Read Stuff, You Should: Who Could Challenge Hillary?

Jonathan Bernstein's morning links.

Happy Birthday to Chris Barnes, 48. He's Tanner from the Bad News Bears; it surely must be one of the top ten best baseball movies ever, no?

Meanwhile, the good stuff:

1. More good news for people trying to follow politics and policy: the debut of Jonathan Cohen's new QED policy section over at The New Republic.

2. Here's QED's Rebecca Leber on exactly what those new Obama Administration carbon rules would really do.

3. Seth Masket on "What Matters in Midterm Elections."

4. What does "Islamist" mean? What people or groups does it include? Elizabeth Nugent at the Monkey Cage explains.

5. Matt Yglesias is correct; there's no reason at all to believe that Hillary Clinton's wealth will hurt her in November 2016, and no significant evidence that it will hurt her in nomination politics.

6. Greg Sargent makes a good point about comprehensive immigration reform and the status quo alternative.

7. And Keith Humphreys on the logic and the evidence of challenging Clinton from the left. I think he's generally correct that a hopeless symbolic challenge would have little effect; it would take a more serious nomination battle to force Clinton to make promises. I don't think it matters much where the challenge comes from; Clinton is already in the middle of the party and I think pushing her away from that is highly unlikely, but a more serious challenge could push her to make more specific, constraining promises instead of remaining as untethered as possible.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg View's editorial board or Bloomberg LP, its owners and investors.