A FAILURE TO REACT — DECONSTRUCTING THE IRAN TALKS: “A Nuclear Deal for U.S. and Iran Slips Away Again” — David Sanger, Michael Gordon, Peter Baker in the NYTimes:“If anything, the last few weeks underscored a larger conclusion about the negotiations: If the deal had been left to Mr. Kerry and Mr. Zarif, and to their respective teams, it probably would have happened. The two men have developed a strong working relationship, and the flare-up in Oman a couple weeks ago underscored how much each wanted to get to a deal but could not. In the end, both were constrained by hard-line politics at home. Mr. Zarif, while friendly, outgoing and Westernized, had pushed to the very limits of his brief; he often warned that the final decision would be in the hands of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. And Ayatollah Khamenei, American intelligence officials had told President Obama and Mr. Kerry, was heavily influenced by the Revolutionary Guard Corps and his own distrust of the Americans…

[The lack of a deal] was a function of “mathematics, not politics,” one Western official said. “Essentially we were saying, ‘We’ll meet you halfway.’ ” But the Iranian side would not budge, leading to the ominous confrontation between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Zarif. Mr. Kerry flew to Vienna on Thursday for a final shot at meeting the deadline. The Americans sensed that Mr. Zarif had little leeway. Mr. Zarif and his aides warned that after the first meeting, the foreign minister would fly back to Tehran to get a bottom line from the clerics and military elite. The Americans said Mr. Kerry would also be leaving and told reporters to pack their bags.” [NYT]

Republicans React: U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), and John McCain (R-AZ) today made the following statement on the extension of negotiations with Iran over their nuclear program: “If the P5+1 negotiates a good deal which successfully dismantles Iran’s nuclear weapons program, it will receive an overwhelming vote in support. However, if it sets the stage for the creation of another North Korea, we will vote against it and expect Congress to reject it. “When it comes to the Iranian nuclear ambitions, we strongly believe the most prudent policy would be to verify, verify, verify…. never trust.”

Kerry Under Fire: “It is disappointing and worrying that after a year of serious talks with Iran that we do not have a deal,” said the Democratic Senate Foreign Affairs Committee chairman, Robert Menendez, in a statement…Administration officials strongly dispute the idea that Kerry is wasting his time or that the extension amounts to a disappointment. Iran’s nuclear program is frozen in place, they say — its growth capped by a November 2013 agreement that provided limited relief from international sanctions…The danger for Kerry and Obama is that Democrats in Congress will lose patience, and side with Republicans who say Iran will only swallow such a deal under even stiffer economic sanctions than the ones applied by the U.S. and other world powers in recent years.” [Politico]

AIPAC: “Congress must now act to send a clear message that U.S. patience is not limitless and that Iran must not be allowed to achieve a nuclear weapons capability.” [Statement]

WHITE HOUSE: New Sanctions on Iran would be ‘counterproductive’: “The concern that we have is that layering on additional sanctions could leave some of our partners with the impression that this sanctions regime is more punitive in nature than anything else, and that could cause some cracks in that international coordination to appear,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said. “And that would therefore undermine the point of the sanctions regime in the first place.” Earnest added that allies would believe that the U.S. was simply “more interested in punishing” Iran than striking a deal, and that the administration could lose “buy-in” on the talks with additional penalties.” [TheHill]

2016 WATCH: “Texan Ted Cruz, ’16 Hopeful, Woos New York Jewish Donors” by Ken Kurson in the Observer: “Jewish life in New York is dominated by ritual. Holidays. A pastrami reuben on a hero at Katz’s. The reading of holy books in cycles that take a year (the Torah) or seven and a half years (the Talmud). And just as reliably, there’s the ritual of presidential candidates sniffing around for dough right after the midterm elections. That last one got going in earnest yesterday and today, with Senator Ted Cruz of Texas making a whirlwind tour of power Jews in New York City.” Prior to speaking at the ZOA dinner on Sunday evening, Mort Zuckerman hosted Cruz for lunch. Yesterday, Cruz met withSheldon Adelson for two hours. According to a source, “the casino owner liked Mr. Cruz but found the senator “too right wing” and concluded he is a longshot to win the nomination.” After the Adelson meeting, Michael Steinhardt hosted Cruz at his office for lunch. Other attendees included Dan Arbess, Ken Abramowitz, Edward Turen, and Cruz’s senior advisor Nick Muzin.

—Cruz laid out his 2016 plan: ““In my view, Hillary will be the Democratic nominee. And I think Hillary is every bit as radical as Obama is. I don’t think Bill is, I think Bill is genuinely more moderate. But I think Hillary is. So how does a Republican win in 2016? Einstein famously said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. If you look at the field in 2016, it’s going to be crowded field, there could be a dozen, there could be fifteen. There’s one bucket that, for lack of a better word, I’ll call the ‘moderate establishment’ bucket. It’ll be some combination of Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney. My guess is two of the three will run. And my view is whoever’s in that bucket will raise tons of money. A lot of donors will rush to write them checks. And yet if the nominee comes from that bucket, the same voters who stayed home in 2008 and 2012 will stay home again and Hillary’s the winner.”… “Where we are today is very much like the late 1970s. The parallels between Obama and Carter are uncanny — same failed economic policy, same disastrous foreign policy. And I think ’16 will be like 1980. The way Reagan won was not by blurring the differences. He drew a line in the sand and with a positive, optimistic hopeful vision said we can get back to the principles that made America great. That’s how we win and that’s how we energize the people who are feeling dispirited.” [Observer]

Why is Elizabeth Warren in Israel? “Democratic strategists said the trip reflects Warren’s growing influence within the party. “She’s very quickly in a very different place than when she was first elected,” said Scott Ferson. He called the trip, which aides told the Globe was organized in August, smart for both political and policy purposes, citing Massachusetts’ important trading relationship with Israel and the state’s sizable Jewish population. “My sense is that she’s going to listen, more than talk, on this trip,” Ferson said… Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen agreed traveling to Israel is “a prerequisite for any national politician” but agreed that too much shouldn’t be read into Warren’s intentions.” [Politico]