Question: Does Bernie Sanders have a "better message" vs. Hillary Clinton? Major media and certain Democrats who love Sanders say "yes," and have been saying so for a long time. What is the evidence from the latest public opinion surveys?
Lanny Davis | All Articles
- Subscribe to RSS
Lanny J. Davis counsels individuals, corporations and government contractors, and those under congressional scrutiny, on crisis management and legal issues by developing legal, media and legislative strategies that are designed to best produce a successful result for the client. He has experience in securities fraud and SEC investigations as well, and has found that utilizing such an integrated legal/media/lobbying approach can lead to quicker and less expensive settlements or even successfully litigated outcomes. Senior officials of public companies have also hired Lanny and his crisis group to defend themselves successfully against "short and distort" attacks and other market manipulations. For 25 years prior to 1996, before his tenure as special counsel to President Clinton, Lanny was a commercial, antitrust, government contracts and False Claims Act litigator (both in defense as well as plaintiff). He has argued numerous appellate cases in the U.S. courts of appeals.
In June 2005, President Bush appointed Lanny to serve on the five-member Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, created by the U.S. Congress as part of the 2005 Intelligence Reform Act. In that capacity, he received the highest level security clearances so that he could be fully briefed and "read in" to the various anti-terrorist surveillance and financial tracking programs at the highest classified level. From 1996 to 1998, Lanny served as special counsel to the president in the White House and was a spokesperson for the president and the White House on matters concerning campaign finance investigations and other legal issues. Lanny has participated in national, state and local politics for almost 30 years. He has served three terms (1980 to 1992) on the Democratic National Committee representing the state of Maryland, and during that period he served on the DNC Executive Committee and as chairman of the Eastern Region Caucus. In Montgomery County, Maryland, he served as chairman of the Washington Suburban Transit Commission.
Lanny has authored several books and lectured throughout the United States and Europe on various political issues. Between 1990 and 1996, Lanny was a bimonthly commentator on Maryland politics for WAMU-88.5/FM, a Washington, D.C. local affiliate of National Public Radio. He has been a regular television commentator and has been a political and legal analyst for MSNBC, CNN, Fox Cable, CNBC and network TV news programs. He has published numerous op-ed/analysis pieces in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, he Washington Post and other national publications.
Lanny graduated from Yale Law School, where he won the prestigious Thurman Arnold Moot Court prize and served on the Yale Law Journal. A graduate of Yale University, Lanny served as chairman of the Yale Daily News.
Lanny is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia and Connecticut and before the Supreme Court of the United States and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
So I can just imagine Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's inner voice giving him advice in his usual fact-free zone — the same voice that told him he "watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down" — though we now know there was no such scene.
With the murderous and frightful terrorist attacks in Paris just last week, once again we are reminded of the need for law enforcement and our international intelligence agencies to have the ability to anticipate and prevent terrorist attacks and to protect us.
A unique moment for this writer: I agree with the Republican presidential candidates.
South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy’s Special Committee on Benghazi has been now thoroughly outed — not by Democrats but by his fellow Republicans.
There are a lot of ways to contrast the Democratic debate with the Republican debates, but one thing I believe would get agreement across the spectrum – voters Red States and Blue States, liberals and conservatives: Democrats avoided personal attacks and insults and debated the issues; Republicans have spent much more time during their debates attacking each other, with the vitriol and bile of Donald Trump leading the race to the bottom.
We all remember the scene in the classic 1939 movie “The Wizard of Oz” where the little dog Toto goes to a curtain and pulls it back, revealing not the great and mighty wizard but an old man using smoke and mirrors and a microphone to defraud the good citizens of Oz. “You are a very bad man,” Dorothy says. “No,” the fake wizard says, “I’m just a very bad wizard.”
I have written before about the media’s anti-Clinton and pro-Sanders bias in reporting poll results in the Democratic presidential nomination contest. If you need any further evidence, take a look at the disparate media treatment when, in the last several days, Hillary Clinton’s poll results have been more positive, both nationally and in the early caucus and primary states.
“Ray, people will come. ... And they’ll watch the game, and it’ll be as if they’d dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories will be so thick, they’ll have to brush them away from their faces. ... The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It’s been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past, Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good, and it could be again. Oh, people will come, Ray. People will most definitely come.” —Terence Mann, “Field of Dreams”
Let's start with hats off to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — written by someone who is a longtime friend and strong supporter of Hillary Clinton — for the strong showing in The Des Moines Register's most recent poll. The senator is now within 7 percentage points (37 percent to 30 percent) among Iowa caucus-goers as of the middle of August, a gain of 6 percentage points since the last Des Moines Register poll, and a drop of 13 percentage points by former Secretary of State Clinton since June.
You would never know it by reading the mainstream media or watching this morning's or Sunday's cable news hosts and talking heads doing their usual negativity pile-on about Hillary Clinton's alleged troubles due to emails and a possible entry in the race, due to those alleged troubles, by Vice President Biden.
At about the same time Donald Trump was surging to the top of Republican presidential polls — after calling illegal immigrants from Mexico rapists and challenging John McCain’s heroism because he was shot down and imprisoned — Time magazine’s cover showed former President Bill Clinton, progressive Democrat, and former President George W. Bush, conservative Republican, half-smiling.
If there were any realistic alternative to having no nuclear deal with Iran — an alternative that seemed more likely to prevent or substantially delay Iran’s development of a nuclear bomb — I would oppose the Obama administration’s deal without any doubt.
On June 25, the results of two polls of likely New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary voters were published by their sponsors: CNN-WMUR and Bloomberg/Saint Anselm College. The polls were conducted during the same time period (the prior week), with a similar total sample of Democratic likely voters (about 400) and the same approximate margin of error (plus or minus 5 percentage points).
On June 9, 1954, Republican Sen. Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin, chairman of a House subcommittee investigating communism in government, was confronted by attorney Joseph Welch during nationally televised hearings. McCarthy had carried on his anti-communism innuendo campaign through congressional investigations for several years. Now, before a national audience, he attacked a young legal associate of Welch as a member of a communist “front” organization when he was at law school.
As I watched Hillary Clinton deliver her formal announcement speech last Saturday at Roosevelt Island in New York City, I went through kind of a time warp. What year is this?
“Mobs of reporters and cameramen and other Big Timers were out there wearing bush jackets with leather straps running this way and that and knocking back their Pepsi-Colas and Nehis and yelling to each other and mainly just milling about, crazy with the excitement of being on the scene, bawling for news of the anguished soul of Louise Shepard. They wanted a moan, a tear, some twisted features, a few inside words from friends, any goddamned thing. They were getting desperate. Give us a sign! Give us anything! Give us the diaper-service man! The diaper-service man comes down the street with his big plastic bags, smoking a cigar to provide an aromatic screen for his daily task — and they’re all over him and his steamy bag. Maybe he knows the Shepards! Maybe he knows Louise! Maybe he’s been in there! Maybe he knows the layout of chez Shepard! He locks himself in the front seat, choking on cigar smoke, and they’re banging on his panel truck. ‘Let us in! We want to see!’ They’re on their knees. They’re slithering in the ooze. They’re interviewing the dog, the cat, the rhododendrons. …These incredible maniacs were all out there tearing up the lawn and yearning for their pieces of Louise’s emotional wreckage.”
We are again facing the fallacy of the false choice. Those who are concerned about protecting the privacy rights of Americans (including this writer) should not have to choose between protection of those rights and avoiding another 9/11 terrorist attack.
What do Hillary Clinton, Rand Paul, Cory Booker, Tim Scott, Elijah Cummings, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Van Jones, John Kasich, Bob Goodlatte, Koch Industries and the Tea Party-aligned group FreedomWorks have in common?
It is a felony for a prosecutor or law enforcement official with knowledge of a grand jury’s investigation to disclose to newspapers that an individual is about to be indicted by that grand jury. It is also a fundamental violation of due process. It taints the jury pool. It prejudices the individual’s rights.