Category Archives: Democrat

When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky spoke to members of Congress on Wednesday and pointedly highlighted President 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 MOREs role in helping to stop the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, some Democrats worried that he was handing Republicans a new talking point.

Despite there being an uncommon bipartisanship in Washington for wanting to help the Ukrainians, Republicans have tried for months to drive a narrative of Biden being a weak leader, and Zelenskys words, even Democrats acknowledge, could become fodder in the midterm election season.

I think its a very real possibility, said one Democratic strategist. I know we keep saying were doing everything we can, but clearly theres a lot more we could be doing, and Im not just talking about sending in troops.

You could easily see Republicans making hay out of it, the strategist added.

During the final moments of his virtual speech to lawmakers on Wednesday, Zelensky switched to English for emphasis when speaking directly to Biden: You are the leader of the nation, of your great nation. I wish you to be the leader of the world. Being the leader of the world means to be the leader of peace.

Since the start of the Russian invasion last month, Democrats and Republicans have been more united on Ukraine than any other issue in recent memory. During Bidens State of the Union address, for example, supportfor the war-torn country was one of the few issues that received rousing applause from both sides of the aisle.

But some Republicans have tried to cast Biden as weak in his response to the crisis and continued to do so after Zelenskys address to lawmakers in the Capitol.

Sen. John KennedyJohn Neely KennedyLouisiana Democrat running for US Senate smokes marijuana in campaign ad MORE (R-La.) accused Biden of having a Bambis baby brother moment, while Sen. John CornynJohn CornynGOP talking point could turn to Biden's 'underwhelming' Russia response Capito to make Senate GOP leadership bid Graham to meet with Biden's Supreme Court pick Tuesday MORE (R-Texas) said, The Biden administrations timidity in the face of this evil needs to end.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellGOP talking point could turn to Biden's 'underwhelming' Russia response The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - What now after Zelensky's speech? Capito to make Senate GOP leadership bid MORE (R-Ky.) said following the Ukrainian presidents address that Biden needed to step up his game, a day after singling out what he dubbed the administrations hesitancy and weakness in the face of Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinRepublican senators introduce bill to ban Russian uranium imports Hillicon Valley Invasion complicates social media policy Defense & National Security Blinken details Russia's possible next steps MORE.

Putin has not pulled his punches as a thank you to President Biden for pulling his punches, McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor Tuesday.

The conservative-leaning New York Post also ran a headline: In lesson for Biden, Zelensky shows what true leadership looks like.

Republican strategist John Feehery, a contributor to The Hill, said Zelenskys comments do dovetail with the Republican narrative forming around Biden on the issue of Russia-Ukraine.

I think there will be a lot of Republicans who ask for the White House to be more forceful based on Zelenskys comments, Feehery said. The president hasnt been very forceful and throughout this whole thing he had decent intelligence and they didnt do anything about it. He said were going to do sanctions and they kind of sucked. Everything is underwhelming.

Republicans will jump on this, Feehery continued. I think Biden is, in many ways, congratulating himself for his restraint and the aid hes given, but its cold comfort to the Ukrainians.

Feehery added that it isnt a closed question about how Republicans handle Bidens perceived weakness on Ukraine in the months ahead.

Usually in wartime, the country comes together and the president gets a boost, and I dont think it's happening this time, he said. The country has come together but Biden hasnt gotten a boost, and I think it's because he's leading from behind.

Still, Biden has gotten relatively strong public support for his handling of the Ukraine situation and particularly his responses to Russia such as imposing sanctions.

A Pew Research Center survey released earlier this week found that 47 percent of Americans polled approve of the Biden administrations handling of the Russian invasion, while 39 percent disapprove and 13 percent are unsure. A whopping 85 percent of surveyed Americans support maintaining strict economic sanctions on Russia, the survey found.

Biden responded to Zelenskys address Wednesday by announcing a robust shipment of military assistance to Ukraine, including drones, small arms,and anti-aircraft systems, and he said his administration is helping Ukraine acquire longer range air defense systems.

Meanwhile, the administration has thus far resisted calls to send to Soviet-made fighter jets to Ukraine due to the possibility of it escalating the conflict, and the U.S. and NATO have rejected Zelenskys pleas for a no-fly zone for similar reasons.

How President Biden makes decisions is through the prism of our own national security, White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiHealth Care Pelosi shoots higher on COVID-19 funding Defense & National Security Blinken details Russia's possible next steps Biden says US is open to help Ukrainian refugees MORE told reporters during a briefing Wednesday. And as we've said before, a no-fly zone would require implementation, it would require us potentially shooting down Russian planes, NATO shooting down Russian planes. And we are not interested in getting into World War III.

Republicans have also had to grapple with divisions in their party over how to handle Putin, after four years during which 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 talked warmly of the Russian leader. Many GOP lawmakers have pushed back on Trumps more recent comments about Putin being smart and savvy. Trump was also impeached in 2019 for withholding military aid from Ukraine as he sought an investigation into Biden and his son.

Some say Republicans need to tread lightly in their criticisms of Biden.

I think Republicans need to walk a careful line between showing Putin that our country is united while criticizing Bidens approach, added Alex Conant, a Republican strategist. Thats why most of the criticism has been very muted to date.

Republican strategist Doug Heye said its possible Zelenskys words about Biden could come up in political ads.

But he said its dependent on two things: Events in Ukraine and what Congress is willing to do.

So far, he said, in the early days of the war, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has only come up in one ad in a North Carolina Senate GOP primary and is focused on a candidates words about Putin.

Others in the GOP say its unlikely that Republicans delve into that territory.

One never ceases to be amazed at the imagination of attack ads, but I doubt Zelenskys clarion call for U.S. assistance will redound to Bidens disadvantage, said Richard Fontaine, the chief executive officer at the Center for a New American Security who served as a foreign policy adviser to the late Sen. John McCainJohn Sidney McCainGOP talking point could turn to Biden's 'underwhelming' Russia response Graham invokes McCain in latest call to take out Putin Juan Williams: Biden must rebut GOP attacks on war MORE (R-Ariz.). The reality is that the administration has done a great deal for Ukraine and is prepared to do even more.

Anyone casting the response as somehow weak should specify what theyd do instead and the benefits and risks that alternative proposals would generate, Fontaine added. Otherwise its just empty criticism.

Continue reading here:

Democrats worry Zelensky offered GOP key talking point | TheHill - The Hill

When I was growing up in the 2000s, the Republican party was associated with a muscular foreign policywhat George W. Bush in his second inaugural address dubbed the concerted effort of free nations to promote democracy. Democrats, on the other hand, tended to put more faith in diplomacy and international organizations, believing that soft power was more effective.

For two or three generationssince Eugene McCarthys challenge in 1968, probablythese views of foreign affairs were a more or less consistent cleavage between the parties. The Taftian isolationism that had long ago been a major strain of GOP thought had never entirely disappeared, but it had shrunk considerably, and post-Reagan, post-Gulf War, post-9/11 Republicans tended to believe that the United States should use its power to preserve the liberal global order and to protect democracies. Post-9/11 Democrats, more skeptical about how American power could be used effectively and morally, tended to prefer what one Obama adviser called leading from behind.

How things have changed.

Two focus groups I recently observed with Republicans and Democrats from Texas suggested the ways in which the parties have been undergoing a realignment on foreign policy.

Here are some statements from members of the two groups. Try to guess which is the Republican group and which is the Democratic group.

Heres the first Texas group, where six of the ten participants were in favor of sending American troops to Ukraine.

Moderator: What would the situation there need to look like for everybody, personally, to feel comfortable or want to send troops over? Nobodys brought that up.

Texas Voter 1: I would have already.

Texas Voter 2: I think he should have done a preemptive thing. As soon as they started doing it, he should have done it. . . .

Texas Voter 1: Bullies are gonna bully until theyre stopped.

Texas Voter 3: Exactly. Yeah.

And heres the other Texas group, where only three of nine were in favor of sending troops to Ukraine:

Texas Voter 4: When you go into battle, you look at the enemy. Hes got 100,000 troops waiting to invade Ukraine with everything under the sun, except nuclear. What would Biden send? 2,000? 5,000? Against 100,000. Im opposed to our young men getting slaughtered. And thats what it would be if it was a war. . . .

Texas Voter 5: I do agree with that, yes. . . .

Texas Voter 6: I was just gonna say, I think we should support Ukraine with troops, temporarily. And I emphasize that word temporarily because I think we have to call Putins bluff. I think its a bluff myself.

Texas Voter 7: I do too.

At this point Im sure you can guess the trick: The hawkish first group was made up of Democrats, and the more dovish second group was the Republicans.

These trends have been developing for a while. A Pew analysis from 2019 showed a steady reversal in what had been the dominant Republican and Democratic attitudes on foreign policy:

Today, the Republican partys leader calls Vladimir Putin a genius and whitewashes his carnage in Ukraine as the strongest peace force Ive ever seen. Meanwhile, the Democratic party is led by a president who, unlike his predecessor, did not hesitate to call Putin a killer and helped assemble the free world to enact crippling sanctions on the Russian economy.

Its a strange shift.

Podcast March 18 2022

Sarah and JVL talk about free speech, cancel culture, and whether or not we have

But the strangest change from the politics of the 2000s is that prominent Republicans and conservativesmajor figures in the pro-Trump righthave turned out to be actively pro-Putin. From Tucker Carlson becoming a Kremlinpropaganda fixture to Candace Owens regurgitating Putins propaganda about Ukrainian history to Madison Cawthornsuggesting that Volodymyr Zelensky is a thug, the rhetoric of the right has clearly shifted away from support for a foreign policy explicitly promoting human dignity in the face of an authoritarian Russian regime.

But to what extent are the views of those conservative elites also held by rank-and-file Republicans? Lets turn to the data.

In anAP-NORC poll conducted in mid-Februarythat is, just prior to the invasion of Ukraine22 percent of Republican respondents thought the United States should play a major role in the Ukraine conflict. For Democrats, the number was 32 percent.

A post-invasion Navigator survey of registered voters conducted from March 3 to March 7 found that Democrats were more supportive than Republicans of sanctions on Russia and of sending Ukraine military aid including arms and air support:

The Navigator survey showed that Republicans and Democrats alike held unfavorable views of Russia and Putin and favorable views of Ukraine and Zelensky.

A Pew poll conducted last week appears to suggest that Republicans may be returning to their post-9/11 outlook, finding that 49 percent of Republican respondents believed the United States was not providing enough support to Ukraine, compared to Democrats who felt the same at 38 percent:

To some extent, Republican views of U.S. policy toward Ukraine must be understood through a partisan lens rather than an ideological one. The Pew poll found that 67 percent of all Republicans, including 74 percent of all conservative Republicans, disapproved of the Biden administrations response, compared to 17 percent among Democrats. Which raises the question of what, then, Republicans are in favor of doing that the Biden administration is not already doing?

Not sending troops. In a Monmouth University poll conducted from March 10 to March 14, 78 percent of Democrats say they are in favor of sending troops to support our European allies as a deterrent to keep Russia from invading those countries, compared to 65 percent of Republicans. This backs up a striking finding from the Navigator poll: Democrats had a much more favorable view of NATO than Republicans, by 50 to 24. The Pew poll, too, found more Democrats than Republicans favoring a large U.S. military presence in NATO countries neighboring Ukraine.

As far as sending troops to fight specifically in Ukraine, the Monmouth poll showed Democrats almost evenly split, with 46 percent in support and 49 percent opposed. But among Republicans, only 37 percent say they support deploying troops to Ukraine, while 62 percent are against.

Imagine going back in time to 2003 and telling Dick Cheney or Trent Lott that in about twenty years, more Democrats than Republicans would want to deploy U.S. troops abroad in response to a major foreign crisis. Theyd think you were crazy.

Some of this shift can be chalked up to the partisanship surrounding Russia that went along with the Trump era. But there are deeper forces at work, too, having to do with the aftermath of the 9/11 era, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the changing nature of our political coalitions.

Because of those forcesand because of how Donald Trump remade the GOPRepublican voters abandoned their longstanding commitments to free trade, small government, public morality, and the rule of law.

The crisis in Ukraine can be seen as a test of how entirely Republicans have abandoned muscular foreign policy as well.

Continue reading here:

Democrats Are Now the Party of American Leadership in the World - The Bulwark

Austin, TX On Saturday, March 19, Democrats across Texas will set the stage for one of the biggest showdowns in Texas politics, the 2022 midterm election. The Democratic County and Senate District conventions will bring together County party chairs, precinct chairs , candidates, elected officials, and activists to unite behind themission of winning in November.

Important party business will be discussed, resolutions for Democratic state platform will be submitted, state delegates will be elected, and mobilization strategies will be determined as Democrats gear up for a big fight in November. Our Democratic County Conventions will pave the way for the Texas Democratic Party Convention on July 14-16 where Texas Democrats will elect a slate of Democratic leaders who reflect our Texas values and who will fight to better serve all Texans.

Texas Democratic Party Chair Gilberto Hinojosa issued the following statement:

Texas Democrats are mobilized and ready to win! And from now until November, we are preparing at all levels to make sure Texans are heard and that they finally get the leadership they deserve.

Because our fight to take back Texas starts with our local precincts and counties, our county conventions are a critical part of laying the groundwork for a winning slate, and a strong platform.

Saturdays meetings will set the foundation for our state party convention in July, where we will again come together in full force to work towards electing Democrats up and down the ballot in November 2022.

###

Originally posted here:

Democrats Across the State will Unite at This Year's 2022 Democratic County and Senate District Conventions - Texas Democratic Party

The Biden Administration has just passed an executive order furthering research into crypto assets in view of regulating them, but politicians within the ruling Democrat party remain deeply divided on digital currency.

The lack of consensus among Democrats could mean that a progressive regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies could still be a long way off but also makes it more likely the eventual regulations wont be too harsh thanks to the work of crypto-friendly representatives. The crypto community is familiar with the names cropping up time and time again in the digital asset debate.

On the one side, you have vehemently anti-crypto politicians such as Democrat Senators Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown, and in the pro-innovation camp are the likes of Democrat Congress members Ritchie Torres and Jim Himes.

The division runs deep, and political wrangling could further delay any regulatory processes in the United States.

Senator Warren recently crafted a bill to restrict crypto exchanges to prevent digital assets from being used for sanctions evasion. However, it has been widely reported that Russia will not switch to cryptocurrencies to circumvent sanctions, even if so individual Russians do.

Warren has continued her war on crypto with letters to the Treasury urging further crackdowns on the industry. According to reports, she recently criticized the banking system, adding in reference crypto:

Fortunately, several Democrat lawmakers favor the crypto industry and the innovation it will bring to the U.S. financial system. One such policymaker is New York representative Ritchie Torres who said, the project of radically decentralizing the internet and finance strikes me as a profoundly progressive cause, before adding:

Related: Bidens executive order promises great things for the crypto industry Eventually

Democrat Josh Gottheimer, who represents New Jersey, has pushed plans to regulate cryptocurrencies and stablecoins. Last month, he put forward the Stablecoin Innovation and Protection Act, stating at the time that the expansion of cryptocurrency offers tremendous potential value for our economy.

Four Democrats put their names to a bipartisan letter sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 16. Gottheimer, and Torres signed of course, along with Florida representative Darren Soto and Massachusetts Congressman Jake Auchincloss.

Republican congressman Tom Emmer drafted the letter, which was also signed by three other Republicans, addressing the issue of overburdening crypto companies with excessive reporting requests and increased scrutiny of the industry by the agency.

View original post here:

Democrat division over crypto isnt all bad news for regulation - Cointelegraph

What Cheney doesnt know until now is that a band of Trump-loving Republicans will be on hand to greet her. They snapped up roughly a quarter of the 350 tickets, at $10 apiece, to give the embattled congresswoman a piece of their minds.

I was here when the Democrats dragged her fathers effigy down a village road behind a truck at one of their rallies, and those are the people who are supporting her now, that shes embraced, an angry Rebecca Cloetta, 66, said over breakfast at a greasy spoon called the Virginian.

Can you believe it? Charging for a ticket! Its a slap in the face, said Rebecca Bextel, 41, another Trump-backing Republican planning to attend the voting event. We have one person representing us Wyoming has a single House member and she shows up in town and it costs $10 to see her. Its embarrassing.

She is not, Bextel vowed, going to get reelected.

Bextel may well be correct. Though theres been scant public polling of her primary campaign against Trump-backed Harriet Hageman, its apparent that Republicans in Wyoming which voted for Trump over Joe Biden, 70 to 27 percent, in 2020 have turned against Cheney en masse since Jan. 6, 2021.

Republican U.S. House candidate Harriet Hageman talks to a supporter at a campaign event on March 7, 2022, in Cheyenne, Wyo.|Mead Gruver/AP Photo

Just as obvious is that Cheney needs Democrats and independents to change their party registration and cast their vote for her in the Aug. 16 primary. Her campaign is loath to talk strategy publicly, but the math doesnt lie and neither do Cheneys actions on the ground here in recent months.

She has shunned town halls and other voter forums in Wyomings overwhelmingly red counties in favor of controlled events. At the March 22 event, which is being hosted by Issue One, a bipartisan organization that advocates for sweeping reforms to fix our broken political system, Cheney will answer pre-selected questions.

When Cheney was censured by the state Republican Party in February 2021, three of the eight votes against the move were by officials from Teton County, which encompasses Jackson. The dissenters included Mary Martin, now the countys GOP chair.

Since then, however, Martin has soured on Cheney. She said the congresswoman is rarely in the state, despite having been urged to explain why she voted to impeach Trump.

She was absolutely invited to come and present what her facts were, to defend why you are doing this and instead she opted to call the Republicans radicals, which has made people upset within the party, Martin said from the Jackson mansion of Nancy Donovan, a prominent Republican donor in Wyoming.

Shes not in the state, she has not been anywhere, maybe one or two places, Donovan echoed. She doesnt show up shes very entitled. Her parents have events at their house, Ive spent money to go to her house to fund her. I truly will never vote for her again. Donovan and Bextel are both members of Hagemans grassroots leadership team.

Martin went further, calling Cheneys work on the Jan. 6 committee duplicity.

Shes been MIA since Jan. 6. And what we all truly believe is that the Wyoming seat is a stepping stone to running for president in 2024 and she needs to get Trump out of the way. And to raise money, shes using the anti-Trump commentary, Martin speculated.

An empty chair labeled "Representative Cheney" sits in front of a meeting room in Rawlins, Wyo., on Feb. 6, 2021. The Wyoming Republican Party central committee voted to censure Rep. Liz Cheney for voting to impeach President Donald Trump. Republican officials said they invited Cheney, but she didn't attend.|Mead Gruver/AP Photo

Cheney declined to be interviewed for this story. But she told The New York Times last month that she will not openly court Democrats by supporting a Democrats for Cheney group or encourage an existing political action committee, dubbed Switch for Wyoming, that encourages Democrats to vote in Republican primaries.

Without an aggressive campaign strategy to win over Democrats, it might seem like a tough sell: Cheney, after all, voted with Trump 93 percent of the time, according to FiveThirtyEight. But some Democratic voters in Jackson are embracing her. They appreciate Cheneys work in Congress prosecuting Trump and theyre ready to switch parties to vote for her.

Even if theyre not ready to admit it publicly.

I think her politics are crap, but I like how much hate she gets from the people of Wyoming, said a 27-year-old event planner who will register as a Republican for the first time to vote for Cheney. He asked not to be named because its a small town.

There are a lot of things about her that dont appeal to me as a gay man, he said. She was not supportive of her sister until it came out in the news, and that is a big red flag. At the same time, its Wyoming, a population of 500,000. Every vote counts. Wyomings population is just under 579,000, according to U.S. Census figures.

Pete Jenkins, 54, a contractor whos lived in Wyoming for three decades, said he identifies personally as a Democrat he did not vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020 but is registered as a Republican just to have some influence in Wyoming politics. He said he intends to vote for Cheney and has heard from lots of other Democrats planning to do the same.

I think its a fairly popular thing, he said of the party-switchers-for-Cheney movement.

Cheney needs as many of them as she can get.

Wyoming political strategists say the only path to victory for Cheney is with the help of Democrats and independents. The states 2018 Republican primary for an open governors seat is instructive. Mark Gordon, the GOP state treasurer at the time, was facing stiff competition from the right. More than 10,000 voters switched parties or registered as Republicans for the first time between the primary and general elections.

Gordon won the primary by 9,000 votes against candidates that included Hageman. Turnout was 116,000 and Gordon received just shy of 39,000 votes.

While Cheney has yet to overtly court Democrats, her decision to aggressively investigate Trump as a leader of the select Jan. 6 House committee naturally appeals to voters who detest the former president.

Cheney allies are hopeful that crossover voters will bail her out this time. They are counting on a primary with at least two pro-Trump GOP candidates that will divide the anti-Cheney vote. With the help of even half of the 73,000 Democrats who voted for Biden in 2020, they believe Cheney could pull it off.

That theory isnt lost on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who has told members that hes worried that the numbers add up for Cheney and that she might be back in Congress next session, according to a source with direct knowledge of the discussions. McCarthy did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump, too, is worried that Democrats will help reelect Cheney. He backed a bill in the Wyoming legislature that would have barred voters from switching parties on the day of a primary election in order to vote for a candidate of another party.

But that proposal died in the Wyoming legislature last week.

At an event in Cheyenne earlier this month where nearly 200 people in cowboy hats and boots showed up to support Hageman, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) urged voters to call their legislators to back the measure.

Ill tell you this, theres only one way Liz Cheney wins, and thats if you let Democrats vote in your primary, so you need to call your state rep and let them know, he said just days before the bill died.

After the event, Hageman told reporters, Im fully confident I can win this race whether the crossover bill happens or not. Its something thats been an issue in our state for many years, its not just 2020.

A progressive organizer who helped get the Democratic vote out for Gordon in 2018 crunched the numbers based on a hypothetical three-way race between Hageman, Cheney and Republican state Sen. Anthony Bouchard. The person said Bouchard because he remains popular among the MAGA set even after Trump endorsed Hageman could play spoiler by drawing as much as 15 percent of the vote.

That could open the door just enough for Cheney to slip through, the organizer said.

It will depend on Cheneys on-the-ground voter engagement not high-priced advertising campaigns that will quickly saturate Wyomings small markets, the person said. We know at least some of these voters will vote if they think their vote will make a difference in a race that means something to them.

More here:

Liz Cheney turns to Democrats to save her hide - POLITICO

Why this Democratic Party official attend a Republican-leaning conference: I wanted to help

Matt Grodsky| Arizona Republic

By Matt Grodsky

With the threat of authoritarianism looming and a hostile faction threatening a democratic nation, it is incumbent upon us to support and coordinate with the insurgency.

Im not talking about Ukraine. I am describing Democrats supporting Republican refugees within the insurgency of the GOP, people who belonged to the party of Reagan and now find themselves impressed into the party of Trump.

Thats why I traveled to Washington, D.C., to take part in the Principles First conference, a gathering of moderate Republicans many of whom are actively working to restore the GOP and cleanse it of Trumpism.

Some of my Democratic colleagues might wonder why this was a worthwhile endeavor for someone working to elect Democrats?

Shouldnt I be enjoying the implosion of the GOP?

No.Our democracy works best with a two-party system, in which both bodies operate in good-faith for the best of our nation. One-party dominance is not the answer. So while I work to elect Democrats, I also want to help eliminate extremists from the GOP.

Both parties have their bad eggs, but only one has been hijacked by them. Yes, there has been political warfare since the founding of America. Political parties have shifted and evolved throughout our history, but members of both sides ultimately always worked together for our common interests.

We have never had one party with such blatant anti-American sentiment as the modern GOP. The party of George H.W. Bush has been overrun by Putinites, insurrectionists and conspirators.

They have isolated the moderates in their ranks who still believe in our democratic-republic. This has led to the Democratic Party being the only safe option for voters. This is not sustainable for our government.

It impairs our ability to legislate and puts us on a burning high-wire every election cycle, repeatedly presenting the stark choice between authoritarianism and democracy.

You wouldnt want a professional basketball team to play in the finals against a team of suicide bombers. Yet thats what we have been seeing in our elections one party endeared to our democratic norms, the other overrun by fanatics.

One bad performance for Democrats could send us into the abyss. In that scenario, we had better be sure the right kind of Republican is holding key elected offices when democracy is threatened.

Had someone like Arizonastate Rep. Mark Finchem been handling things in Georgia, 2020 would have ended with substantially more drama.

The reality is the GOP is not a monolith. Many Republicans are being held hostage within their party by radical elements. It should not be assumed that they identify with them.

Most of these hostages are willing and able to build a coalition. In fact, when I was the director of communications for the Arizona Democratic Party in 2020, speaking to this audience,was a key component of our strategy and it paid off.

It is not inevitable that the Republicans of yore will reclaim their party without help. So I went to engage with Republicans in hopes of identifying collaborative ways to elevate moderates in their party primaries - funding PACs, working together to dismantle radical candidates and elected officials, establishing sound communications strategies, nationwide candidate recruitment, and more.

There were many like-minded people at Principles First.

Several voiced support for President Joe Biden and democratic policies. The event included Rep. Adam Kinzinger, David Frum, Bill Kristol, Charlie Sykes, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, and it honored heroes like U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

Most of the people I interacted with identified themselves as being lost in the political wilderness, cut out of todays GOP but still beholden to the traditional principles of their pre-Trump party.

Most notably, they recognized the value of a strong two-party system. When I asked people why they didnt just leave their party to become Democrats or independents, many of them, like my Republican colleague Adrian Bakke, answered Because I was here first. This is my party, I cant abandon it to this.

I had plenty of disagreements with attendees on a myriad of issues. But our most concrete areas of common ground were that Jan. 6 was an insurrection, Trumpism is bad, Putin is evil, and Lets go Brandon is a dumb slogan.

In the event the Trump fever doesnt break before 2024, forgotten Republicans in their party should reach out to Democrats. I encourage Democrats to reach back across the chasm.

We need to help them reclaim their party so that we can get back to competing against people we disagree with, not people hell bent on upending democracy. Coalitions are what bring change, not one-party messaging.

Trust me, I want Democrats to win. Im not doing this because I support the policies of the traditional Republican Party, nor am I doing this because I want more obstructionists in moderate clothing (see our senior senator).

I want us to have a voter registration advantage in Arizona, I want our commonsense policies adopted at the state and federal level. But I also want whats best for our republic in the long term.

Matt Grodsky is vice president and director of public affairs at Matters of State Strategies. He previously served as the director of communications for the Arizona Democratic Party from 2019 to 2021. He is a Democratic precinct committeeman in Legislative District 28 and an Arizona Democratic Party state committee member. Follow him Twitter: @mattgrodsky.

Follow this link:

I'm a Democrat who infiltrated the Republicans - The Arizona Republic

In recent weeks, President Joe Biden has tried to resurrect the legislation formerly known as Build Back Better, the social spending and climate bill Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) effectively killed in December when he said he wouldnt support it.

So far, not much has changed. Bidens efforts include ditching the name and rebranding the policies as measures to curb inflation. Senate Democrats are also holding hearings on issues like prescription drug prices to try to keep talks going. And Democrats, on the whole, have signaled a willingness and political motivation to get something done while they remain in control of Congress.

Few lawmakers, however, seem to have any clue how to actually move it forward. The answer is I dont have the foggiest idea, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) told Vox.

Because no Republicans support the bill and because Democrats have a very narrow Senate majority, all 50 members of the caucus need to be on board to pass it via a process known as budget reconciliation. And Democrats are still struggling to piece together a bill that could get this degree of support, given longstanding opposition from holdouts like Manchin.

Earlier this month, Manchin indicated that there were provisions hed potentially be open to including reducing prescription drug prices, reforming the tax code, and addressing climate policy but theres no explicit agreement yet about what a plan could look like.

I hope that we will do some of the bill and that well get some key investments in, said Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA). Look, folks ought to get in the room and figure out what that is.

Here are three possible routes Democrats could take as they try to salvage the legislation.

Much like the previous bill, any potential agreement hinges on Manchin.

In early March, Manchin effectively put a new offer on the table, saying hed be willing to consider legislation that focuses on prescription drug prices, tax reforms, and climate investments as long as half the revenue it raises is targeted to paying down the deficit.

Half of that money should be dedicated to fighting inflation and reducing the deficit, he told reporters. The other half you can pick for a 10-year program, whatever you think is the highest priority. Right now, it seems to be the environment.

If Manchin is serious about his proposal, its possible that Democrats could come together on a plan that counters the deficit and funds a smaller slate of new policies.

Thus far, however, Manchin has only outlined this plan in broad strokes stopping short of offering details regarding changes to the tax code that hed like to see and declining to say whether hed back the House bills approach to reducing prescription drug prices.

In the House bill, the prescription drug and tax provisions would raise $1.5 trillion over 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Were half this revenue dedicated to deficit reduction and combating inflation, there would still be $750 billion left over to cover new spending. This funding would be sufficient to pay for the $555 billion in clean energy tax credits and job investments that were previously part of BBB.

Already, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has said shes willing to engage in negotiations on this proposal, though she wants specifics before moving forward.

Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden (D-OR) echoed this support. I think we can work with it, he told Vox regarding Manchins plan.

The big question, however, is whether Manchin will stick by this position. Previously, Manchin had offered his own proposal to the White House, only to retract it when negotiations got dicey. Last summer, too, he laid out certain provisions hed consider including support for opioid addiction treatment and authority over a clean electricity standard but found other problems once several of those conditions were met.

And even if Manchin is actually on board with this approach, there are questions about whether Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) would be willing to support it since the provisions shes previously pushed back on were those addressing prescription drug prices and corporate taxes.

Unlike Manchin, however, Sinema backed both the prescription drug policies in the House bill and the White Houses framework on BBB, which included many of the tax provisions that made it into the final bill.

We need to get together on the parts we agree on and pass it, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) told Vox. We have a lot that we still need to pass before the midterms.

If Democrats arent able to reach a deal on a reconciliation bill, its possible they turn to bipartisan alternatives on some of the issues they hoped to address, like lowering prescription drug prices.

Previously, Sens. Wyden and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) had reached an agreement on legislation that would limit the out-of-pocket prices seniors on Medicare would have to pay for drugs. Warnock is also leading a bill that could cap the monthly price of insulin at $35, a proposal that has gotten positive feedback from some Republicans, according to Kaiser Health News. And Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) has expressed an interest in working on the expanded child tax credit and bringing back direct monthly payments for families.

There are major risks, however, to going this route.

For one, the policies that Democrats will be able to pass will likely be much narrower. Wyden and Grassleys bill did not enable Medicare to negotiate drug prices like the budget bill would, for example. Thats a major reform that could significantly curb drug prices given the bodys negotiating power. Romneys child tax credit policy would also impose more work requirements for people to receive the benefit, which Democrats proposal did not.

Additionally, theres no guarantee any bipartisan bills would be able to secure the 60 votes they need to advance in the Senate. Even though several of these bills have Republican support, getting 10 GOP members to sign on in the Senate will still be a challenge.

The follow-up to voting rights legislation has underscored these hurdles.

Because Democrats werent able to pass a voting rights bill on their own, the focus has shifted toward bipartisan talks to reform the Electoral Count Act. That measure is expected to be far more limited than the bill Democrats proposed, and it has yet to move forward in either the House or the Senate.

The darkest scenario for Democrats is that no version of Build Back Better, or any of the policies it includes, is able to pass.

This option could be the most likely one given how the party has struggled to agree on a bill since talks began last June. After expressing his opposition to the previous version of the bill, Manchin has yet to support another concrete proposal, meaning any new discussions could have the same outcome as the ones that took place last year.

Democrats also have a packed spring schedule and a limited window to get legislation done before this falls elections.

In the coming weeks, the Senate will be focused on the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, so it probably wont revisit BBB until mid-April at least. Congress also has to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the US Innovation and Competition Act, a bipartisan bill aimed at investing in the US supply chain. And lawmakers are still weighing additional action sanctioning Russia for its invasion of Ukraine along with a standalone bill that provides more pandemic relief.

That doesnt leave much time for Democrats to work out their differences on BBB.

With BBB in flux, Democrats increasingly appear to be pointing to their other achievements like the American Rescue Plan and the bipartisan infrastructure bill as they try to make their case to voters ahead of the midterms.

Weve already passed the huge infrastructure bill and notice that it was not with the support of the majority of Republicans and, of course, the Rescue bill, which did not get a single Republican, Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) said.

More:

Three ways Democrats Build Back Better bill could go from here - Vox.com

The Democratic Party is perceived by voters as being both ineffective and out of touch and, as a result, stands to suffer substantive seat losses in the midterm elections,new pollingby Schoen Cooperman Research indicates.

Indeed, the findings of our survey which was conducted among likely 2022 midterm election voters show that the electorate is increasingly pessimistic about the direction in which President BidenJoe BidenUngar-Sargon: Working class hit hardest by inflation Nevada county to consider counting all ballots by hand Biden to announce B in Ukraine military aid: report MORE and Democrats are steering the country and feel that the partys priorities do not align with their own.

In order to have a fighting chance in the midterms as well as a shot at holding on to the presidency in 2024 Democrats need to embark on a broader course correction back to the center. The party needs to show voters that they are focused on solving problems and addressing quality-of-life issues and that they reject the progressive lefts embrace of big government spending and identity politics.

Indeed, a majority of voters (54 percent) including 56 percent of independents explicitly say that they want Biden and Democrats to move closer to the center and embrace more moderate policies versus embracing more liberal policies (18 percent) or staying where they are politically (13 percent).

Most voters (61 percent) also agree that Biden and Democrats are out of touch with hardworking Americans and have been so focused on catering to the far-left wing of the party that theyre ignoring Americans day to day concerns such as rising prices and combatting violent crime.

Equally concerning for Democrats, there is a clear sense among the 2022 electorate that the state of the country has deteriorated since Biden became president and that he has not lived up to expectations.

Bidens net approval rating is 9 points underwater (54 percent disapprove, 45 percent approve), which marks a 4-point drop since our December poll (51 percent disapprove, 46 percent approve). A plurality of voters (43 percent) also say that Biden has done worse as president than they expected, rather than better (19 percent).

As inflation has risen, the economy has become a particular area of vulnerability for Democrats. Indeed, voters growing economic pessimism is one of the driving forces behind their dissatisfaction both with the current state of the country as well as with Biden.

Bidens approval rating on handling the nations economic recovery is 21 points underwater (59 percent disapprove, 38 percent approve). This marks a notable 17-point decline from our December polling, when Bidens approval rating on the recovery was negative 4 points, 50 percent to 46 percent.

In addition to harboring negative views about the economy generally, two-thirds of voters (68 percent) blame the Biden administrations policies for inflation either fully or partially.

Indeed, inflation which is at its highest level in 40 years is the top issue (51 percent) for voters, followed by the economy and creating jobs (32 percent). Yet only 16 percent of voters believe that Bidens main focus is on the economy. Thus, voters trust Republicans over Democrats to manage the economy (47 percent to 41 percent) and control inflation (48 percent to 36 percent).

In addition to the economy, voters see Biden and Democrats as underperforming on other important issues and in key roles, notably on policing and crime.

As violent crime surges across the country a trend that voters are nearly universally concerned about (85 percent) by a 2-to-1 margin, voters blame Democrats over Republicans for rising crime rates (52 percent to 25 percent). Further, Republicans are trusted over Democrats to reduce crime (49 percent to 34 percent).

Despite Bidens more moderate rhetoric on law enforcement and policing lately, most voters still agree that Biden and Democrats are soft on crime (56 percent) and a plurality agree that Democrats in Congress support the radical defund the police movement (46 percent).

Notwithstanding Democrats weaknesses on the economy and crime, our data on the COVID-19 pandemic is relatively encouraging for the party. Indeed, a majority of voters (53 percent) approve of the way Biden is addressing the pandemic.

To be sure, Democrats success in the midterms hinges partly on Americans feeling like COVID-19 is under control by Novemberand, positively, nearly one-half of voters (46 percent) now say that the pandemic is either completely or mostly under control, while just 12 percent say it is not under control.

Voters are also notably less concerned about the pandemic now than they were in December. Currently, voters are concerned, rather than not concerned, about the pandemic by a 24-point margin compared to December, when voters were concerned by a 50-point margin.

That being said, these improving dynamics vis--vis the COVID-19 pandemic will likely not be enough to tip the scales in Democrats favor, given the enormity of the challenges Biden faces at home and of course, the crisis hes facing in Eastern Europe.

Collectively, our data paints a picture of a Democratic Party that is unable to connect with voters on basic "kitchen table" issues, namely the economy and crime.

In his State of the Union address, Biden attempted to refashion his economic agenda in light of the Build Back Better plans failure and tried to sell some of the same big-spending proposals as anti-inflationary and deficit-reducing measures.

Instead of repackaging a failed progressive spending bill one that most voters either dont prioritize or oppose the president should make a commitment to reducing inflation by practicing fiscal discipline while also ruling out any new spending initiatives that lack bipartisan support.

At the same time, though it was encouraging to hear Biden call to fund the police, rhetoric is just a first step. Absent a Democratic effort to approach criminal justice legislation in a bipartisan manner, the GOP will be able to weaponize the issue against Democrats in the midterms.

Ultimately, if Democrats do not embrace a strategic shift to the political center, they risk historic defeats worse than 1994 or 2010 in this years midterm elections.

Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, America: Unite or Die.

Here is the original post:

New polling confirms Democrats' left-leaning policies are out of touch | TheHill - The Hill

But Democrats can respond in a way that at least doesnt sound tone deaf, Lake added. One is to acknowledge that it exists, she said. All that language about its transitional, its temporary, that doesnt work at all because people think, Well, Im not getting a temporary raise to make up for my temporary inflation. And to say that it didnt really exist, that it wasnt that bad, that wages were keeping upits just not peoples real-world experience. So [its] very, very important to have the kind of language that the president had during the State of the Union, where he said, Families are struggling, inflation is serious. Were very concerned about it, were doing everything we can.

Polling that Lakes firm has done found that the best ways to ease Americans worries about inflation is negotiating prescription drug prices, making big corporations pay their fair share in taxes, bringing American jobs back to America, and pushing buy American, along with reiterating that nobody whose income is under $400,000 a year is going to receive a tax increase. Because people are worried that their taxes, as well as their cost of living, [are] going up.

Democrats have been introducing bills aimed at fighting inflation. Representative Jan Schakowsky introduced a bill to fight price-gouging in relation to Covid-19. Arizona Senator Mark Kellys first reelection campaign ad featured him talking about families experiences during times of economic hardship. Congressional Democrats have held hearings on supply bottlenecks and corporate profiteering related to inflation. Senator Elizabeth Warren has targeted big corporations and their role in leveraging prices during a high inflationary period to make profits.

View original post here:

The Democrats Can't Ignore Inflation in the Midterm Elections - The New Republic

I dont think it's too much to ask to say, if youre running our elections you cant lie about our elections, said Democratic Senate President Steve Fenberg who is the main sponsor of SB22-153.

While the measure had been in the works for a while, it was officially introduced just two days after Peters was charged with breaching the security of her countys voting equipment.

In the words of the grand jurys indictment, Peters and her deputy Belinda Knisley allegedly devised and executed a deceptive scheme to give an unauthorized person access to the county's voting machine hard drives and to sit in on a software update. Photos of passwords and copies of data were later leaked online by election conspiracy theorists.

The sweeping new bill requires counties to store all voting equipment in a secure area only accessible by key card and under constant, year-round video surveillance. It also bans anyone, even election office employees, from going into that area alone.

Currently, cameras only have to be on for a set number of days around each election, and only on certain pieces of election equipment.

The proposal also aims to speed up the legal process when a potential security breach occurs and increases the penalty if found guilty. It would make it a felony to tamper with voting equipment or publish information like passwords, and adds whistleblower protections for employees who reveal misbehavior.

Its important for Coloradans to hear that we wont stand for this kind of thing. Insider threats have no place in our elections, said Matt Crane, the head of the Colorado County Clerks Association and a former Republican county clerk.

Clerks from both parties overwhelmingly support the legislation, according to Crane. He noted it would expand training and certification requirements for election workers, clerks and certain employees within the secretary of states office, everything from election security and misinformation to risk-limiting audits, and accessibility and voter registration.

I think what we saw in Mesa County was a low-information clerk, which made her susceptible to grifters and bad actors, said Crane. Peters did not have experience in elections administration before being elected clerk in 2018.

Pueblo Clerk and Recorder Gilbert Bo Ortiz is the current chair of the clerks association. The Democrat called Peters alleged actions a breach of public trust and said clerks across the state have since pushed for more accountability for election officials.

The bill also budgets a half-million dollars for grants to help countys comply with the new security measures.

But despite broad support in the election world, in the world of politics, SB-153 has been met with some partisan skepticism. It passed its first hearing on a party-line vote Tuesday evening.

Seeing a bill like this being run immediately, in response to what happened in Mesa County, is troubling, said Republican Rep. Matt Soper, who represents most of the county in the House. Quite frankly (it) angers me because I don't think we ought to be writing legislation for just one particular element that has occurred out in society, knowing that the law that's currently on the books has been playing out.

Soper said hes open to voting for the bill, if its amended to address some of his concerns. But he also noted that its hard for Republicans to embrace a proposal when Democratic Secretary of State Jena Griswold is championing it.

She's made the office incredibly partisan, and it didn't have to be that way, he said. It makes the politics around this very difficult to vote for, even if reading through the bill theres a lot of things that Republicans and Democrats could agree with here.

Griswold is running for reelection and her fundraising emails have routinely highlighted her investigation of Peters, who also recently entered the race. She has also developed a national profile as a critic of Republican-led voting policies.

The Colorado GOP is already organizing against the bill. Hours before the measures first hearing, the Party emailed its members with an action alert urging Republicans lawmakers to oppose it.

Jena Griswold not only wants to be the Secretary of State; she wants to become judge and jury as well. The extreme portions of this bill are a transparent attempt to stoke fear and distrust in local elections and center all the power with Jena -- all without checks or balances, said GOP State Party Chair Kristi Burton Brown in the message.

At the same time the party leaders have asked Peters to suspend her campaign for Secretary of State in the wake of the criminal charges.

Whats shaping up to be the most controversial element of the bill is a section that would ban those who oversee elections from knowingly or recklessly disseminating misinformation or disinformation about elections.

Peters has long maintained she was well within her authority to investigate what she came to believe was voter fraud in the 2020 election, doubts which she said started with simply trying to answer questions many of her constituents had.

They just kept bringing it to me and bringing it to me, Peters told CPR last November. I get emails and people wanting to meet with me. I tried to defend that we were, we had pure and fair elections.

Peters said she could no longer defend the system. I can't unsee what I've seen and it's disturbing to me.

Peters has also participated in events and broadcasts hosted by prominent purveyors of false claims about the 2020 election, including Trump associates Steve Bannon and Mike Lindell.

Thats the kind of misinformation bill sponsors want to prevent in the future. Lawsuits and hand recounts in other states, as well as Colorados required post-election audits have consistently shown that the 2020 election results were accurate.

But for one prominent first amendment attorney, this aspect of the bill is problematic, no matter what the motives of its backers are.

Steve Zansberg heads the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition. He also provides legal representation to members of the Colorado Broadcasters Association, including CPR. He said he wonders who gets to decide whether a statement was knowingly or recklessly false.

It raises serious constitutional questions because of the ambiguity in how it could be enforced, said Zansberg. He added that its incredibly disconcerting for the state to potentially use the things someone says as a condition and qualification for overseeing elections.

He said if lawmakers do pass this provision, it should require a high standard of evidence and a clear process for determining whether someone actually broke the law.

For supporters, though, the idea is just common sense. Sen. Fenberg told members of the Senates State Veterans and Military Affairs Committee that he is fully aware that false information about election fraud will continue to spread on social media, talk radio and other platforms. He said his bill isnt trying to curtail that kind of speech.

That's why, in a lot of ways, our democracy is so great and frustrating and messy. But for people who administer the elections, there should be some basic standards, said Fenberg.

And I don't think this bill does anything above and beyond what is a normal, basic security protocol that should be followed for any sensitive information, especially for something as important as our elections and our democracy.

This measure is part of a package of voting bills Democrats have introduced this session that they say are needed to respond to the upheaval around the 2020 election. Those include a bill to ban the open carry of firearms within 100 feet of voting locations, and a bill that would increase penalties for threatening and harassing election workers.

But Secretary Griswold said Colorado is the first state she knows of to propose this latest type of action. She said she recently briefed other Secretaries of State on the bill and hopes states across the country follow Colorados lead.

I do believe that we'll see further insider attacks, as a way to destabilize American elections and push disinformation. So every state should be getting ready for this evolving threat, she said.

Read the rest here:

What if the threat is coming from inside? Democrats push for tighter rules for Colorado's election officials - Colorado Public Radio