Daily Archives: May 18, 2021

Evan McMullin, a conservative ex-CIA analyst so disgusted with former President Donald Trump that he launched an independent presidential campaign in 2016, got on 11 state ballots, and finished in fifth place with 0.5 percent of the popular vote, has co-announced on Thursday a "new political movement" of 150 mostly right-of-center political figures, including former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, former Rep. Joe Walsh (RIll.), and former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, three conservatives so disgusted with Trump that they ran against him in the 2020 GOP presidential primary and lost by a combined 93 percentage points.

In a joint letter precipitated by the removal of Rep. Liz Cheney (RWyo.) from Republican leadership in the House of Representatives, and patterned consciously after the Declaration of Independence, McMullin and his anti-Trump co-signatories "declare our intent to catalyze an American renewal, and to either reimagine a party dedicated to our founding ideals or else hasten the creation of such an alternative."

As a political project, the would-be catalyzers face extremely long odds. The playing field of American politics these past six years has been littered with the corpses of failed or stillborn attempts to challenge Trump from the right. The only lasting third-party alternative in that span "dedicated to our founding ideals" is one that has put in a half-century of grunt work to get one percent of the vote.

But as a media and fundraising initiative, the effort may find more fertile terrain. McMullin's co-organizer of American Renewal is Miles Taylor, a government security analyst known mostly for being the anonymous author of the 2018 New York Times op-ed "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration," which he then spun into the bestselling 2019 book A Warning. In August 2020, a no-longer-anonymous Taylor accused his former boss of "playingon the Russian team and not the American team," and filmed a two-minute advertisement for Republican Voters Against Trump, a project launched by the 501(c)(4) group Republicans for the Rule of Law, which was co-founded by veteran Washington commentator and political schemer Bill Kristol.

"I'm still a Republican, but I'm hanging on by the skin of my teeth because how quickly the party has divorced itself from truth and reason," Taylor told The New York Times this week. "I'm one of those in the group that feels very strongly that if we can't get the G.O.P. back to a rational party that supports free minds, free markets, and free people, I'm out and a lot of people are coming with me."

Those people attracted to such concepts as truth, reason, "free minds," and "free markets" may find themselves nodding along to some of the principles espoused in the letter, especially if they have a strong stomach for portentous language. (The first line of the declaration reads: "These United States, born of noble convictions and aspiring to high purpose, have been an exemplar of self-government to humankind.")

McMullin, Taylor, & Co. favor "open, market-based economiesconsistent with our natural liberty," reject "populism and illiberalism, whether of the right or the left," and stress that "it is the prerogative of all to make personal decisions in accordance with their free will." They want to welcome lawful immigrants, keep regulation limited, and protect property rights. So far, so unobjectionable.

Where the manifesto begins to diverge most sharply from the Libertarian Party platform is the unspecific yet ambitious paragraph titled "Leadership": "Having thrived in the abundance of a choice land, we believe that these United States must work in conjunction with friends and allies to advance worthy interests abroad and to promote freedom by example and with the judicious application of power."

This passage, in a document arranged by two security-state veterans, and unveiled in the service of supporting Liz Cheney, is a good prompt to cross-check some of the names on the bottom of the petition. Sure enough, #NeverTrump 6.0 is endorsed by several people with fingerprints all over an activist foreign policy.

There is Michael Hayden, former director of both the CIA and the National Security Agency, who lied to Congress about torture programs, has likened air strikes to "casual sex," and made jokes about putting Edward Snowden on a kill list. There is former national intelligence director and serial ambassador to geostrategic countries (Honduras in the 1980s, Iraq in the aughts) John Negroponte, former State Department counselor and World War IV booster Eliot A. Cohen, and former Department of Homeland Security chief and indefinite-detention enthusiast Michael Chertoff, among several other lesser-known veterans of the George W. Bush administration.

Many of these same people lent their names to anti-Trump efforts in 2016 on foreign policy grounds, then cheered on the Russia-related investigations that dogged the 45th president, and are now threatening to start their own party if Trumpism isn't sufficiently cleansed from the GOP.

That pro-market anti-Trumpers are talking about a third party while ignoring the Libertarians, even though one of the signatories (Weld) ran as the L.P. vice presidential nominee as recently as 2016, touches on each of the three main obstacles to herding Trump-averse non-Democrats into anything like a single tent.

1) The three biggest anti-Trump blocs are ideologically incompatible. It has been clear since the dawn of the Trump era that opposition to the crudely mannered America First mercantilist would come most intensely from foreign policy hawks (John McCain, John Kasich, Bill Kristol), libertarian-leaners (Justin Amash, Mark Sanford, George Will), and Mormons (Evan McMullin, Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake).

While Latter-day Saints members can swing between hawkery and dovery (just think of the significant ideological split between Utah's Republican delegation to the U.S. Senate), the fault lines are obvious: Libertarians and neocons generally dislike one another, and even the most loosey-goosey of Mormons have a hard time embracing the full legal logic of personal autonomy for consenting adults. Any movement that requires these camps to get along will likely be short-term and transactional, not unlike the 2016 third-party voters who in 2020 held their noses to vote for President Joe Biden.

2) Noisy anti-Trumpism is mostly incompatible with holding elected office as a Republican. The American Renewal letter signatures look like the roster of a political reunion for the Class of '95. In addition to two-time Massachusetts Gov. Weld, there's former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman, former California Rep. Tom Campbell, former Minnesota Gov. Arne Carlson, former Oklahoma Rep. Mickey Edwards, former Maryland Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, and dozens of others unburdened by the need to win reelection from the modern Republican electorate.

Of the vanishingly few current office-holders on the list, they tend to share a rare characteristic: recent defection from the GOP. Jim Hendren was the Republican majority leader of the Arkansas Senate until this January, when, disgusted by the Capitol riot, he stepped down from leadership, and then the next month left the party altogether. And California State Assemblyman Chad Mayes, the former Republican minority leader, left the party in late 2019 after drawing fire for his criticisms of Trump.

Prior to his departure, Mayes engaged in the kind of Third Way/No Labels activity common among many signatories of the American Renewal letter. From his Wikipedia page:

In January 2018, Mayes formed "New Way California," aiming to broaden the appeal of the Republican Party by advocating for "individual freedom, shared responsibility, educational excellence, environmental stewardship, efficient government and an open economy." The group has been publicly supported by former governorArnold Schwarzenegger, and both Mayes and Schwarzenegger along withOhio governorJohn Kasich headlined the group's inaugural summit inLos Angeleson March 21.The summit was criticized by some in theCalifornia Republican Party, including former chairman Ron Nehring, who described them as "elites talking down to grassroots voters."

As an independent and non-fan of Trump, I share the Renewalists' embarrassment at mainstream GOP fear of crossing Trump voters. Yet that is the world we live in. If you want to hold office as a Republican, and spend any measurable amount of time criticizing the former president, you better have a safe seat, stature, and bank vaults full of cash. Even then, you're going to get booed.

3) At a time of intense negative polarization, centrist scolds are popular mostly in limited corners of the media, and among opportunistic anti-Trump partisans. See: Jeff Flake, Howard Schultz, John Kasich, etc.

Arguably the most successful anti-Trump centrist initiative, at least as measured by revenue and media reach, has been The Lincoln Project, a political action committee of former GOP political operatives that raised scores of millions of dollars from Democrats to run anti-Trump ads in 2020. The project has been dogged by all kinds of scandal and controversy, particularly after the election was safely delivered to Biden.

Three of the American Renewal signatoriesGeorge Conway, Jennifer Horn, and Mike Madridwere co-founders of The Lincoln Project; former Michigan GOP executive Jeff Timmer, too, has been a key member. Evan McMullin's most likely path to success lies less in the direction of dreary third-party construction, and more in a Lincoln Project-style initiative to raise money and make noise about the Republican Party's regnant Trumpism.

But there's an obstacle on that road, too. America's high alert about Trump has nowhere to go but down. The man is not the president, he is not going to be the president, and most people worried about such have moved on with their lives. Sure, I would love to see a GOP that explicitly rejects its most internally popular figure, just as I would love to see a Democratic Party worried about the national debt. In either case, the short-term chances of that happening are the same: slim, none, and fat.

More:

Will a Coalition of Hawks, Mormons, and Libertarian-Leaners Form a New Third Party? - Reason

If I am ever asked, Boris Johnson once wrote of ID cards, on the streets of London, or in any other venue, public or private, to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am, when I have done nothing wrong and am simply ambling along and breathing Gods fresh air like any other freeborn Englishman, then I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it in the presence of whatever emanation of the state has demanded I produce it.

Righto. Well, in a plot twist worthy of Dial-A-Plot-Twist, the emanation of the state turns out to be Boris Johnson himself. Yes, despite the warnings and objections of civil liberties campaigners and race equality campaigners indeed, despite in-person voter fraud being effectively nonexistent in the UK - Johnsons government is pushing ahead with legislation to introduce mandatory voter ID at elections. We know these plans are illiberal because the traditional hero of a Boris Johnson column namely, Boris Johnson has already opposed them.

Of course, in Johnsons published oeuvre, freeborn Englishmen are forever being admired for doing exuberantly freeborn things like beating the hedgerows with staves even as Johnsons government seeks to ban any protest that is too noisy or somehow annoying. In Johnsons canon, the praises are forever being sung of peasants blind drunk on non-EU approved scrumpy and yet, the authors very first act as London mayor was to immediately outlaw drinking on the Tube. I sometimes wonder if Boris Johnson is a committed civil libertarian in the same way Im a peerless opening batsman for England.

The nagging doubt certainly crossed my mind as I sat in front of his latest podium address on Monday night, for which the dear old British public were once again invited to press their noses up against their TV sets and marvel appreciatively as the soy Churchill graciously bestowed upon them his very qualified permission to hug their own family and friends.

Each stage of the Covid pandemic has brought its fresh hells, but one of the most absolutely objectionable parts of unlocking is having to look grateful as the prime minister meagrely parcels out what have been standard freedoms since time immemorial, and hands them back to us like theyre some kind of special present entirely in his gift. As for the ancient rights Johnson did remove, we have been without them far longer than we would have had to be, had the prime minister not been a slave to his own ancient inability to make a tactical decision in good time last autumn.

Anyway, back to the Downing Street gifting suite. Having failed to break it gently to people that they were running out of government-sanctioned excuses not to have to see their relatives, Johnson swept on to the business of policing those who planned to. To wit: Hugging. (In fact, hugging has never been against the law.) You should do it if you think its appropriate, intoned a PM whose intimacy history has always been the benchmark of what is proper, and if you think the risks are very, very low. But you should exercise care and common sense. Increasingly, the only appropriate reply to this is: thanks, but Ill do what I want, Cuck Norris.

As for the continued banning of dancing at weddings, it does seem preposterous that a man with Johnsons self-image should think it remotely appropriate to be standing up on a day where there were four Covid deaths in the UK and acting like the preacher dad in Footloose. I was amused to stumble across a subsequent tweet addressed to Johnson by a member of the public who had just bleeding had it with this nonsense. Maybe you dont want to get married yourself, she said pointedly, but many other people do! And you know, now she puts it like that perhaps it does rather read like the subconscious rearguard action of someone trying to stall their own nuptials. Of COURSE I want to get married, darling but lets wait till we can have 500 people and they can celebrate us rhythmically, as they would only yearn for. (I wonder wholl eventually pay for the wedding? At this stage of murk, lets just count ourselves lucky if Downing Street rules out a petro-state.)

Mindful of Johnsons endless perversions of the term common sense, let us return to this suspiciously unnecessary business of voter ID. Yesterday a Downing Street spokesman was insisting that you already need photo ID to pick up a parcel. When it was pointed out to this committed non-elitist that, as everyone normal knows, you dont actually need photo ID to do this, journalists were then directed towards Post Office guidance that states youd need photo ID if you wished to pick up a parcel for, say, your grandmother. So do make sure to take your card along when you vote for her.

Speaking of the post, there are undoubtedly problems with fraudulent postal voting and yet the Conservatives are, strangely, not doing anything about that one. Perhaps, like complicating in-person voting, postal voting is one of those things generally judged to favour the Tories. (In recent years, incidentally, the main thing that favours the Tories is the Labour party.)

As for the governments decision to flirt with complications that can lead to voter suppression, it calls to mind the joke John Oliver made back in 2013, in response to whatever was that years attempt to roll back US voting rights. Among those pushing hard to overturn electoral liberties was the state of North Carolina, where there had been precisely one documented case of in-person voter fraud during the previous presidential election. The problem isnt people showing up and not being who they say they are, Oliver pointed out. Its person. As in one. Singular. One guy, out of four and a half million people who voted in the last election. You could have got the same result from just passing a bill that said, Dave cant vote, he knows why.

Likewise in todays UK. In 2019 there was ONE conviction for in-person voter fraud in the entire UK, handed to a man who had voted twice in the European parliament elections (arguably even more pointless than it was to vote once). Yet the government is pressing ahead with legislation to spend a conservatively estimated 20m per election on stopping something that isnt even meaningfully occurring. What sort of a return on your investment is that for the party of business? The only reasonable conclusion is that the investment is in fact in a system that will end up favouring the Conservatives. Think of them as the party of funny business, and it all makes common sense.

Excerpt from:

Johnson the civil libertarian wants to have his voter ID card and eat it - MSN UK

A collage of New York City mayor candidates.

Hedge fund billionaires, charter school boosters and prominent labor unions are pouring cash into the New York City mayors race contributing to a record haul intended to shape the outcome of the election at the same time new reforms seek to limit the influence of money in politics.

A decade after the U.S. Supreme Court flung open the doors to unlimited special-interest money in elections, the Democratic primary is being infiltrated at every turn, with an unprecedented $11 million already committed in TV ads, according to a POLITICO review of spending calculated by AdImpact.

That total has already surpassed the $8 million spent to promote and attack candidates the last time the mayors seat was open in 2013 a figure that accounted for both the primary and the general election that year.

It is kind of an arms race between the citys Campaign Finance Board and the political money trying to find a way around it, said John Kaehny of good-government group Reinvent Albany.

With five weeks until the election, checks are flowing from divergent wings of the ideological spectrum.

One recent contributor who provided $500,000 in seed money for a PAC supporting Andrew Yang has backed conservative politicians like U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley. Cruz was among a handful of Republicans who applauded Yangs public statement on fighting in Israel last week.

Pro-Yang donor Jeff Yass, co-founder of investment firm Susquehanna International Group, also bankrolled a PAC pushing a debunked claim that the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald Trump.

A Pennsylvania resident who has sought to distance himself from Protect Freedom PACs Stop the Steals messaging, Yass told POLITICO he does not believe the election was stolen. He said he was enticed by Yangs support for charter schools and his criticism of teachers unions.

I thought he would be the best guy for school choice, Yass said in a recent interview.

The billionaire is a self-described libertarian who saw somewhat of a kindred spirit in Yang.

Andrew has a lot of libertarian leanings, Yass said. He is not quite a libertarian, to say the least, but he has those leanings.

Yass was the first reported contributor to Comeback PAC an effort by public relations consultant Lis Smith, who set a $6 million goal to counter any negative advertisements against one of the leading candidates in the eight-way race.

Gabe Tobias, who is running a rival PAC intended to blunt Yangs momentum, criticized the contribution.

Far-right mega-donor Jeff Yass found in Andrew Yang the same thing [consultant] Bradley Tusk did: An empty vessel for corporate power, Tobias said. How can New Yorkers trust a candidate with so little substance and so many conflicts of interest?

Tobias, meanwhile, has run into difficulty securing funds for his Our City PAC. As of Monday evening he had raised just $43,500, including $10,000 from writer and activist Susan Ochshorn, who also fundraised for candidate Maya Wileys campaign.

This week Wiley got a promised $1 million boost from George Soros of Open Society Foundations and healthcare workers union 1199SEIU. Both are closely tied to Patrick Gaspard, who is advising Wileys bid; 1199 endorsed her in February.

Tobias said his own fundraising efforts are hampered by his self-imposed ban on donors in the real estate and fossil fuel industries, as well as police unions.

I think the fundraising differential between us and some of the other super PACs is a reflection of the tilted playing field between progressive candidates and those that are aligned with corporate interests, he said.

Not so for Wall Street executive Ray McGuire.

A PAC supporting his first-time candidacy received its second round of donations from John Hess last week, boosting the oil magnates total contribution to $1 million. New York For Ray also received $30,000 from the Rudin family of dynastic real estate fame.

In total, the pro-McGuire effort has locked in $6 million, though it has yet to boost him in the polls: The latest survey released Monday night reported McGuire winning just 4 percent of voters.

Four other charter school supporters, including hedge-funders Kenneth Griffin and Daniel Loeb, have contributed a combined $2 million to a PAC backing Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams campaign. The organization began airing a TV ad last week highlighting Adams history as a police captain who was abused by cops as a teenager.

Griffin and Loeb also contributed $500,000 each to Smiths PAC an indication they view both Adams and Yang as beneficial to the nontraditional schools that are at odds with the United Federation of Teachers. Charter school growth is capped by state legislation but mayors can advocate against them, as Bill de Blasio did upon taking office.

Not to be outdone, the UFTs parent union has already pumped $1 million into NY4Kids, which is running ads for its preferred candidate, City Comptroller Scott Stringer.

One donor is on track to single-handedly outspend every campaign and PAC by at least a 2-to-1 margin, according to the latest projections from AdImpact.

Michael Donovan has shelled out $6.8 million to New Start NYC, in hopes of propelling his son Shaun, a first-time political candidate, to Gracie Mansion. The PAC has already booked $5.5 million in ads.

To put that in perspective, Michael Donovan has given $1 million more than all of the 14,966 donors to Yangs campaign combined as of the last disclosure in March. And his largesse is 133,233 percent more than what would be allowed if he only donated to his sons campaign under rules designed to curtail monied interests.

In an interview with POLITICO, Donovan indicated hes closing his wallet.

I think the message is out there, and I think this is about what we needed, he said last week, noting he has accomplished his goal of trying to boost his sons name recognition though his namesake is still polling in the single digits.

Donovans generosity briefly stalled his sons campaign, as city regulators halted his matching funds while investigating whether there was any illegal coordination between the PAC and the candidate. The probe, sparked by a complaint from Stringer, concluded there was no wrongdoing.

A PAC funded by the Hotel Trades Council and its parent organization has raised $2.2 million, and plans to spend much of that supporting Adams.

Meanwhile, a committee that appears to cater to the political whims of Knicks owner James Dolan has raised $2.7 million, almost exclusively from his own organization.

The flow of outside money takes place against the backdrop of an election meant to blunt the influence of special interests. The citys campaign finance system, already lauded by government reformers, is imposing a stricter limit on individual donations and expanding the amount of taxpayer-backed matching funds this year. Voters approved the changes, proposed by de Blasio, in a 2018 referendum.

Despite the unlimited contributions, candidates are still relying most on standard donations regulated by the city Campaign Finance Board. So far donors have given $23.3 million in the race and the board has more than doubled that through an 8-to-1 matching funds system.

These PACs are giant slush funds that rich people can create to support the candidate of their choice, Kaehny said. They are a serious threat to the campaign finance system here.

See more here:

Special interests flood the mayor's race as candidates race to the finish line - Politico

Matthew McConaughey has been quietly making calls to political experts as he weighs up whether to run for Governor of Texas, according to a report.

The Oscar-winning actor, 51, revealed in an interview last month that he wasconsidering a run for Governor of Texas in 2022 but did not reveal for which party .

Reactions ranged from joyful enthusiasm of fans and those impressed by his recent Texas winterstorm reliefdrive and gun-control campaigns, to stark warnings tostay out of Texas politics and eye-rolls in established Republican and Democratic political circles in the Lone Star State.

Now, insiders have toldPoliticothat the Hollywood star has quietly started making calls to political experts to take the temperature before he decides whether to throw his hat in the ring and run against current Republican Governor Greg Abbott, 63, who has indicated that he will seek a third term.

The Independent has contacted Mr McConaugheys representative for comment.

Republican strategist, Karl Rove, said of Mr McConaugheys potential run: I find it improbable, but its not out of the question.

He added: The question is: Would he run as a Republican? A Democrat? Independent? And where is he on the political scale? He says he has a funny phrase about being a hardcore centrist, but what party would he run under?

Matthew Dowd, founder of Country Over Party and former chief strategist on the 2004 Bush-Cheney campaign, told Politico: I think theres an impression of, Do we really need another celebrity candidate in the midst of this?

But Brendan Steinhauser, an Austin-based GOP strategist, said: Im a little more surprised that people arent taking him more seriously, honestly. Celebrity in this country counts for a lot its not like some C-list actor no one likes. He has an appeal.

When Mr McConaughey first mooted a run earlier this year, many dismissed him as yet another inexperienced, Hollywood star interfering in politics and warned him not to look to the increasingly long list of celebrities-turned-politicians - former presidents Donald Trump andRonald Reagan; and former California governorArnold Schwarzenegger, as his role-models.

CNNpolitical analyst Jim Moore warned theTrue Detectivestar: You are not prepared. Be kind to your state and yourself. Stick with what you know.

But following a March Gallup poll that revealed a record-high 62 per cent of Americans feel that a third party option is needed, some have started eyeing the A-lister from Austin, who has refused to align as a Republican or Democrat, as a potential candidate.

On 10 March, The Libertarian Party of Texas, the state arm of the USs third most popular party, tweeted: Hey, @McConaughey, can we talk?

Matthew McConaughey speaks during "One World: Together At Home" presented by Global Citizen on April, 18, 2020

(Getty Images for Global Citizen)

Third, or minor, parties have historically performed poorly in American politics. This is largely attributed to first-past-the-post (FPTP), which favours a two-party system, creating less room for smaller parties who cannot gain any representation without an outright win.

Since 1990, just six (2 per cent) of governors out of 369 have been elected from minor parties. The most recent was Alaskas Bill Walker, a Republican turned Independent, who merged his campaign with Democratic nominee Byron Mallott in 2014. He dropped out of the 2018 race after low polling.

Only 53 Independent candidates for governor (14 per cent) have won at least 5 per cent of the vote.

An Independent, third-party candidate has never won a presidential election, not counting fresident George Washington who ran as an Independent but supported by the Federalist party.

Only once did a major party come third in a general election. In 1912, former president Theodore Roosevelt, represented by the Progressive Party, surpassed the Republicans to come second but was beaten by the Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

Not exactly a rounding endorsement for Mr McConaughey to run as a third-party nominee.

But Bekah Congdon, vice-chair of the Texas arm of the Libertarian Party, who tweeted at Mr McConaughey and is hoping to set up a meeting, said that following what some see as disappointing leadership by Republican Abbott, there may be an opportunity.

She told The Independent: Texas has for so long felt like a completely red state and we know its not. It has been about 26 years since a Democrat won a statewide electron here [Ann Richards 1991-1995] so its clear we have been stuck in one way of thinking for such a long time and that is holding us back as a state.

Founded in 1971 following the Watergate scandal and Vietnam War, the Libertarians focus on the rights of individuals over government intervention. They bill themselves as culturally liberal and fiscally conservative, supporting same-sex marriage but also gun-rights (which Ms Congdon admits might not align with the actors previous campaigns on gun-control).

In 2016 the party appeared to be on the rise. It counted two ex-governors as its presidential candidates and received 4.5million (3.3 per cent) votes in its most successful national election result ever.

But in 2020, following a polarising four years, its popularity faded. Libertarian vice presidential candidate, Spike Cohen, who promised free ponies and zombie power, and presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen won just 1.86million votes (1.18 per cent).

Ms Congdon said that Mr McConaughey appealed because of his independent spirit.

He isnt Republican or Democrat and does a lot of pointing out negatives and positives on both sides. Wanting to stop nasty political rhetoric and bridge that divide, she said.

It has been building over the years as he has become more vocal here. He is someone who is relatable, someone who people like and respect, and has an enviable platform.

Speaking toThe Longview News Journal in March, Mr McConaughey said he was serious about the right leadership role but was put off by bipartisan politics.

He said: For me, I need politics to define its purpose before I would choose it as a possible lane for me to pursue. I dont know that politics is my category where I would be the most useful I am looking for where I would be the most useful and it may be that I could be more useful as a free agent.

He then gave a trademark, rambling monologue in which he appeared to endorse a third option, outside of mainstream politics.

Ive said this analogy a few times before, but someone told me: There aint nothing in the middle but dead armadillos and yellow lines. I said, Well, Im walking right down the yellow lines, right in the middle of the highway right now. And the armadillos are free having a great time, because right now, both sides are so far to the right or the left, there arent even tires on the pavement.

Ms Congdon concluded: Its hard to tell if hes serious, but were here for it if he is.

Born in Uvalde, Texas in 1969, the actor hit the big time in 1993s coming-of-age film, Dazed and Confused, before starring in a slew of critically-panned romantic comedies in the 2000s that painted him as a talentless hunk known for giving winding, nonsensical interviews and his catchphrase: Alright, alright, alright.

In the 2010s the actor, who was once arrested for playing the bongos naked, launched a comeback which he called a McConaissance, appearing in multiple hits including The Wolf of Wall Street in 2013 and winning an Academy Award for his role in Dallas Buyers Club in 2014.

Over the last few years the actor, along with other Texas-born stars like Beyonc and Sandra Bullock, has become increasingly active in civic life in his home state. In the wake of disasters, he has made large financial donations and been boots-on-the-ground with his foundation, Just Keep Livin, that opened in 2008.

Matthew McConaughey makes plea for Hollywood to embrace Donald Trump

In 2017 he ruffled feathers when he called for the entertainment industry to get behind Donald Trump and be constructive during his presidency.

A year later he spoke at gun-control rally, March for Our Lives, where heurged law-abiding, gun owners to take one for the teamand give up some of their gun rights.

At the start of the Covid pandemic, the city of Austin broadcast the Matt Signal, using the well-liked actor in a series of PSA ads to persuade residents to stay at home and practise social distancing.

In fall 2020, signs of a potential political future for Mr McConaughey began to emerge. The star, who was appointed Minister for Culture and visiting film professor by his alma mater, the University of Texas, in 2019, started to tell multiple media outlets that he was looking for a leadership role where he can effect change.

When a freak snowstorm hit Texas in February and crippled the states power grid, leaving thousands of residents without heat and electricity, Mr McConaughey was one of several Texas-born celebrities to fundraise.

Soon afterwards, the magazine,Texas Monthly, published a piece titled Matthew McConaughey and Beyonc Did More for Texas Than Ted Cruz lambasting the disgraced Texas senator who was caught breaking lockdown rules to escape the storm with a trip to a Cancun, Mexico.

In April, after months of denying it, the actor casually told Houston-based podcast, The Balanced Voice, that running against Gov. Abbott in 2022, is a true consideration.

On social media his mooted run has received mixed reviews. Some are calling for Beto or bust, referring to Beto ORourke, the Democratic politician who lost the Texas Senate race to Mr Cruz in 2018 and the presidential nomination in 2020.

But even if Mr McConaughey declined the invitation from the Libertarians (whose own candidate selection system would be his first hurdle) many believe there could still be space for a third party, or a high-profile, Independent candidate.

The most recent high-profile success story is Vermonts Bernie Sanders, the longest-serving Independent senator, who has switched back and forth between Independent and Democrat several times.

While his 2016 and 2020 Democrat presidential runs were unsuccessful, some analysts credit Senator Sanders grassroots campaigns with pushing the party further left.

In March a New York Times op-ed conceded that the time may be right for a third-party of the liberal centre to rise, showing respect for the outcome of elections, the rule of law [and] freedom of speech but scepticism of identity politics ... dictators and demagogues.

Conservative columnist Bret Stephens wrote: This is not a political party, yet. But it could be the seeds of a party.

Alright, alright, alright.

Continued here:

Matthew McConaughey is 'making calls' as he mulls a run for Texas governor - The Independent