2022 elections. The steady march for sanity continues.

printer

Well-Known Member
QAnon promoter Ron Watkins is running for Congress in Arizona
Ron Watkins, long-suspected of being "Q", the mysterious figure behind the QAnon conspiracy theory and one of the leading purveyors of the "Big Lie" that the 2020 election was stolen from President Trump, announced his candidacy for Congress in Arizona this week.

In a video posted to the social media platform Telegram, Watkins said that he was running for the Republican nomination in Arizona's 1st Congressional District to defeat the "dirtiest Democrat in the D.C. swamp," incumbent Congressman Tom O'Halleran, who has held the seat for four years.

"We must stay vigilant and keep up the pressure both here in Arizona and throughout the country to indict any and all criminals who have facilitated election fraud," Watkins said. "President Trump had his election stolen not just in Arizona, but in other states too. We must now take this fight to Washington, D.C., and vote out all the dirty Democrats who have stolen our republic."

Arizona's 1st District is currently the state's largest district, and is one of its more competitive ones. O'Halleran won there by just three points in 2020, and is being targeted by the National Republican Congressional Committee in 2022. The state's independent redistricting commission is in the process of drawing maps, but a draft released last week shrunk the size of the district in a way that would make it slightly more Republican.

"Just when you think the GOP candidates in AZ-01 can't get any more extreme, a literal QAnon ring leader jumps in the race," Johanna Warshaw, a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson, said in a statement.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
QAnon promoter Ron Watkins is running for Congress in Arizona
Ron Watkins, long-suspected of being "Q", the mysterious figure behind the QAnon conspiracy theory and one of the leading purveyors of the "Big Lie" that the 2020 election was stolen from President Trump, announced his candidacy for Congress in Arizona this week.

In a video posted to the social media platform Telegram, Watkins said that he was running for the Republican nomination in Arizona's 1st Congressional District to defeat the "dirtiest Democrat in the D.C. swamp," incumbent Congressman Tom O'Halleran, who has held the seat for four years.

"We must stay vigilant and keep up the pressure both here in Arizona and throughout the country to indict any and all criminals who have facilitated election fraud," Watkins said. "President Trump had his election stolen not just in Arizona, but in other states too. We must now take this fight to Washington, D.C., and vote out all the dirty Democrats who have stolen our republic."

Arizona's 1st District is currently the state's largest district, and is one of its more competitive ones. O'Halleran won there by just three points in 2020, and is being targeted by the National Republican Congressional Committee in 2022. The state's independent redistricting commission is in the process of drawing maps, but a draft released last week shrunk the size of the district in a way that would make it slightly more Republican.

"Just when you think the GOP candidates in AZ-01 can't get any more extreme, a literal QAnon ring leader jumps in the race," Johanna Warshaw, a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson, said in a statement.
Screen Shot 2021-10-19 at 5.41.43 PM.png
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Virginia State Police investigating death threat against McAuliffe
"The Virginia State Police is in receipt of the threat and has forwarded it to our Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management Team, as is done with any email of an alarming/threatening nature that is received by a candidate running for elected office. No arrest or charges have been placed at this time," Corinne Geller, public relations director for the Virginia State Police, said in a statement.

Due to the threat, McAuliffe was assigned protection at an event in Charlottesville on Wednesday. Gubernatorial candidates do not normally receive security in Virginia.

The Hill obtained a copy of the emailed threat, which read: "If I get the opportunity I will shoot Terry! MAGA."

A spokesperson from McAuliffe's campaign said in a statement, "This is the type of violent, dangerous behavior we've come to expect from supporters of Donald Trump."

McAuliffe's Republican opponent Glenn Youngkin's campaign also condemned the threat.

"Political violence is a threat to our democracy and is absolutely unacceptable," said Youngkin spokesperson Macaulay Porter.

The threat comes less than two weeks out from Election Day in the commonwealth on Nov. 2.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article255170227.htmlScreen Shot 2021-10-22 at 8.01.31 AM.pngScreen Shot 2021-10-22 at 8.05.51 AM.png
North Carolina Republicans tried to distance themselves from the type of radical extremism that led to the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. But a leaked membership roster reveals that at least two state lawmakers are affiliated with the Oath Keepers, a right-wing militant group whose members are among those charged in connection to the Capitol insurrection.

North Carolina Reps. Mike Clampitt, a Republican from Bryson City, and Keith Kidwell, a Republican from coastal Beaufort County, are both listed as members of the group, according to ProPublica. Clampitt was elected to the state legislature for one term in 2016 and then again in 2020. Kidwell has served since 2019, and is the House deputy majority whip. Clampitt and Kidwell joined the Oath Keepers in 2014 and 2012, respectively, ProPublica’s analysis showed.

That information should concern every North Carolinian. The Oath Keepers are one of the country’s largest anti-government extremist groups, whose self-described mission is to defend the Constitution. In practice, that looks like armed standoffs with authorities and, of course, participating in storming the U.S. Capitol. The organization is a threat, and that’s not just our opinion; it’s the FBI’s, which has described the Oath Keepers as a “large but loosely organized collection of militia who believe that the federal government has been co-opted by a shadowy conspiracy that is trying to strip American citizens of their rights.”

Anyone who identifies as an Oath Keeper or member of any anti-government paramilitary group has no place in elected office. So why aren’t Republicans coming out and saying so?

The revelation that state lawmakers would belong to such a group is alarming, if not entirely surprising. Some Republicans in the state legislature have previously shown a willingness to rub elbows with the far right — such as when Kidwell and other legislators met with the North Carolina Sons of Confederate Veterans in 2019, for example — but for lawmakers to be members of these groups themselves is additionally concerning.

Kidwell also serves as chairman of the newly reorganized House Freedom Caucus, which has propagated theories of voter fraud in the 2020 election. During the 2021-22 session, Kidwell has introduced legislation such as a bill to allow concealed carry by elected officials at the legislature, a bill to allow certain faculty and school staff to carry weapons on school grounds and a bill called the “Second Amendment Preservation Act.”

Clampitt stands by his Oath Keepers affiliation, according to ProPublica. Clampitt appears to be a Confederate sympathizer who has previously supported legislation to repeal the portion of the state’s constitution that prohibits secession.

Kidwell did not comment on the inclusion of his name on the roster, but said he doesn’t think the information should be in the public domain, according to an article published jointly by Raw Story and Triad City Beat. Kidwell, Clampitt and House Speaker Tim Moore did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this editorial.

The Oath Keeper revelations are one piece of a larger, more worrisome trend. In addition to Clampitt and Kidwell, ProPublica’s analysis identified 46 other state and local government officials on the Oath Keepers roster. Far-right groups aren’t just on the fringes of politics anymore. Slowly but surely, they’re making their way to the mainstream, emboldened by politicians who give legitimacy to their conspiracies whether they belong to these groups or not.

It’s hard for Republicans to distance themselves from the Capitol rioters when members of their own party belong to a militant group — and when their baseless claims about election fraud helped incite the riots in the first place. Both Kidwell and Clampitt have said they don’t condone violence, but those are empty words when they’ve aligned themselves with a vigilante group that thinks violence is the path to justice.

This is a tipping point for North Carolina Republicans, who have, for the most part, avoided the level of election fraud conspiracy we’ve seen in states like Arizona and Pennsylvania. But that’s changing notably with Madison Cawthorn, and having two North Carolina lawmakers belong to Oath Keepers without so much as a “that’s not who we are” statement from leadership is exactly the kind of normalization that should alarm North Carolinians. There’s a fine line between party loyalty and complicity. Republicans need to decide which side of it they want to be on.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
"Far-right groups aren’t just on the fringes of politics anymore. Slowly but surely, they’re making their way to the mainstream, emboldened by politicians who give legitimacy to their conspiracies whether they belong to these groups or not."

Germany all over again. Using the same playbook.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-california-voting-pennsylvania-elections-3c4bb63da9313676f522807a6f2a2993
Screen Shot 2021-10-23 at 11.10.13 AM.png
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Republicans have succeeded this year in passing a range of voting restrictions in states they control politically, from Georgia to Iowa to Texas. They’re not stopping there.

Republicans in at least four states where Democrats control the governor’s office, the legislature or both — California, Massachusetts, Michigan and Pennsylvania — are pursuing statewide ballot initiatives or veto-proof proposals to enact voter ID restrictions and other changes to election law.

In another state, Nebraska, Republicans control the governor’s office and have a majority in the single-house legislature, but are pushing a voter ID ballot measure because they have been unable to get enough lawmakers on board.

Republicans say they are pursuing the changes in the name of “election integrity,” and repeat similar slogans — “easier to vote, harder to cheat.” Democrats dismiss it as the GOP following former President Donald Trump’s false claims that widespread fraud cost him the election. They say Republicans have tried to whip up distrust in elections for political gain and are passing restrictions designed to keep Democratic-leaning voters from registering or casting a ballot.

DONALD TRUMP
GOP uses voters to push election reforms in unlikely states
Amid the Capitol riot, Facebook faced its own insurrection
Amid the Capitol riot, Facebook faced its own insurrection
Judge nixes Trump-era rule limiting review of water projects

“It’s depressing that this is the way that (the Trump) wing of the Republican Party thinks they have to win, instead of trying to win on issues or beliefs,” said Gus Bickford, the Democratic Party chairman in Massachusetts. “They just want to suppress the vote.”

A common thread among the Republican proposals is toughening voter identification requirements, both for in-person and mail voting.

In Michigan and Pennsylvania, Republicans are trying to get around Democratic governors who wield the veto pen. Wisconsin Republicans say they also are considering such a strategy.

In California and Massachusetts, Republicans are a minority in both houses of the legislature. In Republican-controlled Nebraska, the hang-up is an officially nonpartisan legislature where more liberal lawmakers can derail legislation that enjoys broad conservative support.

The road to gain voter approval is uphill in California and Massachusetts, but there’s a clearer path to success in the other states.

The leader of the California effort, Carl DeMaio of Reform California, said his organization is pursuing a ballot initiative because Democratic lawmakers will never take up his group’s proposals.

“That would mean they’re validating Donald Trump, and they have so much hatred for Donald Trump that they don’t even want to acknowledge that there’s even a problem here,” DeMaio said.

Trump’s baseless election fraud claims aside, DeMaio said Trump’s message is resonating with people who have had doubts about the election system based on their own experience, such as getting duplicate ballots mailed to them at home.

Voter fraud is exceedingly rare, and when it’s attempted is typically caught by local election offices.

In any case, Democrats say voter ID laws will do nothing to prevent the little fraud that exists. Rather, it will serve only to force the elderly, poor and disabled to go to unnecessary lengths to get proper government-issued identification cards they may not have, they say.

Despite Trump’s false claims of a stolen election, his own Justice Department and scores of recounts have debunked them, and courts up to the U.S. Supreme Court have swept aside such assertions. The government’s own cybersecurity agency declared the 2020 presidential election the most secure in U.S. history.

No state legislature has produced evidence of widespread election fraud. Even so, at least 10 Republican-controlled states have enacted laws so far this year that toughen voter ID or signature requirements or pare back opportunities to register to vote or cast a ballot.

Putting voter-related matters to a statewide vote is nothing new.

In recent years, for example, voters in California and Florida restored felons’ right to vote. In 2018, Michigan voters approved a constitutional amendment allowing people to register on Election Day and request absentee ballots without having to give a reason.

The difference this year is Republicans using the process in an attempt to enact restrictions they couldn’t pass otherwise.

In California, Massachusetts and Nebraska, Republicans are trying to gather enough signatures to get their proposals on ballots in next year’s general election.

In Michigan, Republicans are using an unusual provision in the state constitution to gather enough petition signatures so the GOP-controlled Legislature can pass a veto-proof voter ID bill.

Among other things, the Michigan initiative would prohibit sending mail-in ballot applications to people who did not request them, with backers saying it sowed confusion and mistrust in 2020.

“Democratic leadership is out of step with their voters,” said Jamie Roe, a Republican campaign consultant and strategist with the Secure MI Vote initiative.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, is preparing to veto similar legislation on her desk, telling reporters this month that there was not one “scintilla” of evidence of widespread voting fraud in last year’s election and that Republicans are simply unhappy over Trump’s loss.

“Our elections work. You don’t like the outcome? Well, then you run in the next election and try to win and earn people’s votes — not cut out a segment of people that cast their ballot as Americans and have a right to do that,” Whitmer said.

In Pennsylvania, which allows no direct access to the ballot for citizen initiatives, the earliest the Republican-controlled Legislature could put its election changes on the ballot — through a proposed constitutional amendment — is 2023.

The Pennsylvania proposal is among several that would go beyond changes to voter ID.

As Trump allies go state to state, pushing partisan reviews of last year’s presidential election, the measure in Pennsylvania would require election results to be audited by the state’s auditor general. It would require paper ballots to bear a watermark and be open to “public inspection” after an election is certified.

The measure is awaiting a vote in the state House, perhaps as early as next week, before it can go to the Senate. Its sponsor, Republican Rep. Jeff Wheeland, said it will “give back to the voters surety” that their elections are safe and secure. Another Republican, Rep. Eric Nelson, said it would let voters ”address what many feel is a frenzy of mistrust in our current election system.”

Democratic Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, referring to Trump’s loss in the battleground state, said the only reason the measure is coming up “is because some are disappointed in the result of the election.”

Under the proposed initiative in California, counties would be required to do more to clean up voter registration rolls, evaluate wait times for in-person voting in every election and show how they will fix “unreasonably long” waits.

In Nebraska, groups including Black Votes Matter and the League of Women Voters have joined forces to oppose the Republican-backed ballot initiative.

John Cartier, director of voting rights for Civic Nebraska, said the initiative would violate Nebraska’s constitutional protections for voting access. He said there has never been a single conviction for voter impersonation fraud in the state’s history.

Besides, he said, states such as Arizona and Georgia already have tough voter ID laws “and people don’t really trust the system there,” Cartier said. “So passage of a voter ID law doesn’t do anything for trust. If anything, it hurts it.”
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/10/22/house-republicans-pro-insurrection/
Screen Shot 2021-10-24 at 8.26.00 AM.png
The first test of the Republican response to Donald Trump’s attempt to hold power after his election loss came hours after the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Members of the House were asked whether they would reject the electoral votes submitted by the state of Arizona, siding with specious arguments about their validity.

Most of them chose to do so. A few hours later, the same question arose about Pennsylvania’s votes and, again, most House Republicans voted to reject them.

Over the next nine months, members of the Republican caucus had multiple additional opportunities to align more closely with Trump or more closely with efforts to hold him to account. By tracking those occasions on which Republicans deviated from the consensus on those votes, we can map out a new polarity within the party, one oriented around democracy itself.

To construct this axis, I looked at six other votes related to the riot. There was the vote to impeach Trump for his role in the attack, the vote to form the committee that would investigate the attack and, on Thursday, the vote to hold Stephen K. Bannon in contempt for failing to offer testimony to the committee.

In the other direction, there were three interesting votes. In response to the attack, the House voted at two different points to award the Congressional Gold Medal to law enforcement who responded on that day and, in each case, a cluster of right-wing legislators opposed the move. Then there was a symbolic but loaded vote aimed at condemning a military coup in Burma. There, again, some Republicans rejected the condemnation, echoing an undercurrent of approval for the act that surfaced in far-right discussion.

By mapping the occasions on which legislators rejected the caucus consensus on those eight votes, we get a map that looks like this.
Screen Shot 2021-10-24 at 8.35.28 AM.png

What’s useful about that illustration is that there are three distinct groups that emerge.

There’s the group at the top, those who were most supportive of the effort to uphold the election results and condemn Trump’s response to it. It includes Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who voted against impeaching Trump (agreeing with the party majority) but supported the contempt vote for Bannon (in opposition to the majority).
And, of course, it includes Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), both of whom serve on the committee itself.

In the middle are the Republicans who voted to accept at least some of the cast electoral votes but who otherwise went no further. This includes Rep. Greg Pence (R-Ind.) (the former vice president’s brother) and Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), both of whom supported Arizona’s electoral votes, but not Pennsylvania’s. (Earlier this year, in retaliation for her views of the Jan. 6 attack, House Republicans ousted Cheney from the position that Stefanik now holds.)

Then, at the bottom, are the right-wing legislators who have often managed to gain national attention for their approach to the job. They include Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who has gained attention for other reasons as well.

If we assign point values to the various votes, ranging from 10 points for supporting the impeachment to minus-7 for opposing the June vote on awarding gold medals to law enforcement (that vote being a moderated versionof a similar March vote), we can distribute the legislators on an axis more explicitly. If we overlay ideology, as measured by VoteView’s DW-Nominate scores, we get a grid.

The legislators who were more supportive of efforts to introduce accountability for Jan. 6 are near the top — and generally less conservative (i.e., more to the left side of the graph). Those who were more opposed to accountability efforts are also generally more conservative.

Screen Shot 2021-10-24 at 8.35.43 AM.png

These are the twin axes on which the House caucus operates at the moment, and there is palpable tension between the two vertical poles. After the vote on the Bannon contempt resolution on Thursday, Greene accosted Cheney and a leading Democrat, calling the vote a “joke.”

The two legislators are not that far apart on ideology, but miles away from one another on efforts to institute some accountability for the Capitol attack.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Next up the insurrectionist RINO's in our state will spread their big lies in a sick attempt to try to rip away our ability to easily vote by getting enough signatures that they can pass some bullshit suppressive legislation that Whitmer can't veto.

https://www.rawstory.com/gov-whitmer-vetoes-another-round-of-michigan-gop-voter-suppression-bills/
Screen Shot 2021-10-30 at 7.29.52 AM.png
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer vetoed Friday three more bills from the Republicans' 39-bill election package that would have imposed stricter ID requirements for voters.

Senate Bills 303 and 304, as well as House Bill 5007, would eliminate the state's current option for voters to submit an affidavit attesting to their identity when attempting to vote without a state issued ID.

Whitmer said the bills would “disproportionately harm communities of color," as non-white voters are five times more likely to lack access to an ID on Election Day.

“Voting restrictions that produce such a racially disparate impact must never become law in this state," Whitmer said.

Advocates for “common sense election reform" applauded Whitmer for her decision to veto.

Nancy Wang, executive director of Voters Not Politicians, said the bills “would have disenfranchised voters across the state by putting up new barriers to voting and restricting funding for local elections."

Sharon Dolente, senior advisor for Promote the Vote, also supported Whitmer's vetoes.

“These bills are out of step with what we know Michigan voters want, a voting system that works for everyone. Michigan law already requires voters to verify their identity prior to voting. These bills would impose a radically restrictive identity verification scheme rejected by 42 states. These bills would make it harder for election officials to ensure Michigan elections remain both accessible and secure," Dolente said.

State Sen. Ruth Johnson (R-Groveland Twp.), a former Michigan secretary of state, said that “by vetoing these measures, the governor is rejecting nearly 80% of Michigan voters who support requiring every voter coming to the polls to present a government-issued ID to cast their ballot — including over 58% of voters in her own party."

Johnson also stated that Proposal 3, which allows for no-reason absentee voting, same-day voter registration, straight-ticket voting and more, “weakened the integrity of our election system by allowing people to register and vote without ever being seen in-person."

Secure MI Vote, a Republican-led petition drive, is working to implement many of the same restrictions to voting access. If the campaign is able to gather enough signatures, the initiative will go to the GOP-led Legislature for approval before voters and Whitmer can't veto it.

“Now, we anticipate that the politicians and political operatives behind Secure MI Vote will attempt to use this veto to fuel their anti-voter plan," Wang said.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan Demas for questions: [email protected]. Follow Michigan Advance on Facebook and Twitter.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.rawstory.com/nra-lawsuit/Screen Shot 2021-11-06 at 8.58.03 AM.png
The Giffords gun safety organization has sued the National Rifle Association and the campaigns of U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and U.S. Rep. Matt Rosendale of Montana, alleging group used shell corporations to improperly aid the Republican lawmakers in 2018.

The suit alleges two NRA affiliates made up to $35 million in illegal campaign contributions — in the form of coordinated communications efforts — to the GOP Senate campaigns of Hawley, Rosendale, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Cory Gardner of Colorado and Tom Cotton of Arkansas, as well as Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

It was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia this week.

The NRA Political Victory Fund, a political action committee, and the NRA Institute for Legislative Action spent millions on supposedly independent political advertising for the six Senate candidates and Trump in the 2014, 2016 and 2018 federal election cycles, according to the suit.

The Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan campaign finance group, is representing Giffords, a gun-safety group founded by former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., in part to counter the NRA's influence in national politics.

Under a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision, outside groups are allowed to spend unlimited amounts on political speech, including advertisements in favor of candidates.

But federal campaign finance rules require such advertisements to be commissioned without coordinating with campaigns. Coordinated messaging counts as an in-kind contribution.

Political action committees are subject to a $5,000 limit per cycle on contributions, including in-kind contributions, to a single candidate. Corporations are not allowed to spend treasury funds for coordinated messaging on behalf of political candidates.

The suit accuses the NRA and the campaigns of using the same political messaging firms to disguise coordinated campaign activity as independent advertising.

The NRA paid Starboard Strategic Inc., a Virginia and Maryland-headquartered company, for advertising in support of the candidates. The candidates paid a company called OnMessage that the suit says is “functionally indistinguishable" from Starboard.

“They are led by the same people and located at the same address, and no internal separation or firewall exists between the staff who work for each entity," the suit says. “OnMessage has been nominated for, and has accepted, industry awards for [NRA] ads contracted through Starboard."

The companies, which the suit alleges are actually one firm operating under two names, then coordinated to create and place complementary advertisements—exactly the type of coordination that is not supposed to be allowed between campaigns and outside groups.

“By falsely claiming their advertising spending was independent, however, the NRA affiliates evaded [federal] contribution limits, source prohibitions and disclosure requirements," the Campaign Legal Center said in a statement.

OnMessage previously drew controversy in Missouri after the Kansas City Star revealed that soon after Hawley was sworn in as state attorney general in 2017, he brought consultants from the firm who would go on to run his Senate campaign into his official office to help direct taxpayer-funded staff.

A report issued by the state auditor's office in 2020 was unable to say conclusively whether the arrangement violated the law because state business was being conducted using private email and text messages.

During the 2018 campaign, Rosendale seemed to publicly confirm his campaign was coordinating with the NRA, the suit alleges. At a July 18, 2018, fundraiser, Rosendale said the NRA Institute for Legal Affairs political director, Chris Cox, would make expenditures in support of Rosendale, then accurately described the content and the timing of the ads that ran weeks later, according to the suit.

The suit says Rosendale accepted up to $383,196 in coordinated expenditures. Hawley accepted up to $973,196, the suit says.

The bulk of the illegal expenditures—$25 million of the $35 million total alleged—went to Trump's 2016 campaign, according to the suit.

Although the suit only names Hawley and Rosendale, other matters concerning the other candidates named in the suit could be proceeding at the Federal Election Commission, the federal regulator for campaign finance violations. The FEC keeps proceedings secret while they are ongoing.

The suit arose from an administrative proceeding at the FEC that Giffords brought in April 2019, but the commission— long derided as a toothless regulator—took no action.

A September court order gave the agency 30 days to act. If the agency did not act, Giffords would be allowed under that order to bring the matter to civil court. The FEC has not acted since that court order.

Because the original complaint was made in 2019, it did not cover the 2020 elections, when Rosendale, Tillis, Gardner, Cotton and Trump all ran again for federal office.

Representatives for the NRA, Hawley, Rosendale, Tillis, Johnson and Gardner did not respond to messages seeking comment Friday.

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: [email protected]. Follow Missouri Independent on Facebook and Twitter.
 

nuskool89

Well-Known Member
everyone wants to be with The President of the United States of America.

View attachment 5019559

two years ago, not so much; Trump had to push himself past everyone because no one wanted him and he knew.

It’s crazy because this is one of the most G gif moments, and a real reminder perception is reality. The context of what happened in that video has nothing to do with the point you’re trying to make though lol. The fact you perceive it as “no one likes him or wanted him there” is just an affirmation of an internal bias.

“White House spokesman Sean Spicer later told reporters that spots for the “family photo” for which the leaders were preparing were predetermined, as is usually the case — implying that Trump was not trying to get a better position, The Washington Post reported, but rather that he was heading for the position reserved for him.

Markovic, afterward, responded to questions by shrugging it off.

“This was an inoffensive situation,” Markovic said. “I do not see it in any other way.”
He said he had the opportunity Thursday to thank Trump personally for his support of Montenegro’s entry into NATO and “of course the further development of our bilateral relations.”
“But, when journalists are differently commenting this scene,” the prime minister said. “I want to tell you that it is natural for the president of the United States to be in the first row.”
Montenegrin news websites were brimming with articles describing how this minor exchange captured the attention of many major U.S. and European news outlets.”

context and calm reason above ^ vs social media and a media personality creating controversy below



“It did not go unmentioned that Trump brushed aside the leader of a country that last month defied Russia and pro-Russian opposition by ratifying its membership in NATO — a historic turn toward the West.


With that tense history in mind, some on social media did not take Trump’s gesture as the kindest welcome to the alliance’s new member.
“Trump shoved Prime Minister of Montenegro at NATO meeting to please Putin, once again,” said one Twitter user.”

source:

 
Last edited:

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
It’s crazy because this is one of the most G gif moments, and a real reminder perception is reality. The context of what happened in that video has nothing to do with the point you’re trying to make though lol. The fact you perceive it as “no one likes him or wanted him there” is just an affirmation of an internal bias.

“White House spokesman Sean Spicer later told reporters that spots for the “family photo” for which the leaders were preparing were predetermined, as is usually the case — implying that Trump was not trying to get a better position, The Washington Post reported, but rather that he was heading for the position reserved for him.

Markovic, afterward, responded to questions by shrugging it off.

“This was an inoffensive situation,” Markovic said. “I do not see it in any other way.”
He said he had the opportunity Thursday to thank Trump personally for his support of Montenegro’s entry into NATO and “of course the further development of our bilateral relations.”
“But, when journalists are differently commenting this scene,” the prime minister said. “I want to tell you that it is natural for the president of the United States to be in the first row.”
Montenegrin news websites were brimming with articles describing how this minor exchange captured the attention of many major U.S. and European news outlets.”

context and calm reason above ^ vs social media and a media personality creating controversy below



“It did not go unmentioned that Trump brushed aside the leader of a country that last month defied Russia and pro-Russian opposition by ratifying its membership in NATO — a historic turn toward the West.


With that tense history in mind, some on social media did not take Trump’s gesture as the kindest welcome to the alliance’s new member.
“Trump shoved Prime Minister of Montenegro at NATO meeting to please Putin, once again,” said one Twitter user.”

source:

I mean if Sean Spencer said it!

But overall I agree with you outside of the smug dick face he had when he did it being the tell that he was being a asshole.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
The congressional map is interactive on their website.
https://apnews.com/article/redistricting-gerrymandering-46ceaf3fb90a4ce3b2fc026c7c18e747Screen Shot 2021-11-11 at 8.05.13 AM.png
North Carolina Republicans are well positioned to pick up at least two House seats in next year’s election — but it’s not because the state is getting redder.

The state remains a perennial battleground, closely split between Democrats and Republicans in elections. In the last presidential race, Republican Donald Trump won by just over 1 percentage point — the narrowest margin since Barack Obama barely won the state in 2008.

But, last week, the GOP-controlled legislature finalized maps that redraw congressional district boundaries, dividing up Democratic voters in cities to dilute their votes. The new plan took the number of GOP-leaning districts from eight to 10 in the state. Republicans even have a shot at winning an eleventh.

North Carolina’s plan drew instant criticism for its aggressive approach, but it’s hardly alone. Experts and lawmakers tracking the once-a-decade redistricting process see a cycle of supercharged gerrymandering. With fewer legal restraints and amped up political stakes, both Democrats and Republicans are pushing the bounds of the tactic long used to draw districts for maximum partisan advantage, often at the expense of community unity or racial representation.

“In the absence of reforms, the gerrymandering in general has gotten even worse than 2010, than in the last round” of redistricting, said Chris Warshaw, a political scientist at George Washington University who has analyzed decades of redistricting maps in U.S. states.

Republicans dominated redistricting last decade, helping them build a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years.

Just three months into the map-making process, it’s too early to know which party will come out on top. Republicans need a net gain of just five seats to take control of the U.S. House and effectively freeze President Joe Biden’s agenda on climate change, the economy and other issues.

Screen Shot 2021-11-11 at 8.06.14 AM.png

But Republicans’ potential net gain of three seats in North Carolina could be fully canceled out in Illinois. Democrats who control the legislature have adopted a map with lines that squiggle snake-like across the state to swoop up Democratic voters and relegate Republicans to a few districts.

RELATED COVERAGE
Gerrymandering surges as states redraw maps for House seats
Capitol rioter who hit officer gets over 3 years in prison
Biden: Infrastructure bill will ease economy woes, just wait
US faces 'heightened threat' in holiday season, DHS says

Screen Shot 2021-11-11 at 8.09.26 AM.png

Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who leads the Democrats’ effort, has called for more states to use redistricting commissions, and a Democratic election bill stalled in the Senate would mandate them nationwide. Democratic-controlled states such as Colorado and Virginia recently adopted commissions, leading some in the party to worry it is giving up its ability to counter Republicans.

Still, Democrats have shown themselves happy to gerrymander when they can. After a power-sharing agreement with Republicans in Oregon stalled, Democrats quickly redrew the state’s congressional map so all but one of its six districts leaned their way. In Illinois, Democrats could net three seats out of a map that has drawn widespread criticism for being a gerrymander.

In Maryland, Democrats are considering a proposal that would make it easier for a Democrat to oust the state’s only Republican congressman, Rep. Andy Harris.

The legal landscape has changed since 2010 to make it harder to challenge gerrymanders. Though using maps to diminish the power of specific racial or ethnic groups remains illegal, the conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that several states no longer have to run maps by the U.S. Department of Justice to confirm they’re not unfair to minority populations as required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The high court also ruled that partisan gerrymanders couldn’t be overturned by federal courts.

“Between the loss of Section 5 and the marked free-for-all on partisan gerrymandering in the federal courts, it’s much more challenging,” said Allison Riggs, chief counsel for voting rights at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, which is suing North Carolina to block its new maps.

Newly passed congressional maps in Indiana, Arkansas and Alabama all maintain an existing Republican advantage. Of the combined 17 U.S. House seats from those states, just three are held by Democrats, and that seems unlikely to change. In Indiana, the new map concentrates Democrats in an Indianapolis district. In Arkansas, a GOP plan that divides Black Democratic voters in Little Rock unnerved even the Republican governor, who let it become official without his signature. In Alabama, a lawsuit from a Democratic groupcontends the map “strategically cracks and packs Alabama’s Black communities, diluting Black voting strength.”

On Wednesday in Utah, the Republican-controlled state legislature approved maps that convert a swing district largely in suburban Salt Lake City into a safe GOP seat, sending it Gov. Spencer J. Cox for his signature.

Though gerrymanders may not always be checked by the courts, they are limited by demographics.

In Texas, for example, the U.S. Census Bureau found the state grew so much it earned two new House seats. Roughly 95% of the growth came from Black, Latino and Asian residents who tend to vote Democratic. The GOP-controlled Legislature drew a map that, while creating no new districts dominated by these voters, maintained Republican advantages.Civil rights groups have sued to block it.

North Carolina Republicans took a different approach, much as they did a decade ago. Last cycle, courts first found that Republican lawmakers packed too many Black voters into two congressional districts, then ruled that they illegally manipulated the lines on the replacement map for partisan gain.

The new North Carolina map, which adds a 14th district to the state due to its population growth, already faces a lawsuit. Experts say it’s unlikely it would have been approved by the Department of Justice if the old rules were in place, especially because it jeopardizes a seat held by a Black congressman, Democratic Rep. G.K. Butterfield.

“It raises a boatload of red flags,” said Michael Li, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice.

North Carolina House Speaker Tim Moore, a Republican, says he’s confident the maps “are constitutional in every respect.”
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/09/senate-seats-up-2022/Screen Shot 2021-11-14 at 4.58.18 PM.png
Democrats have complete control of Washington for the first time in a decade, after winning both the presidency and the Senate in 2020. But for how long?

Retaining both the Senate and the House in 2022 will be a tough task. The Democrats’ majorities are among the slimmest in modern history — with a 50-50 Senate and an effective nine-seat House majority — and midterms are usually very tough on a president’s party.

2021 Election: Complete coverage and analysis

Republican retirements were the early story of the 2022 battle for the Senate. Five of the 20 GOP senators facing reelection — fully one-fourth of its class — announced their retirements, with several in competitive states. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) is still deciding. None of the 14 Democratic senators who are up has yet announced retirements.

Also this week, Republicans lost out on a top potential recruit, with popular New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R) opting not to challenge Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) and to instead seek reelection.

Democrats also have a structural advantage. Every two years, one-third of Senate seats are up, and where those seats lie is hugely important.

But given that Democrats have only a functional 50-50 Senate majority (with Vice President Harris breaking ties) — and given the historical midterm advantage for the opposition party, as reinforced by last week’s elections in New Jersey and Virginia — that early edge is tenuous.
Losing a net of just one seat would cast Washington politics in a very different light by handing the Senate back to the GOP.

Grassley, the oldest GOP senator at 88, announces he will seek another term

How is that battle for the Senate shaping up? Here are some basics.

The first is that Democrats are defending 14 seats, compared with the GOP’s 20. They also arguably have better opportunities, at least on paper. Open seats in North Carolina and Pennsylvania are particularly tantalizing, given how close those states were in the 2020 presidential race and that it’s generally tougher to defeat an incumbent. Democrats could also have a good opportunity in another key swing state, Wisconsin, regardless of whether Johnson seeks reelection.
Screen Shot 2021-11-14 at 5.00.20 PM.png

The Democrats could also have opportunities in Ohio, where Sen. Rob Portman (R) is retiring, and in Florida, home of Sen. Marco Rubio (R), but both of these once-preeminent swing states have drifted toward the GOP in recent elections and could be tough to pick off in 2022.

The GOP’s top two pickup opportunities are also readily apparent: Arizona and Georgia. Both were among the most narrowly decided states that President Biden won, and both have a history of favoring Republicans. Both are home to Democratic incumbents who won their seats in 2020 special elections: Sens. Mark Kelly (Ariz.) and Raphael G. Warnock (Ga.). The GOP’s path back to a majority begins with reclaiming these two states.

Beyond that, though, obvious GOP opportunities are harder to come by. Sununu’s decision not to run leaves less-heralded options in a blue-trending swing state, which went for Biden by seven points last year. Ditto Nevada, where first-term Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D) is up for reelection, and the leading GOP candidate is former Attorney General Adam Laxalt, who lost a race for governor in 2018.

The big question in the battle for the Senate is whether the map assists the Democrats enough in what should be a good year for Republicans.
The 2018 midterms, for instance, were very good for Democrats — they won more than 40 House seats and took that chamber — but a very tough Senate map meant Republicans actually gained two seats there. The structural imbalance isn’t as great for the president’s party in 2022, but it could be significant.

Democrats’ control of the House is arguably more imperiled than their hold on the Senate. That’s a function of the Senate seats that are up for reelection as well as the lay of the land in the House, where Republicans are able to re-draw many more districts in their favor after the 2020 Census.

Put plainly: Through a combination of the GOP’s inherent advantage on the House map, its control over the upcoming round of redistricting and the very narrow Democratic majority, 2022 could be very tough for the Democratic Party.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Butterfield announces retirement, hits GOP over 'racially gerrymandered' map
Butterfield, who has served North Carolina’s 1st Congressional District for nearly 18 years, announced his retirement in a video posted to Twitter, in which he knocked the Republican Party for placing “party politics” above the “best interests” of North Carolina residents.

“The map that was recently enacted by the legislature is a partisan map. It's racially gerrymandered. It will disadvantage African American communities all across the first congressional district,” Butterfield said in the video.

“I am disappointed, terribly disappointed with the Republican majority legislature for again gerrymandering our state's congressional districts and putting their party politics over the best interests of North Carolinians,” he added.

North Carolina’s GOP-led General Assembly earlier this month approved new congressional maps that put Butterfield in a potentially competitive seat. Under the new lines, Butterfield’s district would not have included the Democratic-leaning city of Greenville. The new maps also makes his district, previously one of two majority-minority districts in the state, majority-white, according to the Raleigh News and Observer.
Democrats are suing the state over the new maps, arguing that they were drawn with political intentions which is unconstitutional in North Carolina.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Nice to see a president not pulling a Trump and using their 4 years as one long presidential campaign because they are focused on doing the actual work of the position they were elected into.
 
Top