hillary and Chelsea Clinton / AP

BY: Madeleine Weast April 26, 2017 10:52 am

Hillary Clinton's top spokesmen for her failed 2016 presidential campaign rushed to defend Chelsea Clinton on social media this week after the former first daughterclaimedagain that she is not running for public office.

On Monday night, Chelsea Clinton responded on Twitter to a Vox writer who asked who will challenge her in the Democratic primary for New York's 17th congressional district.

"I'm not running for anything*," Clinton wrote, indicating the asterisk meant, "Apparently periodic reminder may mean twice a day reminding."

The former first daughter received backlash for the Twitter exchange, causing senior communications officials from her mother's 2016 campaign to quickly come to her defense.

Brian Fallon, Hillary Clinton's former national press secretary, responded within an hour and defended his former boss's daughter by criticizing President Donald Trump's daughter, Ivanka Trump.

Josh Barro, a senior editor at Business Insider,wondered why "ex-Clinton staffers do [Chelsea Clinton's] comms work like it's their job."

Nick Merrill, another one of Hillary Clinton's former press secretaries, jumped in to criticize Barro, coming to Chelsea Clinton's defense.

Neera Tanden, head of the Center for American Progress and a policy adviser who worked with both Bill and Hillary Clinton, defended their daughter with a sarcastic joke about her running for home association president when she is 65.

Chelsea Clinton recently dispelled rumors that she will run for public office in the near future but appeared to leave the door open for a potential future in politics.

"If someone steps down or something changes, I'll then ask and answer those questions at that time," she told Variety. "But right now, no, I'm not running for public office."

Here is the original post:
Hillary Clinton's Fmr Campaign Spokesmen Rush to Defend Chelsea From Social Media Detractors - Washington Free Beacon

Its all really about now William Gibson. Photograph: Keystone USA/Rex

Science fiction writer William Gibson is to use the dream of a Hillary Clinton win in last years US presidential election as the launch point for his next novel. Gibson, who coined the word cyberspace in his 1984 debut Neuromancer, will reimagine the world under a Clinton presidency in his next novel Agency, as well as London in the distant future.

Due out in January 2018, the novel will travel between two periods: one in present-day San Francisco, where Clintons White House ambitions are realised; and the other in a post-apocalyptic London, 200 years into the future after 80% of the world population has been killed.

In the present-day strand of Gibsons story, a shadowy military organisation develops and tests artificial intelligence on a young woman named Verity. The parts set in the distant future show that time travel has been discovered and used to create a stub, a way of interfering to create an alternative future, starting in 2017.

The author, whose books include The Difference Engine and All Tomorrows Parties, said the new book acts as an unplanned sequel to his 2014 novel The Peripheral, which also features London after climate change, famine and war have ravaged the Earth. However, he told the New York Times, his target was closer to the present day: Every imaginary future ever written is about the time it was written in People talk about science fictions predictive possibilities, but thats a by-product. Its all really about now.

The manuscript was written before Clintons defeat in November rendered the original plot obsolete. Although he attempted to rewrite the original draft with the Trump win in mind, Gibson said: It was immediately obvious to me that there had been some fundamental shift and I would have to rebuild the whole thing.

The author has yet to confirm whether the alternative history he imagines under Clinton is more positive than he envisioned in July 2016 when he urged US voters: To not vote for Clinton *is* to vote for the candidate Putin and David Duke so badly wants you to. Its a raggedy-ass world, that way.

Gibson-watchers will be looking closely at his latest vision of humanitys future. Hailed as one of the most important novelists, whose influence is shown on everything from The Matrix to Stieg Larssons Millennium trilogy, the 69-year-old has gained a reputation for prescience. He has predicted, among other developments, the rise of reality television, virtual sex and technologies such as Google Glass. He credits his success in seeing into the future not on understanding technology but on his observations of the people who use it. In 2007, he told PC Magazine: Im anything but an early adopter, generally. In fact, Ive never really been very interested in computers themselves. I dont watch them; I watch how people behave around them.

Read more:
New William Gibson novel set in a world where Hillary Clinton won - The Guardian

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

We call it Kultursmog, it being that collection of attitudes, ideas, tastes and personages that are polluted by the politics of the left and that predominate on both coasts. And who are we? We are the freethinkers who are immune to the Kultursmog by virtue of our natural skepticism and reliance on empiricism, which is to say, reliance on evidence. Thus, we understand and generally accept that Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. We also accept that Hillary Clinton, assisted by her hubby and their consultants, lost the election. In fact, she lost the election after outspending Donald two to one and turning many of her consultants into millionaires.

Now the question being asked by political wizards is why Hillary lost despite being the smartest candidate, the most virtuous candidate, and, oh yes, the candidate with the best sense of humor since W.C. Fields, though she is a lot prettier. And the question being asked by us that is to say, us skeptics is: Has the Kultursmog learned anything since Hillarys defeat, by which we mean her latest defeat? You will recall that in her 2016 race she was dubbed the inevitable one, at least until the clock struck 8 p.m. on Nov. 8, much as she was dubbed the inevitable one through the election cycle of 2008 until there emerged a little-known community organizer.

Incidentally, does anyone wonder how Candidate Trump would deal with Candidate Obama? That would be a campaign for the ages.

Now there has appeared from the hazy vapors of the smog a book attempting to explain the election, and all the smogs outlets are reviewing it. The book is titled Shattered: Inside Hillarys Clintons Doomed Campaign. The best thing about it is the title, Shattered. After that it is pretty uneven. There are a few glints of understanding, but from what I can tell from reading Shattered and its reviews, the Kultursmog remains securely in the dark. According to it, Hillary was the victim of plots by FBI Director James B. Comey, Russian hackers, errors made by her staff, the sinister doings of the deplorables, and misogyny. Six decades after the dawn of feminism, with the feminists fingerprints all over the republic, Hillary still cannot get a break. Though I am told by reliable sources that up there in the Kultursmog she is contemplating another suicidal run in 2020. She does not take no for an answer.

As I say, there are glints in Shattered that suggest the authors have learned a thing or two about the new political scene that we were being presented with in 2016, though there are few references to Donald Trump and the unique campaign he waged. He proved to be the finest campaigner in my adult life going all the way back to Bob Kennedy in 1968. And Hillary, after all the absurd laudations that the Kultursmog has basted her in, is about the worst. As the authors say, The campaign was an unholy mess, fraught with tangled lines of authority, petty jealousies, distorted priorities, and no sense of purpose. Hillary never could explain why she was running for president. The only other candidate who had trouble answering that question was, as I recall, Teddy Kennedy as he sat frozen before CBS Roger Mudd in 1980.

So Shattered does provide some answers as to why Hillary lost and what the Kultursmog has learned, which is very little. One learns this by noting what the smog neglects to mention. For instance, there is only a brief mention of why she nearly collapsed on a New York street and nothing about the dark glasses she wore, provoking her critics to question her health. Others get angry in this book and even use coarse language but not Hillary, despite years of witnesses quoting her foul mouth. There is no mention of her election night tantrum fueled by alcohol. Why not at least mention that her critics were leveling such charges that night?

Finally, there are people who ought to be mentioned, but are not. Why no David Brock, her controversial ally, or Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime adviser? The best chapter in this book is the chapter on Hillarys server and her failure to deal with it honestly and expeditiously. But by not mentioning Mr. Blumenthal and the 23 classified memos that the Daily Caller reported from his correspondence with her (they were classified as Confidential and Secret), knowledgeable readers will suspect a cover-up.

This is why when we skeptics come across some artifact fashioned by the Kultursmog, we sense that it will be in some way untrustworthy. We are rarely wrong. Just over the weekend, The Washington Post reported polls that suggest Donald Trumps days are numbered. It is not until readers get to the very end of the report that they discover Donald Trump still beats Hillary 43 percent to 40 percent an even wider margin than on election night.

R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc.

Here is the original post:
Hillary Clinton loss detailed in book 'Shattered' - Washington Times