Clinton's possible cabinet choices under scrutiny by liberal Democrats as she heads for election day

Lael Brainard

As election day grows closer and the polls show Hillary Clinton with a substantial lead, many are wondering what a Clinton cabinet will look like. With over 30 years of public service it’s not hard to see that it would reflect a strong measure of diversity in both gender and race. While the candidate herself has demurred, and said to inquiring reporters, “No I really haven’t. I’m a little superstitious about that,” the likelihood that a short list exists, even at the bottom of a desk drawer, is not without warrant.

Recent discussions have focused on Jake Sullivan, as national security adviser, and former under secretary of defense in the Obama Administration Michèle A. Flournoyas for defense secretary. Perhaps the most coveted, and most scrutinized would be that of Secretary of State, and according to Vanity Fair, speculation centered on both Tom Donilon, head of Clinton’s transition team, and William Burns, a former deputy secretary of state, for Clinton’s former job. He is known for being a low-key and loyal team player,  qualities that she highly prizes

Holding a distinct advantage of having worked with most of the people that she would appoint, she will not have to review resumes in the conference room, to identify key candidates for the top jobs. But, that also might make jockeying for her attention, more important than those for Donald Trump.  Reports from Washington is that some of those identified have been keeping in touch with key advisors and, those on the transition team, with revised resumes. While speculation can run rampant, in a feverish campaign, surprises can also come with dark horse candidates coming to the foreground. Witness the speculation --- almost surefooted -- that national security advisor would go to either James B. Steinberg, or Gregory B. Craig, former Clinton presidency veterans, for the Obama administration.

Low hanging fruit is available from disaffected, and disavowed Republicans, among them Michael V. Hayden, formerly of the CIA and National Security Administration, and also Robert B. Zoelick, former U.S. trade rep, thus increasing the wide range of candidates with extensive experience.

Guessing games on who will be appointed, as well as the losers, are a constant game in Washington, whenever there is a new president, but this one also takes on a different color due to how transition teams will now act. The New York Times reported that new laws targeting the transition experience will make it easier, even for those of the same party; far removed from some of the lined yellow legal sheets of paper, with possible candidate names that Jacqueline Kennedy found, from JFK, found strewn about the library of  her Georgetown home.

With election day just around the corner, few are talking so as to not appear presumptuous, and Ken Salazar, heading the Clinton transition team would only talk around the issue, without revealing any details. But, Clinton’s familiarity with most of the players and their teams from her past roles as U.S. first lady and secretary of state, gives her the advantage of knowing whom she should hire.

While there is some sidebar discussion away from these choices, due to another trove of unmeasured and defined emails, from the private server, on a laptop belonging to a top Clinton aide; no one expects the speculation on possible cabinet choices to be eliminated, as election day draws closer.

Ideological differences will be taken into consideration, especially by such left of center advocates such as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, which may tilt Clinton away from her more established centrist views, and people. An example is who might be treasury secretary -- against a Wall Street choice, a favorite bete-noire of the liberal camp in favor of one, who, as Sanders noted last week, “. . . is prepared to take on the greed and recklessness of Wall Street, not someone who comes from Wall Street.”

As the Times noted, Clinton is under pressure by liberals to move to a more populist approach, and away from some of her previous remarks that suggest a lean, if not outright sympathy, to Wall Street and its denizens. In fact, Dan Cantor, the national director of the Working Families Party, said she would not be given the honeymoon, that liberal dissenters gave President Obama.

Leading the contenders for treasury secretary is Lael Brainard, a Federal Reserve governor, who advocates against taking interest rates higher. The choice, as far as gender alone, would be a first for the nation. But, she and her boss, Fed Chief, Janet Yellen received some sharp attention by lawmakers last month, when it was discovered that she “gave the Clinton campaign $2,700, the maximum permitted individual donation, in four contributions between mid-November and February, according to Federal Election Commission records,” reported the Wall Street Journal.

Rep. Scott Garrett said during a House Financial Services Committee hearing that the donations created “an appearance of conflict, citing unspecified media reports,” saying that Brainard “is angling for a top job with the Clinton administration if Hillary wins,” noted the Journal.

Yellen, in turn noted that the donations were lawful, and that she had no knowledge of any contact from the Clinton campaign and Brainard.  This brought about a waggish comment from one source, who spoke on deep background, since he is not authorized to comment: “If that’s all [the money] it takes to become treasury secretary, then the Clintons are asking very little.”

Over the last year, the Federal Reserve has been criticized by the Republican establishment and by Donald Trump in particular, that the Fed is shilling for the Obama administration.

Meanwhile Clinton is toeing the line on the slow dragging economy, not losing, but not winning especially with wage growth, which last month showed only a modest increase. She has said, ‘My primary mission as President will be to create more opportunity and more good jobs with rising wages right here in the United States.”

Clinton also had to step away from the TPP to make herself more palatable to the liberal wing; a move that would force her as president to also  ”navigate the lame-duck debate,” as Fortune Magazine noted, as Obama attempts a twilight triage on it.

Clinton clearly wants to look at investment and growth, to jumpstart the economy, something she suggested in her speeches to Wall Street, courtesy of Wikileaks, where she noted that she dreamed of “open trade and open borders.” This has earned her more support from corporate executives who hitherto would have thrown money at the  GOP candidate. Her cabinet appointments, while under scrutiny by party liberals, are going to reflect a very delicate balance between competing interests.

Clinton hits a trifecta win in third presidential debate

In the third of the presidential debates Hillary Clinton put Republican rival, Donald Trump, to the test, or as many have said, gave him the taste of his own medicine, as she parried, thrust, and even skewered him on occasion, that not only made him seem petulant but showcased her command of the issues, that many have been clamoring for, and not the circus, that much of this presidential campaign has offered.

At times, Fox News moderator Chris Wallace had to intervene to get a word in edgewise, at one point noting, “I’m not a potted plant,” to the laughter of many.  While his role was challenging, as that remark demonstrated, he gave more of an “old school” style of moderation, versus that of previous moderators.

Trump, for his part, repeated the, by now shop worn, tirade of “her emails,” the “country is in trouble, big, big trouble,” the Mexican mantra of that country sending rapists to our shores, and “we are going to be big again.”

Clinton wisely stuck to the facts again and again, citing her knowledge of the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, and how many people it has helped, and how she would make it stronger; her knowledge of the cheap Chinese steel that has infiltrated the U.S. and that Trump used, even in the eponymous hotel, that he was staying in, and that she slyly made note of.

When she did talk about his manner - the brutality of his remarks against women, for example, she wisely frame them in the context of his personality, temperament and behavior. True prosecutor that she was, Clinton said,”So it's not one thing. This is a pattern, a pattern of divisiveness of a very dark and in many ways dangerous vision of our country where he incites violence, where he applauds people who are pushing and pulling and punching at his rallies. That is not who America is and I hope that as we move in the last weeks of this campaign, more and more people will understand what's at stake in this election. It really does come down to a kind of country we are going to have.”

She reached across the divide of abortion and discussed those women who were forced to make terrible choices, while sidestepping the controversial and medically inaccurate term of “partial birth” abortions, and said, “Donald has said he is in favor of defunding Planned Parenthood. He even supported shutting the government down to defund Planned Parenthood. I will defend Planned Parenthood. I will defend Roe v. Wade and I will defend women's rights to make their own healthcare decisions. We have come too far to have that turn back now and indeed he said women should be punished; that there should be some form of punishment for women who obtain abortions. And I could just not be more opposed to that kind of thinking.”

With this Clinton solidified both her base, and her record, and one that she has consistently favored in less than three minutes, showing a presidential style that Trump with his waverings, hyperbole and accusations could not, and did not make, that night, or any other time, say critics.

In her trademark flattened lawyerly tone, she said, “Because Roe v. Wade very clearly sets out that there can be regulations on abortion so long as the life and health of the mother are taken into account. And when I voted as a senator, I did not think that that was the case. The kinds of cases that fall at the end of pregnancy are often the most heartbreaking, painful decisions for families to make. I have met with women who, toward the end of their pregnancy, get the worst news one could get that their health is in jeopardy if they continue to carry to term or that something terrible has happened or just been discovered about the pregnancy. And, furthermore,  “I do not think the United States government should be stepping in and making those most personal of decisions. So you can regulate if you are doing so with the life and health of the mother taken into account.”

During the volley of what could, or would have been done, about immigration, Clinton, pulled, to the shock and displeasure of Trump, “ that he even criticized Ronald Reagan, and in mock surprise, “even Ronald Reagan,” the conservative icon.

The night definitely was won by Clinton and her tactic paid off, by parodying him, and using his own style, made Trump seem almost whiny. And, as one Clinton supporter noted, “It’s almost a shame, because he’s not even a worthy adversary.”

The old political adage used to be that debates didn’t help a candidate much, and that voter minds were already made up. But this election is different, in both the scope and tenor, its ramifications have shaped the conversations, and the narrative; with both sides entrenched in what seems to be more vitriol than the 1801 contest between Adams and Jefferson.

Add to the Clinton trifecta the strong  early voting patterns - 3.3 percent increase from 2012 - of many states, have shown strong leads in Arizona, North Carolina, and in a real outlier: Utah. But she has 270 electoral votes, by consideration, and that alone helps propel her closer to the Oval Office than many of her opponents might be willing to concede.

The biggest takeaway from Trump is that he would not say that he would accept the results of the election, a time honored tradition of modern presidential elections, a stance that Clinton was appalled by, and she noted,”That is not the way our democracy works," Clinton said. "We've been around for 240 years. We have had free and fair elections. We've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them. And that is what is expected of anyone standing on a debate stage during a general election."

Continuing, she  added: "He is denigrating -- he's talking down -- our democracy. And I for one, am appalled that somebody who is the nominee of one of our two major parties would take that kind of position."

Now, Trump says that he will,only if he wins, still not far from the “rigged” charges that he has brought up, now forcing a reasonable person to believe that, once again, if he doesn't get elected, it’s the system's problem, and not his. As the lady said, if he doesn’t get his way, there will be trouble. The French have a term for this type of person, l’enfant terrible. And, for Donald Trump, it rings true

Second presidential debate shows slugfest by Trump against Hillary

Sunday night’s presidential debate, the second scheduled, came under the shadow of the eleven year old tape of Republican candidate Donald Trump’s discussing how he used his celebrity frame to grope, fondle and kiss women. In an onslaught of pushback from the media, not to mention, those of his own party, Trump came in looking, and sounding, exhausted as he came out swinging, and prepared to say and do, just about anything, in his defense.

The result was less than a debate, than a professional wrestling smackdown, as he groped his way through questions that he seemed not to know the answers to, especially those on foreign policy, and after a half-hearted apology, regarding those remarks, dismissing them as locker room talk, went on stalking the stage at Washington University in St. Louis, glaring at his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, who on more than one occasion, stood her ground, as he insulted, and baited her, with lines such as “she’s lying,” and [if I were president] “you’d be in jail,” which brought cheers from his supporters.

At times he retreated from previous statements, such as his brutish treatment of the Khans and their son, who he now hails as a hero, and then reading from his own, and the combined Republican playbook, trashing Obamacare, as a disaster, the Iranian deal, blaming Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal for this “birther” attack (which has been proven false), blamed her for ISIS, and on and on.

The lack of a nuanced issue driven debate was the greatest casualty of the evening, and lent nothing to the very real issues that the country faces. Lost in hyperbole, and distortion, Trump’s wisecracks and rages revealed a candidate who is running scared, with the latest revelations of unacceptable behavior.

As he scattered and tossed inaccuracies, hither and yon, his desperation increased, even extending his own fears to project onto former president Bill Clinton, “what he’s done to women.” Perhaps the kicker was the old chestnut that Hillary defended a rapist, in the Kathy Shelton case, a story long discredited by the facts: she was appointed to represent a rapist, who wanted a female attorney, and she did so, with great reluctance, but he received a just sentence for his crime.

Clinton, in a response, noted that “he has never apologized to the Khan family,” the Mexican judge, “who he mimicked and mocked, and the racist lie that the president was not born in the United States.”

In a diversionary move, Trump, when asked about these charges began ranting about the “39,000 emails that she washed and the missing records,” which after being vetted by the FBI were found to be duplicates of emails, most truly personal in nature; while Clinton may have downplayed the nature of some of them, in her initial public remarks, Trump’s assertions were false.

For anyone used to presidential debates of yesteryear - including the famous 1960 debate between Vice-President Richard Nixon and Senator, John F. Kennedy, the evening was a real lesson in how American presidential politics has sunk to a new low, with the advent of a reality television figure as a candidate.

With bread and butter issues Trump seemed to lean in the misdirection of partisan politics -- and was perhaps nowhere more off base than he was criticizing  the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

As CNN noted, “Trump cited Obamacare as one of the top problems he wants to address if he is elected president."When I watch the deals being made and watch what's happening with horrible things like Obamacare, where your health insurance and healthcare are going up by numbers that are astronomical. By 68%, 59% and 71%," Trump said.”

The fact checkers said, “It's true that some insurers are raising some of their plans' premiums by that much, but that's not the typical increase. Insurers have requested a rate hike of 9%, on average, for the benchmark silver plan for 2017, up from 2% for this year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The vast majority of Obamacare enrollees, however, don't see those massive hikes. Some 85% of them receive federal subsidies that can lower their premium to less than 10% of their income.” So, if misleading the American public is a sin of Clinton, then Trump had better stand in line for the confessional.

Post debate discussions have centered largely on the spoken, and not the unspoken, which has shown that Trump’s hectoring of women has turned off women on all sides of the political divide, and if they stay home on election day, the die may be cast for a Clinton victory.

Threatening to put Clinton in jail if he was elected takes the collective breath of democracy away from most viewers and listeners, and shows that the mentality of the man, is that of a dictator, not someone to be trusted to head a republic, like the United States. With that line alone, there may be more pause given, at the voting booth, than any other cause.

September Jobs Report shows modest increase, yet is bright spot in otherwise drab U.S. economy

U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez

Friday’s release of the September Jobs Report showed only a modest gain of 156,000 jobs to the U.S. economy, far less than the 170,000 that many economists and bankers had predicted. With some calling it “blah”, and others reiterating the word “modest” and still others “tepid,” it seems that while the economy is adding just enough jobs to keep up with population growth, the pace is slow enough that the Federal Reserve will hold off from a rate increase.

The report showed the smallest gains since May, and the only bright spot seems to be the labor force participation rate, but that also grew by an equally modest half point. There is some evidence that the decreased unemployment rate of 5 percent, reflects an increased desire for work. Or, so says U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez who said “this says that 3 million more people have found, or are out looking for a job.”

Wages have also grown only so far --- 2.6 percent to year’s date --  and while showing some improvement, the steady inching has not grown, as predicted, yet some say, that this might be reflected in increasing holiday this coming season, if not in overall consumer spending, (an index of a healthy economy), and retailers are gearing up for a healthy holiday season..

What is not predicted is whether there will be the mammoth sales and discounts that have trained most consumers to only shop during deep discounting, thus affecting any glad tidings of the holiday balance sheet.

Last month’s assertion by both the anecdotal information of the Beige Book, and other indicators have shown that the historically low interest rates, designed to help households spend and invest, has not been seen, and inflation has yet to reach the 2 percent marker that is the Fed’s benchmark.

Some, however, are sanguine, like Harry Holzer, a Georgetown professor of public policy, who says, this is “a slow but steady improvement” and a “gradual tightening” of the employment market.

Wages, have, however, shown a modest increase averaging $25.79 in the private sector, up 6 cents, and 0.2  percent from the previous month; and, an overall 2.6 over the prior year’s number.

Labor market participation reached 62.9 percent in September, representing a 1/10th point increase from August, and a half point from a year earlier, but it’s the lowest level since 1970; and, some are attributing this to retiring baby boomers, and those who gave up looking for work.

The figures is also not reflective of those who are underemployed, jobless, work part time, and would prefer full time.

Who are the winners this time around? Professional and business services are once again leading the pack, with increases of 67,000, followed, by healthcare, with another strong showing this month of 33,000, as food services inched up by 30,000 jobs.

Oil and gas continued their downward trend with 13,000, along with mining, undoubtedly due to cheap natural gas and the demise of coal, as king. Manufacturing has also sustained a decline with lowered oil prices, and a strong U.S. dollar.

Despite the lowered expectations the jobs report is the bright spot in an otherwise dismal economy, one that low inventories, according to one analyst, is the culprit.in the lack of significant growth.

Most observers and industry analysts are looking closely at this report for any changes, since it is the last one that can be analyzed, with any depth, before the November 8th presidential election. And, whoever the winner is, they will come to office with an economy that is still sluggish after the Great Recession, and crawls to rectify itself, despite brighter increases in employment.

Pence edging out Kaine in vice-presidential debate makes up for Trump's weak debate

Governor Mike Pence and Senator Tim Kaine had their marching orders for Tuesday night's vice-presidential debate, and that was to show the viewers and any undecided voters - lest there be some, at this stage - that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton had what it took to become the next president of the United States.

Both came off as polished and professional in their attitudes and beliefs, With Pence a former radio host, and US Senator and Kaine’s own senate experience, as well as the governorship of Virginia, gave them both a viable and visible comfort level.

Pence had the added burden of making up for Trump’s dismal showing in the last presidential debate where he came off as testy, and uninformed, even insensitive as Clinton skewered him on a number of key areas, especially his Achilles heel: his refusal to release his tax returns, and the late leak by the New York Times which showed him adept at avoiding tax payments.

Kaine shot out of the starting gates like a supercharged racing horse, ready to take the race, but unfortunately, he was so “on message” that, at times, he seemed scripted, and even stilted. What required a more relaxed tone -- right down to the choice of being seated at a conference style table, versus a podium, should have been a clue to his preparation. Instead his aggressive style, so well suited to Clinton made him seem awkward, and he lost much of the laid back southern style, that most in the media are used to seeing from him.

On the issues, Pence definitely showed a thorough preparation that Trump often lacks and even, on one issue, Syria, showed a much tougher stance than the latter has expressed. While not entirely out of step with the creation of safe zones, Pence’s inclusion and commitment of the military showed a much more hawkish position than was envisioned. Perhaps as a decisive turn from the position that President Obama has set, was offered, but did he go too far? Was this an intentional leak?

Kaine will be remembered for how many times that he talked over,and interrupted Pence, to the point that some observers started a stroke tally to keep score. Again, out of character.

Pence, tripping over his own sword, dismissed the Kaine inclusion of the, by now, infamous, remarks that Mexico was sending rapists to the U.S. --- which became enlarged to say that Trump thought all Mexicans were rapists, thieves, and the like. But, the die was cast and Pence remarking “there you go with that Mexican thing,” will be fodder for the Republican ticket critics as they brand them as racists.

Also, on message, was Pence, who followed the Republican playbook to the core, with the theme of bringing America back, and the lack of unity -- all Trump signature phrases, that seem to be point to some former halcyon days, when the country peaked, and now, despite evidence, to the contrary, are believed to be at our lowest.

An old saying used to be “It played in Peoria,” also seems to ring true today with the nativist bent taken by Trump, and the none too subtle urgency that the presidency must be taken away from the blacks and kept away from women.

For Kaine, the inclusion of Trump’s admiration for Russian president, Vladimir Putin, and also by Pence, was his glory moment, and on Wednesday CNN showed tapes of both men expressing their admiration for Putin, whose alliance with Syrian president, Bashar Assad, has been responsible for the millions of deaths of his countrymen, and the wave of immigration that has swept through Europe, in response.

Outside of these moments Pence proved to be unflappable, and when Kaine rushed to the net with an aggressive move, he let the ball drop, rather than respond.  For some viewers this might have been a lack of defense, but in reality it left Kaine looking awkward, and lacking a response he could tear into.

On script, Kaine, departing from his Catholicism, asked Pence why he wouldn't let women decide for themselves, and most notably said: “Why don’t you trust women to make this choice for themselves?  We can encourage people to support life, of course, we can, but why don’t you trust women? Why doesn’t Donald Trump trust women to make this choice for themselves. That’s what we ought to be doing in public life — living our lives of faith or motivation with enthusiasm and excitement convincing each other, dialoguing with each other about important moral issues of the day, but on fundamental issues of morality, we should let women make their own decisions. “

For this moment, Kaine, got the issue out, played to the base of Hillary supporters and scored a homerun to attract younger women. Game set.

Pence, on the other hand, hit his own play with three references to the war on coal, in an obvious appeal to Trump’s base of white working class men and the lack of coal production as an environmental hazard, and the cheap production of coal, exported to other countries.

Closer examination, by the fact checkers, undermined some of his assertions, yet the die was cast, and the bleachers erupted in cheers, as once again, to their mind, those Democrats, led by, Obama were unsettling the lives of families, dependent on coal.

“The coal industry is struggling, but the Indiana governor incorrectly blamed its woes solely on new federal regulations, omitting the effects of steep competition from cheap natural gas,” reported newsok.com.

They also said, “A string of major coal companies has filed for bankruptcy in recent years, including Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources and Peabody Energy. Layoffs and cutbacks have spread economic suffering through coal country in the Appalachians and Wyoming's Powder River Basin.”

The kicker was that “the Obama administration has implemented rules that aren't making the coal industry's life any easier. Obama last year imposed a rule requiring coal-fired power plants to cut their carbon emissions as part of his effort to combat climate change. The rule has been suspended pending a legal challenge. Obama also has halted new coal leases on federal lands until it completes a comprehensive review.”

There was some certainly some fancy footwork on Pence’s part as he dealt with the aggression on the other side of the net. As BBC.com noted, “When Mr Kaine confronted him on Mr Trump's past controversies, he responded by asserting that the Clinton team was the one waging an "insult-driven campaign".

“When Mr Kaine attacked Mr Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the US, Mr Pence said "we're going to put the safety and security of the American people first.”

Perhaps his greatest moment was when ”Kaine noted that Mr Trump had suggested women who have abortions should be subject to criminal penalties (a position he later recanted), Mr Pence said they "would never support" such legislation - and then, when pressed, said Mr Trump wasn't a polished politician and "things don't always come out exactly the way he means them".

While many will say that Pence won, or that Kaine won --- it was more of an overall draw, with Pence scoring major points for shoring up Trump’s profile since the first debate with Hillary. He also managed to hold off Kaine’s aggression, and to show more of the traditional Republican stance, more characteristic of another generation. Which is exactly why he was chosen to be the vice-presidential candidate.

Kaine on the other hand played to Clinton’s base, as designed, and despite some “Red Bull” fueled moments did position her as the one to lead. But, this is a position that most of her supporters already had -- so while he may have underscored that reality, it was Pence that gets kudos for doing the job he was assigned.