Tag Archives: Warren’s

Bill Gates says Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax would leave him ‘counting what he had left over’

Bill Gates says Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax would leave him ‘counting what he had left over’Bill Gates has criticised Elizabeth Warren’s proposed wealth tax, claiming it left him doing “a little math about what I have left over”.The Microsoft founder and billionaire spoke about the Democratic presidential candidate’s plan at The New York Times DealBook conference on Wednesday.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Biden Says Warren’s Medicare for All Plan Would Require $9 Trillion Middle-Class Tax Hike

Biden Says Warren’s Medicare for All Plan Would Require $  9 Trillion Middle-Class Tax HikePresidential candidate Joe Biden took a shot at the Medicare for All white paper released Friday by rival 2020 contender Senator Elizabeth Warren, saying her plan would require a nearly $ 9 trillion middle-class tax hike.“For months, Elizabeth Warren has refused to say if her health care plan would raise taxes on the middle class, and now we know why: because it does,” Biden's deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield said. “Senator Warren would place a new tax of nearly $ 9 trillion that will fall on American workers.”Warren on Friday released the results of her campaign's numbers crunching on Medicare for All, which does not raise taxes on the middle class through an increase in income tax, but does include an almost $ 9 trillion tax on employers. The Massachusetts Democrat argues that the tax would simply replace the costs employers currently incur for their workers' health insurance — but Biden warned that cost will ultimately be passed along to rank-and-file employees.“There’s no two ways about it, we cannot defeat Donald Trump with double talk on health care — especially not about the impact and cost of a proposal to completely dismantle our health care system and eliminate employer-sponsored and all other private health insurance,” Bedingfield added.Biden has repeatedly criticized Warren's Medicare for All plan, which she claims would require $ 21 trillion in additional spending over ten years, which is significantly less than the cost projections for Senator Bernie Sanders' similar plan. The former vice president instead favors expanding the existing Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration’s signature legislative accomplishment, so that all Americans would be eligible to sign up.“My plan costs a lot,” Biden said from the Democratic debate stage in September. “But it doesn’t cost $ 30 trillion. That’s twice the entire federal budget before it exists now. How will we pay for it? I want to hear. [Warren] has not said how she’ll pay for it, and [Sanders] only gets about half way there. I lay out how I can pay for it and how I can get it done and why it’s better.”



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Michael Bennett Slams Warren’s Medicare for All Plan: The ‘New Numbers are Simply Not Believable’

Michael Bennett Slams Warren’s Medicare for All Plan: The ‘New Numbers are Simply Not Believable’Democratic senator and long shot presidential candidate Michael Bennet panned the new details of Senator Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan on Friday, arguing that the cost estimates she provided simply won't cover the services her plan promises.“Voters are sick and tired of politicians promising them things that they know they can’t deliver," the Colorado senator said in a statement. "Warren's new numbers are simply not believable and have been contradicted by experts. Regardless of whether it's $ 21 trillion or $ 31 trillion, this isn't going to happen, and the American people need health care."Warren on Friday released the cost estimate of her plan, which increases federal spending by $ 21 trillion over the next ten years, a significant increase that is nevertheless cheaper than the $ 31 trillion increase attributed to Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All plan.The plan does not directly tax the middle class but does levy $ 9 trillion in additional taxes on employers over the next decade. The Massachusetts lawmaker argues that the employer tax would simply replace the cost employers currently incur to provide employee health insurance plans.Former Vice President Joe Biden, another 2020 contender, said the plan's nearly $ 9 trillion tax on employers would end up hitting middle class workers hardest as employers would simply pass them along to rank-and-file employees."The mathematical gymnastics in this plan are all geared towards hiding a simple truth from voters: it's impossible to pay for Medicare for All without middle-class tax increases," Biden's deputy communications director Kate Bedingfield said.Former Maryland congressman John Delaney, another long shot Democratic 2020 candidate, dismissed the plan as well, saying Warren's "numbers don't add up," but the "public options" plans more moderate Democrats have proposed are not enough."A 'public option' is a government run insurance company that does not go nearly far enough in addressing the inequality in our healthcare system," Delaney said in a pair of tweets on the issue. "We need universal healthcare; most developed nations have universal healthcare. But Medicare4all is a bad plan, BetterCare works."



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Elizabeth Warren’s Untenable Plans

Elizabeth Warren’s Untenable PlansIf you’ve been having trouble finding someone to walk your dog, don’t worry. Any day now, Elizabeth Warren will announce “a plan for that.” It will undoubtedly be comprehensive, detailed, and replete with subsidies for lower- and middle-class dog walkers and underserved breeds. It will cost tens of billions of dollars and will receive widespread positive notice from the media. However, to judge by her other recent plans, the one thing it won’t include is any discussion of how she plans to pay for it.The Massachusetts senator has challenged and possibly overtaken former vice president Joe Biden as the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, largely based on having a plan for the government to tackle every problem facing this country, no matter how big or how small, from issues with military housing to Puerto Rican debt to climate change.The price tag for this massive expansion of government is enormous. Much of the attention in recent weeks has been focused on Warren’s embrace of Medicare for All, which she refuses to admit would require an increase in middle-class taxes. Even Vermont senator Bernie Sanders has conceded that such proposals, which would cost $ 30–40 trillion over 10 years, cannot be financed without tax hikes. Warren’s refusal to address this obvious fact makes her look less like a would-be policy wonk and more like a typical politician.But even setting aside Medicare for All, Warren’s plans are likely to dump oceans of red ink onto our growing national debt. Her non-health-care spending proposals already total some $ 7.5 trillion per year over the next 10 years. Although these are not quite Bernie levels of government largesse, her proposals would still require nearly double our current levels of spending.To pay for all this, Warren proposes a variety of tax hikes, mostly designed to hit corporations or high-earners: higher payroll taxes for those earning more than $ 250,000 per year; a 7 percent profits tax on companies earning more than $ 100 million; a 60 percent lobbying tax on firms that spend a million or more on lobbying, and so forth. But the biggest chunk of money would come from Warren’s proposed “wealth tax,” a 2 to 3 percent levy on net worth above $ 50 million. Warren estimates that this wealth tax will pull in more than $ 2.75 trillion over ten years. It won’t.First, there is the slight problem that a wealth tax is probably unconstitutional. Of course, constitutional constraints are quaint notions in the Age of Trump. Regardless, it is worth noting that the Constitution permits the federal government to impose only “direct taxes,” such as a property tax. That’s why it required a constitutional amendment to enact the federal income tax. Many constitutional scholars warn that a wealth tax is neither a direct tax nor income tax.Even if Warren can find a way around the constitutional guardrails — perhaps by something such as a retrospective wealth tax in which you wait until a taxpayer sells assets or passes away — a wealth tax is unlikely to raise anywhere near the amount of money she predicts.Simply look at Europe’s experiments with wealth taxes. At one time, a dozen European countries imposed wealth taxes. Today, all but three have abandoned those levies. Among those repealing their wealth tax are the Scandinavian social democracies that Warren admires, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. Norway retains a wealth tax but has significantly reduced it in recent years. Additional countries abandoning the tax include Austria, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. Other countries, such as Great Britain, have considered wealth taxes and rejected them.They did so because wealth taxes are administratively complex and difficult to enforce. Also, they significantly reduce investment, entrepreneurship, and, ultimately, economic growth. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, European wealth taxes raised, on average, only about 0.2 percent of GDP in revenues. By comparison, the U.S. federal income tax raises 8 percent of GDP.Two groups, however, would benefit substantially from a wealth tax. The tax would be a full-employment opportunity for the tax-preparation industry and for lawyers. After all, we would now have to determine fair market value for everything from homes and vehicles to artwork and jewelry to family pension rights and intellectual property. The other big winner would be lobbyists, who could be expected to descend on Washington en masse seeking exemptions and exceptions for their clients. If you think the tax code is a mess today, just wait until D.C. is done with Warren’s plan.There is an old Yiddish proverb that goes “Mann tracht, un Gott Lacht,” or “Man plans, and God laughs.” It is all well and good that Senator Warren has a plan for everything. But until she actually figures out how to pay for everything without crippling our economy, such plans really don’t add up.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

The Media Scramble the Jets for Elizabeth Warren’s Lies

The Media Scramble the Jets for Elizabeth Warren’s LiesElizabeth Warren is telling a lie about herself. Again. The media are covering for her. Again.It is by now well established that Elizabeth Warren is a serial liar. She lied about her parents having to elope because of racism against her mother, who was white. She lied about being the first nursing mother to take the bar exam in New Jersey (which doesn’t keep such records). She lied about being a “single mom” when she met her second and present husband (she was still married, and had not yet filed for divorce). She lied about the death of Michael Brown, which was not a murder. Only recently, after more than 30 years, has she stopped lying about being a Cherokee and a woman of color.Lately Warren has been telling a story about how a boss supposedly fired her from a teaching gig after discerning at a glance that she was pregnant. Her own previous telling was otherwise: She walked away from that job.After teaching two days a week in 1971, “By the end of the first year I was visibly pregnant, and the principal did what principals did in those days: wished me luck, showed me the door, and hired someone else for the job,” Warren says on the stump. The clear takeaway is that she was fired for being pregnant. On Twitter she added this week, “By June I was visibly pregnant — and the principal told me the job I’d already been promised for the next year would go to someone else.” (The principal in question, Edward Pruzinsky, died 20 years ago.)A Washington Free Beacon report found suggestive but not conclusive evidence: records from the Riverdale, N.J., Board of Education show that Warren was offered an extension on her contract as a two-day-a-week speech pathologist in April of 1971, but she resigned and her resignation was “accepted with regret.”  True, it’s conceivable that this is a kind of fiction and that Warren was forced to resign by that nasty principal who hated pregnant women. (Firing women for being pregnant has been illegal only since 1978). But the Free Beacon report happens to be perfectly consistent with Warren’s previous version of the story, the version she told when she had no motive to whip up a tale of woe. In a 2007 interview, she said: “I did that [teach] for a year, and then that summer I didn’t have the education courses, so I was on an ‘emergency certificate,’ it was called. I went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out for me.’” If the principal had fired her in June, why would she have needed to go to grad school over the summer to do course work?The response from the media has been fatuous. Coverage falls into the following categories: Republicans pounce, and it must have happened to Warren because it happened to others, therefore the larger truth is what matters.A HuffPost piece by Amanda Terkel is a classic of partisan water-carrying: “People Get Fired From Their Jobs Without Being ‘Fired’ All The Time.” Yes, well, people win Nobel prizes all the time too, but I’d still be lying if I said I was one of them. The issue is not whether the situation Warren describes ever happened to anyone else but whether she is telling the truth.USA Today ran with this curiously discreet headline, seemingly constructed to warn readers that the matter was too trivial to read about: “Elizabeth Warren defends story that she was fired for being pregnant after more details surface.” Instead of presenting facts as facts, it tarnished them as conservative-discovered details. This is one of the unloveliest tricks of the mainstream liberal press: They hate to do their jobs and dig up information if it might make preferred candidates look bad, so they get scooped by conservative outlets, then they sniff “consider the source” when inconvenient truths appear. “Conservatives have latched on to the changes in her account as yet another example of a ‘made up’ story,’ wrote the paper, “along with the now-infamous claim to Native American ancestry.” Which, er, has now been proven a lie.The paper then buried Warren’s lie under accounts of various women who said they had been discriminated against because they were pregnant. Note that when President Trump lies or says something that isn’t true, the media happily set the record straight. There are only two issues allowed in the room: what Trump said, and the truth. No supporters are brought in to say they believe him. The HuffPost doesn’t take pains to note that what Trump claimed has actually happened to others. And USA Today doesn’t poison the wells by informing us “liberals have latched on” to something Trump said. Truth is framed as partisan only when doing so might aid the left.The New York Times, taking on unpaid-publicist duties, served up the studiously non-judgmental headline “Elizabeth Warren Details Her Account of Losing Teaching Job Because of Pregnancy” instead of something more pointed but also more informative, e.g. “Warren Repeats Lie.” The Times characterized her sticking to the lie as assertive and bold — “pushing back against any suggestion that she had misrepresented” her departure from the school. The paper claimed in a tweet that she was “refuting” rather than simply contradicting truthful reports.The gong for most outlandish headline in a supposedly nonpartisan outlet goes to the Washington Post, though, for this beauty: “Conservatives claim Elizabeth Warren lied about pregnancy firing. Women reality-checked them on social media.” A farrago of irrelevance, the piece noted that “On Twitter, women told stories of being fired outright for being pregnant…or being told during interviews or meetings that pregnancy was a mark against them as they competed for positions, promotions and raises. They wrote of contracts not being renewed after they gave birth, and of positions that were revoked…”None of this has any bearing on whether Elizabeth Warren lied. It’s like saving other boys at Brett Kavanaugh’s private school mistreated women, so he must have also. The WaPo went all-out to frame the question of truth as a matter of whatever the mob wants it to be: “The chorus of voices sharing tales of misconduct served as yet another rebuttal to a concerted campaign to undermine a prominent woman’s account of misconduct.” The story dismissed the details Warren supplied in 2007 as simply “an old interview” that provided “supposed evidence that she has been misleading,” leaving unmentioned that 2007 Warren flatly contradicts 2019 Warren.By covering for Warren’s tall tale, the media are ensuring that the story will stay alive (because it’s disputed), that Warren will keep lying (because she rightly thinks the media have her back) and that its self-image as a profession of brave truth-seekers will continue to decay. The more the media behave like the DNC’s propaganda arm, the more Americans will dismiss them as such.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Elizabeth Warren’s Fracking Proposal Has Shale Investors Weighing E&P Risk

Elizabeth Warren’s Fracking Proposal Has Shale Investors Weighing E&P Risk(Bloomberg) — The prospect of Elizabeth Warren becoming the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, or the 46th president of the U.S., has energy investors worrying about risks to hydraulic fracturing.“What happens if Elizabeth Warren becomes president and bans fraccing?” was the most common question Sanford C. Bernstein received during recent marketing, analysts led by Bob Brackett said in note Tuesday. They don’t currently have a good answer.Concern on Wall Street has been rising along with Warren’s poll numbers, with sectors such as financials, health care and industrials as well as energy identified among those at risk from her policy proposals.In early September, Warren tweeted that she would ban fracking “everywhere” if she becomes president:READ MORE: The 2020 Democrats Agree on 7 Ways to Fight Climate ChangeThe former part of Warren’s plan would have a modest longer-term impact given the “mature state” of areas such as onshore Alaska or the federal Gulf of Mexico, according to Bernstein. However, a fracking ban would offer “much more immediate consequences,” and be “incredibly bullish for both global oil prices and U.S. natural gas prices.”Federal leasing changes could have the most impact on shale drillers such as EOG Resources Inc. and Devon Energy Corp., Brackett said. Kosmos Energy, Hess Corp., Apache Corp. and ConocoPhillips may have little to worry about from a fracking ban, however.Still, any impact from a Warren win may be short-lived. “We have a government with checks and balances,” Brackett noted, pointing to processes which have caused executive orders to be moderated. He also highlighted the ability of E&Ps to re-allocate capital to mitigate effects.And, as RBC Capital Markets wrote earlier this week, most of the sectors seen to be at high risk “are already deeply undervalued versus the broader market.”Canada ImplicationsThere may also be some beneficiaries. UBS analyst Lloyd Byrne recently identified Canadian producers such as Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. and Suncor Energy Inc. as likely to gain from curbs on drilling in U.S. federal acreage.Though at least one investment bank isn’t so certain Canada’s oil-patch will benefit from a Warren victory, given her and fellow presidential candidate Bernie Sanders haven’t been so friendly on their stance for pipeline projects. Energy investment bank Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. cited Warren’s opposition to Enbridge Inc.’s Line 3 oil pipeline replacement and expansion project, along with the mention of permits being revoked for TC Energy Corp.’s long-delayed Keystone XL oil pipeline.Also, Sanders is opposed to Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline. “We’d caution the enthusiasm,” analysts from Tudor told clients in a note Wednesday.(Updates section on Canadian energy impact, adds tweet)To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Bellusci in Toronto at mbellusci2@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Brad Olesen at bolesen3@bloomberg.net, Morwenna Coniam, Jeremy R. CookeFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Warren’s Poll Numbers Surge with Rising Support Among Black Voters

Warren’s Poll Numbers Surge with Rising Support Among Black VotersElizabeth Warren’s polling numbers continue to surge among African Americans, an important demographic in the race for the Democratic nomination, according to the most recent Morning Consult poll released on Wednesday.The poll indicated Warren is up by five points among black voters since August, a shift confirmed by the latest Quinnipiac national poll, which showed the Massachusetts senator winning 19 percent of the African-American vote — a nine-point jump over earlier polling.In the RealClear Politics national polling average, Warren has cut former Vice President Joe Biden’s overall lead to a mere 1.7 percent.“It’s certainly a dramatic shift that had to be noticed by the Biden campaign — and also Sanders, Harris and Buttigieg,” Tim Malloy, Quinnipiac’s polling analyst, told Politico. “Other [candidates] aren’t moving. And if they are, it’s in the wrong direction.”While Joe Biden still maintains a strong lead among African American voters, polling steady at around 40 percent, Warren’s increased efforts on the campaign trail to reach black voters have helped. Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, told Politico that the gradual broadening of Warren’s base has played a significant role in her rise.“If you’re African-American, Warren may not have been someone you knew very well,” Murray said. “You knew Joe Biden, sure, but now you’re paying more attention.”Warren’s next challenge is performing well in South Carolina, the fourth state on the primary trail, where more than 60 percent of primary voters are African American. While a recent CNN poll put her at only 4 percent of the black vote in South Carolina, compared to Biden’s 45, Warren has not dedicated significant time and resources to the state; she is ranked 12th overall among the Democratic pool in attending South Carolina events, with only 13 public appearances so far, per the Charleston Post and Courier.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

‘You go to the mat’: Zuckerberg vows to fight Warren’s Facebook breakup bid

‘You go to the mat’: Zuckerberg vows to fight Warren’s Facebook breakup bidMark Zuckerberg pledged to “go to the mat” to fend off Elizabeth Warren’s plan to break up Facebook in an audio recording leaked Tuesday, foreshadowing a major fight between her would-be administration and the Silicon Valley giant. The mogul and Facebook CEO predicted during an open meeting with employees in July that the social media company would best a Warren administration in court if the 2020 presidential hopeful follows through on her pledge to unleash antitrust enforcers against the company. “If she gets elected president, then I would bet that we will have a legal challenge, and I would bet that we will win the legal challenge,” Zuckerberg said, according to a recording obtained by The Verge.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Problem Isn’t Going Away

Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Problem Isn’t Going Away‘I have listened and I have learned,” said Elizabeth Warren at a forum of Native American voters in Iowa last month. “Like anyone who’s being honest with themselves, I know that I have made mistakes. I am sorry for the harm I have caused.” Did any reporter ask her what harm, specifically, she’d caused, or what, specifically, she’d learned? Did any reporter ask her if her “mistakes” were ones anyone could have made, or ones she believed any of her peers, either at Harvard or in the Senate, had also made?No, they did not.I suppose people think that the controversy over Warren’s past claims of Native American ancestry has been put to bed, with Warren rising in the polls because she has plans for everything, including for Native Americans. But in fact, the controversy has not been put to bed, and it shouldn’t be. It points to Elizabeth Warren’s ambitions and lack of integrity, and forces us to ponder whether the rules really apply to those who would make them.The media have certainly done their best to help Warren in putting the controversy to bed, though. The Boston Globe — in a story that briefly acknowledged that Warren's "political enemies have long pushed a narrative that her unsubstantiated claims of Native American heritage turbocharged her legal career" — gave ample space to her own much-more-charitable version of events. Her reporter-defenders have pointed out that until a certain time in her life, she declined to participate in affirmative-action programs, though even they have had to admit that the crucial leaps in her academic career — her landing a job at the University of Pennsylvania and then moving on to Harvard — occurred after she began listing herself as a racial minority. The year before Harvard Law School hired her — and trumpeted her as the first woman of color so hired — it had been subject to major, headline-grabbing protests for giving tenure to four white men.Of course, Warren could have been deluding herself as well. She claims that her belief in her Cherokee heritage came from longstanding family lore. But the fact that she participated in the now-cringe-inducing Pow Wow Chow cookbook and plagiarized her recipes from a French cookbook suggests a certain awareness that she was perpetrating a racial fraud. And then there is the fact that Cherokee Indian is not so much a "socially constructed" racial category as a specific, legally defined identity: You are a Cherokee when the Cherokee nation recognizes you as a member on its rolls. Surely someone who identified as a Native American academically and socially in the way Warren once claimed she did would have sought such official status. But she didn't.Warren has repeatedly claimed over the years that her parents’ marriage was rejected by racist grandparents because of her mother’s Cherokee ancestry. But Cherokee genealogist Twila Barnes has said there’s simply no evidence of Cherokee genealogy in Warren’s family. Warren's mother was not some racial outcast, but the popular daughter of a prominent local family. And there’s no evidence of the romantic elopement, or racist animus on the part of her paternal grandfather, Grant Herring, who regularly played golf with Carnal Wheeling, a recognized Cherokee.The media haven’t really known how to handle this story. Like a Geiger counter in a North Korean nuclear-weapons lab, the reaction of the “smart set” on Twitter was wildly disconcerting when Elizabeth Warren announced the results of her spectacularly ill-conceived DNA test earlier this year. At first, the trace amounts of Native American heritage were held up as proof against Donald Trump’s attacks. Then, as geneticists and common sense intervened in the discussion, it became obvious that Warren’s Native American roots were negligible.As the social-climbing Warren begins to gain over actual socialist Bernie Sanders, I expect the Sandernistas to unload on the contradictions between the upwardly mobile Left’s hatred of cultural appropriation and the changing racial identity and falsified family history of its darling Warren. If she survives that and wins the nomination, she’ll face a general election in which the same basic problem remains.I predict that should she make it that far, everyone will just try to change the subject.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines

Elizabeth Warren’s Rivals Start to Turn on Her

Elizabeth Warren’s Rivals Start to Turn on HerHeidi Gutman/GettySen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has mostly been coasting to her position atop the 2020 Democratic primary field, often dodging the scrums other candidates have engaged in on the trail and the debate stage. But as she’s risen, her opponents have begun to notice. And this week, several of them have started to test out attack lines against her.On Thursday, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg accused Warren of dodging questions about potential tax increases that could come with instituting a Medicare for All healthcare system, which Warren supports. “You know, Senator Warren is known for being straightforward and was extremely evasive when asked that question, and we’ve seen that repeatedly,” Buttigieg told CNN in an interview. “I think that if you are proud of your plan and it’s the right plan, you should defend it in a straight forward terms. And I think it’s puzzling that when everybody knows the answer to that question of whether her plan and Senator Sanders’ plan will raise middle class taxes is yes. Why you wouldn’t just say so, and then explain why you think that’s the better way forward?”Warren, in recent debates, has rejected the premise of questions about whether middle class tax will be part of a Medicare for All health care system, by stressing that overall costs would go down for individual consumers since they would no longer be paying high costs for coverage. Buttigieg’s campaign, which came out with a “Medicare for All Who Want It” proposal, said that his plan could be paid for with higher corporate taxes but didn’t get into much more detail. Warren’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But Buttigieg wasn’t alone in taking a shot at Warren. He merely offered the most direct one. During a call with reporters on Thursday morning, Sen. Kamala Harris' campaign (D-CA) appeared to knock Warren for transferring money from her Senate campaign prior to her presidential outfit. And Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who has attempted to run in a more moderate lane in the primary, continued her derision of plans like Medicare for All and free college during a visit to the Midwest. “We’ve got a lot of great people running, but some of these ideas are better left in the college faculty lounge,” Klobuchar said in Michigan on Thursday, according to local reports. “I’m a common sense person whose always governed by that.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.



Yahoo News – Latest News & Headlines