Analysis | December 6, 2012

The Hillary Clinton Republican Primary (Cont.)

10:30 a.m. E.T.

More from “Morning Joe”:

All these Republicans we’re talking about — Rubio, Bobby Jindal, all the others, Paul Ryan — they all have some strengths. They’re all now talking, the smarter ones, are talking about trying to remake the party, standing up to the party a little bit. The reason why the Hillary Clinton thing is such a big challenge for them is there’s no doubt about Hillary Clinton. Can she raise the money? Is she well-known? Does she have good relationships with her own party? Does she have appeal across the aisle? I mean, yes. Yes to national security experience. Yes to everything. And all these Republicans have to prove themselves within the Republican Party but also do the thing you and Nicolle Wallace talked about, which is appeal to Hispanics, broaden the base of the party, build an organization, raise money, all these things. It’s an extraordinary task and while it is early, if you’re going up against Hillary Clinton, the absolute presumption in this city, in China, in lots of other places, you’ve got a huge project. Four years isn’t enough time if she runs.

Watch the video above.

Analysis | December 6, 2012

The Hillary Clinton Republican Primary

9:50 a.m. E.T.

Me on “Morning Joe,” explaining the litmus test for all potential GOP ’16 hopefuls:

You talk to Republicans about ’16, and obviously people are already talking about it. On the broadcast of record, “Way Too Early,” you were talking about Hillary Clinton. For a lot of Republicans, now, what people are auditioning for is can you beat Hillary Clinton? If you don’t have the premise of beating her, the stature to beat her, the fundraising to beat her, Republicans say, “No need to apply,” because that is, right now, the prism they’re looking at.

Watch the video above.

Analysis | December 6, 2012

State of the (Would-Be) Deal

7:25 a.m. E.T.

From “Morning Joe”:

WILLIE GEIST: Are these guys talking to each other in a real, meaningful way? I know they put out the information that the President talked to John Boehner yesterday but are there real, behind-the-scenes, intense negotiations going on, as we’re now less than four weeks away from this thing?

MARK HALPERIN: In talking to people on both sides yesterday, they had an identical message, which is the other side isn’t ready to listen. They’re not ready to listen yet so we’re just kind of waiting until they’re ready to listen. That’s obviously not a great environment to move things along. The optimists on both sides think we’re going to get a deal, not by Christmas but by New Year’s. But if you ask people, Democrats and Republicans, what’s the next step, what gets things moving it’s still complicated and nobody has a consensus on that. The biggest challenge is how you strike a deal this year that has some things left undone for next year and there’s all sorts of people thinking about different kinds of triggers, different kind of things that say, “Well, if Congress doesn’t do X, then Y kicks in.” But there’s no agreement on what those need to be. There’s going to be more revenue but the things like entitlement reform, tax reform, those things are very unsettled.

…

WILLIE GEIST: As you said a little bit earlier, if he’s not in the room with these guys, if they’re not trying to broker a deal in the way that any of us would try to broker a deal with the clock ticking, how does this change? How does this dynamic change? With the White House and Tim Geithner saying yesterday that there is no deal, forget about it, without raising rates on the top two percent, who gives here?

MARK HALPERIN: Well, look, you got to give the President a lot of credit for his political smarts about what would the impact be, who’d win the election — he thought he was going to win — and what the impact of winning was. And one is business is on his side. As Joe suggested earlier, and Steve, business wants this deal. Business wants a major deficit reduction package and most business leaders are open to it as much on the President’s terms as on the Republicans’. That very nuanced New York Times story on John Boehner goes back to what, I think, is still the key. Boehner and the President — there are lots of other players here — they are the center of this and the question is, is Boehner working towards a deal that gets a majority of the majority in House? I don’t think that’s possible. I don’t think the President would support that deal on the politics or the policy. So, how does Boehner keep enough strength to get a deal in the room with the President that he’s confident he can get enough Republicans to join a significant number of Democrats, more Democrats, to pass the House. I think it’s up to Boehner, really, to decide if he’s willing to do that. If he sticks to saying this is a Republican majority deal in the House, I don’t think they’ll get a deal. But it’s the interaction between the President and Boehner, with business as much on the President’s side as Republicans, that’s going to make this happen.

Watch the video above.

December 6, 2012

Thursday’s Political Ledes

4:50 a.m. E.T.

New York Times: “Boehner Gains Strong Backing of House G.O.P.”

Washington Post: “Some in GOP Seek Broader Fiscal Deal”

Wall Street Journal: “Obama, GOP Each Pitch to Business”

Associated Press: “How Far Over the ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Could They Go?”

Politico: “10 Most Delusional Campaign Moments”

The Hill: “Obama-Friendly Business Group Given Great White House Access”

December 5, 2012

Wednesday’s Political Ledes

6:15 a.m. E.T.

New York Times: “In Tax Fight, G.O.P. Seeks a Position to Fall Back On”

Washington Post: “Obama: ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Deal Must Include Higher Tax Rates for Top Earners”

Wall Street Journal: “GOP Deficit Plan Irks Conservatives”

Associated Press: “Analysis: Obama Could Risk Going Over Cliff”

Politico: “Democrats to Obamaland: Share Your Data”

The Hill: “After Five Year Odyssey, Eshoo’s Cancer Bill Nears the Finish Line”

Analysis | December 4, 2012

Andrea and I

2:45 p.m. E.T.

My colloquy with Anchor Mitchell on the cliff’s consequences, defense cuts, the battle for fiscal leverage, Petraeus presidential intrigue, and Anna Wintour’s ambassadorial prospects.

Watch the video above.

Foreign Policy | December 4, 2012

The Instability Opportunity

1:10 p.m. E.T.

My “Morning Joe” colloquy with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in which he says Middle East unrest could help push Israelis and Palestinians towards a solution.

MARK HALPERIN: You’ve twice mentioned instability in the region as being something that runs counter to the prospects of a negotiated settlement. Aren’t we going to have instability, now, for a long time? People are talking about Jordan being unstable. Egypt looks like it’s going to be unstable for a long time. So, if instability is an enemy of a deal, don’t we have to settle it now for a good long time?

TONY BLAIR: That’s possible but, actually, there is another way of looking at it, which is that, right now, with this instability in the region, this is the time for the two sides to recognize it would be sensible to make progress and, therefore, get to the politics of both sides, a bit of insulation from what is otherwise a situation that is… It’s hard to imagine what’s going on in the Middle East right now. And, remember, one of the things I will say to people about this: remember, Egypt, 50 years ago, had a population of 30 million. Today, it’s 90 million. It’s tripled its population. The average age of people in Gaza, it’s 50 percent under the age of 18. So you’ve got a situation where you’ve got a young population all over that region. They’ve got to have jobs. They’ve got to have opportunity and hope for the future. This is not just about politics. It’s also about the economy and, frankly, if you could take the Israeli-Palestinian thing to a better place, you would have then, I think, a better chance of not having that dispute then get caught up in the turmoil of the region, which I think there’s every prospect if we don’t move it forward.

Watch the video above.