CALIFORNIA YANKEE

The Strongest Trump Supporters Are Registered Democrat

Sorry Democrats. In Today's New York Times, Nate Cohn crunches the statistics on Donald Trump's supporters and reveals that the Donald "holds his greatest strength among registered Democrats who identify as Republican leaners." Cohn also put it this way, Trump's "very best voters are self-identified Republicans who nonetheless are registered as Democrats."

Another mind-boggling conclusion set forth by Cohn is that registered Republicans are "one of Mr. Trump's weakest groups." If you can't wrap your mind around that, well join the club. Perhaps this helps explain why so many Republicans I know don't care much for Trump as a Presidential candidate. 

The data Cohn's crunched was provided by Civis Analytics, a Democrat data firm, and is based on interviews with more than 11,000 Republican-leaning respondents since August. According to Cohn, this data presents the most detailed examination yet of Trump’s coalition.

Cohn's article offers much more less inflammatory information about the Trump supporters:  

• Trump fares best in a broad swath of the country stretching from the Gulf Coast, up the spine of the Appalachian Mountains, to upstate New York.
• Trump’s best state is West Virginia, followed by New York. Eight of Mr. Trump’s 10 best congressional districts are in New York.
• Trump’s strength fades as one heads west. Nearly all of his weakest states lie west of the Mississippi.
• Trump leads among Republican women and among people in well-educated and affluent areas.
• Trump even holds a nominal lead among Republican respondents that Civis estimated are Hispanic, based on their names and where they live.
• Trump has held the steady support of between 26 and 32 percent of the vote for five straight months.

The problem for Trump is that his campaign may not have the turnout operation necessary to mobilize all of his supporters: 

Another turnout challenge for Mr. Trump is that he commands the support of many people who are unlikely to vote. Civis found him winning 40 percent of the vote among those it gave less than a 20 percent chance of participating in the general election — let alone in the primary. He held 29 percent among those who had greater than an 80 percent chance of voting in the November election.

Mr. Trump’s campaign will need to mobilize these less-likely voters to maximize his strength. But the challenge shouldn’t be overstated, either. Registered Democrats make up just 8 percent of self-identified Republicans in the states with party registration, according to the Civis data.

Worse, some states don't allow voters registered with the other party to participate in partisan primaries. This group of states includes some favorable to Trump, like Florida, Pennsylvania and New York. Nevertheless, Cohn cautions there is no reason to believe that his support would simply evaporate among a traditional Republican primary electorate because registered Democrats make up just 8 percent of self-identified Republicans in such states.

Cross posted from RedState.

Revenge Replaces Hope And Change

Frank Luntz tells us that Trump supporters are not just angry. They want revenge. They seek vengeance for Obama's fundamental transformation of America. These Trumpeteers see the Donald as the antidote for all that Obama has made wrong with America. Trump's bombastic attacks on the Republican establishment, the mainstream media and his critics are cathartic for the millions who feel "silenced, ignored and even scorned by the governing and media elite."

According to Luntz, to understand why Trump is so popular, you have to listen to why his supporters hate Obama so much. One only has to look at the Frank Luntz focus-group conducted on December 9 to see how much Trump supporters dislike Obama:

 The video clip and following transcript are from Luntz' appearance on the December 13 edition of Face the Nation. You can watch the entire ten minute segment here.

DICKERSON: Want to play a little more from the focus groups, because a lot of what motivates them that you discovered is an anger about President Obama. So let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LUNTZ: And I want a word or phrase to describe Barack Obama.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Pathetic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's a great speaker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jellyfish marshmallow.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Annoying.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Delusional.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Naive.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Unbelievable. I just can't believe him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lost.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Good talker and tries hard. Out of touch.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A politician.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Full of himself. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Clueless.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ineffective.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Elitist.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doesn't respect American values.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Overwhelmingly cocky.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Anti-American.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Un-American.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Amateur.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Zero leadership.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Out of his depth.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Arrogant.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Still waiting on this hope and change.

LUNTZ: Anti-American, un-American, Barack Obama. Seriously?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, absolutely.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DICKERSON: So, Frank, I would suggest that obviously they don't like the president, but could any other Republican -- why couldn't any other Republican just grab onto that feeling? Why is Donald Trump particularly...

LUNTZ: Because no other Republican is willing to say the things that Donald Trump says. I don't believe there would be a Trump candidacy if there wasn't an Obama presidency.

And Trump's willingness to say things that we all would say go beyond the pale, that we would say is unacceptable in American politics, for these voters, is exactly what they want to hear, and no other candidate is talking that way.

DICKERSON: So, it's not just that they dislike the president, but that Donald Trump is the opposite of the qualities they see in the here

Let me ask you about any other candidate in the Republican field. Was there any purchase for any other Republican candidate in that room?

LUNTZ: The only one who seemed to have some interest was Ted Cruz.

Trump is different than other straight talking presidential candidates who rise and fall. Luntz says Trump defies electoral gravity because the attacks against him delivered by a distrusted mainstream media and an elite political and business establishment that are detested.

The anger of the Trump supporters was reflected in a new CNN/ORC Poll, which found that 75% of Americans are dissatisfied with the way the nation is being governed, and 69% are at least somewhat angry with the way things are going in the U.S. that dissatisfaction is much greater among Trump supporters:

While majorities across party lines express dissatisfaction and anger, Republicans are most likely to feel that way. And both sentiments are particularly strong among those Republicans who back Donald Trump in the GOP race for the nomination. Overall, 90% of Republicans are dissatisfied with the way the nation is being governed, and 82% express anger with the way things are going in the U.S. today. Among Trump backers, 97% are dissatisfied with government, 91% at least somewhat angry.

Also reflected in the new CNN poll is that the days when the Obama's promise of hope and change drew huge crowds and infected the mainstream media with Obamamania are long gone:

Obama's 2008 campaign pledge to bring change hasn't panned out successfully in the eyes of many of his constituents. Overall, 37% say Obama has brought positive change to the country, but an equal share say he's changed things for the worse. Another 21% say he hasn't changed anything. Among Democrats, 67% say Obama has brought positive change, while Republicans mostly lean the other way, with 63% saying he's changed the country for the worse.

The CNN/ORC Poll was conducted on Dec. 17-21 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percent.

Cross posted from RedState.

Why Cruz won't and shouldn't attack Trump

One only has to look at the Frank Luntz focus-group conducted on December 9 to see that attacking Donald Trump is counterproductive and that Sen. Ted Cruz is right to not engage Trump with personal attacks or insults. During a Dec. 9, 2015 interview by Bill Hemmer on America's Newsroom, Sen. Ted Cruz explained why he doesn't engage in personal attacks and insults against the other presidential candidates. You can watch the exchange between Sen. Cruz and Hemmer at the 6:05 mark of this video.

Here's the transcript of the exchange:

Cruz: Listen from the beginning my approach, not just to Donald Trump but to all of the candidates, is not to engage in personal insults and attacks. You think of the first couple of debates that they just descended into food fights and personal insults back and forth.

Hemmer: You had a very effective comeback that got a lot of headlines. Maybe a more appropriate question is does it change?

Cruz: I like and respect Donald Trump. I don't anticipate that changing at all.

Hemmer: No?

Cruz: The reason I won't get engaged in personal insults and attacks, I don't think the American people care about a bunch of politicians bickering like school children. What they're interested in is positive real solutions to the great challenges facing this country. That's why I am working to lead on defending this nation, on standing up to radical Islamic terrorism, on stopping President Obama's plan to bring tens of thousands of Syrian Muslim refugees.

Hummer: But no critique on Trump?

Cruz: I am grateful Donald Trump is running. And I'll tell you what, He has helped focus the discussion on securing the border. Border security is national security. I think that's been very beneficial.

Frank Luntz let a number of reporters watch his December 9 Global dial group as he tested clips of Trump's speeches and TV appearances, as well as anti-Trump ads. The 29 member focus group all voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 and supported or used to support Trump. After watching the three-hour focus group, Lesley Clark McClatchy Newspapers Washington Bureau White House correspondent, reported that support for Trump intensifies with every provocation. Trump's supporters are "invested in him and they’re prepared to dismiss every critique." Many of Trump's backers would abandon the Republican Party if necessary to support an independent Trump for president.

The Washington Post's David Weigel reported that the three hours of messaging, venting and friendly arguments revealed the roots of Trump’s support. All that really mattered to the focus group was that the Republican establishment had failed, badly, and that Trump was offering a way out. Participants derided the mainstream media, accusing reporters of covering snippets of Trump quotes when the full context would have validated him. They cited news sources they trusted to refute what they were being told.

Luntz told the group of reporters when the session ended, normally, if I did this for a campaign, I’d have destroyed the candidate after three hours of showing that stuff. Nothing seemed to budge the Trump voters.

According to Weigel, the only issue that moved the panel against Trump was one that evoked memories of the 2012 election. The group was shown an ad in which contractors blamed Trump for the loss of their jobs. That, said one participant, made Trump look less  electable. He downgraded the likelihood of his own Trump vote — from nine out of 10 to just eight.

Asked whom they would back in a three-way election with Rubio, Hillary Clinton and an independent Trump on the ballot, just 10  of the 29 said they would support the Republican nominee. When Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) was swapped into the question, a bare majority — 15 — said they would stick with the Republican Party.

Weigel quoted Luntz as saying losing Iowa might help Trump:

"I can’t wait for Iowa, because I now think Ted Cruz will win Iowa. That will be a rallying cry. Losing there might actually help Trump win New Hampshire."

According to the article about the Luntz focus group in Mike Allen's Playbook, Luntz told reporters, The participants hate political correctness more than anything else, and that really does stand out to them as a reason to vote for Trump. The participants are also eager to vote establishment Republicans out. Luntz said he thinks some Republican incumbents  will lose because these Trump voters want to send a message so much that they will vote against some of their own candidates. Luntz compares it to Perot back in '92. But the intensity of support among Trump supporters is far greater than it was for Ross Perot:

"[W]e showed them pro-Trump clips, we showed them anti-Trump clips. ... His numbers went up -- and up and up. And that's because it is the people ... who are attacking him who lack the credibility. ... When's the last time you saw a Republican ... going after opponents, with such viciousness, only to be applauded for being so entertaining? ... [T]he longer that this goes, the greater the intensity, the greater the passion, the greater the commitment. And they're going to be angry as hell. If you think this is angry now, wait and see what happens two months from now."

Sen. Cruz is right not to engage Trump with personal attacks and insults. To do so is counterproductive. The other Republican candidates would be wise to follow Cruz' example.  

 Cross posted from RedState.

Voters fear both Hillary and the Donald

The latest New York Times/CBS News nationwide poll, to be released at 6:30 p.m. this evening, finds that voters are scared and fearful of a Hillary Clinton and a Donald Trump presidency:

Republican voters were most likely to say they were excited (24 percent) or optimistic (41 percent), a full one-third of Republicans say they are concerned or scared about Mr. Trump. Mrs. Clinton’s base views her potential presidency more favorably than does Mr. Trump’s. Twenty-two percent of Democratic voters are excited and 54 percent are optimistic, while only 23 percent said they were concerned or scared.

Trump is now supported by 35% of Republican primary voters, leading Sen. Ted Cruz  (16%) and Ben Carson (13%) by more than 2-to-1. Cruz has quadrupled his support since the late October New York Times/CBS News nationwide poll. Carson's support is only half what it was in the October poll, while Rubio is at 9% and the remaining GOP candidates are at 4% or less.

Hillary maintains her 20-point lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders, but possibility of Hillary winning the presidency is "only marginally more palatable to American voters than that of Mr. Trump."

Republican primary voters are more enthusiastic than the Democrats. A majority, 54%, of Democrat primary voters have made up their minds about whom they will support, while 64% of Republicans remain unsure.

The New York Times/CBS News poll was conducted Dec. 4-8 plus and the margin of error is plus or minus 6 percent each for Republican and Democratic primary voters. Most of this polling was conducted before Trump's proposal to temporarily block Muslims from entering the United States.

A new Fox News South Carolina poll suggests that Trump's temporary Muslim bar proposal isn't hurting despite all the hullabaloo over it. The Fox News poll finds Trump in front with 35% among South Carolina Republican primary voters and Carson -15%, Cruz - 14% and Rubio - 14% tied for second. The rest of the candidates are in single digits. According to Fox News: 

It looks like his [Trump] comments help him in South Carolina. Support for Trump increased eight points after his statement -- from 30 percent the first two nights vs. 38 percent the last two nights. The shift is within the margin of sampling error.

Republican pollster Daron Shaw says, “There are enough people in the last two nights of the sample to question the widespread assumption that Trump’s comments will hurt him among GOP primary voters.” Shaw conducts the Fox News Poll with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson.

That shouldn't be surprising as a new Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies poll found that Trump's proposal to block Muslims from entering the U.S. is actually popular among Republican voters.
Sixty-five percent of GOP respondents in the latest Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies poll favored Trump's call for a ban on Muslims seeking to travel or emigrate to the country.

Cross Posted from RedState.

Hillary and Leading From Behind

Image credit: YouTube Video - Leading From Behind

The good folks at the America Rising PAC have released a powerful new video contrasting the strong and inspiring leadership exhibited by Presidents Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush with the so-called leading from behind adopted by President Barack Obama and endorsed by presidential wannabe Hillary Clinton.

The imagery is powerful. Newsreel footage of the Japanese attack on Pear Harbor followed by FDR saying, "No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people and their righteous might will win through absolute victory," accompanied by images of D-day and the victory celebration in New York City. Video of the confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union over Berlin as a news reporter says "West Berliners they know as President Kennedy said that Khrushchev is testing more than bombs. He is testing the will and determination of the free world through atomic blackmail." Ronald Reagan saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall," as images of the Berlin Wall coming down are shown. A little news footage of the Twin Towers burning followed by video of  President George W. Bush on top of the pile of rubble that was the World Trade Center saying "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down, will hear all of us soon."

The video then moves on to the war with Daesh or ISIS. We see images of the Daesh evil doers on the march, then the Boston Globe’s James Pindell asks Hillary, "As for President Obama himself, what letter grade would you give his administration?"And Hillary responds, "I’d give him an A." Then Chuck Todd is seen saying, "The current strategy to defeat ISIS is simply not working." The video cuts to the infamous George Stephanopoulos interview of Obama Broadcast on February 13, 2015, just hours before the Daesh terror attacks against Paris. Stephanopoulos asks Obama, ISIS is gaining strength aren’t they?" Obama replies, "I don’t think they are gaining strength." We see a little news coverage of the Paris terror attack and then Obama saying, "And we have contained them." There are more images of carnage and six different locations across Paris and then the video moves to Norah O'Donnell's December 3, 2015 interview with Obama with this exchange:

Norah O'Donnell: "Do you think Americans are living in a bit of fear that Paris could come here?"

President Obama: "ISIL is not going to pose an existential threat to us."

The video moves onto  Stephanopoulos saying "We have the clearest indication yet that, that shooting rampage is act of terror inspired by ISIS," and Jake Tapper saying, "If this is what ISIS looks like contained." The video comes to a conclusion with Hillary being asked by an NDTV interviewer, "If you were in the administration today, what would you have advised President Obama to do in Iraq?" Hillary response is devastating, "I would have advised him to do exactly as I believe he is now doing." It ends with a strong voiceover, "The world reacts to our reaction, and thus far, this leading from behind approach has created rampant uncertainties." A phone rings and Hillary say, This cannot be an American Fight."

Watch the video:

As Jeff Bechdel, America Rising PAC communications director put it, "Without question, President Obama’s failure to lead the fight against ISIS has hurt America’s global standing, and shoulder to shoulder with him every step of the way has been Secretary Clinton. The Obama-Clinton foreign policy agenda is a weak, feckless prescription for a growing threat. We can’t afford four more years of leading from behind."

Cross posted from RedState.

California's strict gun laws failed to stop the San Bernardino attack

 

Just days after a terror attack in his state, California's out-of-touch Gov. Brown a.k.a. Gov. Moonbeam, flew to Paris for the climate talks, and then proceeded to attack neighboring states Arizona and Nevada from his elite perch in Paris. Apparently Brown felt a need to blame the San Bernardino terror attacks on neighboring states' gun laws so that California's strict gun controls wouldn't be seen to be as ineffective as they are in preventing such attacks:

 

"Gov. Jerry Brown said Saturday that 'wide open' gun laws in Nevada and Arizona are a 'gigantic back door through which any terrorist can walk,' while he was noncommittal on efforts to strengthen gun control measures in California.

 

Brown, arriving in France for climate talks after the mass shooting in San Bernardino last week, called the shooting a terrorist attack."

 

Arizona Gov. Ducey fired back at Gov. Moonbeam:

"All of Arizona mourns for the victims in California. To politicize a tragedy of this magnitude and use it as an opportunity to attack our state is out of bounds. Not only will we be ignoring Gov. Brown's advice, but I call on him to retract his incredibly thoughtless and ill-advised comments."

The Associated Press reports that California's gun controls did nothing to stop the San Bernardino attack:

"The deadly shooting in San Bernardino happened in a state with some of the nation's toughest gun laws: California bars assault weapons, blocks the sale of large-capacity magazines and requires universal background checks for all gun purchases.

Authorities say they believe attackers Syed Rizwan Farook and wife Tashfeen Malik had legally obtained two handguns and that two rifles were also legally purchased in California. Federal officials say the attackers had large-capacity magazines that violate California law in their SUV.

Since the attack Wednesday at a social service center in Southern California, the state's strict laws and the apparent legal purchase of the weapons have set off a debate over the effectiveness of gun measures and whether getting tougher would help prevent more violence."

What might help is if law enforcement agencies would enforce the plethora of existing gun control laws. This argument was set forth very clearly in the following video by NRA executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre:

 

 

Under the existing federal gun laws, every felon with a gun, Drug dealer with a gun and criminal gangbanger with a gun could be taken off the streets tomorrow and locked up for five years or more. So why aren't they?

 

If you want to stop violent crime, take violent criminals off the street. Prosecute them under existing gun laws.

 

Cross posted from RedState.

 

Remember The Day Of Infamy

Image Credit: An aerial view of the USS Arizona Memorial (Released to Public: Permission details -- PD-USGOV-MILITARY-NAVY; PD-USGOV-NAVY.)

Seventy-four years ago, early on a quiet Sunday morning on December 7, 1941, aircraft of the Empire of Japan, without provocation or warning, attacked the United States forces at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The Japanese attack left 2400 Americans dead, and 1347 wounded. Twenty one U.S. vessels, including eight battleships, were sunk or badly damaged, and 188 U.S. planes also destroyed or damaged.

In the dramatic message that President Franklin Roosevelt delivered to Congress on Dec. 8, 1941, he told Americans:

Yesterday, December 7, 1941, a date which will live in infamy, the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

President Roosevelt then asked Congress to declare war on Japan, a request that was approved by lawmakers, with only one "nay" vote.

Don’t forget!

One of the things I remember most about my visit to the USS Arizona Memorial is that most of the visitors were Japanese. That still puzzles me.

Watch the following U.S. Department of Defense video remembering Pearl Harbor 74 years later:

As reported by the SpaceCoast Daily, the Japanese attack actually began before the bombing. Japan launched five midget submarines near Pearl Harbor the night before the attack.

One of those submarines was first seen by the USCG Condor at 3:50 a.m., about two miles from the harbor’s entrance. The Condor notified the USS Ward, which spotted the sub tailing the USS Antares into the harbor, opened fire and sank it. About an hour later, the air attack began.

Americans sank two other Japanese subs during the battle. One was found in the harbor and eventually salvaged. The second was found off the harbor entrance in 1960 and is now on display in Japan. A fourth Japanese sub called the Ha-19 never made it into the harbor and instead drifted around until it was captured near Oahu the next day. It was recovered immediately and is now on exhibit in Fredericksburg, Texas.

The sub that initiated the Pearl Harbor attack wasn’t found until 2002, when crews discovered it in deep water about five miles from the harbor’s entrance. It remains there as part of the Pearl Harbor National Historic Landmark. A fifth Japanese sub that was launched that day was never found.

With Hillary's Enemies, She Doesn't Need Friends

 

Image Credit: YouTube -  First Democratic Presidential Debate 2016 by CNN 10-13-2015 - FULL

During this year's first Democrat Presidential debate, Hillary Clinton said that she was proud to be enemies with “health insurance companies” – putting the insurance industry alongside the NRA, Iran and Republicans on her enemies list. That might be news to Clinton's campaign staff, which according to Politico Pro, recently held two high-level meetings with the insurance industry to hear – and presumably allay – any concerns they have:

"Top Hillary Clinton staffers are hosting insurance executives at the campaign's Brooklyn headquarters this week, coming face-to-face with an industry that Clinton ranked among her top ‘enemies’ during the first Democratic debate."

In the first meeting, "top Hillary Clinton staffers" hosted Marilyn Tavenner, the chief executive of the insurance industry’s trade association, AHIP, at Clinton’s Brooklyn campaign offices. Tavenner is part of Washington, D.C.’s revolving door; prior to her job at AHIP, she was the Obama Administration’s administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). At CMS, she was "in charge" of Healthcare.gov.

In the second meeting, the campaign met with executives from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, whose subsidiaries frequently appear as top donors to Clinton’s campaigns and the Clinton Foundation. In fact, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina alone donated between $1 and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. Another $1 to $5 million came from Humana, another large insurance company.

Adding up Clinton's campaign contributions, insurance companies have poured millions into her various campaigns. U.S. News crunched the numbers:

"The insurance industry – which includes health insurers and also car, life and property insurance – donated $1,260,400 to her 2008 campaign, making her the third-highest recipient of cash from the industry that year and also in 2006, when she raised $397,110 for her reelection to the Senate. During her first bid for the Senate in 2000, she raised $167,550 from the industry.

She was the second-highest recipient of cash in 2008 from the health services sector and HMOs, receiving $636,670, and the highest earner in 2006, at $183,770. In 2000, she raised $70,575."

Why did Clinton's campaign meet with big insurance? Both Anthem, Blue Cross Blue Shield’s largest member company, and Humana are trying to consolidate with two other mega insurance companies, Cigna and Aetna, respectively. The combined total for these deals is in excess of $90 billion. So what’s a few million in campaign contributions?

Of course, these mergers will help insurance companies to squeeze even more profits out of their customers, who have suffered higher premiums along with less choice. The Center for Public Integrity outlined ObamaCare’s results:

"Among those who apparently have not yet benefited much at all, at least so far, are owners of small businesses who would like to keep offering coverage to their employees but can no longer afford it. They can’t afford it because insurers keep jacking their rates up so high every year that more and more of them are dropping employee health benefits altogether.

And let’s be clear, these insurers aren’t suffering. UnitedHealth Group, the largest health insurer, reported last week that it made $10.3 billion in profits in 2014 on revenues of $130.5 billion. Both profits and revenues grew seven percent from 2013."

Yes, that's the same UnitedHealth Group that is threatening to pull out of ObamaCare because it "loses hundreds of millions of dollars on the program." Maybe that’s why Tavenner told the New York Times that lobbying for health insurance companies was "a great opportunity."

According to The Hill, Clinton also has ties to another AHIP executive – Mary Beth Donahue, who served as a senior official in the Clinton Administration in the 1990s. Donahue, an executive vice president, as well as “several” other “high-ranking” AHIP officials are in "close contact with the White House and HHS." 

With enemies like Big Insurance, Hillary Clinton doesn’t need any friends.

Image Credit: YouTube - First Democratic Presidential Debate 2016 by CNN 10-13-2015 - FULL

Cross posted from RedState.