Mediaboss Marketing

Of the 20 states -- and DC -- where preliminary 2018 premiums and insurer participation are available, premiums will rise in every location but one, according to the Kaiser analysis. The lone exception is in Rhode Island where premiums in Providence are expected to dip by 5% as compared to 2017. The premium increases range from 3% in Detroit, Michigan to 49% in Wilmington, Delaware. Fifteen of the locations are projected to see a premium increase of double digit percentages.

Those rate increases are, according to the Kaiser study, the direct result of the uncertainty around the law and its future. Here's the key bit from Kaiser on that:

"In the 20 states and DC with detailed rate filings included in the previous sections of this analysis, the vast majority of insurers cite policy uncertainty in their rate filings. Some insurers make an explicit assumption about the individual mandate not being enforced or cost-sharing subsidies not being paid and specify how much each assumption contributes to the overall rate increase. Other insurers state that if they do not get clarity by the time rates must be finalized -- which is August 16 for the federal marketplace -- they may either increase their premiums further or withdraw from the market."

It doesn't -- or shouldn't -- take a political genius to see how those numbers could translate into a political context. Close your eyes and imagine seeing this ad:

[images of sick, sad looking patients on screen]

Narrator: "Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are gutting our health care. Premiums are spiking. And Trump? 'Let Obamacare fail...I'm not going to own it."

Add in a little localized factoid -- "in Pennsylvania, premiums are surging by 25%" -- and you have the makings of a devastatingly effective ad.

And, unlike, say the Russia investigation, which remains difficult to weaponize in a political context because of its abstractness and complexity, health care is a tremendously potent issue in a campaign.

It touches everyone on a daily, weekly or, at a minimum, monthly basis. It is not some pie-in-the-sky idea. It is a real-life struggle and challenge. It impacts lives. Those are the sorts of issues that really matter in politics -- ones that speak to the heart more than the head.

We've seen proof of health care's power as an issue in both the 2010 and 2014 midterm elections. In 2010, conservative outrage at what they viewed as major overreach by the federal government into their health care fueled the Republican takeover of the House. In 2014, the broken promise of "If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan" led to the Republican takeover of the Senate.

This Kaiser study is the sort of thing that you will see in lots and lots of Democratic ads over the next 15 months. And it's a line of attack Republicans -- at least to this point -- have no obvious answer to.

See the original post here:
This health care study might be a silver bullet for Democrats in 2018 - CNN

President Donald Trumps judicial nominees are ignoring key Senate Democrats as they vie for lifetime appointments to the bench, according to documents and senators a break from longstanding practice that diminishes the minoritys power to provide a check against ideologically extreme judges.

The brewing tension between the White House and the Senate over filling an unusually high number of judicial vacancies is impeding the pace at which Trump installs lifetime appointees to the federal bench so far one of the presidents few major victories, with his legislative agenda largely stymied in Congress.

Story Continued Below

University of Pennsylvania law professor Stephanos Bibas met privately with his state's GOP senator, Pat Toomey, before Trump chose him to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in June but not with Democratic Sen. Bob Casey, according to a questionnaire submitted by Bibas to the Senate Judiciary Committee about his nomination. Same goes for 7th Circuit nominee Amy Coney Barrett, who interviewed with Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) about the appellate vacancy before she was formally nominated but not fellow Indiana Sen. Joe Donnelly, a Democrat, according to her questionnaire.

And in Minnesota, 8th Circuit nominee David Stras met personally with two House Republicans who had recommended him to the White House but with neither of the two senators Democrats Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar who actually wield influence over whether Stras nomination can advance.

Lets be clear: The Trump administration did not meaningfully consult with Sen. Franken prior to Justice Stras nomination, Franken spokesman Michael Dale-Stein said. Rather than discuss how senators traditionally approached circuit court vacancies or talk about a range of potential candidates, the White House made clear its intention to nominate Justice Stras from the outset.

A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Though the nominee questionnaires dont disclose all communications between the White House and senators about a judicial candidate, Democratic senators and aides argue that consultation over court nominees generally a bipartisan custom has been minimal under Trump, at best. That contention is disputed by allies of the Trump administration and other sources familiar with the process.

The fights are largely over process, not a nominees merits. But they come at a time when conservatives are pushing Senate Republicans to break with courtesy that gives deference to home-state senators on judicial nominees a move that would upend yet another longstanding tradition in the chamber.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has signaled hes prepared to push through circuit court nominees even if their home-state senators dont return the so-called blue slip a piece of paper that allows a lawmaker to essentially block a nominee from his or her own state. Ignoring blue slips would give Trump even more power to install conservative nominees to the appeals courts.

The blue slip rule is a century-old tradition, though it has been ignored under previous administrations. So far this year, Grassley has waited for senators to submit the slips before scheduling a hearing.

The Trump administration is well on its way to leaving a lasting conservative imprint on the federal courts. That's due not only to the vacancies but because Democrats alone can't block someone from a confirmation vote after the Senate did away with the filibuster for nominations. So far, the White House has 22 pending candidates for the district courts and seven others for the more influential circuit courts.

Because home-state senators still have virtual veto power over judges through the blue slip, that means the bulk of the nominees have so far hailed from states where both senators are Republicans. Nevertheless, people aligned with the administration say there has been more than adequate consultation with Democrats over judges.

There are some people who are not even returning phone calls from the White House, said Carrie Severino, chief counsel of the conservative advocacy group Judicial Crisis Network that works closely with the White House. You can only do so much to confer with people who are being intransigent.

Some nominees have met with their Democratic senators after being officially tapped for the vacancy. For instance, Barrett met with Donnelly's Senate counsel for two hours and then an hour-long meeting with Donnelly himself, one source knowledgeable with the administration's efforts said. The senator's spokeswoman said the meeting between Donnelly and Barrett occurred in mid-July.

The Senate has long treasured its role in negotiating judges with the White House, particularly when the senators are of the opposing party from the administration, to produce consensus candidates.

Christopher Kang, a deputy counsel for former President Barack Obama, said it appeared very unusual that judicial nominees would so often skip over Democratic home state senators. He cautioned, however, that the questionnaires wouldnt document all outreach between the White House and senators themselves.

Still, appellate picks from the Obama administration from Pennsylvania to Utah to Georgia frequently interviewed with their GOP senators well before being formally nominated, documents show.

The Obama White House even held off nominating a Texas judge, Gregg Costa, to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for a year until both of his home-state senators had met with him, Kang said. Costa was confirmed in 2014.

What we tried to do, to the greatest extent possible, was to consult with the Republican home-state senators, Kang said. Thats something that we really wanted to do to make sure that we could get their support.

The current White House disputed the assertion that there had been insufficient consultation with Democrats.

The Trump administration is committed to filling all the U.S. attorney and judicial vacancies as quickly as possible, White House spokeswoman Kelly Love said in an email. We are working with and extensively consulting all senators nationwide in order to complete the nomination process.

But some Senate Democrats argue otherwise.

Franken had just two conversations with the White House about Stras before the current Minnesota Supreme Court justice was nominated in May, the senators spokesman said. Klobuchar said in an interview that she talked with the White House a number of times about Stras but only recently met with the nominee. Neither has returned a blue slip, according to a Judiciary Committee spokesman.

When the White House nominated Joan Larsen to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in May, her two home-state senators Michigan Democratic Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters were given a brief advance notice but not much beyond that, the senators said. Larsens own nominee questionnaire says she spoke with White House and Justice Department officials about getting picked for the bench, but lists no communication with her home-state senators.

They mentioned that they had a nominee, but that was about the extent of it, Peters said in a recent interview of his interactions with the White House regarding Larsens nomination. There shouldve been more consultation. Theres no question about that.

Stabenow said while she did speak with the White House about Larsen, we certainly werent asked about offering names. Peters and Stabenow each returned blue slips to the committee just last Friday after Larsen was nominated in early May. The lag had prompted Severinos group to shell out $140,000 in early July for ads in Michigan to pressure the two Senate Democrats to back the nominee.

Its gonna be important that they [the White House] work with us, Stabenow said. The Senate has advice and consent. So hopefully they will do that.

In Colorado, 10th Circuit nominee Allison Eid spoke with her former law student, Republican Sen. Cory Gardner, about the Denver-based vacancy, but not with fellow Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, according to her nominee questionnaire. The White House informed Bennet that her nomination was coming, but that was the extent of any discussions, according to the Democrats office.

Larsen, Eid and Stras are particularly notable because all three were on Trumps short list for Supreme Court nominees during his campaign and would be considered candidates for future vacancies. That list produced high court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Amul Thapar, Trumps first confirmed judge to the lower courts.

Trump's appellate picks are also highly recommended by the legal community, with Barrett, Larsen, Stras, Eid and Bibas all earning well-qualified ratings from the American Bar Association. They've also received support from lawyers and other legal professionals in their home states.

Most of these people are not unknown, Severino said. It shouldnt be that challenging to assess them.

One Trump appellate court pick who did reach out to a Democrat was 8th Circuit nominee Ralph Erickson in North Dakota. He spoke with Sen. Heidi Heitkamps staff about the vacancy. Heitkamp has returned the blue slip for Erickson, as has Donnelly for Barrett, according to the committee.

The White House has been consulting home-state senators throughout the judicial selection process, said another source familiar with the administration's efforts. It has been consulting them throughout the vetting process, it has been checking in with them before the nomination and it has been jumping to attention whenever a senator calls seeking an update.

The person added: Short of hiring them to come work in the administration, it is difficult to imagine what more the White House can do to include home-state senators in the process.

But in other cases, Democrats are accusing the Trump administration of blowing past longstanding procedures designed to produce consensus judicial candidates.

The White House announced last week that it was nominating Michael Brennan, a Milwaukee lawyer who once led Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walkers judiciary advisory committee, to a seat on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that has been vacant since 2010.

Brennan didnt get the requisite support from a state-based nominating commission for judges, Baldwins office said. Getting the commission's full support requires five votes from the six-member group, and a spokesman for Wisconsin's other senator, Republican Ron Johnson, said Brennan received four votes.

President Trump has decided to go it alone and turn his back on a Wisconsin tradition of having a bipartisan process for nominating judges, Baldwin said. I am extremely troubled that the president has taken a partisan approach that disrespects our Wisconsin process.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

Go here to read the rest:
Trump's judge picks snub Democrats - Politico

Democratic candidate for governor J.B. Pritzker on Friday won the backing of the Cook County Democratic organization, which rejected calls by his rivals that the party modernize and make no formal endorsement.

Pritzker, a billionaire entrepreneur and investor, has pledged to both fund his own campaign and help out the party's candidates across the ticket next year, providing a financial allure for Democrats to support his bid to take on Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner.

Rauner, an equity investor prior to becoming governor, has used his personal wealth to not only help pay for his own campaign, but also subsidize the Illinois Republican Party and back GOP legislative candidates.

With Democratic committeemen from Chicago's wards and suburban Cook County townships gathered at a River North restaurant, Pritzker touted his early field organizing and communications efforts to counter Rauner and the state GOP.

"Like no other candidate in this race, I am focused on building up the party, uniting the Democratic Party and winning up and down the ticket," Pritzker said.

"So now more than ever, we Democrats need to come together to defeat Bruce Rauner, to stand up against (President) Donald Trump, and today I ask you humbly for your support and endorsement," he said.

The vote for Pritzker by the state's largest Democratic county organization had been expected. It comes as a precursor to next week's gathering of party activists at a large annual county chairmen's brunch to mark Democrat Day at the Illinois State Fair.

Some of the county party's more progressive members had sought an open primary with no endorsement a concept that Pritzker's rivals readily encouraged in an apparent acknowledgment he was likely to get the nod.

"I think it's essential to have an open primary," said businessman Chris Kennedy, an heir to the iconic Massachusetts political family. He urged the slatemakers to "bring the Democratic Party into the 21st century" and restore trust with voters.

"We can't ask them to make our choice theirs if we're not prepared to make their choice ours. We're alienating ourselves from the voters. No voter wants to be told who to vote for in the primary," he said.

Later, Kennedy issued a statement saying top party officials were more concerned with "preserving the status quo."

"So, in the backroom of a restaurant, they anointed their choice for governor," he said.

Another contender, state Sen. Daniel Biss of Evanston, urged the party not to endorse by asking, "Are we going to hold an election or are we going to hold an auction?" After the organization announced it endorsed Pritzker, Biss issued a statement saying the vote was unsurprising and represented "more of the same."

"More backroom deals and more closed door coronations to replace one billionaire with another," he said. "For far too long, families like mine have felt the pain of a system rigged against us, and we're ready to choose something new. Today's vote doesn't change that."

Biss and Ald. Ameya Pawar represent the more progressive candidates for the Democratic nomination for governor. Pawar used his appearance before slatemakers to criticize government run by the wealthy, warning that Rauner was an example.

"I am sick and tired of watching a wealthy few decide what's best for the rest of us," Pawar said.

"If we simply anoint someone based on fame or fortune, then nothing changes," he added.

Also appearing before top Cook County Democrats were governor candidates state Rep. Scott Drury of Highwood, lone downstate contender Bob Daiber, anti-violence activist Tio Hardiman and a new contender who surfaced Friday, perennial candidate Robert Marshall of Burr Ridge.

The organization also endorsed all of the current incumbent statewide Democratic officeholders: Secretary of State Jesse White, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Treasurer Michael Frerichs and Comptroller Susana Mendoza. All county incumbents received endorsements, too. And Cook County Recorder of Deeds Karen Yarbrough was endorsed to replace retiring Clerk David Orr.

White has said he will announce next week whether he will seek a sixth term for the office he has held since 1999.

rap30@aol.com

Twitter @rap30

Read more here:
Pritzker endorsed by Cook County Democrats - Chicago Tribune

Aug. 10, 2017 at 6:47 AM

In the past few months, Democrats have been on a search for saviors who can lead them out of the wilderness. Even though nationally its still unclear who will take on the partys mantle in 2020 Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Cory Booker and countless others have been floated as possibilities theres been an uptick in the number of Democrats writ large who want to run for office on the local level. In the midst of this surge of enthusiasm, Ive noticed that a particular crop of white young men from state-level offices have captured national attention. Their prominence, coupled with their appeal to a certain kind of voter, has left me wondering what these men say about the strategic direction of the Democratic Party.

Self-possessed, serious, maybe a little self-serious these politicians seem to be taking stylistic cues from the dominating political figure of their era, President Obama. Army veteran Jason Kander proved masterful in creating a compelling personal political narrative during his bid for a Missouri Senate seat; a campaign ad showing him assembling a rifle while blindfolded went viral. Jon Ossoff, who ran in a special House election in Georgia, admitted that his careful parsing of language, often about Americans coming together, made him sound a little like Obama. Tom Perriello, a candidate in the Virginia gubernatorial primary, spent formative time abroad and came home adamant about creating a new kind of Democratic politics. Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is a well-credentialed (Rhodes Scholar, Naval Reservist) Midwesterner who seemed to come out of nowhere to wide, approving attention as he sought the chair of the Democratic National Committee in February.

President Obama in 2004, before he was elected as a U.S. senator.

Getty images

They are all, as Obama was when he burst onto the national scene, young, well pedigreed, and varying degrees of attractive on the Brooks Brothers scale; each inoffensively clean cut, the sort of guy who cuts himself off after two light beers because he has to wake up early.

These men are figures of relative obscurity who have capitalized on a political moment to vault their careers several levels up. The same could be said for Illinois state Sen. Obama, who made waves in 2004 with a blockbuster convention speech. This groups moment is different than Obamas, though these politicians caught the Democrats magpie eye following the rise of Donald Trump, though it should be noted that all did so while losing elections.

Each has claimed in his campaign that he is a droplet of that fresh blood needed to reinvigorate the party, a clean slate upon which to write the Democratic compact of the future. This was more or less Obamas line when he entered the Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton all those years ago; he had no Iraq War vote to sully his record, no decades of political battles weighing him down.

But Obama, of course, was a figure of incredible historical import the first black major party nominee and then the first black president. His promise of change was economic he was the (relative) outsider fixing the mess of the financial crisis created by craven New York and D.C. insiders but also cultural: voters, black and white, could cast a ballot for him and be a part of history.

Kander, Ossoff, Perriello, and Buttigieg offer the promise of change as well, but the meaning of that change is more vaguely implied. Each has promised to bring the message of the Democratic Party back to the people it has forgotten. Thats all well and good, but who exactly are those people?

Clockwise from upper left: Jon Ossoff, Tom Perriello, Jason Kander, Pete Buttigieg.

Getty images

Since the election, a debate has been raging in the Democratic Party about the best path to electoral victory: appeal to whites who voted for Obama and later Trump, or turn out those who stayed home in 2016, namely black voters?

This group of newcomers appeal is in part to white voters, and the attention given to Kander, Ossoff, Perriello and Buttigieg in recent months suggests Democrats are, consciously or not, leaning most toward the plan of winning back white voters. Election results for these men do show certain promising patterns. Though Kander lost his Senate race, he outperformed Clintons 2016 and Obamas 2012 showing in a number of places and outright won counties that neither Clinton nor Obama could swing, namely Platte and Clay, outside Kansas City. Both Platte and Clay are wealthy and white places each is 87 percent white, and the median income is $68,254 in Platte, $62,099 in Clay and are in Missouris 6th Congressional District, represented by Republican Sam Graves. Graves won reelection in 2016 with 68 percent of the vote in the district.

The counties have similar demographics to Georgias 6th Congressional District, where Ossoff campaigned and lost, but by a slim margin. Republican Karen Handel won that race by about 4 percentage points, a notable result since only a few months before, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price overwhelmingly won reelection in the district with 62 percent of the vote. Ossoff ate into Republicans support substantially in the district.

The Kander/Ossoff appeal to suburban voters (Kander helped Ossoff campaign) seems built in part on their ability to assure voters with a more rightward cultural bent that Democrats arent to be disdained. Kanders ad showing him assembling a rifle blindfolded became a sort of shorthand for his understanding of a certain milieu gun owners and Second Amendment advocates while Ossoff became known for his keen ability to say almost nothing controversial. Young, handsome, kind of preppy, it made him a nice blank slate onto whom voters could project their desires.

Perriello, too, has demonstrated success with white voters, despite losing the Virginia primary against Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam. He performed best in the parts of the state that are largely white and rural. Northam (who had the advantage of being a party insider) won areas like Hamton Roads, which are filled with black voters, the kind that swung the state blue for Obama in 2008. Perriello courted rural Virginians specifically, spending far more time in the states non-urban areas than Northam did, according to a candidate tracker from the Virginia Public Access Project.

Given that Buttigieg has only been elected as mayor, its more difficult to know if he has broader appeal, though South Bend is whiter than many other urban areas 61 percent and solidly Democratic.

Theres a risk that in hyping the effort to win back white Obama/Trump voters, black candidates get lost in the shuffle or female candidates are passed over because of a Hillary Clinton hangover. (The fear of the complicated challenges that women face when running for office is real.) Nina Turner articulated this view to me back in January: African-Americans, no matter what, will vote hook or crook for Democrats, and so that particular demographic is owed a lot more by the Democratic Party than what we have gotten, and what I mean by that is no African-American woman has ever been governor in this country. Democrats need to be making sure that happens.

Thrown into relief against Turners sentiments, the attention that Kander et al. have received seems significant. Buttigieg, known pretty much only to the good people of South Bend prior to this winter, was recently on Late Night with Seth Meyers talking about Republicans appropriation of the idea of freedom and on Chelsea Handlers show chatting about what its like to be a Democratic mayor in a deep-red state. Kander had enough grist coming off of his loss to start a voting rights group, Let America Vote, and be named the head of a DNC voting rights commission. A Nexis dive of coverage from the last six months finds him quoted in numerous national outlets on voting rights issues The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the Houston Chronicle but also written about as a potential presidential contender in The Hill and in a recent Washington Post profile.

Ossoffs campaign is now infamous for how much press attention and money it received, while Perriello got endorsements from a series of high-profile Obama administration officials and was profiled in national outlets. (I wrote about him in March.) Pod Save America, the brainchild of former Obama staffers that has become a de facto outlet for Democratic politicians, the fireside chat for the Resistance, has hosted and promoted all of these young, white Democrats.

And its not as if there is a dearth of minority talent. Turner herself has been floated as a potential 2018 Ohio gubernatorial candidate, while Stacey Abrams, another black woman, is making a bid for the Georgia governors mansion, and Ben Jealous, former head of the NAACP, recently announced a long-awaited bid for Maryland governor. Where is their national party hype machine?

It might be that at the heart of the matter, Democrats have internalized most acutely the accusation that they shamed and alienated white constituencies by elevating cultural conversations around issues like the Black Lives Matter movement and gay rights. The more subtle argument, that exciting the partys base namely, minority groups could be just as electorally rewarding, has been less interrogated. There are years left for younger Democratic talent to develop, and perhaps for the party to again focus on strengthening its base. But for now, at least in its promotion of rising talent, it seems the Democratic approach is lopsided.

CORRECTION (Aug. 10, 1:40 p.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that Pete Buttigieg had not run in a statewide election. He ran for state treasurer in 2010.

Continue reading here:
The Future Of The Democratic Party Is White Guys? - FiveThirtyEight

The high-profile stars of the Democratic Partys populist wing have steered the agenda their way on Capitol Hill this year, but the fight over the partys direction is far from settled.

As the party faces great expectations of big gains in the 2018 midterm elections, Democratic centrists are increasingly worried that the disproportionate share of attention shown to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and the agenda pushed by his anti-establishment allies will do more harm than good.

That direction, the thinking goes, will energize liberals in places where Democrats are already winning by big margins. But it may drive away the voters needed to win inland races that will shape the House majority and determine which governors and state legislators are in charge of redrawing federal and state legislative districts early next decade.

Enter a group called New Democracy, a combination think tank and super PAC trying to reimagine the partys brand in regions where Democrats have suffered deep losses.

Leaders of the group want to focus on rebuilding in states where, during the Obama presidency, Democrats lost nearly 1,000 legislative seats and more than a dozen governors mansions.

Our most important work will be done outside of Washington, Will Marshall, founder of New Democracy, said in an interview.

The effort is publicly being labeled as supplemental to the emerging agenda being crafted on Capitol Hill, including the highly populist Better Deal proposal that party leaders in the House and the Senate touted last month. But the new groups leaders do not see that agenda, including a push for lower prescription-drug prices, as particularly helpful to Democrats in exurban districts or key Midwestern states that President Trump won last year.

That is an accurate reflection of many Democrats who represent deep blue districts. But it has limited appeal beyond the coasts, Marshall said.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have been trying to offer the sort of economic agenda items that can appeal to voters in Iowa as well as California, targeted at working-class voters who abandoned Democrats for Trump.

But some centrists fear that this populist message will be tuned out by heartland voters if it is accompanied by the partys increasing embrace of staunch liberal positions on cultural matters, including abortion rights and transgender issues.

Should House Democrats write off rural congressional districts?

Marshall helped begin similar efforts as Democrats lost three straight presidential elections in the 1980s, under the auspices of the Democratic Leadership Council and its offshoot, the Progressive Policy Institute.

Back then, operating under the New Democrat banner, the centrists helped create the ideas behind the 1992 presidential campaign of Bill Clinton, who became the first two-term Democrat in the White House since FDR.

New Democracy is taking shape under the failure of another Clinton Hillary whose loss to Trump helped solidify the already growing divide between Democrats and voters beyond large urban centers. Several dozen Democrats have signed on with New Democracy, including Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto and Rep. Stephanie Murphy (Fla.), a freshman rising star.

The two Democratic wings could be headed for a fierce clash over what the party needs to stand for in the wake of the stunning 2016 defeat. Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and other liberals have been making gains in getting congressional Democrats to support ideas, including a $15-an-hour minimum wage and some form of free college, and demanding a full-frontal assault on big banks and big corporations.

So far, however, the college plans pushed by Sanders have not been in the Better Deal. Senior Democratic advisers say that their effort has been to embrace economic populism without focusing on less politically popular liberal ideas.

The early portions of the Better Deal agenda tilt in the populist direction, with calls for stronger antitrust regulations and tough talk on trade deals. The belief is that white, working-class voters millions of whom voted for Barack Obama but then Trump felt left behind in an economy with fewer manufacturing plants, and those jobs went offshore or disappeared through automation.

Marshall and other Democrats fear that the populist tone is built around a negative message of casting blame, and lacks the optimistic tones around which Bill Clinton and Obama built their successful presidential bids.

Combine that negative tone with what critics say is a cultural elitism among urban liberals on social issues, and the centrist wing feels that voters in the heartland simply do not embrace the Democratic message anymore.

The partys gotten a little too comfortable with its urban and coastal strongholds, Marshall said.

New Democracys mission statement is even more blunt, warning that both parties have engaged in a civically corrosive form of identity politics and that Democrats should avoid vilifying people whose social views arent as progressive as we think they should be.

For many working class and rural voters, the partys message seems freighted with elite condescension for traditional values (especially faith) and lifestyles, the group says.

The first big public event for New Democracy will come at an October summit hosted by Vilsack, who grew increasingly disenchanted last year with what he viewed as the Clinton campaigns unwillingness to court rural voters.

Vilsacks tough message for fellow Democrats: Stop writing off rural America

In the 2008 election, Obama won the Hawkeye State by nearly 10percentage points, giving Iowa Democrats a 32-to-18 edge in the state Senate and a 56-to-44 edge in the state House. The governor, Chet Culver, was a Democrat, as were four of the states seven members of Congress.

In 2016, Trump won Iowa by nearly 10percentage points, and Republicans now hold a comfortable nine-seat majority in the state Senate and a 19-seat majority in the state House. Trump appointed the states popular Republican governor, Terry Branstad, to be ambassador to China.

Iowa now sends just one Democrat to Congress.

That kind of shift happened across many states far away from the Atlantic and Pacific coasts over the past eight years.

It remains to be seen how much efforts like New Democracy really will supplement the partys efforts to reach new voters and how much of this will turn into a deep fight with the liberal wing.

New Democracy is reserving the right to wade into primaries to support moderate candidates, which could foreshadow the type of expensive primary battles Republicans have had over the past eight years.

Obamas success has masked the narrowing of the partys appeal, Marshall said, fearing that Democrats are not reaching beyond liberal elites. Dogma seems to be in the drivers seat.

Read more from Paul Kanes archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

See the original post here:
Centrist Democrats begin pushing back against Bernie Sanders, liberal wing - Washington Post