Daily Archives: March 18, 2022

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) Texas threw out mail votes at an abnormally high rate during the nations first primary of 2022, rejecting nearly 23,000 ballots outright under tougher voting rules that are part of a broad campaign by Republicans to reshape American elections, according to an analysis by the Associated Press.

Also see (March 2021): An all-hands moment: Republicans are rallying behind new voting limits

Roughly 13% of mail ballots returned in the March 1 primary were discarded and uncounted across 187 counties in Texas. While historical primary comparisons are lacking, the double-digit rejection rate would be far beyond what is typical in a general election, when experts say anything above 2% is usually cause for attention.

My first reaction is yikes, said Charles Stewart III, director of the Election Data and Science Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It says to me that theres something seriously wrong with the way that the mail ballot policy is being administered.

Republicans promised new layers of voting rules would make it easier to vote and harder to cheat. But the final numbers recorded by AP lay bare the glaring gulf between that objective and the obstacles, frustration and tens of thousands of uncounted votes resulting from tighter restrictions and rushed implementation.

From the archives (September 2021): Republican lawmakers give voice to fear that new voting restrictions could work against their own party

Also see (January 2022): What the federal voting-rights bill successfully filibustered this week by Senate Republicans aimed to achieve

And (January 2022): Arizona Democrats censure Sinema for blocking voting-rights bill with filibuster inflexibility

In Texas, a state former President Donald Trump easily won although by a smaller margin than 2016, the trouble of navigating new rules was felt in counties big and small, red and blue. But the rejection rate was higher in counties that lean Democratic (15.1%) than Republican (9.1%).

The unusually high rejection rate to start Americas midterm election season is expected to put more attention on changes to the ballot box elsewhere in the country. Texass election was the debut of more restrictive voting rules the GOP raced to put on the books across the U.S. in time for the midterm elections, a push that took particular aim at mail voting that soared in popularity during the pandemic.

At least 17 other states in the coming months will cast ballots under tougher election laws, in part driven by Trumps baseless and persistent claims of rampant fraud in the 2020 election. The rejected ballots in Texas alone far exceeds the hundreds of even possible voter fraud cases the AP has previously identified in six battleground states that Trump disputed.

From the archives (December 2021): Swing-state Republicans full steam ahead on reviews of 2020

Also (April 2021): Pressure mounts on corporations to denounce Republican voting bills

Plus (February 2022): Comcast, Goldman Sachs resume donations to some Republicans who objected to election results

The AP counted 22,898 rejected ballots across Texas by contacting all 254 counties and obtaining final vote reconciliation reports. Some smaller counties did not provide data or respond to requests, but the 187 counties that provided full numbers to AP accounted for 85% of the 3 million people who voted in the primary.

Last week, AP reported that 27,000 ballots had been flagged in Texas for initial rejection, meaning those voters still had time to fix their ballot for several days after the primary and have it count. But the final figures suggest most voters did not.

The most rejections were around Houston, a Democratic stronghold, where Harris County elections officials reported that nearly 7,000 mail ballots about 19% were discarded. During the last midterm elections in 2018, Texass largest county only rejected 135 mail ballots. Harris County elections officials said they received more than 8,000 calls since January from voters seeking help, which they attributed to confusion and frustration over the new requirements.

Dont miss (March 2021):Voting rights an intensifying partisan battleground, as Democrats push H.R. 1 and Republicans alter election procedures at state level

In the five counties won by Trump that had the most mail-in primary voters, a combined 2,006 mailed ballots were rejected, a rate of 10% of the total. In the counties won by Biden with the most mail-in voters, which include most of Texas biggest cities, a combined 14,020 votes were similarly rejected, which amounted to 15.7%.

In rural East Texas, Annette Young voted by mail like usual but received a surprising letter a week after the primary, informing her that the ballot never counted because it didnt comply with a new state law requiring mail voters to include personal identification numbers.

I just threw it right in the trash, she said.

Most of the rejected ballots, according to county election officials and the Texas secretary of state, failed to adhere to the new identification requirements. The changes were part of the sweeping overhaul to Texas elections that Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law in October, saying at the time that no one who is eligible to vote will be denied the opportunity to vote.

Abbott and top Texas Republicans who championed the changes have largely been silent about the high rejection rates. Abbotts office did not respond to requests seeking comment, and messages for Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Republican House Speaker Dade Phelan also went unanswered.

Republican state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, a proponent of the changes, said in an email that one issue might have been that ballot instructions printed in different ink colors red for signature, black for identification numbers might have left voters with the wrong impression they did not need to provide both.

Federal data on discarded mail ballots in general elections show few instances of double-digit rejection rates. The outliers include Indiana (14.5%) in 2006, Oregon (12.7%) in 2010 and New York (13.7%) in 2018, according to records from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

Stewart, of MIT, said generally less is known about trends in primary elections because of lacking data. One assumption, he said, is that because primaries tend to draw the most habitual voters, they are less likely to mistakes that cause rejections.

But Stewart said others believe that officials may have more time to scrutinize, and reject, ballot paperwork in low-turnout elections.

The new mail ballot requirements in Texas include listing an identification number either a drivers license or a Social Security number on the ballots carrier envelope. That number must match the countys records, and if a ballot is rejected, voters are given the opportunity to supply the missing information or simply cast a ballot in person instead.

It is unknown how many Texas voters whose mail ballots were rejected may have still had their vote count by deciding to just show up in person instead.

Sam Taylor, a spokesman for the Texas secretary of state, said the office did not yet have its own final comprehensive numbers on ballot rejections. He said a significant portion of their efforts this year will be awareness about the new mail-in rules.

We are confident we will have all the information we need to apply any lessons learned during the primary to an even more robust voter education campaign heading into the November general election, he said.

Delores Tarver Smith, 87, took no chances with a mail ballot this year. She applied in Harris County for a mail ballot Feb. 1, but when none arrived before the election, she voted in person.

Last Wednesday more than a week after the primary her absentee ballot finally showed up at her home. I had to make sure my vote counted, she said.

From the archives (January 2022): Democrats more drawn to fine-tuning Electoral Count Act of 1887 after failure this week of ambitious voting-rights legislation

Read on (April 2021): More than half of Americans support open access to early and absentee voting, but nearly a third disagree

Visit link:

Republican overhaul of Texas voting procedures has caused a spike in rejected ballots - MarketWatch

Eight Republicans voted against legislation to revoke normal trade relations with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine in a Thursday vote.

The eight were on the other end of a lopsided 424-8 vote to punish Moscow with the removal of normal trade relations. The legislation would raise tariffs on imports from Russia and Belarus, which has backed Moscow's bombardment of Ukraine.

It would also givePresident BidenJoe BidenRepublican senators introduce bill to ban Russian uranium imports Energy & Environment Ruling blocking climate accounting metric halted Fauci says officials need more than .5B for COVID-19 response MORE power to impose even stricter taxes on their goods.

The eight GOP "no" votes were Reps. Marjorie Taylor GreeneMarjorie Taylor GreeneGOP efforts to downplay danger of Capitol riot increase The Memo: What now for anti-Trump Republicans? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene says she's meeting with Trump 'soon' in Florida MORE (Ga.),Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzCongress must strengthen protections against insider trading by its members and their families Far left, far right find common ground opposing US interventionism The 17 lawmakers who voted against the Russian oil ban MORE (Fla.), Lauren BoebertLauren Boebert16 House Republicans vote against bill to promote education on internment camps Five things to watch for during Zelensky's address to Congress Far left, far right find common ground opposing US interventionism MORE (Colo.),Thomas MassieThomas Harold Massie16 House Republicans vote against bill to promote education on internment camps Far left, far right find common ground opposing US interventionism The 17 lawmakers who voted against the Russian oil ban MORE (Ky.),Andy Biggs (Ariz.),Dan Bishop (N.C.),Glenn GrothmanGlenn S. GrothmanFar left, far right find common ground opposing US interventionism The 17 lawmakers who voted against the Russian oil ban Overnight Defense & National Security Russia throws curveball with troop withdrawal MORE (Wis.) andChip RoyCharles (Chip) Eugene Roy16 House Republicans vote against bill to promote education on internment camps Congress must strengthen protections against insider trading by its members and their families Far left, far right find common ground opposing US interventionism MORE (Texas).

All eight Republicans in the House who voted against the anti-war measure have made it a point to stand out in the far-right wing of the GOP and have been holding tight to former President TrumpDonald TrumpGOP talking point could turn to Biden's 'underwhelming' Russia response House Oversight Committee opens investigation into New Mexico 2020 election audit Hunter Biden paid off tax liability amid ongoing grand jury investigation: report MORE as he plots a potential run for president in 2024.

Greene, in a video posted online, said she couldn't support the U.S. intervention in the war because Americans have more pressing issues.

If we truly care about suffering and death on our television screens, we cannot fund more of it by sending money and weaponry to Ukraine to fight a war they cannot possibly win," she said. "The only effect, more arms and more money from America will be to prolong the war and magnify human suffering."

She bemoaned the attention that Ukraine has received as the Kremlin's attacks have escalated.

"All were hearing is potential war with Russia over Ukraine," she said on the House floor. "Ukraine is not a NATO member ally and President Biden had told them we would only be standing with our NATO member allies."

The vote came just after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made a virtual plea to Congress for more assistance, as thousands have died in the ongoing war.

Massie said on Twitter that he thought the legislation granted too much power to the president to sanction other countries.

Gaetz last month expressed frustration over Americans providing financial assistance for the war.

"Why should Americans have to pay the costs for freedom elsewhere when our own leaders won't stand up for our freedom here?" Gaetz said during the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Fla.

See more here:

Here are the eight Republicans who voted against ending normal trade relations with Russia | TheHill - The Hill

The New Jersey Republican Party announced today that Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under the administration of President Donald Trump, will deliver the keynote address at the state GOPs annual leadership summit next week in Atlantic City.

We are thrilled to welcome Dr. Carson to gain insight into both his time in Washington and his views on the road ahead for the GOP, party chairman Bob Hugin said in an email announcing Carsons address.

The conference, which will run from the afternoon of March 25 to the evening of March 26, will also feature most of the states most prominent Republicans, including Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-Dennis), Rep. Chris Smith (R-Hamilton), congressional candidate and former Senate Minority Leader Tom Kean Jr. (R-Westfield), both current minority leaders in the state legislature, and a large number of other Republican elected officials and strategists.

See original here:

Ben Carson will give keynote address at NJ Republican summit - New Jersey Globe | New Jersey Politics

Like most presidents, Donald Trump changed the political party he led. But Trump was hardly a normal president.

That was apparent while Trump was president, but in many ways thats even easier to understand now that he is out of office. Unlike previous presidents, Trump has refused to take a step back from the limelight. Instead, he has continued to try and be the partys kingmaker, playing a far more active role in the 2022 primaries than he did in 2018 and 2020. His endorsements have gotten bolder and more aggressive down ballot, and hes often used them to root out those who oppose him or his false claims about the 2020 election results.

He also still commands considerable personal loyalty among voters within the party. But as Ive written before, there is evidence that the alliance between Republicans and Trump is uneasy, and it could test how much clout he carries in the party. To be sure, that doesnt mean we should expect Republicans to break from Trump en masse, but nevertheless, there are signs that both Trumps style and ideas are evolving as other politicians take them up and inevitably change them.

In the last few years, a number of ambitious politicians have established a national name for themselves by claiming the Trumpist mantle all while offering voters their own interpretations of Trump-style conservatism. This group includes governors like Ron DeSantis of Florida and Glenn Youngkin of Virginia; senators like Ted Cruz of Texas and Josh Hawley of Missouri; and even erstwhile members of the Trump administration like former Vice President Mike Pence and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley.

Though a few of these figures, like Cruz and Haley, had national ambitions prior to the Trump era, many became national figures starting in 2016 and thus created political profiles inextricably linked to Trump. Lets take a look, then, at how these aspiring GOP leaders are reinventing or resisting Trumpism and what this might mean for the future of the Republican Party.

The first category of note is politicians who have tried to distance themselves from Trumps political style without really rejecting any of his views. The most prominent example of a GOP politician in this group is probably Youngkin, whose November 2021 victory in the Virginia gubernatorial race could serve as a model for Trump-style candidates running in purple states. What remains to be seen is whether this type of Trumpian politician will be any more successful at governing than Trump was. Youngkins administration so far has veered to the right and relied heavily on culture war tactics like going after critical race theory in schools, which hasnt proved popular among voters in the state. Its possible that this approach isnt a political winner in a purple state, even when the Democratic brand is struggling.

Some Republicans have gone further than Youngkin, though, explicitly trying to separate loyalty to Trump and his policy positions from believing in the Big Lie, the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Former New Jersey Gov. and Trump transition leader Chris Christie, who has also criticized Trumps general approach to politics, has said, for instance, that the Republican Party needs to move on from false beliefs about the last presidential election. He also recently told conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt that Trump incited the Jan. 6 riot.

Pence has also publicly contradicted Trump, suggesting that Trump was wrong to claim that the vice president could overturn the results when Congress met to count the Electoral College votes. Hes also repudiated Trumps embrace of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Meanwhile, Haley has tried to strike more of a middle-of-the-road approach, criticizing Pences rebuke of Trump while maintaining publicly that Biden won the 2020 election. In other words, theres a not-so-insubstantial faction of Republicans trying to split the difference when it comes to Trumpism. They derive some of their national stature from their affiliation with Trump but disavow some of his more extreme positions.

Some Republicans, though, have broken even more decisively with Trump. Members of this group vary in their relationship to Trumps legislative agenda some actually backed core components of his policy goals but theyre nonetheless distinct from others in the party in that theyre not trying to reinterpret Trumpism; rather, theyre aiming to distance themselves from it. Some prominent Republicans who fall into this group include Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

A key distinction, though, between these figures and Republicans like Christie, Pence or Haley is that its even harder to imagine any of the former entering or gaining traction in a GOP presidential primary. The presence of a more outwardly anti-Trump faction is still significant, though, as it raises questions about the viability of the larger party coalition. Currently, it appears that members of this group will be ostracized. For instance, Cheney and Kinzinger have been censured by the Republican National Committee. Cheney also lost her leadership position for her comments about the 2020 election and support for Trumps second impeachment, and Kinzinger, who also supported Trumps second impeachment, isnt seeking reelection.

Finally, the polar opposite of the firmly anti-Trump group are those in the party who seem to be trying to out-Trump Trump, or leaning into the most bombastic reimagining of Trumpism possible. This group most prominently includes DeSantis, who has tried to establish himself as the 2024 front-runner of this wing of the party. As such, he has positioned himself as a leading figure in the GOPs fight to curtail abortion rights and LGBTQ rights and voting rights. He has even criticized Trump from his right, saying in January that he regretted not speaking out in 2020 against Trumps COVID-19 recommendations.

In Congress, this group includes legislators like Sen. Ron Johnson and Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Madison Cawthorn and Paul Gosar. Trying to out-Trump Trump has a lot of different expressions, but among this group of Republicans, it broadly refers to their attitudes toward COVID-19, the 2020 election and electoral democracy in general. This groups rise to prominence illustrates the appeal of a constituency for an even more extreme version of Trumpism. That said, its not clear how broad the appeal is Greene faces several primary challengers (though she is likely to keep her seat) and is unpopular nationally. Meanwhile, Johnsons popularity in his home state of Wisconsin has declined since 2020, and he is up for reelection in November.

At this point, there is a lot of uncertainty about what the post-Trump Republican coalition will look like moving forward. Its possible that the GOP is now completely dominated by one individual, as evidenced by the purge of those who pushed back on the 45th presidents fraudulent claims that the election was stolen from him. But there are still other voices in the party, including some that have pushed back on some aspects of Trumpism.

In fact, if the largest group of Republicans prove to be that which seeks to reinterpret Trumpism in some way, its possible itll end up wielding a lot of influence in the party. The key question here is whether these Republicans can carve out their own political identities while still drawing on the past president, as Trump and Trumpism now define the the partys factions. This is a common dilemma for politicians after an influential presidency. And it still remains to be seen whether Trumpism is open to reinterpretation by others, or whether, as is often the case in highly personal political movements, the ideology proves impossible to separate from the leader.

In 2021, political scientist Hans Noel wrote that Republicans could agree to disagree about democracy, citing the need for parties to form broad coalitions in the U.S. political system and the many historical examples of such coalitions exiting despite deep differences within them. But disagreeing over the basic tenets of democracy might prove too much of an intra-party fissure for Republicans to overcome to form a coalition.

The fact, too, that it is so hard to imagine a post-Trump Republican Party speaks to just how successful Trump has been in seizing control of the party, whether its from election officials at the state and local level or from the RNC. And its perhaps the biggest reason why in 2024, as was the case in 2016, a well-known but divisive figure including Trump himself might once again step in and fill the void.

Go here to see the original:

How Republicans Are Thinking About Trumpism Without Trump - FiveThirtyEight

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had another moment that lit up the right, this time pushing back against Disneys critique of the so-called Dont Say Gay bill.

In his statement, DeSantis was absolutely stalwart, saying that the chances are zero that hes going to back away from his support for the law. And he didnt hesitate to go on offense against Disney. He said it had made a fortune off being family-friendly so should understand that families dont want inappropriate material injected into the curriculum at schools and smacked the company for making money in China without denouncing the brutal practices of the Chinese Communist Party.

DeSantis had been equally forthright a few days earlier, contesting the dishonest Dont Say Gay characterization by a reporter at a news conference. Its why people dont trust people like you, the governor said, because you peddle fake narratives, and so we disabuse you of those narratives.

This is the voice of the new Republican Party.

Which is not to say that the party wasnt socially conservative before (George W. Bush ran against gay marriage in 2004), or that it didnt criticize the media (one of George H.W. Bushs best moments in 1988 was slamming Dan Rather during a live interview). But theres a new combativeness that is clearly a reflection of how Trump underlined the power of cultural issues and changed the rules around how you deal with controversy by doubling down and hitting back harder.

Perhaps DeSantis would be just as inclined to rumble if Donald Trump had never emerged Chris Christie, for instance, had considerable success with a bring it on attitude toward criticisms during his governorship.

What feels new, though, is the zest for combat on cultural issues, as well as a willingness to bring to bear public power to the fight where possible (government has every right to control what is and isnt taught in government schools).

Theres also a complete intolerance for playing along with false media narratives.

And, lastly, theres zero hesitation to stand up to corporations siding with the left in policy disputes. It seemed several years ago in the debates over religious-freedom restorations acts at the state level that corporations held the whip hand over state officials. Not anymore. Not after Republicans have learned that the appropriate response to such pressure is, No. Hell, no.

If this new approach draws on Trump, it should vitiate one of the arguments long made for Trump: At least he fights. Now, the party is full of people who want to fight in a broadly similar fashion however, with important differences from Trump.

In the Dont Say Gay controversy, DeSantis isnt relitigating what happened in the last election; he is freshly litigating a defense against a cutting-edge progressive cause.

He isnt defending the indefensible; hes defending the eminently defensible, in fact the unfairly maligned.

He isnt dragging anyone through a fight occasioned by his personal failings or dubious practices; hes standing up for a well-considered conservative initiative.

And he isnt jousting with reporters who know more about the contested topic than he does; no, on this and pretty much everything else, he knows more than any of his antagonists.

So, DeSantis opens up a vista offering an important element of Trumpism without the baggage or selfishness of Trump.

The same can be said of Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton. He gave a speech the other day at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library that thoughtfully integrated Trumpian populist themes with traditional GOP thinking.

Here is another vista, of a policy vision with a strong element of Trumpism that might have broad appeal to GOP voters of all stripes without the distracting obsessions of the former president.

This gets at what could be one of the most persuasive arguments to Republican voters for Trump not running again not that he needs to go away so the old party can be restored, but that hes unnecessary because a new party has emerged.

(Rich Lowry is editor-in-chief of National Review.)

Read this article:

Ron DeSantis and the new Republican Party | Opinion | oleantimesherald.com - Olean Times Herald

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- I recognize the right to bear arms, and for me to whine about how shortsighted Ohioans are on this constitutional right is to pick a fight that cant be won.

In the 1700s, the right made sense. An armed militia had a duty that served and protected. Nowadays, firearms that people can readily buy at Walmart seem out of sync with contemporary mores.

But some safeguards had been in place till now.

Gov. Mike DeWine signed legislation Monday that loosened the restrictions on gun ownership. Recreating in Ohio the Wild West days of Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday, DeWine thought it wise to allow a person over the age of 21 to carry a concealed handgun without a permit.

The legislation the governor OKd also eliminated the requirement that a person take classes to obtain a gun permit. People can walk into a gun shop, show ID and then slide that Glock 19 they bought into their waistband.

This is what we get in feckless politicians like DeWine and from state legislators who govern year-round. Their idle minds find ways to make mischief and awaken a political base, and what better way to do that than stoking fears about crime and how to protect ourselves against it?

Stand-your-ground legislation is one thing; having two people stand their ground with handguns is a different proposition altogether.

Tuning out those who knew better, DeWine and Republicans trampled the concerns of local cops and county sheriffs. The Fraternal Order of Police, predicting a rise in violent crime, had opposed the legislation.

One Democrat in the Ohio Senate called the law anti-public safety and anti-police.

He was right.

To put a face to such concerns, critics of the law Im one of them need only recount the tale of the off-duty police officer killed on New Years Eve in a West Side carjacking.

Charged in his death was an 18-year-old woman who should not have had a handgun in her possession. We know she had no problem finding one.

Various sources put the number of guns at 393 million in homes and other places in America, enough to ensure every person has one. In 2021, gun deaths topped 20,000, and deaths from bullet wounds continue to pile up in 2022.

What the totals suggest is that guns dont make the U.S. safer; they make it deadlier.

I suspect Clevelanders who support open carry and freer access to guns will trumpet the fact murders here dipped from 179 in 2020 to 165 last year, ignoring two salient points: covid isolation and the fact the 21 total was still the second highest in decades.

Lawmakers had to have heard bullets ricocheting in Columbus as well. The city recorded more gun deaths in 2021 than in 2020.

Gun ownership is an obsession of Ohioans. Many cling to this constitutional right; few of them apologize for standing behind the Second Amendment, 26 well-chosen words unseen in the governing principles of fellow democracies.

Jefferson, Hancock & Co. followed no blueprint in penning these magnificent words, which reflect a pioneers soul.

Their handiwork, however, needs revision. For nobody wants to see shootouts that mirror the O.K. Corral.

Im unsurprised DeWine disregarded the carnage handguns left on Black lives. But did he forget the lives in blue?

Let me answer: Yes.

Justice B. Hill grew up on the citys East Side. He practiced journalism for more than 25 years before settling into teaching at Ohio University. He quit May 15, 2019, to write and globetrot. Hes doing both.

Justice Hill, columnist for cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer. January 14, 2022. - Justice Hill, columnist for cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer David Petkiewcz, cleveland.comDavid Petkiewcz, cleveland.com

Read the original:

Gov. DeWine and Republican lawmakers trampled police concerns over law that will transform Ohio into Wild We - cleveland.com

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

The rest is here:

Pick the real Republican in District 2 House race - The Herald Journal

Patsy Hazlewood has been busily killing or trying to kill - good pieces of Conservative legislation and often finds herself voting with Democrats more than Republicans.

Here are three examples. I could give you more, but I have work to do...

Hazlewood recently voted against a bill that would secure freedom of speech for Conservatives in Tennessee by banning censorship on social media platforms that function as a de facto monopoly. I suppose she does not realize that Conservative voices, candidates and causes are being silenced, censored and banned.

This social media censorship bill passed yesterday despite her opposition.

She voted recently against a bill that would have ended vaccine passports in entertainment venues if those venues receive your tax dollars. I suppose she thinks Republicans with natural immunity or religious objections should fall in line and receive a medical treatment against their will even though we know vaccination does not stop transmission of COVID-19.

his religious and medical freedom bill was killed by her and a handful of other RINOs.

Hazlewood also voted against transparency in school board races, so constituents would know if those running for office were Republicans or Democrats. Apparently, all the forced masking of children, endless quarantining, critical race theory instruction and sexualization of our children pushed by the left isnt something shes worried about. Not something she has noticed as a problem.

This also passed, without her support.

Now, tell me this: Whats the point of running as a Republican if you vote like a Democrat when it really matters most?

Republicans need to pay closer attention to those who glad-hand at GOP events, yet go to Nashville and actively work against the Conservative agenda.

Someone needs to run against Hazelwood in the next available primary before she does more damage to our county and state.

Almost any random Republican with a pulse would be closer to the will of the Republican primary voter.

When you see Patsy out and about, ask her about these votes. Or, better yet, email and call her office. Many do few receive replies.

If you get a reply, please let me know how she justifies her actions.

Brandon Lewis

* * *

Maybe Mrs. Hazlewoods votes as a whole, while not as conservative as youd like, are closer to the Overton Window than yours are.

Mike Willingham

* * *

Knowing that Rep. Patsy Hazlewood is a person of great character and integrity, I believe she considers all sides of an issue in a non-partisan way and votes her conscience which well serves all her constituency and not any one specific group. She is worthy of our trust and gratitude for her years of service.

Lynda Walker

View original post here:

The Sad Truth: Patsy Hazlewood's Anti-Republican Voting Record - And Response (2) - The Chattanoogan