Mediaboss Marketing

Abortion access in North Dakota is about to change dramatically. On July 28, a 2007 law banning the procedure with narrow exceptions for rape, incest and the mothers life will take effect.

Its a 15-year-old law, written and passed in a bygone era, when the right to an abortion secured by Roe v. Wade seemed ironclad. Passing the law had no immediate consequences then, and existed as little more than a signal to pro-life voters that the state was on their side. But after a late June Supreme Court decision ending the right to abortion, that law will now reshape the politics of North Dakota womens health care.

And without Democrats support, it wouldnt have been possible.

When the 2007 abortion ban passed, it came with remarkable bipartisan backing. The state House passed the bill 68-24, with 14 of its 33 Democrats lending their votes. In the Senate, the measure passed 29-16, and eight of the chambers 21 Democrats supported it enough to have blocked it, had those senators voted the other way.

A handful of Democrats who backed the bill are still in the Legislature. Senate Minority Leader Joan Heckaman, D-New Rockford, is one of them.

State Sen. Joan Heckaman

I think all of us value life. And I think that's probably one of the reasons I voted for that bill, Heckaman said. Pressed on whether she believes its a good law, Heckaman said its debatable.

I don't want any abortions to happen, she said But at the same time, the Legislature has been negligent of its job of fulfilling the health care for women and newborns. We don't take care of the young moms, we don't make sure that they have what they need. And I think we've got a long way to go there.

State Sen. Tim Mathern, D-Fargo and an elder statesman among a shrinking Democratic caucus, was another supporter of the bill. He said hes proud of work he did in 2007 to insist on several exceptions that make the law less strict such as exceptions for cases of rape and incest and to protect the mothers life. Like Heckaman, he said hes disappointed in a lack of systems that support infants and new parents.

There is also concern about the child the other life that we're dealing with here. That life is also worthy of our society's attention and concern, he said. He added that the legislative process involves compromise, and lamented that its become more of a black and white process that is often driven by the outer edges of debate.

Mathern acknowledged, though, he sees a shift since 2007.

I think society has changed in terms of the concept of bodily integrity as being a concept wholly independent from the issue of the life of another person, he said. And I think that has more energy today from the public than it did 15, 20 years ago.

In one respect, Mathern is clearly correct: quite a lot is different from where it was 15 years ago, when rural Democrats were not yet a rarity and when abortion was less of a partisan debate. In fact, the two leading sponsors in the House were Democrats.

Since then, the Democratic-NPL has been decimated by advances the GOP has made in rural areas, as the country increasingly polarizes into more urban, left-of-center enclaves and more sparsely populated conservative zones.

In North Dakota, Democrats are hardly competitive west of Interstate 29 anymore. Nationally, its hard to imagine a modern Democratic caucus split on the issue of abortion and for a lot of voters, thats what matters. To hear Mathern tell it, North Dakota Democrats cant outrun the reputation of those national Democrats.

I don't think your rank-and-file Democrats changed, he said. But I think the national narrative about what Democrats believe and what Republicans believe has become taken in by North Dakotans.

Mac Schneider, active in North Dakota Democratic politics from 2008 to 2018, has watched a lot of those changes happen.

When I started (as a state senator) back in 09, the Tip O'Neill saying that all politics are local I think that was largely true, Schneider said. Now I think it's largely true to say all politics are national.

Much of North Dakotas modern abortion debate traces to 1991, when an anti-abortion measure with exceptions for rape, incest and to save a mothers life passed the North Dakota Legislature. It was met with a veto by Gov. George Sinner, who once aspired to the Catholic priesthood.

"I am a Catholic and ... I agree with the current Catholic judgment that abortion is wrong," Sinner said at the time. "The issue here, however, is the role of the law."

But Sinner signed a bill that imposed a 24-hour waiting period on abortions, and required women receive information on medical risks and alternatives.

1991 was a year of intense conflict over abortion. The Associated Press also recalls that days after the passage of the abortion bill, 26 people stormed a Fargo abortion clinic, and that 10 North Dakota anti-abortion protests saw 210 people arrested over the course of the year.

Sinners choices slowed the success of the anti-abortion movement. But it couldnt mask that the Legislature was overwhelmingly opposed to the procedure; the ban had passed in the Senate 32-21, and in the House 64-39.

The fact that it did pass showed the majority of our legislative representatives did speak out against abortion, Renee Klein, leader of the North Dakota Right to Life, told the Associated Press that year.

By 2007, Gov. John Hoeven now the states senior Republican U.S. senator was ready to sign an abortion ban, and did. It still left critics unsure what would come next, and raised questions that more politicians will surely face in coming years.

"Assume you're undergoing chemotherapy and found yourself pregnant. What would you do?" Rep. Kenton Onstad, D-Parshall, wondered in 2007. "What does this law allow you to do?"

The state confronted the issue just seven years later, though, when in 2014 North Dakota voters shot down a personhood ballot measure that would have added language to the state constitution noting that the inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected. Politico recalls that critics had worried the measure might restrict access to abortion even before viability, criminalize in-vitro fertilization or limit end-of-life treatment choices.

One of the largest questions now about Roe v. Wade is mostly about how its aftermath will unfold; its already messy and unclear. In Florida, a judge this week moved to block a 15-week abortion ban, citing the state constitution. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joe Manchin, D-W.V., suggested in the aftermath of the ruling that justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch misled them.

Former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., suggested something similar. Heitkamp, who in 2018 lost her seat to Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., had voted for Gorsuch but against Kavanaughs confirmation.

I believed that Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly lied under oath, so I trusted nothing he said about his position on Roe v. Wade, Heitkamp texted a reporter this week. She added on Gorsuch that I think he knew at the time that he testified that he was a likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade but hid behind veiled language on establish precedent to just get through the confirmation process.

Because I have more respect for Justice Gorsuch, its a greater disappointment that he wasnt more transparent, she said.

State Rep. Josh Boschee, D-Fargo is the House minority leader. He lamented the absoluteness of the Supreme Courts decision, he said, worrying that doctors might hesitate in some parts of the country to perform essential care on pregnancies dangerous to a pregnant mother.

But he also pointed out that the Democratic-NPL welcomes all kinds of candidates, especially when a reporter pointed out that Mark Haugen, the partys U.S. House candidate, is pro-life .

Our caucus, compared to the Republican caucus, isnt a caucus that sits down and says, you have to vote this way, Boschee said. He acknowledged, though, that there are supporters who want more litmus tests for politicians on abortion and the rights of sexual minorities and more.

But part of governing is being able to take the information you have and trying to make the best decision you can, he added. What I would say to Democratic voters is that you need to have conversations with candidates, both Republican and Democrat, about the issues that are important to you.

See original here:
15 years later, Democrats reckon with votes supporting North Dakota abortion ban - Grand Forks Herald

Here are seven things to watch in Colorado, Illinois, Mississippi, New York, Oklahoma and Utah:

Its pretty clear that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and other Democrats didnt want to face Richard Irvin in November.

The mayor of suburban Aurora, Ill., Irvin has been bolstered by an extraordinary $50 million in donations from conservative billionaire Ken Griffin. But despite Griffins largesse, Irvin is expected to fall flat on Tuesday, in large part because of Pritzker and the Democratic Governors Association, which have blasted Irvin on the airwaves for months mostly with ads intended to dissuade GOP voters from supporting him, calling him soft on crime and insufficiently conservative.

The ultra-wealthy Pritzker has already spent nearly $33 million on advertising, according to AdImpact, and the DGA has kicked in another $19-plus million, mostly in the pricey Chicago media market. Its all been designed to sink Irvins campaign below that of Darren Bailey, a state senator seen as less able to win over the sizable share of Democrats any Illinois Republican would need to prevail statewide.

The coup de grace likely came three days before the primary, when Trump endorsed Bailey, who had already surmounted Irvin in the polls. It gives Trump a chance to improve his spotty primary-endorsement record in governors races after losses in Georgia, Idaho and Nebraska but the stat-padding former president will hardly deserve any credit.

Meanwhile, Democratic groups are also meddling in three Colorado primaries, trying to bolster the reelection prospects of Gov. Jared Polis and Sen. Michael Bennet and the partys chances of winning a newly drawn House seat.

In the Senate race, a new group called Democratic Colorado has spent $4.2 million in an effort to deny businessman Joe ODea the GOP nomination to face Bennet. The groups ads target Republican primary voters: One highlights state Rep. Ron Hanks conservative credentials, while the other says ODea is a phony for supporting President Joe Bidens $1.2 trillion spending bill and making campaign donations to Bennet and then-Gov. John Hickenlooper, even after he signed new gun safety measures into law.

Its the same story in the governors race: A newly created group, Colorado Information Network, has spent $1.7 million on ads elevating the underfunded Greg Lopez over Heidi Ganahl, a member of the University of Colorado Board of Regents whos seen as a more credible Polis opponent.

And in the new, 8th Congressional District, House Majority PAC, a super PAC with ties to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is running ads calling Weld County Commissioner Lori Saine a conservative warrior, in an apparent effort to elevate Saine over state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer.

The races represent an escalation of Democrats meddling efforts after previous attempts to lock GOP Reps. David Valadao and Young Kim out of the general election in Californias top-two primary last month fell flat. With Baileys likely victory in Illinois, Democrats would succeed in denying Irvin the nomination but wins by Hanks, Lopez or Saine in Colorado would further vindicate Democrats strategy.

Trump visited Illinois last weekend to campaign for freshman GOP Rep. Mary Miller against one of her colleagues, in a race that highlights the divide among Republicans on Capitol Hill.

In one corner are Trump and Miller, who earned almost-instant infamy when she said Hitler was right about one thing in a speech in front of the Capitol on her second full day in office. Miller courted more controversy at the Trump rally, when she called the Supreme Courts ruling last week dismantling federal abortion rights a victory for white life a campaign aide said after that Miller misspoke and meant to say right to life.

On the other side is GOP Rep. Rodney Davis, a five-term congressman whos set to become chair of the House Administration Committee if Republicans win control of the House. Unlike Miller, Davis voted against objections to the 2020 election results and for a bipartisan commission to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. But his ads attacking Miller mostly focus on her anti-establishment votes against government-funding bills hitting her for voting against increased defense spending, for example, along with some liberal Democrats.

The race is a major test of Trumps sway and, given Millers various controversies, his judgment. Trump-backed Rep. Alex Mooney easily defeated fellow Rep. David McKinley in West Virginia in the only previous member-versus-member primary this year. But in Illinois, Davis has outspent Miller on advertising by a roughly three-to-one margin, and the race is more competitive.

Further north, Democratic Reps. Sean Casten and Marie Newman are squaring off for one Chicagoland seat after redistricting. Newman ousted then-Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski in a primary two years ago over Lipinskis opposition to abortion rights.

But campaigning for the seat has essentially stopped after Castens 17-year-old daughter, Gwen Casten, died unexpectedly two weeks before the primary.

And theres one more Illinois incumbent with a tricky primary: Democratic Rep. Danny Davis is facing a rematch against liberal challenger Kina Collins, whom he easily defeated last year. But progressives have targeted Davis Chicago district anew, and Collins has outraised the 13-term incumbent, who got a late endorsement from President Joe Biden last weekend.

When then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo resigned in disgrace last year, it looked like his successor, Kathy Hochul, would face a difficult battle for the Democratic nomination. There was state Attorney General Letitia James, building a national profile as a thorn in Trumps side, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, working to lock down the left, and even the possibility of a Cuomo comeback attempt.

But it all mostly fizzled out. James quit the campaign, Cuomo didnt run, and polls show Hochul way ahead of Williams and Rep. Tom Suozzi.

Now, it appears the only question is who Hochul will face in November between a crowded field of Republican men.

The establishment pick is Rep. Lee Zeldin, who is giving up his Long Island House seat. Hes the choice of state GOP insiders but despite being a top Trump ally in Congress, he hasnt received the former presidents backing: Trump hasnt endorsed in the race.

The list of Zeldin opponents includes businessman Harry Wilson, whos spent nearly $7 million on ads promoting himself as a private-sector turnaround expert; 2014 nominee Rob Astorino; and famous-named Andrew Giuliani, the son of the now-controversial former mayor, who became a national celebrity as a child mugging for the camera at his fathers official events.

Of the 35 House Republicans who supported a bipartisan Jan. 6 commission last year, five are on the ballot on Tuesday: Davis and GOP Reps. John Curtis (Utah), Stephanie Bice (Okla.), Blake Moore (Utah) and Michael Guest (Miss.).

Guest edged his leading opponent in Mississippis June 7 primary, former Navy fighter pilot Michael Cassidy, by just 268 votes but with only 47 percent of the total votes cast, he failed to reach the threshold to win the nomination. The two men are now facing off head-to-head in the lower-turnout runoff, and Guest and House Republicans top super PAC, Congressional Leadership Fund, have spent the past 21 days knocking down Cassidys conservative bona fides in hopes of overcoming voters skepticism of the incumbent.

Of Curtis, Bice and Moore, Curtis has taken his primary most seriously, spending nearly $400,000 on advertising, according to AdImpact.

Two other House Republicans to watch on Tuesday: Reps. Steven Palazzo (Miss.) and Doug Lamborn (Colo.).

Palazzo is in imminent danger. He finished first in the June 7 primary but only earned 31 percent of the vote. That was ahead of Jackson County Sheriff Mike Ezell (25 percent), but Palazzos paltry percentage is a sign of dissatisfaction with the incumbent, who has faced allegations of misusing campaign and official funds.

Lamborn, meanwhile, has had primary problems before, despite being among the most conservative members of Congress. He could face another close shave this year against state Rep. Dave Williams.

Thirteen Republicans appear on the ballot in the special primary election to replace Sen. Jim Inhofe when the 87-year-old incumbent resigns at the end of the year a crowded contest for what is widely seen as a safe GOP seat.

The favorite is Rep. Markwayne Mullin, but there are other bold-faced names in the race. Theres Scott Pruitt, the former state attorney general and Trump-era EPA administrator who resigned from that office amid myriad scandals, and former state House Speaker T.W. Shannon, who was the runner-up in the last special election for Senate in Oklahoma. He came in behind now-Sen. James Lankford in the race to replace then-Sen. Tom Coburn.

Originally posted here:
Democrats' big bets on GOP primaries come due: What to watch in Tuesday's elections - POLITICO

For decades, the mantra for Democrats during a national election was Republicans are in the pockets of special interests. Now, more and more people have come to believe that the Democrats are aligned with the special interests. The question is as they hobnob with Big Tech billionaires, Hollywood celebrities, music executives, internet influencers and woke corporate CEOs do they take even a moment to catch up on the actual news of the day?

Much of the news is financially and mentally crushing working-class Americans and those living below the poverty line. Or, to classify those constituencies in a category the Democratic elites might understand: Tens of millions of voters.

As the elites who pull the levers of the Democratic Party continue to appease their far-left wing with the Jan. 6 hearings; a Green New Deal costing at least $6 trillion (yes, trillions of dollars); forgiving college loans for predominantly wealthy white kids; and the redistribution of wealth, most Americans are literally crying out for help with factors that are negatively impacting their lives and their safety.

Again, current events may not be talking points at five-star, private jet-accessible retreats that these elites attend, so here is a recap: Crippling gas prices may cause some Americans to choose between food and fuel; skyrocketing inflation forces some to do without; violent crime rates in major cities threaten to spread to suburbs; unchecked illegal immigration adds unsustainable stress to our health care system, constituent services and federal, state, county and city budgets, and is literally costing lives. We know this because the real news that elites may have missed or turned away from tells us that, just this week, at least 51 migrants were found dead in an abandoned tractor-trailer in Texas. Shouldnt such a tragic development be a topic of discussion at the next cocktail party?

Defunding the police and not prosecuting criminals, or releasing them back onto the streets and doing away with cash bail, may be the dream of leftist district attorneys but, as a recent recall election in California showed us, its the stuff of nightmares for Americans who must deal with the consequences of such policies.

The death spiral that many believe the United States to be in has moved well past which party will control Congress after the 2022 midterms and who will win the White House in 2024. If the elites paid attention to whats happening in America far from their gated communities, they might realize that most voters now care about basic quality-of-life issues. Can anyone in the Democratic Party read the room anyone?

There are many high-level, skilled and empathic Democratic advisers out there who do believe that their party and the nation as a whole must embrace more commonsense, pragmatic solutions to Americas problems. But, as Ive been told, a number of them simply dont want to deal with the wrath that progressives would direct toward them if they dared to offer opinions.

So, while they join a long list of Democrats who are running away from the issues, more and more voters including traditional Democrats are running toward the issues. They are doing so because their quality of life is being turned upside down by decidedly illiberal policies.

For Democrats who seemingly answer only to the far left, I have one final question: Since when did the welfare of 90 percent of the American people not matter to your party anymore?

Douglas MacKinnon, a political and communications consultant, was a writer in the White House for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and former special assistant for policy and communications at the Pentagon during the last three years of the Bush administration. His latest book is The 56: Liberty Lessons From Those Who Risked All to Sign the Declaration of Independence.

Visit link:
Have wealthy Democratic elites abandoned the working class? - The Hill

All it took for the left to give up their Im afraid for our democracy! charade was a single court ruling. Theyve gone from swearing only they can protect the rule of law to openly wondering what laws are even good for.

The New York Times on Monday published a column by Peter Coy bemoaning the erosion of public trust in our judicial system. Thats not a particularly offensive or even new concept, but what is new is this thing Coy and other liberals are doing now where they profess ignorance of how laws are executed.

All the Supreme Court really has to go on is the publics acceptance of its rulings as legitimate, he wrote. Coy also quoted Washington University law professor Daniel Epps saying, The Supreme Court has no power to enforce its decisions. It doesnt have an army. The only thing it has power to do is write PDFs and put them up on its website.

Maybe we need that nerdy little CNN fact check guy to come on and explain how our government and the separation of powers work. True, the Supreme Court doesnt have an army. Neither does Congress. But what they have is an executive branch charged with faithfully executing the laws they interpret and pass.

To suggest that the word of the Supreme Court has no real mechanism for enforcement is to suggest that the president and every governor are bound by nothing to execute that word.

But, as fate would have it, they are bound by something. The c-word. (Constitution.)

Article II, Section 3: The president shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Aside from making it clear that theyre ready to abandon American democracy because of the Supreme Courts decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, its somewhat of a mystery as to why liberals are even talking about this.

The Courts decision doesnt mandate anything. Theres nothing really to enforce, per se. Abortion remains legal, though all 50 states now reserve the right to regulate it any which way their legislatures see fit. If the threat is to ignore the Supreme Courts ruling, its not much of a threat. Regulate or dont. Its up to the states and yes, they do have ways to ensure that their laws are followed.

But the larger implication is noted. Democrats dont care about our democracy.

See the original post:
Democrats Signal Their Preparation For Abandoning Democracy - The Federalist

WASHINGTON Earlier this month, when Senator Bernie Sanders said he would not challenge President Biden in 2024, Mr. Biden was so relieved he invited his former rival to dinner at the White House the next night.

Mr. Biden has been eager for signs of loyalty and they have been few and far between. Facing intensifying skepticism about his capacity to run for re-election when he will be nearly 82, the president and his top aides have been stung by the questions about his plans, irritated at what they see as a lack of respect from their party and the press, and determined to tamp down suggestions that hes effectively a lame duck a year and a half into his administration.

Mr. Biden isnt just intending to run, his aides argue, but hes also laying the groundwork by building resources at the Democratic National Committee, restocking his operation in battleground states and looking to use his influence to shape the nomination process in his favor.

This account of Mr. Bidens preparation for re-election and his building frustration with his partys doubt is based on interviews with numerous people who talk regularly to the president. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. But several said the president and his inner circle were confounded by Democrats discussions about a Plan B when the one person who has defeated Donald J. Trump has made clear he intends to run again.

Mr. Biden has told advisers he sees a replay of the early days of his 2020 primary bid, when some Democrats dismissed him as too old or too moderate to win the nomination. He blames the same doubters for the current round of questioning.

Those skeptics grew louder over the weekend, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, when Mr. Biden restated his opposition to expanding the ranks of the high court, the lefts preferred solution to the courts current conservative tilt. The remarks angered critics who argue that the president, who has never been comfortable elevating abortion rights and positions himself as a consensus builder, doesnt have the temperament for partisan combat.

Too many people in our party look at the glass as half-empty as opposed to the glass as half-full, said former Representative Cedric Richmond, whom Mr. Biden dispatched from the White House to shore up the Democratic National Committee. Accusing other Democrats of putting too much into these polling numbers, an allusion to Mr. Bidens standing below 40 percent in some surveys, Mr. Richmond said there was a wing in our party who wanted a different candidate and Im sure theyd love to have their candidate back in the mix again.

However, its hardly just the presidents progressive detractors who are nervous about soaring inflation, uneasy about Mr. Biden running again, and not convinced he even should.

Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, who some wealthy donors are hoping will consider a third-party presidential bid, declined to say whether he would consider such a run or if he planned to back Mr. Biden. Were just trying to do our daily thing, brother, Mr. Manchin said. Trying to do what we got to do thats good for the country.

Other interviews with Democratic lawmakers yield grave doubts about whether Mr. Biden ought to lead the party again with some concluding he should but only because theres no clearly viable alternative.

I have been surprised at the number of people who are openly expressing concerns about 2024 and whether or not Biden should run, said Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, recounting a recent dinner of Democrats in the capital where several speculated about who could succeed the president.

More worrisome for Mr. Biden, some ambitious Democrats have found that calling for the president to retire is a sure way to win attention. Former Representative Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, whos hoping to unseat Gov. Henry McMaster, 75, said the president should cede the nomination to a new generation of leadership, as he put it on CNN last week.

In some respects, Mr. Biden invited this moment. Running in the 2020 primary, the president presented himself as a bridge, not as anything else as he sought to rally skeptical Democrats to his candidacy. Consumed with ejecting Mr. Trump from office, the partys voters answered that call but thought little of the implications of having an octogenarian in the Oval Office four years on.

Now, over half of Democrats say they dont want Mr. Biden to run again or arent sure he should, according to recent surveys.

Mr. Bidens top advisers reject the idea that an open primary would deliver Democrats a stronger standard-bearer. They fear his retirement would set off a sprint to the left. Whats more, while Vice President Kamala Harris would most likely garner substantial support, shes unlikely to clear the field, leading to a messy race that could widen the partys divisions on issues of race, gender and ideology.

Mr. Biden has told aides he is determined to run again, although he has also noted he will take his familys advice into account. Mr. Bidens advisers recognize the political risk of being perceived as a one-term president and are intent on signaling that he intends to run for re-election.

The president has made clear he wants a primary calendar that better reflects the partys racial diversity, all but assuring the demise of first-in-the-nation status for the Iowa, which was hostile to Mr. Biden in his last two presidential bids. Senior Democrats are considering moving up Michigan, a critical general election state where the president has a number of allies in labor and elected office.

The Democratic National Committee has been quietly preparing for the presidents re-election by pouring money and staff into eight battleground states that happen to have important midterm elections, an effort that began in the spring of last year. Mr. Biden has also accelerated his fund-raising, holding a pair of events for the committee in June that brought in $5 million, while also spending more time on Zoom sessions courting individual contributors.

The president has moved to consolidate his hold on the D.N.C., and not just by sending Mr. Richmond to the committee. Mr. Biden has also shifted both his social media assets and his lucrative fund-raising list to the party, which has made the committee largely reliant on those channels for their contributions.

Even more subtly, Mr. Biden has made personnel moves that indicate hes at least preparing to run, most notably summoning Anita Dunn, a longtime adviser, back to the White House from her public affairs firm. Ms. Dunn, who helped revive the presidents moribund primary campaign in 2020; Jennifer OMalley Dillon, Mr. Bidens top political aide; and senior adviser Mike Donilon are expected to help guide the re-election, though notably there has been no decision yet on who will formally manage the re-election outside the White House.

What Mr. Biden will not do, aides say, is quiet the critics by filing his paperwork to run in 2024 before this years midterm elections, a step being considered by Mr. Trump. Mr. Bidens advisers feel the move would suggest panic and create a significant fund-raising burden two years before the campaign. Should the midterms go poorly, however, the president may feel pressure to formalize his intentions sooner than what they see as the modern standard former President Barack Obamas April 2011 declaration.

For now, the president is relying on personal diplomacy, as he did with Mr. Sanders, the Vermont independent, and the power of the presidency, to ward off would-be competitors.

Even before Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois arrived recently in New Hampshire, a traditional early voting state, Biden officials said that the governors office had given them a heads up about the eyebrow-raising travel and reassured them that the governor had no plan to mount a primary challenge against the president. The message was appreciated, a Biden official said, noting that Mr. Pritzker has been lobbying to get the Democrats 2024 convention to Chicago. Mr. Biden will make that decision later this year.

White House aides have noticed Gov. Gavin Newsoms repeated denunciations of his party leadership for not more robustly confronting Republicans. They dismissed the California governors critiques as those of a politician feeling his oats after easily thwarting a recall and said Mr. Newsom was in frequent contact with the West Wing. And one Biden adviser noted that Mr. Newsom feels enough affection for Mr. Biden to have posted pictures of his children with the president on social media during Mr. Bidens trip to California last week.

As for Hillary Clinton, few Biden advisers think she will mount a challenge against him, though her recent Financial Times interview made it clear shes eager to have her voice in the political conversation. Mrs. Clinton has made little secret of her frustration that she has not been consulted more by Mr. Biden. But White House aides believe they can direct Mrs. Clintons energy toward assisting with the public response to the Supreme Courts decision to overturn Roe.

When pressed about why Mr. Biden is so intent on running again, the presidents defenders point out he did what Mrs. Clinton did not, defeat Mr. Trump.

Stung about their perceived treatment, they also recall other recent Democrats President Bill Clinton and Mr. Obama who rebounded from low approval numbers and rough midterm elections to win second terms.

But Mr. Bidens age at 79, he is the oldest president in American history has fueled skepticism those presidents didnt face.

Trump is a senior citizen, too, shoots back Fletcher Smith, a former South Carolina legislator, reprising a line White House officials use, as well.

Democrats remain so alarmed by the threat that Mr. Trump, 76, represents that Mr. Bidens aides argue they will be insulated from a primary because such a race will be perceived as effectively aiding the former president, a life-or-death question for American democracy.

For the most part, senior Democrats would rather avoid the question for now.

Asked if he expected Mr. Biden to run again, Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, said: If he runs, Im for him. Pressed if he thought Mr. Biden would do so, Mr. Schumer repeated the same line.

One outside ally of the president and a regular White House visitor, the National Urban League president Marc Morial, played down questions about the presidents age, saying that he still has the old Joe Biden fire.

But Mr. Morial urged the president not to dwell on the criticism. I think sometimes if you overreact to it you give it air, he said.

See the original post here:
Biden Irked by Democrats Who Wont Take Yes for an Answer on 2024 - The New York Times