Ousted from DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz fighting to stay in House
U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz easily won her South Florida district six times, but a Democratic primary challenge from a Bernie Sanders-backed law professor is making her seventh bid less than a sure bet – and her recent resignation as Democratic National Committee chairwoman hasn’t helped. Tim Canova has raised about $2.8 million thanks to the former presidential candidate’s endorsement, an almost unheard of amount for a first-time candidate and almost as much as Wasserman Schultz’s $3 million. He is running an aggressive campaign, accusing Wasserman Schultz of being a pawn of Wall Street who backs corporate donors over progressive causes. The primary is Aug. 30. “Wasserman Schultz is like a lot of politicians who live in their own little bubble. They are not out and around the people and I have been,” said Canova, 56, who teaches business law at Nova Southeastern University. Wasserman Schultz, 49, re-emerged in public Thursday, six days after the Democratic National Convention and her forced resignation as national party chair following a leaked email scandal. She immediately went on the counter-attack, saying Canova is using “disingenuous half-truths, lies and distortions” to attack her record. She received loud applause Thursday night at a forum on healing the rift between the police and black community that was held at a predominantly African-American mega church. “I have a deep and proud commitment to our community,” she said, listing Social Security, the Affordable Care Act and recovery programs that eased the 2008 financial crisis as examples of progressive policies she helped pass. “My opponent can say whatever he wants, but the people I represent … know better.” She also has the support of Vice President Joe Biden, who will campaign on her behalf at a closed fundraiser Friday evening. In Wasserman Schultz’s previous elections, she never drew a primary opponent in her suburban Fort Lauderdale district or a serious Republican challenge. In general elections, she received at least 60 percent of the vote in a 2-to-1 Democratic district that stretches from the ocean to the Everglades and includes high-rise beachfront hotels and condos, golf resorts and luxury malls and a mix of poor, middle-class, retiree and well-heeled communities. Wasserman Schultz has been perceived as such a powerhouse – and the district so uncompetitive – that former U.S. Rep. Allen West, a tough-talking favorite of conservative Republicans and one of her fiercest critics, ran legally in a neighboring district even though he lived in hers to avoid near-certain defeat. The district favored Clinton over Sanders by a 68 to 31 percent margin in the March presidential primary. “I’ve known Debbie for 25 years and she has always been very, very supportive of the district and environmental matters, which is important to me,” said supporter Lily Sayre, who owns a horse stable in Southwest Ranches, a semi-rural enclave in the district. “I’ve always known her to be forthright and standing by what she believes, whether it helps her politically or not.” The email leaks that cost Wasserman Schultz her DNC post are motivating Canova’s backers, who say they prove what they long believed: that Wasserman Schultz threw aside fairness and neutrality to weaken Sanders’ chances of defeating Clinton in the Democratic primaries. “My family fought in the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Civil War and World War I and World War II, including my father. Some of them lost their lives. No one steals my right to a free vote,” said makeup artist Ellen Kinnally, a Sanders supporter who said she moved into the district specifically to vote for Canova. Wasserman Schultz denies showing favoritism in the presidential race, saying she strictly followed party rules. The leaked emails show that DNC staffers closely tracked their boss’s race. They monitored media coverage and tried to get details of a speech Canova gave by internet to an Alaska progressive group while she spoke at that state’s Democratic convention. They circulated a campaign news release about Canova getting Sander’s endorsement – Wasserman Schultz ordered Canova’s name stricken from its headline. Canova said he began considering a challenge last year when he organized opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and Wasserman Schultz and her congressional staff never agreed to a meeting. She became the only Democrat in Florida’s House delegation who voted to fast-track the pact’s approval, which had been opposed by labor unions, environmental groups and other liberal constituencies as well as some tea party groups on the Republican side. “She has been taking millions of dollars from the biggest Wall Street banks and corporations and I started looking at her voting record and it is lined up with these corporate interests,” he said. Wasserman Schultz said her staff met with Canova and his group in her district office last year and had their concerns heard. “Unfortunately, that’s been what my opponent has engaged in this entire campaign,” she said. The winner of the Wasserman Schultz-Canova race will likely face Republican Joe Kaufman in November. He lost to Wasserman Schultz by a 63 to 37 percent margin in 2014. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Officials dismiss Donald Trump’s assertions about NFL and debates
Both the NFL and the Commission on Presidential Debates are rejecting Republican Donald Trump‘s assertions about the fall debates, which the billionaire businessman says have been rigged by his opponents to draw a smaller audience by scheduling two of them at the same time as a football game. Trump began by making an accusation in a tweet posted Friday night: “As usual, Hillary & the Dems are trying to rig the debates so 2 are up against major NFL games. Same as last time w/ Bernie. Unacceptable!” Trump expanded his conspiracy theory when asked about the debates during an interview for Sunday’s “This Week” on ABC: “Well, I’ll tell you what I don’t like. It’s against two NFL games. I got a letter from the NFL saying, ‘This is ridiculous. Why are the debates against’ – ’cause the NFL doesn’t wanna go against the debates. ‘Cause the debates are gonna be pretty massive, from what I understand, OK?” Asked about Trump’s assertion, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy tweeted on Saturday: “While we’d obviously wish the Debate Commission could find another night, we did not send a letter to Mr Trump.” A Trump aide said Saturday that the Republican candidate “was made aware of the conflicting dates by a source close to the league.” The aide was not authorized to speak by name and requested anonymity. The nonpartisan, independent presidential debate commission serves as the event sponsor and sets the participation criteria, dates, sites and formats. The sites and dates for three presidential debates were announced in September 2015. “The CPD did not consult with any political parties or campaigns in making these decisions,” the commission said in a statement issued Saturday. Two of the three debates will be televised at the same time as an NFL game. On Sept. 26, the night of the first debate, ESPN will carry the Monday night game featuring the Falcons vs. the Saints. On Oct. 9, the second debate will air opposite the Sunday night game featuring the Giants vs. the Packers on NBC. The Democratic Party was criticized during the primary race for scheduling debates between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday nights and holiday weekends, times when viewership is low. The Sanders campaign suggested that was an effort to limit the size of the audience. Trump told ABC: “You know, Hillary Clinton wants to be against the NFL. She doesn’t – maybe like she did with Bernie Sanders, where they were on Saturday nights when nobody’s home.” The Clinton campaign did not comment on Trump’s assertions. In the ABC interview, Trump said three debates were “fine” and that he’d rather have three than one. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Martin Dyckman: Donald Trump, Valdamir Putin and NATO – willful ignorance, or dangerous isolationism?
“Vlad, Vlad, is that you?” “Da!” “Donald here. We need to deal. I make great deals. I’ll send you a copy of my book, The Art of the Stea … uh, I mean, Deal.” “I’m sure you do, Donald. What do you want?” “Vlad, I need you to help me beat Hillary Clinton.” “I might be able to do that Donald, but what’s in it for us?” “When I’m president, you can have those little loser countries next door… What do you call them?” “Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.” “OK. They mean nothing to me. Like I said, they’re losers. But what can you do for me?” “Remember your man Nixon and Watergate? What did they call it? A third-rate burglary? Well, we did better than that. Our guys are first-rate. We have all the secrets from your Democratic National Committee. They won’t look good when they leak, if you know what I mean.” “Good to do business with you, Vlad. Let’s plan on getting together sometime. I have great golf resorts.” “I don’t golf. I swim.” “That too, Vlad. We stock our pools with hot women. And you can bring any friend you like.” “Even Bashar Assad?” “Yeah, Vlad. I might need some tips from him on how to stay in power.” Now, of course, this conversation may not have happened. But it could have. As Donald Trump would say, how do we know that it didn’t? What we do know is that Russian fingerprints are all over the leaked emails that convulsed the Democratic Party on the eve of its convention, forcing the resignation of Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz. And it is a fact that this closely followed Trump’s threat — or was it a promise? — to destroy NATO by abrogating our treaty commitments to defend any and all of its members against any — read Russian — attack. It wasn’t the first time he has questioned NATO’s value, so his Republican apologists shouldn’t be surprised that he has now made his disdain so explicit. NATO is one of the two reasons, the European Union being the other, why there has been no major European war since 1945. That’s without precedent in that continent’s history. Peaceful durations were often measured in months rather than years. It was under NATO’s aegis that the United States and its allies succeeded in ending Serbia’s aggression against Bosnia. It is only NATO that presents any effective obstacle to the transparent neocolonial ambitions of Russia’s new Stalin, Vladimir Putin. There has been nothing as rash as Trump’s undermining of NATO since the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin gave Hitler everything he wanted at the Munich conference and declared that he had purchased “peace in our time.” That turned out to be a very short time. Hitler invaded Poland, precipitating World War II and the loss of 60-million lives, merely 11 months later. It’s not hard to imagine the terror that Trump’s words have struck into the Baltic lands that had struggled for centuries to escape Russian rule, losing their liberty in 1940 and regaining it only a half-century later, with the dissolution of the Soviet empire. My wife and I paid a brief, enjoyable visit to Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, during a Baltic cruise in May. It seemed to be a very pleasant country, inhabited by hospitable people. But as our tour guide made plain to us, everyone senses that the Russian hegemony is not yet dead. There are only 1.2-million Estonians, which would be to the Russian bear as a field mouse is to a grizzly. Ethnic Russians comprise 24.8 percent of the population and nearly 30 percent speak Russian as their first language. Estonians with relatives in Russia have the option of holding Russian passports, as our guide said his wife does. It was the presence of sizable ethnic German minorities in Czechoslovakia and Poland that Hitler claimed as pretexts for his aggression. It’s the same rationalization that Putin applies to his poorly disguised war-making in Ukraine. Trump’s couched his irresponsibility in the form of a threat to base our national honor—the fulfillment of a treaty commitment—on his opinion on whether member countries are paying enough for their own defense. Estonia’s president replied promptly, saying that his country has been spending what NATO requires and also sent troops to the war in Afghanistan. “Estonia’s commitment to our NATO obligations is beyond doubt, and so should be the commitments by others,” his spokesman said. “Two world wars have shown that peace in Europe is also important for the security of the United States,” said NATO’s secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg. Mitch McConnell, who is plainly uncomfortable with his new role as a Trump stooge, was quick to repudiate him on this issue. “NATO is the most important military alliance in world history. I want to reassure our NATO allies that if any of them get attacked, we’ll be there to defend them,” said the Senate majority leader. But that’s an assurance he would be powerless to keep if a president chose to ignore it. It’s the president, not the Congress, who has the power and duty to act in such an event. In speaking as he did to The New York Times last week, Trump either forgot or chose to ignore two telephone interviews with the newspaper’s reports barely four months earlier. Asked whether he would defend Estonia in particular against Russian aggression, here is what he said: “Yeah, I would. It’s a treaty, it’s there. I mean, we defend everybody. (Laughs.) We defend everybody. No matter who it is, we defend everybody. We’re defending the world. But we owe, soon, it’s soon to be $21 trillion. You know, it’s 19 now but it’s soon to be 21 trillion. But we defend everybody. When in doubt, come to the United States. We’ll defend you.” Is this episode yet another example of Trump’s colossal and willful ignorance? Does it mean that at heart he’s a throwback to the American isolationism of the 1930s that
A lot of holes in GOP presidential ground game in key states
Presidential battleground states were supposed to be swarming with Republican Party workers by now. “We’ve moved on to thousands and thousands of employees,” party chairman Reince Priebus declared in March, contrasting that with the GOP’s late-blooming staffing four years earlier. “We are covering districts across this country in ways that we’ve never had before.” That hasn’t exactly happened, a state-by-state review conducted by The Associated Press has found. With early voting beginning in less than three months in some states, the review reveals that the national GOP has delivered only a fraction of the ground forces detailed in discussions with state leaders earlier in the year. And that is leaving anxious local officials waiting for reinforcements to keep pace with Democrat Hillary Clinton in the states that matter most in 2016. To be sure, the national party actually has notched record levels of fundraising over the past few years and put together a much more robust ground game than it had in 2012. But officials acknowledge the real competition isn’t their past results or the chronically cash-strapped Democratic Party. It’s Clinton and what GOP party chairman Reince Priebus calls “that machine” of Clinton fundraising. Some examples of Republican shortfalls: Ohio Republicans thought they were going to see 220 paid staffers by May; in reality, there are about 50. Plans for Pennsylvania called for 190 paid staffers; there are about 60. Iowa’s planned ground force of 66 by May actually numbers between 25 and 30. In Colorado, recent staff departures have left about two dozen employees, far short of the 80 that were to have been in place. AP learned of the specific May staffing aims from Republicans who were briefed earlier this year; the RNC did not dispute them. Current totals came from interviews with local GOP leaders over the past two weeks. The gulf between what state leaders thought they could count on and what they’ve actually got comes as RNC’s ground game is asked to do more than ever before. Presumptive nominee Donald Trump is relying on the party to do most of the nuts-and-bolts work of finding and persuading voters in the nation’s most competitive battlegrounds. “This is a race we should win,” Ohio GOP chairman Matt Borges said, citing a voter registration boom. “Now, we have to put the people in the field.” In New Hampshire, a swing state that also features one of the nation’s most competitive Senate contests, the Republican National Committee’s original plan called for more than 30 paid staff on the ground by May. Yet what’s happening there highlights that even when the RNC is close to meeting its staffing goals, there can be problems. In this case, 20 positions have been converted to part-time, and local officials have been struggling to fill them. “It’s a tall order to ask the RNC to be the complete field operation for the presidential nominee,” said Steve Duprey, a national party committeeman from New Hampshire. “We’re following through on the plan, but it was slower being implemented than we first would have hoped.” Borges and Duprey, like Republican leaders across the nation, acknowledged that the national party has dramatically reduced its staffing plans in recent months. “You discuss idealistic, you discuss realistic,” said the RNC’s political director Chris Carr. “Some people hear what they want to hear.” The Democrats have been more focused. The GOP’s foes, says party chairman Priebus, “have built their program around a candidate.” By that measure, Clinton and her Democratic allies appear to be quite far ahead, with roughly double the staff of the Republicans in Ohio, for example. For anyone – party or candidate – ground operations are expensive. The RNC’s 242-person payroll cost $1.1 million in May, federally-filed financial documents show. Additionally, the party transfers hundreds of thousands of dollars each month to state parties, which in turn hire more people. Between direct RNC employees and state employees hired with the help of transfers, the party counts more than 750 staff members, including 487 spread across the country and concentrated in battleground states. By contrast, at this point in 2012, there were just 170 paid Republican operatives across the country. Party officials say they are confident they will raise enough money to maintain – and very likely boost – the current level of employees until Election Day. Trump, who did not actively raise money during the primary season, touted surprisingly strong fundraising numbers in late May and June, including $25 million that will be shared with the party. But it was the primary triumph of Trump in May – and the fact that he did not bring with him a hefty portfolio of donors – that derailed the party’s fundraising and hiring goals, party officials said. The timing was important because a nominee typically serves as a major fundraiser for the national party, and having one in March or April would have given the Republicans a boost. A sign on an office door in Sarasota, Florida, illustrates how critical the RNC will be to Trump’s bid for the White House. It’s Trump’s state headquarters. “THANKS FOR STOPPING BY OUR OFFICE!” the blue paper reads. “Our office is TEMPORARILY CLOSED to the public, while our office works to prep for the National Convention in Cleveland.” A phone call to the number on the sign ended with an automated message stating, “Memory is full.” The Republican Party has 75 employees on the ground in Florida – a few dozen shy of Clinton – but they aren’t seamlessly integrated with the Trump campaign. “I do see cooperation between the national party and the Trump campaign,” said Michael Barnett, chairman of the Palm Beach County GOP. “But that hasn’t materialized at the local level yet. That doesn’t mean it won’t happen. It’s a little bit of a late start, but I’m not nervous. Not yet.” Like Florida, Ohio and New Hampshire, Wisconsin is a presidential battleground that features a highly competitive Senate race. That means national party staffers have the dual task
Bernie Sanders, yet to concede, says he’ll work for Donald Trump’s defeat
Pressing his “political revolution” to turn its attention to defeating Donald Trump, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said he will work with Hillary Clinton to transform the Democratic Party itself and “create the America that we know we can become.” Sanders spoke Thursday night in a livestream address to political supporters two days after the final primary election of the nomination race. The major task they now face is to “make certain” the presumptive Republican nominee loses in November, he said, adding that he plans to begin his role in that process “in a very short period of time.” “But defeating Donald Trump cannot be our only goal,” Sanders said, pointing to his 1,900 delegates at next month’s Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. “We must continue our grassroots efforts to create the America that we know we can become.” On Friday, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said a “tremendous burden” is falling on Clinton to demonstrate that she has heard the voices of the young people who powered Sanders’ effort. Weaver said the Sanders team is in contact with the Clinton campaign daily as the two sides work to resolve differences. Yet when asked on MSNBC whether Sanders is still running for president, Weaver said repeatedly, “Yes he is.” Although Clinton has secured enough pledged delegates and superdelegates to become the presumptive nominee, Sanders did not concede the race or refer to Clinton as the likely nominee, instead offering a lengthy list of policy proposals he hopes to see approved by the party. The two rivals met Tuesday night at a Washington hotel to discuss policy goals and plans. Sanders said that while it is “no secret” that he and Clinton have “strong disagreements on some very important issues,” it was “also true that our views are quite close on others.” He said he looked forward to additional talks between the two campaigns to ensure that his supporters’ voices are heard and the convention adopts “the most progressive platform” in the party’s history. Sanders said he anticipated working with Clinton “to transform the Democratic Party so that it becomes a party of working people and young people, and not just wealthy campaign contributors.” The speech – it could be Sanders’ final address before the summer convention – was viewed by more than 200,000 people, according to the campaign. It sought to shape his legacy as a one-time “fringe” candidate who generated a massive following through sprawling rallies and threatened Clinton for the nomination. Looking ahead to the convention, Sanders said the party must support a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage, pay equity for women, a ban on the sale and distribution of assault weapons and a defeat of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. Sanders thanked his supporters for providing more than $200 million in donations, most in increments of $27, and rattled off what they had accomplished: 1.5 million people who attended his rallies and town meetings and more than 75 million phone calls from volunteers “urging their fellow citizens into action.” He encouraged his followers to consider running for political office up and down the ballot as a way to prevent Republicans from controlling state and local government. And he made clear that he intends to leave his imprint on the fall campaign and beyond. “We have begun the long and arduous process of transforming America, a fight that will continue tomorrow, next week, next year and into the future,” he said. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
In swing state suburbs, white women are skeptical of Donald Trump
For Donald Trump to win the White House in November, he’ll need the votes of women like Elizabeth Andrus. Yet Andrus, a registered Republican from Delaware, Ohio, sees “buffoonery” in the presumptive Republican nominee and says “I am not on the Trump train.” With all the trouble in the world, she went on, “you just don’t want Donald Trump as president.” Her negative impression of Trump was shared by most of the dozens of white, suburban women from politically important states who were interviewed by The Associated Press this spring. Their views are reflected in opinion polls, such as a recent AP-GfK survey that found 70 percent of women have unfavorable opinions of Trump. Democrat Hillary Clinton‘s campaign sees that staggering figure as a tantalizing general election opening. While white voters continue to abandon the Democratic Party, small gains with white women could help put likely nominee Clinton over the top if the November election is close. Democrats believe these women could open up opportunities for Clinton in North Carolina, where President Barack Obama struggled with white voters in his narrow loss in the state 2012, and even in Georgia, a Republican stronghold that Democrats hope to make competitive. Patty Funderburg of Charlotte, North Carolina, voted for Republican Mitt Romney in 2012, but says she’s already convinced that Trump won’t get her vote. “He’s not who I’d want to represent our country,” said Funderburg, a 54-year-old mother of three. Trump insists he’s “going to do great with women.” He’s also said he will link Clinton aggressively to past indiscretions with women by her husband, former President Bill Clinton. He made good on that pledge Monday, releasing an online video featuring a photo of the former president with a cigar in his mouth and statements that appear to come from women who have accused Clinton of sexual assault. Trump sent the video from his Twitter account with the message, “Is Hillary really protecting women?” The businessman also has previewed an argument focused on national security, with echoes of the pitch that President George W. Bush successfully made to white suburban women during his 2004 re-election. “Women want, above all else, they want security,” Trump told The Associated Press recently. “They want to have a strong military, they want to have strong borders. They don’t want crime.” He said “Hillary is viewed poorly on that.” Not so in the AP-GfK poll. About 40 percent of women surveyed said Clinton would be best at protecting the country and handling the threat posed by the Islamic State group, and about 30 percent said Trump. Throughout the primary, Clinton has talked about policies meant to appeal to women: equal pay, expanded child care, paid family and medical leave and more. And Trump has his own complicated past regarding women and has faced criticism for his actions both in his personal life and at his businesses toward them. He’s vigorously defended his treatment of women, as has his daughter Ivanka Trump, who said her father “has total respect for women.” A super political action committee backing Clinton has released its first television advertisements featuring Trump’s contentious statements about women. “Does Donald Trump really speak for you?” the super PAC ad asks. For many of the women interviewed, the answer appears to be no. Andrus, a Republican who nevertheless voted twice for Obama, praised Trump’s political skills and argued his business career indicates an intellect and ability that could benefit the nation. But his temperament, she said, is somewhere between “buffoonery” and “complete narcissism.” “It would be like having Putin for president,” she added, referring to Russia’s sometimes belligerent president, Vladimir Putin. Erin Freedman, a 38-year-old from Reston, Virginia, said Trump scares her. While she’s an enthusiastic backer of Clinton’s primary rival, Bernie Sanders, she said she’d have no problem backing the former secretary of state against Trump in a general election. Even some reluctant Trump supporters say they want him to dial back the braggadocio and caustic insults, and engage people more seriously. “He’s the nominee, so I’ll vote for him,” said Renee Herman, a 45-year-old from Sunbury, Ohio, who preferred retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson and her home-state governor, John Kasich, in the GOP primary field. “But it’s time we get past all this showmanship and hear from him what he actually wants to do and his plans for how to do it.” Trump’s best opening is that Clinton, who is on the cusp of clinching her party’s nomination, would enter the November race with a majority of Americans taking a dim view of her candidacy. Fifty-five percent have a negative view of Clinton, including 53 percent of women, in the AP-GfK poll. “Anybody but Hillary,” said Carolyn Owen, a 64-year-old educator from Clayton, North Carolina, near Raleigh. She said Trump wasn’t her first choice, “but it’s better than the alternative.” While Obama won the support of women overall in his two White House campaigns, white women have increasingly been shifting toward the Republican Party in recent elections. Obama only won 42 percent of white women in 2012. Romney won 56 percent of white women, more than Bush and the party’s 2008 nominee, Sen. John McCain. Clinton’s hopes will largely hinge on replicating Obama’s coalition of blacks, Hispanics and young people. In both of his elections, Obama earned near-unanimous support from black women, while drawing the votes of roughly 7 in 10 Hispanic women. But she would have more room for error with those groups if she can increase Democrats’ share of white women. Another potentially favorable scenario for Clinton involves Republican and independent women who can’t stomach a vote for Trump but also don’t want to vote for a Democrat. Maybe they simply stay home, keeping the GOP nominee’s vote totals down. For Angee Stephens of Indianola, Iowa, that seems to be the only option at this point. She’s wary of Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, which is the subject of an FBI investigation, and her
Kay Ivey named one of the ’50 Most Influential Female Republicans’ in America
In what is easily the most-talked about election in history, the political landscape of the Republican Party continues to shift. And despite the Democratic Party‘s accusations of so-called “war on women, an increasing number of strong, well-educated women emerge into leadership roles of the GOP. Among those notable female leaders — Alabama’s own Lt. Gov. Kay Ivey, who was on Thursday named to the national, conservative website Newsmax’s 2016 list of the 50 Most Influential Female Republicans. Comprised of women “who will play a key role in shaping America’s future” the list features others including No. 1, former Alaska governor and Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin, No. 3, best-selling conservative author Laura Ingraham, No. 14, former candidate for the Republican nomination for president Carly Fiorina, and No. 39, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (another Alabama native). “It is truly an honor to be included in Newsmax’s 50 Most Influential Female Republicans,” Ivey said of her inclusion on the list. “I am humbled to join the prestigious list of hardworking Republican women from across the Nation. I am most proud to have the opportunity to serve and represent the people of this great State.” In 2002, Kay became the first Republican elected State Treasurer since Reconstruction and was re-elected in 2006. As Treasurer, Kay was committed to making the office more open, transparent, and efficient. She made history yet again in 2010 when she was elected the first Republican woman Lieutenant Governor in Alabama’s history, and repeated the feat when re-elected in 2014.
Ben Pollara: A Democrat’s unsolicited advice for the GOP that created Donald Trump
What is more appealing for Democrats like me? Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, or a fractured convention that produces a nominee who received no Republican primary votes, like Paul Ryan? Honestly, both sound pretty good and likely to culminate in a Hillary Clinton presidency. But it’s not up to Democrats like me, and the questions Republicans should be asking themselves have more serious consequences for both their party and our system of governance. Beyond my partisanship, I hold a core belief in the essential function of the two-party system and the imperfect, yet better than the alternatives, manner in which it maintains the values of our republican democracy. Assuming Trump enters Cleveland with a plurality but not majority of delegates, to deny him the nomination would shatter the Republican Party for a decade to come, and with it the two-party system that balances the most extreme tendencies of American political ideology. The media reacted with shock at Trump’s assertion that a brokered convention that denied him the nomination would lead to rioting. Trump has said many outrageous things, many of them without basis in fact. This was not one of them. Just as Vietnam and Civil Rights nearly tore apart the Democratic Party in 1968, denying Trump the nomination through Byzantine delegate rules would succeed in doing the same to the Grand Old Party. The party of Lincoln must come to terms with the reality that it now holds that moniker by historical fact only. The Republican Party has, by virtue of a political strategy to build a winning national coalition post-New Deal, become the party of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and yes, Donald Trump. To survive, Republicans must face down that which they have wrought through two generations of “dog whistle” racism and us-vs-them fearmongering that, until recently, served the cynical corporatists and political elites in the party quite well. The Southern Strategy and the rise of fundamentalist religious extremism paved the way for the K Street Project and 20 of 28 years of Republican White House occupancy; the Tea Party and Birtherism gave rise to the Koch-era and hegemony of the legislative branch in D.C. and most state capitols. But the craven decisions that led to these triumphs are causing the Republican Party to collapse under the weight of its own base. What fueled government shutdowns over previously benign issues like raising the debt ceiling and funding Planned Parenthood (and the ultimate ouster of John Boehner as Speaker of the House) is precisely what is fueling Donald Trump’s success. It is willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty of the first degree for Republicans to bemoan the “Make American Great Again” movement and its accompanying rhetoric of angry xenophobia without owning responsibility for creating the environment that spawned it. You reap what you sow. Give Trump the nomination he has earned; you fostered the environment that incubated him. Let Trump fail spectacularly in November. Then look in the mirror and begin to rebuild the Republican Party in the image of Abraham Lincoln, rather than David Duke and his ilk. The alternative is a splintering of the very foundation of our political system and a generation of Democratic hegemony, which may have pundits in the not distant future bemoaning that “Barack Obama wouldn’t have been able to win a single state’s primary in today’s Democratic Party. He was basically a Republican.” Republicans should ask themselves, what is scarier? Four more years of a Democrat in the White House, or a future where that statement is true? • • • Ben Pollara is a political consultant and a founding partner of LSN Partners, a Miami Beach-based government and public affairs firm. He runs United for Care, the Florida medical marijuana campaign and is a self-described “hyper-partisan” Democrat.
Hillary Clinton now faces struggle to win back younger voters
Standing in a line of thousands outside an arena at Colorado State University, Aleksandr Cronk contemplated the grim possibility that the man he was waiting to see, Bernie Sanders, may not make it to the November ballot and he’d have to decide whether to vote for Hillary Clinton. Like millions of young voters nationwide, Cronk has been electrified by Sanders’ longshot bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. Even as Clinton has racked up a commanding lead in the contest, she’s overwhelmingly losing voters between ages 18 and 29 in early-voting states. Her lukewarm reception among people like Cronk points to a challenge for her in November, should she win the nomination. Overwhelming support from young voters twice helped secure the White House for Barack Obama. “I don’t think there’s going to be a lot of change” if Clinton wins, said Cronk, 21. Like many younger voters, he’s especially alarmed by income inequality, the issue that Sanders has made a centerpiece of his campaign. “The Clintons don’t really stand in that position very well. Clinton’s weakness with younger voters has stood out consistently this year — she lost Democratic primary voters who are aged 18 to 29 by 70 points in Iowa, 68 points in New Hampshire and 25 points on Super Tuesday, when she won seven of the 11 states in play for Democrats. “Hillary’s weakness with millennials has to be very worrisome for the Democratic Party,” said Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, a center-left advocacy group. “What you’re seeing is the millennial generation has essentially seceded from the Democratic establishment.” Obama’s presidential campaigns showed the power of voters under 30, who gave him 2-1 support in both 2008 and 2012. In 2016, even more millennials than Baby Boomers are eligible to vote, and they make up a large share of potential voters in battleground states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Iowa, demographers say. For months, Clinton tried to connect with younger voters through famous supporters such as singer Katy Perry and actor Lena Dunham. She embraced the anti-police-brutality movement Black Lives Matter, spearheaded by young African-Americans, and vowed to expand President Obama’s deportation relief for young people in the country illegally and their families. She promised debt-free college for all, only to be one-upped by Sanders’ pledge of free college for all. Clinton has acknowledged she’s fallen short, saying she has to work harder to convince young people she will help them. When an Iowa college student asked her in January why so many other youths found her dishonest, Clinton blamed decades of Republican attacks. “I have been around a long time and people have thrown all kinds of things at me and I can’t keep up with it,” replied Clinton. “If you are new to politics and it’s the first time you’ve really paid attention, you go, ‘Oh my gosh, look at all of this.’” Joelle Gamble of the Roosevelt Institute, a liberal New York think-tank, said young voters are increasingly distrustful of institutions like political parties. She noted that, on the Republican side, many have rallied around Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who boasts of how hated he is by Washington Republicans. “I don’t think there’s any one candidate that can fix this,” she said. Sanders, a socialist senator who was an independent until launching his quixotic Democratic primary run last year, has come the closest. His call for a political revolution has reached people like Daniel Harty, a 21-year-old computer science student in Las Vegas who once saw himself as a libertarian but registered as a Democrat to support Sanders. Should Clinton be the nominee, Harty said, he’d never back her. “Hillary Clinton doesn’t seem like a genuine person,” Harty said. “She changes her opinions based on what’s politically expedient.” Jay Morris, 24, of Oklahoma City, has $72,000 in student debt and no job. A Sanders supporter, he said he’d never back Clinton. “I think she’s completely entrenched in the political machine,” he said. “I just wouldn’t vote.” Michelle Williams, 20, a natural resources student, didn’t pay attention to politics until the hashtag #FeeltheBern began popping up in her social media feeds. She was excited to see Sanders speak in Fort Collins. “He keeps it real about how America truly is,” she said. But she would drop out of politics if the nominee were Clinton. “She’s weird,” Williams said. Cronk has a running debate with his parents about his support of Sanders. They’re Clinton voters, fearful of what Republicans could do to Sanders in a general election. Cronk, on the other hand, was in elementary school when a Republican last won a presidential election and believes the increasing divide between the wealthy and everyone else demands dramatic action. He worries whether he’ll be able to have the same life as his parents, a librarian and part-time teacher who own a house in a nice San Diego, California, neighborhood. “To see how quickly the gap is increasing is kind of scary,” he said. Cronk said that, if it came down to it, he’d vote for Clinton in a general election. She’d be better than whoever emerges from the Republican primary, he said. “You feel kind of forced.” Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Bernie Sanders campaign: DNC is “attempting to undermine” campaign
Bernie Sanders‘ presidential campaign angrily accused the Democratic Party of “taking our campaign hostage” on Friday after it was temporarily barred from accessing a trove of information about potential voters as punishment for improperly accessing data compiled by the campaign of rival Hillary Clinton. The reaction of the Democratic National Committee to the data breach, the depth of which was debated by all involved, thrust into the open long-standing suspicions among Sanders and his supporters that the national party is unfairly working to support the candidacy of its front-runner. “Clearly, in this case, they are trying to help the Clinton campaign,” said Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver, who threatened to file a lawsuit against the DNC as soon as Friday afternoon, unless the party backs down. DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz responded that “the Sanders campaign had inappropriately and systematically accessed Clinton campaign data,” rejecting Weaver’s effort to portray the breach as the fault of a software glitch and a small group of rogue staffers. Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said the campaign was “informed that our proprietary data was breached by Sanders campaign staff in 25 searches by four different accounts and that this data was saved into the Sanders’ campaign account.” “We are asking that the Sanders campaign and the DNC work expeditiously to ensure that our data is not in the Sanders campaign’s account and that the Sanders campaign only have access to their own data,” he added. The back-and-forth on the eve of the party’s final presidential debate of the year underscored Sanders’ attempt to cast himself as an anti-establishment upstart willing to take on Clinton, the unquestioned front-runner for the party’s nomination who is not beloved among some of the party’s most liberal voters. But by firing his top data staffer, and acknowledging that members of his staff looked at information that belonged to the Clinton campaign, Sanders also threatened to undercut his image as an honest broker seeking to foster a “political revolution” to help the nation’s poor and beleaguered middle class. The incident interrupted a period in which Democrats were sailing toward a peaceful primary season, with Clinton comfortably ahead of Sanders nationally in a campaign that harbors little of the discord and discontent roiling the Republican Party. The DNC maintains an extensive database of voter information that it rents to campaigns. The campaigns then update that database with their own information about voters. The data is used to target likely voters and anticipate what issues might motivate them to support a candidate. The information is of particular importance in the first states to votes in the presidential nominating process, where a campaign’s ability to organize its supporters and make sure they cast a ballot can make the difference between winning and losing. Firewalls are put in place to prevent campaigns from looking at data maintained by their rivals. But officials said the vendor that runs the system, NGP VAN, ran a software patch on Wednesday that allowed all users on the system to access data belonging to other campaigns. The breach did not involve any hacking or enable any voting information to enter the public domain, officials said. The Sanders campaign accused NGP VAN of making “serious errors.” Weaver said four members of the Sanders campaign had accessed the information, but only the actions of one, the campaign’s data director, had risen to the level of a firing offense. Weaver argued that the firewall used by the vendor had previously failed and he railed against the party for not taking the steps required to keep the information secure. “While that information was made available to our campaign because of the incompetence of the vendor, it should not have been looked at,” Weaver said. Josh Uretsky, the data director fired from Sanders’ campaign, said his team was merely investigating the security problem and trying to figure out how exposed their own data was by the software patch. “We wanted to document and understand the scope of the problem so we could report it accurately,” he said, in an interview with MSNBC. “We didn’t actually use it for anything valuable and we didn’t take custodianship of it.” While Uretsky took responsibility for the incident, he didn’t believe the DNC would think he violated any rules. “I didn’t believe at the time that I did it that they would believe what I was doing was wrong,” he said in the interview. “I did it with full knowledge that they could see what I was doing.” Wasserman Schultz said the DNC had asked the Sanders campaign for a “full accounting of whether or not this information was used and the way in which it was disposed.” Only then will the party make a decision on restoring Sanders’ access to the database. That decision infuriated Weaver, who said the party had cut Sanders and his team off from “lifeblood of any campaign.” “This is information that we have worked hard to obtain,” he said. “It is our information, not the DNC’s.” News of the data breach was first reported by The Washington Post on Friday. DNC spokesman Luis Miranda said Friday the party had instructed NGP VAN to conduct an analysis of any users who accessed the data and report back its findings. Stu Trevelyan, NGP VAN’s chief executive and president, said in a statement that his firm was “confident at this point that no campaigns have access to or have retained any voter file data of any other clients; with one possible exception, one of the presidential campaigns.” “NGP VAN is providing a thorough report to the DNC on what happened and conducting a review to ensure the integrity of the system,” he said. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Party insiders give Hillary Clinton early, commanding delegate edge
Hillary Rodham Clinton has locked up public support from half of the Democratic insiders who cast ballots at the party’s national convention, giving her a commanding advantage over her rivals for the party’s presidential nomination. Clinton’s margin over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley is striking. Not only is it big, but it comes more than two months before primary voters head to the polls — an early point in the race for so many of the people known as superdelegates to publicly back a candidate. “She has the experience necessary not only to lead this country, she has experience politically that I think will help her through a tough campaign,” said Unzell Kelley, a county commissioner from Alabama. “I think she’s learned from her previous campaign,” he said. “She’s learned what to do, what to say, what not to say — which just adds to her electability.” The Associated Press contacted all 712 superdelegates in the past two weeks, and heard back from more than 80 percent. They were asked which candidate they plan to support at the convention next summer. The results: Clinton: 359. Sanders: 8. O’Malley: 2. Uncommitted: 210. The 712 superdelegates make up about 30 percent of the 2,382 delegates needed to clinch the Democratic nomination. That means that more than two months before voting starts, Clinton already has 15 percent of the delegates she needs. That sizable lead reflects Clinton’s advantage among the Democratic Party establishment, an edge that has helped the 2016 front-runner build a massive campaign organization, hire top staff and win coveted local endorsements. Superdelegates are convention delegates who can support the candidate of their choice, regardless of who voters choose in the primaries and caucuses. They are members of Congress and other elected officials, party leaders and members of the Democratic National Committee. Clinton is leading most preference polls in the race for the Democratic nomination, most by a wide margin. Sanders has made some inroads in New Hampshire, which holds the first presidential primary, and continues to attract huge crowds with his populist message about income inequality. But Sanders has only recently started saying he’s a Democrat after a decades-long career in politics as an independent. While he’s met with and usually voted with Democrats in the Senate, he calls himself a democratic socialist. “We recognize Secretary Clinton has enormous support based on many years working with and on behalf of many party leaders in the Democratic Party,” said Tad Devine, a senior adviser to the Sanders campaign. “But Sen. Sanders will prove to be the strongest candidate, with his ability to coalesce and bring young people to the polls the way that Barack Obama did.” “The best way to win support from superdelegates is to win support from voters,” added Devine, a longtime expert on the Democrats’ nominating process. The Clinton campaign has been working for months to secure endorsements from superdelegates, part of a strategy to avoid repeating the mistakes that cost her the Democratic nomination eight years ago. In 2008, Clinton hinged her campaign on an early knockout blow on Super Tuesday, while Obama’s staff had devised a strategy to accumulate delegates well into the spring. This time around, Clinton has hired Obama’s top delegate strategist from 2008, a lawyer named Jeff Berman, an expert on the party’s arcane rules for nominating a candidate for president. Clinton’s increased focus on winning delegates has paid off, putting her way ahead of where she was at this time eight years ago. In December 2007, Clinton had public endorsements from 169 superdelegates, according to an AP survey. At the time, Obama had 63 and a handful of other candidates had commitments as well from the smaller fraction of superdelegates willing to commit to a candidate. “Our campaign is working hard to earn the support of every caucus goer, primary voter and grass roots and grasstop leaders,” said Clinton campaign spokesman Jesse Ferguson. “Since day one we have not taken this nomination for granted and that will not change.” Some superdelegates supporting Clinton said they don’t think Sanders is electable, especially because of his embrace of socialism. But few openly criticized Sanders and a handful endorsed him. “I’ve heard him talk about many subjects and I can’t say there is anything I disagree with,” said Chad Nodland, a DNC member from North Dakota who is backing Sanders. However, Nodland added, if Clinton is the party’s nominee, “I will knock on doors for her. There are just more issues I agree with Bernie.” Some superdelegates said they were unwilling to publicly commit to candidates before voters have a say, out of concern that they will be seen as undemocratic. A few said they have concerns about Clinton, who has been dogged about her use of a private email account and server while serving as secretary of state. “If it boils down to anything I’m not sure about the trust factor,” said Danica Oparnica, a DNC member from Arizona. “She has been known to tell some outright lies and I can’t tolerate that.” Still others said they were won over by Clinton’s 11 hours of testimony before a GOP-led committee investigating the attack on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Clinton’s testimony won widespread praise as House Republicans struggled to trip her up. “I don’t think that there’s any candidate right now, Democrat or Republican, that could actually face up to that and come out with people shaking their heads and saying, ‘That is one bright, intelligent person,’” said California Democratic Rep. Tony Cardenas. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Top Joe Biden aide lays out potential 2016 platform
Vice President Joe Biden would run an optimistic and unscripted “campaign from the heart” based on restoring middle-class opportunity, one of his top political advisers said Thursday, laying out for the first time the argument Biden would make if he runs for president. Former Delaware Sen. Ted Kaufman, one of Biden’s closest political advisers, said Biden would soon make a decision about whether to enter the race. In an email obtained by The Associated Press, Kaufman asked former staffers to stay in close contact and said Biden would need their help immediately if he enters the race. “If he runs, he will run because of his burning conviction that we need to fundamentally change the balance in our economy and the political structure to restore the ability of the middle class to get ahead,” Kaufman said. Calls within the Democratic Party for Biden to run have been growing for months, fueled largely by concerns that front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton‘s campaign was faltering under the weight of an email scandal and declining popularity. But Clinton’s commanding performance Tuesday in the first Democratic debate, coupled with Biden’s seemingly endless delays in making a decision, have put a damper on the speculation in recent days, with top Democratic leaders questioning whether it’s too late for Biden. Kaufman’s letter to former Biden aides marked an attempt by the vice president to signal he’s still very much considering running and shouldn’t be written off. It also served to reinforce the notion that Clinton isn’t the only Democrat who could run in part on a promise to lock in policies that Obama has advanced during his two terms. “He believes we must win this election,” Kaufman said. “Everything he and the president have worked for — and care about — is at stake.” Clinton and her top rival in the race, Sen. Bernie Sanders, have been campaigning for months and have raised tens of millions of dollars, giving them a huge head start that would make it tough for Biden to mount a viable challenge. The first filing deadlines in some states are just weeks away and Biden currently has no operation in key states. Alluding to those concerns, Kaufman said Biden was “aware of the practical demands of making a final decision soon.” “If he decides to run, we will need each and every one of you — yesterday!” Kaufman wrote in the letter, distributed to Democratic operatives who worked for Biden in the Senate, in the White House or on his previous presidential campaigns. Kaufman, a longtime Biden confidant, served as his chief of staff in the Senate and was appointed to replace him when Biden became vice president. In the weeks after the vice president’s son, former Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, died from brain cancer in May, Biden brought Kaufman back into the fold and gave him an office on the White House campus. He’s one of three top advisers who have spent the last two months cloistered with Biden as he decides about 2016; Biden chief of staff Steve Ricchetti and political adviser Mike Donilon round out the trio. The group met with Biden to discuss the 2016 race on Wednesday evening at Biden’s official residence, said a person familiar with the meeting, who wasn’t authorized to speak to reporters and requested anonymity. Yet Kaufman and other top Biden staffers have put together a campaign-in-waiting that could be activated quickly if he decides to take the plunge, with lists of potential staffers who have agreed to work for a campaign and donors committed to helping fund it. Those discussions have all taken place in private, and Biden’s office has declined to comment on the status of his deliberations. Kaufman’s letter to former staffers opened a new, more public phase of the deliberations, as Biden seeks to keep himself in the discussion despite the fact that many Democrats have moved on or grown frustrated with his indecision. Even Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, told reporters this week that it was time Biden make a decision. Biden’s top consideration is the welfare and support of his family, Kaufman said. The vice president has said previously he’s unsure he has the emotional fortitude to run following his son’s death. “He is determined to take, and to give his family, as much time as possible to work this through,” Kaufman said. Clinton’s resurgence following Tuesday’s debate has prompted questions about what rationale Biden could offer for challenging her and how he would differentiate himself from the former secretary of state he served alongside in Obama‘s Cabinet. But Kaufman said he’d spoken extensively with Biden about his deliberations and that if he runs, Biden would mount an “optimistic campaign.” “A campaign from the heart. A campaign consistent with his values, our values, and the values of the American people,” Kaufman said. “And I think it’s fair to say, knowing him as we all do, that it won’t be a scripted affair — after all, it’s Joe.” Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
