Mediaboss Marketing

Ever since the election of US president Donald Trump, consumer surveyors have noticed a trend: A determining factor for Americans economic outlook is whether they are Democrats or Republicans.

Between June 2016 and December 2016before and after the electionthe University of Michigans consumer sentiment survey found [pdf] that Democratic consumer sentiment fell almost 13 percentage points on their index, while Republican sentiment rose 40 percentage points. Today, the latest data shows that the divergence is still huge, but the gap between Democrats and Republicans narrowed slightly to 55 Index points from 65 three months ago.

Though the new administration has yet to enact any significant economic policy, there is a logic to the shifting expectations: Republicans are more optimistic because they are expecting Trumps administration to eventually pass what they see as pro-growth policiestax cuts, for examplewhile Democrats become more pessimistic because they fear their unintended consequences.

That makes sense. What makes less sense is that while overall confidence is growing, this increase doesnt seem to be translating to direct measures of economic activity. While the sentiment survey hit a 13-year high in January, the first three months of the year saw slowing economic growth and consumer spending.

In other words, economists and investors are counting on consumers to tell them their expectations for the economy, but consumers may be offering political opinions instead.

The latest quarters economic data is still preliminary and unrevised, and more analysis will be needed to see if the partisan divergence effects the survey and how it is used. But so far, the surveys director isnt concerned that the partisan divergence will effect the datas usefulness.

People will use the data as long as it predicts, says professor Richard Curtin, the director of the University of Michigan survey. And there is no evidence so far that it isnt a good predictor.

The survey is a leading indicator of inflation, the unemployment rate, and personal consumption expenditures, Curtin says. Personal consumption spending increased at an annualized rate of 0.3% in the first quarter of 2017 (the most sluggish growth since 2013), but the Michigan survey forecasts 2.3% growth over the full year, only slightly slower than in 2016.

The remarkable divergence in partisan responses to the survey is a transient phenomenon that will pass, according to Curtin, unlike larger demographic changes. The two partisan preferences cancel themselves out, with self-identified independents driving the aggregate results of the data, he says, adding that questions about partisan disparities effecting the survey are naive and the wrong approach.

It is a losing strategy for either side to promote such unrealistic economic prospects, Curtin wrote in January. Indeed, in the months ahead, it is more likely that economic optimism will improve among Democrats and decline among Republicans.

So far, Curtins prediction has been true, but partisan views of the economy can last longer than expected. Gallups consumer survey reported a massive gap in economic confidence ahead of the 2012 election. That survey raised similar questions about political polarization and perceptions of the economy.

Research into the predictive utility of consumer surveys like these has found that they tend to be useful at predicting future activity, but also that they can change and be effected by non-economic factors.

This OECD working paper comparing 30 years of consumer surveys across eight countries found that while they were useful prediction tools, they werent correlated to any one set economic indicators across different countries. Instead, consumer confidence indicators were more predictive during major economic shocks that gain consumer attention, and could be affected simply by intense political debate about public finances or the welfare state.

Another interesting example comes from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, where researchers wondered about periods where consumer sentiment is driven away from what economic fundamentals suggest. Their culprit? The media. Assuming that many people form their conceptions of the economy based on what they read about it, the researchers tested measures of media coverage of the economy against changes in the sentiment index. They found coverage of layoffs or other bad economic news coincided with more negative sentiment than other indicators suggest.

These findings suggest that as long as US political debates and news coverage remain deeply polarized, so will American views of the economy. Only time can tell if that will make prosperity harder to predict.

More here:
Why don't Republicans and Democrats see the same economy? - Quartz

Some, such as California Rep. Maxine Waters, have explicitly called for impeaching the President. Others, like Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, have merely mentioned the possibility, with Gabbard saying last month that she was studying the impeachment process.

Impeachment requires the support of a majority of members of the House of Representatives. No Republicans have publicly voiced support for impeaching Trump. CNN's KFile is, however, keeping a running count of Democratic lawmakers who have talked about impeachment. That count, which includes those who discussed impeachment prior to Comey's firing, is currently at 11, 10 members of the House and Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal.

California Rep. Maxine Waters: Waters has been talking about impeachment for months, most recently telling MSNBC's Chris Hayes on Thursday that "The President needs to be impeached." Waters also suggested in the interview that Trump could be charged with "obstruction of justice" for saying that the FBI's Russia investigation was a factor in his decision to fire Comey.

"If the President is found to have done this to circumvent this investigation, to thwart to the efforts to get the bottom of this, I think this is going to be an impeachable offense," Green said. "He's really treading in some very dangerous waters. This is unusual for this kind of thing to happen in the United States of America."

"Impeachment will happen if handful of Republicans in Congress join Dems to put country above party. Or in 2019 after Dems win the House," Huffman tweeted at 1:51 a.m. on Friday morning.

"It may well produce another United States vs. Nixon on a subpoena that went to United States Supreme Court," he said. "It may well produce impeachment proceedings, although we're very far from that possibility."

"On the issue of impeachment, I am doing my homework," Gabbard said at the Hilo, Hawaii, event. "I am studying more about the impeachment process. I will just say I understand the calls for impeachment, but what I am being cautious about and what I give you food for thought about is that if President Trump is impeached, the problems don't go away, because then you have a Vice President Pence who becomes President Pence."

Continued here:
A running list of Democrats who have discussed impeachment ... - CNN

Candidates, from left, Assemblyman John Wisniewski, Phil Murphy, Jim Johnson and Sen. Ray Lesniak attend a Democratic gubernatorial primary debate, Thursday, May 11, 2017, in Newark.(Photo: Julio Cortez, AP / Pool AP)

Democratic candidates for governor sharpened their attacks on Phil Murphy during the partys second and final primary debate Thursday night, calling his progressive values into question and condemning what one called an obscene amount of spending.

Murphy, the wealthy former banker and ambassador who is leading the contest for the nomination, endured the assault with a broad, toothy smile. Rather than punch back at his opponents, Murphy often dismissed them by responding with all due respect and saying, in some instances, that their charges against him were alt-facts, the term made famous by President Donald Trumps gaffe-prone counselor Kellyanne Conway.

The forum, hosted by NJTV and NJ Spotlight at the television stations studio in Newark, was a departure from the more collegial debate two nights earlier, at Stockton University, when the challengers fired at Murphy but when it came to policy they all found themselves mostly in agreement.

Over the course of Thursdays 90-minute debate, the candidates had light moments teasing each other and backing certain ideas, like $15 minimum wage, but largely clashed with each other.

Assemblyman John Wisniewksi and Jim Johnson particularly went after Murphy hard, especially when given the opportunity during the debate to question other candidates. Wisniewski said that Murphys investment portfolio includes companies that sponsor and run pipelines that he says he opposes and companies that produce the fracking fluid that contaminates water.

How can you really expect the people of New Jersey to believe your environmental credentials when your financial portfolio takes a different position than youve taken publicly here in the campaign? Wisniewski said.

Murphy responded, Theres probably no good answer in terms of those investments, adding, I mean what I say about fracking, I mean what I say about the environment.

Wisniewski also cited speech Murphy made while he was the U.S. ambassador to Germany and said that Murphy extolled the virtues of fracking, the controversial process to extract natural gas. Murphy disagreed and said that he was discussing fracking as a geopolitical step to push back on the Russians.

The candidates also condemned Murphys heavy spending $18.4 million so far, more than three times all other candidates combined -- and New Jerseys system of county party bosses endorsing hopefuls and giving them a significant advantage in the primary. Murphy has the backing of all 21 county party chairs, helping to make him the front-runner for the nomination.

Lesniak, a 40-year lawmaker, said the Union County chairman, Assemblyman Jerry Green, told him not to run because were going to get whatever we want from Phil Murphy.

He tried to convince me to get out of the race. That convinced me to get in the race, Lesniak said.

Murphy said that his campaign knocked on thousands of doors, working the phones, shaking hands and earned the support of workers and volunteers around the state. And the money that Murphy has spent, he said, has been for grassroots organizing and party-building.

And asked whether he would support reforms to strip county party committees of their ability to award preferential ballot placement to the candidate of their choice, Murphy said vaguely that he was open to open democracy."

I am participating in a system that exists, he said in an interview after the debate.I did not create this system.

Johnson, a former U.S. Treasury official, repeatedly went after Murphy for his spending and questioned how he could have progressive values after two decades at Goldman Sachs, the bank often vilified by progressives. And, echoing Christie, Johnson said Murphys candidacy is unrealistic because he has promised to fully fund pensions, schools and legalize marijuana, among many other initiatives.

The list of promises that youve made is breathtaking and its unachievable, Johnson said. He added, Youre in bed with the insiders and youre not challenging what theyre doing.

Staff writer Nicholas Pugliese contributed to this report.

Read or Share this story: http://on.app.com/2qbz1q8

The rest is here:
Democrats train fire on Murphy in final primary debate - Asbury Park Press

No Democrat in the House of Representatives did what Cheri Bustos did last November. She wasnt the sole member of her party to win in a congressional district Donald Trump also tookthere were 11 othersbut she was the only one to post a 20-point landslide, and she did it in agricultural, industrial, blue-collar northwestern Illinois. In the kind of place where Hillary Clinton lost big last fall and where Democrats have been losing in droves for the last decade, Bustos has done just the opposite. A former newspaper reporter, the wife of a county sheriff and the mother of three grown sons, the 55-year-old third-term representative has won by wider margins every time shes run. And this past election, she notched victories not only in the urban pockets she representsRock Island and Moline of the Quad Cities, plus pieces of Rockford and Peoriabut in all her rural counties, too. If Democrats are going to wrest control of the House from Republicans, argue many party strategists, its going to happen in large part by doing more of whatever it is Bustos is doing three hours west of Chicago in her nearly 7,000-square-mile district of small towns and soybean fields.

We ought to be studying Cheri Bustos, Democratic consultant Mark Longabaugh, a senior adviser in Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, told me recently.

Story Continued Below

So twice in the first four months of this year, I traveled to her district to watch her work. In January, on a frigid Saturday the week before Trumps inauguration, I accompanied her in a silver, staffer-driven Ford Taurus, as she donned a yellow hard hat and installed an air filter in a locomotive in Galesburg (the latest in a regular series of appearances she calls Cheri on Shift), stationed herself in a grocery store produce section to introduce herself to customers at a Hy-Vee in Canton (Supermarket Saturdays) and swung by a pub in Peoria to talk with a group of activist women. And last month, on a rainy Wednesday, I joined her again, when she put on a pair of safety goggles for a tour of an aerospace factory in Rockford and met with the mayor of Rock Falls, population 9,266.

Left: Cheri spotwelding on a pickup truck at Daves Auto Body in Galesburg, Illinois. Right: Cheri on a forklift at KMI Packaging and Exporting in Pekin, Illinois. Cheri previously earned her certification as a forklift driver. | Cheri Bustos' Office

The Bustos blueprint, she told me in January as the Taurus dodged raccoon road kill outside a speck of a village called Maquon, is rooted in unslick, face-to-face politicking. She shows up. She shakes hands. She asks questionsa lot of questions. Dont talk down to peopleyou listen, she stressed. When she does talk, she talks as much as she can about jobs and wages and the economy and as little as she can about guns and abortion and other socially divisive issueswhich, for her, are no-win conversations, she explained. And at a time when members of both parties are being tugged toward their respective ideological poles, the more center-left Bustos has picked her spots to buck such partisanship. Shes a pro-choice Catholic and an advocate for limited gun control, but she has supported the Keystone pipeline and called for improvements to Barack Obamas imperfect Affordable Care Act. Its worked. Shes the only Democratic member of the Illinois congressional delegation from outside Chicagoland.

Rick Jasculca, a Chicago-based Democratic political consultant who worked in the administrations of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, told me he considers Bustos the future of the party.

She offers something the party needs, in a region of the country where it needs it desperately, said Robin Johnson, a political science professor at Monmouth College in Monmouth, Illinois, and one of Bustos closest confidants. If youre going to get back to a majority in the House, youre going to have to win some rural areasand all this comes through the Midwest.

Democratic leaders seem to acknowledge thisthat Bustos could help them build back a geographically broader electoral appeal. In the aftermath of the partys crushing defeats of 2016, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi chose Bustos to be a co-chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, after which she was elected by her peers. Her assignment is to teach other members of her caucus essentially how to talk to people like the shoppers she encounters by the bananas at the Hy-Vee. In some ways this was a confirmation of an existing though less formal role. Bustos, the single Midwesterner in House Democratic Leadership, already was a co-chair of the Red to Blue initiative of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and now shes ramping up her role in the organizations rural and heartland outreach efforts. Her national television and radio appearances have spiked. Shes been dubbed one of the partys rising stars.

It remains to be seen, though, whether her partys most powerful shot-callers ultimately will actually implement key tactics of hers in time for the 2018 midterms. Democratic Congressman Ron Kind, whos won for 20 years in western Wisconsin in a district Trump won, too, talked in an interview of a growing openness and willingness in the caucus to incorporate some of what has worked for Bustos and others like herKind ran unopposed last yearbut he worries, he told me, about his party succumbing to the temptation to lurch to the left in response to Trump. Congressman Rick Nolan of Minnesota, another of the dozen Trump-district Democrats, lamented his colleagues general lack of interest in tapping into the expertise of the few who have won in Upper Midwest. I could count, easily, on one hand, Nolan told me, the number of candidates for public office from the Democratic Party whove come up to me and said, you know, How did you do that? One of them, he added, was Bustos. Democrats, said Denny Heck, the congressman from Washington who has worked with Bustos on Red to Blue, would very considerably benefit if they listened to her. Bustos recently met with new Democratic National Committee boss Tom Perez, which her office saw as a starting point in what she and her staff hope will be an ongoing discussion.

This is a moment, of course, of existential angst for Democrats. Theyre unified mainly by their antipathy toward Trump. Beyond that, theyre grappling with the much more complicated calculus of whether to focus on stoking the Trump-hating base or re-embrace a more moderate approach and earn back the votes of traditional Democrats theyve leached practically everywhere but cities and the coasts. Ben Ray Lujan, the New Mexico congressman who heads the DCCC, is clear about where he stands on this. I can assure you, he said when we talked last week, that the direction Im giving is that we need to go back and re-establish trust and earn trust with people all over the country, including rural and blue-collar Americans. But what has made Bustos in particular so successful in her rural, blue-collar district is also what at times has caused friction and consternation in Washington. Not everybody she works with thinks shes a part of the solution for their partys woes.

Memorabilia lines Bustos congressional office in the Longworth House Office Building. | M. Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO

You better have thick skin after youre elected, because youre going to have members of your caucus who are upset with you that youre not voting straight party line, she told me not long ago in her office on Capitol Hill, sitting in front of a John F. Kennedy poster while drinking coffee from an Abraham Lincoln mug.

Ive had fellow members who are very upset with me, she continued. Ive had somebody say, Are you even a Democrat?

She wouldnt tell me who that was. She just said she told the person shes been a Democrat her whole life. But maybe, she said, Im a little bit of a different kind of Democrat.

I asked if she feels like shes being listened toif she thinks her model will be embraced and implemented elsewhere. Bustos, whos dispositionally cheerful, highly competitive and eager to share, did not respond with an unqualified yes.

Theres people who think weve got to just work on the baseright?and get people fired up, and thats going to get us to 218. I dont, she said. I dont think thats going to get us to 218. I think whats going to get us to 218 is to understand these tough districts where we have not done well.

She cited as evidence last months special election in Kansas. The Democrat won Wichita but lost everywhere else. That candidate bombed in all those rural areas, Bustos said bluntly. If he just didnt bomb in those rural areas, we couldve won that.

***

If you reverse-engineered a Democrat capable of winning in Illinois 17th congressional district at this anti-elitist, politically volatile time, you couldnt do a whole lot better than Bustos.

Shes the granddaughter of a hog farmer who was a state legislator, a Democrat from a small, out-of-the-way and predominantly Republican county in eastern Illinois. Shes the daughter of the late Gene Callahan, a onetime political reporter for the Springfield Registerthe afternoon newspaper at the time in the state capitalwho left journalism to become a top aide to legendary Illinois Democratic lawmakers Paul Simon and Alan Dixon. Simon and Dixon, and a young Dick Durbin, too, were regulars at her house, talking politics around the kitchen table of her childhood.

Before she graduated from the University of Maryland with a degree in political science and from the University of Illinois at Springfield with a masters in journalism, she went to Illinois College, where she played volleyball and basketball and was picked as the MVP for both as well as the schools top female-student athlete. Her high school basketball coach told me Bustos was a ferocious rebounder thanks to a willingness to scrap and a knack for knowing where the ball was going to be.

Bustos plays catch with Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz to warm up for softball practice on May 4. | M. Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO

She moved in 1985 to the Quad Cities to be a night-shift police reporter for the Quad-City Times. Her starting salary was $16,500 a year. She drove a white Plymouth Horizon hatchback and had a Goodwill couch and a dog named Kibble. Early on, the former Cheri Callahan met a young deputy sheriff named Gerry Bustos, a Quad Cities local, at a bar called the Lil Cowbell. They married quickly, raised their three sons in East Moline and carved out Friday nights for family dinners at Franks Pizza in nearby Silvis, where the walls are white cinder blocks and the only salad on the menu is a plate of iceberg lettuce.

After 17 years at the newspapershe also covered city hall and was an editor and an investigative reporter who zeroed in on abuses allowed by the state Department of Children and Family ServicesBustos spent a decade working in corporate communications and public relations for a pair of major regional health care companies. Health care is very, very complicated, she learned, but her time at Trinity and Unity Point Health was a tutorial in the sprawling, complicated sector of the economy that would come to be the core of the nations bitter political fight.

She works her butt off, said Bill Leaver, her boss and mentor at both companies.

Until 9, 10 oclock at night nearly every single day, and I mean that, said Gerry Bustos, who exercises at the Two Rivers YMCA every morning at 4:30along with his wife when Congress isnt in session.

And in the winter of 2006 and 2007, for the first time in her life, Bustos ran for officea bid to be an alderwoman in East Moline. The ground was so frozen during the campaign her husband used a drill to make holes for signs, while she wore long underwear and a thick brown down coat and knocked on every door twiceregardless of party affiliation. Because why would a Republican not vote for me? she said.

***

Illinois 17th district over the last generation has leaned Democratic, buoyed by organized laborbut the linchpin manufacturing industries are stressed, dealing with reinvention or outright elimination. The local nexus of this painful, systemic change is Galesburg, where 5,000 steady, relatively well-paying jobs vanished when a Maytag factory moved to Mexico. That was in 2002. The town still hasnt recovered. Johnson, the Monmouth professor who is Bustos friend and adviser, sees it as ground zero in this battle over globalization. And the Democrats in Galesburg and around the area as a whole are not liberal in the least, he explainednot latte Democrats but beer-and-shot Democrats, with pickup trucks with shotgun racks. A significant swath of voters in the district prize their independence and pragmatism and make their political picks based on the person rather than the party, said Chad Broughton, the author of Boom, Bust, Exodus, a book about Maytag, Galesburg and the region. They want to hear from Democrats, but they generally feel like theyve been abandoned by Democratson trade deals, on bread-and-butter economic considerations and in a perceived shift to the left in the overall culture. And in the 17th District in 2010, a year in which more than two dozen centrist Democrats got voted out of Congress, Bobby Schilling, a pizza shop owner, rode the national tide and edged out the incumbent Democrat Phil Hare.

But the political reorientation didnt stick in northwestern Illinoison account of Bustos. In 2012, she beat Schillingbecause of redistricting that added parts of more Democrat-friendly Rockford and Peoria, because Obama was on the ballot and made for a more favorable national turnout, and because she was assiduous in talking about jobs, agriculture and infrastructure while steering clear of the flashpoint social issues. In her victory speech at the Rock Island Holiday Inn, she told supporters she intended to reach across the aisle in Washington. People just want to succeed, she said, and government can help.

In 2014, she beat Schilling againand her margin went up, from seven points to 11. Then, last November, with Trump triumphing due to his pledges to bring back lost jobs, and with Bustos endorsing Clinton, she nonetheless tightened her grip on the district, trouncing GOP challenger Patrick Harlan. A fifth of the people in her district who voted for Trump also voted for her.

She was getting white male voters when they were abandoning our party in rural America, said Doug House, the Rock Island County Democratic Party chair and the president of the Illinois Democratic County Chairmens Association. They were for Trumpand they were for her. She was connecting with them.

The key in these districts, said Kind, the congressman from Wisconsin, is you have to be able to connect with your constituents on a basic-value level, so they understand that you get them.

Joe Manchin, the senator from West Virginia who consistently has won as a Democrat in a state that voted overwhelmingly for Trump, told me Bustos has been able to win because of a certain likeability factor and an intangible authenticity. Cheris real, Manchin said.

Bustos talks with Rep. Rick Nolan (D-Minn) following an Agricultural Committee hearing on May 3. | M. Scott Mahaskey/Politico

Bustos sits on the House Committee on Agriculture and the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. She toggles deftly between unions and chambers of commerce. Shes been endorsed by the Illinois Farm Bureau, and the Illinois Sierra Clubnot easy to do, she said. She organizes an annual economic summit at Augustana College in Rock Island, and she spent last August trekking around her district on what her office titled a 21st Century Heartland Tour. Last fall, she was noncommittal about how she would have voted on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, but she called it a tough one for me, given the state of industry in her district. We have been hit very, very hard in this part of the state of Illinois, and in the state of Illinois, she told the Quad-City Times in 2015, because of what I would call bad trade deals.

Less than a month after her 2016 win, Bustos discussed this in an interview on NPR.

We have been the party of working-class men and women for the entire history of our party, Bustos said. My dad raised us to say if it werent for organized labor and the Democratic Party, there wouldnt be a middle class. I believe that. But weve got to go where people are. And weve got to listen.

***

Watch the pinch points, one of the workers told her at the locomotive repair factory in Galesburg in January, as Bustos gamely (but not quite successfully) attempted to insert the large air filter while wearing the yellow hard hat and an orange safety vest that paired awkwardly with her gold hoop earrings.

What am I doing wrong? Bustos asked.

An employee gave the filter a final necessary nudge and told Bustos she had done well for her first time. The bright white gloves she had been given were black with soot and grime.

Cheri on Shift feels a little like a gimmick. In the most simplistic, play-the-game, political sense, its a photo op. At this one, I wasnt the only reporter. There also was a local public radio correspondent. But what was different about this Cheri on Shift photo op was the patter of her questions. It was constant. She quizzed the supervisors leading the tour and the employees we encountered. What do you do here? How long have you been with the company? Do you like it? Can you support your family? Can you go on vacation? Who works here? Who do you like hiring? You guys like hiring farm kids? How long does it take to train for one of these jobs? Anything else on your minds?

Being present mattersthats how DCCCs Lujan put it when we talked. Cheri gets that, he said.

Bustos doing a beekeeping shift at Beacon Woods Farm in Peoria, Illinois. | Cheri Bustos' Office

Its more than presence, from what I observed. Bustos in essence reports the story of her district so she can better tell it back in Washington. In the Taurus, I asked her how she talks about the thorniest subjects for her, and for any Democrat in a district like the 17th of Illinois. How, I wanted to know, does she talk about the issues that her party sometimes thinks are most importantbut that her constituents see differently?

I started with guns.

I say, My husband carries a gun on his hiphes the sheriff of Rock Island County. All my sons own guns. I own a gun. But weve got to be reasonable about this, she said to me. I say, All I want to do is make sure people who are deranged or on a terrorist watch list dont have guns. Thats how I talk about it.

And abortion?

I dont try to change their mind, she said. Im Catholic, so I understand their views. Im pro-choice, buthere she shifted the subject with me, the way she says she does with othersthats not what most people are talking about. Most people are talking about jobs.

She talks, in other words, about these kinds of things by not talking about them much, because the people she represents, she says, arent talking about them much, either, or dont want to.

On these sensitive topics, she saidBlack Lives Matter, transgender bathroom laws and so onI dont dwell on them.

Bustos has said to me several times that she considers members of Congress independent practitioners, free in their districts to do what they think is best for themselves and their constituents. But the flexibility intrinsic in this approach butts up before long against the heightened rigidity of the expectations of the party nationally. Witness the recent occurrence of Perez, the DNC chair, endorsing a pro-life mayoral candidate in Omaha, Nebraska, only to backtrack after blowback from pro-choice advocates. Bustos, though she had been tapped to help the party in spots like northwestern Illinois, was not the pick to respond to Trump after his joint session speech at the end of February.

Robin Johnson from Monmouth watched former Kentucky governor Steve Beshear handle the Democratic Partys responsedelivered from a Lexington diner, closed, darkened and quiet but filled with citizens set up at tables as stock-still props. The content of what Beshear said hit the appropriate populist notes on health care and jobs, but it elicited mixed reviews. Johnson, for one, was baffled not only by the odd dose of stagecraft but the selection of the person to deliver the messagean old name, not a new face.

Why not Cheri Bustos? Johnson told me. During Beshears remarks, he said, he sent Bustos a text message. I said, Jeez, you should be the one giving this response.

***

Being a centrist doesnt mean being an enemy collaborator. In Washington in late April, in her Capitol Hill office, Bustos smiled, drank from her Abe Lincoln mug and verbally thrashed President Trump.

This was three months after I had watched Bustos at the pub in Peoria say in an interview with a local TV reporter that she would give him the benefit of the doubt.

A week before our meeting in Washington, though, I sat in the front row of a panel at the Institute of Politics in Chicago and listened to Bustos say people in her district who had tried Trumpthats how she phrased itat this point were expressing a lot of concern. She didnt stutter when she pronounced his first 100 days a disaster.

And the day before, in a news conference, she said the passage of the Trump-pushed health care legislation would be like ripping out the beating heart of rural America.

Now, sitting across from me in her office, Bustos practically was taunting Trump.

Man, she said, if I were president of the United States in my first 100 days, Id want to have a lot of winsand, you know, I wouldnt want to have wins that I have to lie about. She scoffed at his multiple claims of unprecedented accomplishment in his administrations first few months. Its like, Did you ever study history?

But the calamity of his presidency to this point, Bustos thinks, presents an opportunity for Democrats, confident and poised to make up ground, to get to 218 in 2018but particularly, she believes, if they focus on winning districts like hers.

Could Bustos teach Democrats how to win again? Responding to that question of mine, she said she didnt want to sound stuck up, but what she has done, she pointed out, has worked.

What she has done challenges the purity-test fealty that has defined this era of historic and increasing polarization in Congress. Paying attention to the messages shes getting on the ground as much as to the talking points from above, she might say, shouldnt make her a traitor in the eyes of her party. To keep faith with both her constituents and the Democrats broader national aims is often less a question of the precise stance she is taking and more a question of how she puts it. In short, her blueprint for success is simply the freedom to make a call in the field.

Mine is just one way of doing things, she said. Im not saying its the only way or its absolutely the right way. Im not presumptuous enough or arrogant enough to think that I have all the answers or that mine is the way to go. Im not saying that at all.

And yet

Im just saying, she said, that in a district that Donald Trump wonand here is the closest the classically Midwest-nice native of Illinois came to a boastI won by 20 points.

The competitive college team MVP in Congress, one of the star players and power hitters in the annual Congressional Womens Softball Game, wants to help her side.

That is what I want to share, she said. This is whats worked for us, and maybe it will work for you, and heres how you can execute.

She looked at mereally, though, she was looking at, and speaking to, the whole Democratic Party.

Heres our blueprint, Bustos said. You can have it.

Michael Kruse is a senior staff writer for Politico.

Read the original post:
The Secret Weapon Democrats Don't Know How to Use - POLITICO Magazine

Since President Donald Trump abruptly fired FBI director James Comey on Tuesday evening, the White House and its defenders have been claimingthat Trump was merely heeding the call of many Democratic politicians who had previously called for Comeys dismissal

The White Houses line of reasoning goes like this: Canning Comey was actually an instance of Trump trying to sing Kumbaya with the opposition. Thisclaim has been repeated by the president and his staff, as well as many rightleaning publications.

The Democrats have said some of the worst things about James Comey, including the fact that he should be fired, but now they play so sad! Trump tweeted on Wednesday morning.

Deputy White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders echoed the talking point later that same day during a news briefing.

Frankly, I think its startling that Democrats arent celebrating this since theyve been calling for it for so long, she said.

But this spin is false on two different levels.

First, Trump himself has statedthat he had decided to fire Comey on his owneven before he received a memorandum from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein citingComeys conduct during the FBIs investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clintons unauthorized private email server. The Kumbaya claims are completely false on that score alone.

Secondly, Democrats, by and large, did not callfor Comey to be fired before his termination.

In December 2016, in his final weeks before retirement, former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reidhastily agreed to the propositionthat Comey should resign. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., appears to be the only currently serving Democratic legislator who had called for Comey to resign before Trump fired him, which he did in a November 2016 op-ed.

Other than those two exceptions, elected Democrats have not called for Comeys resignation, though a number said they hadlost trust in him after the former directordrew attention to himself in the waning days of the 2016 presidential campaign. As nearly everyone remembers, less than two weeks before the election, Comey told members of Congress that the FBI was reviewing newly-discovered emails from Clintons server. His announcement was a false alarm those emails turned out to be duplicates of messages the agency had already reviewed.

I do not have confidence in him any longer, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., now the leader of the upper chambers Democrats,said last year. The FBI director has no credibility, said Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., this past January.

Whether or not they were sincere in those expressions, the reality is that congressional Democratsdidnot ask for Trump to fire Comey. They might not have liked him, but plenty of them appeared to be willing to give him a chance to prove his nonpartisanship by spearheading the agencys criminal and counterespionage probes of Russian government involvement in computer hacking efforts against the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party.

But even if Democrats had called for Comeys head, such hypothetical demands would still haveno bearing on the appropriateness of President Trump deciding to fire the FBI director while his agency was in the middle of overseeing the potentially explosive Russia investigation.

One would expect Republicans to jump to defendtheir partys president like this, but even some members of the mainstream press have bought intothe Trump administrations superficial reasoning.

NBC reporter Peter Alexander, for instance, appeared to have swallowed the White House spin during a Wednesday interview with Rep. Waters.

So she [Clinton] should have fired him, but he [Trump] shouldnt fire him, Alexanderasked the congresswoman, in a highly contentious discussion during which he seemed unable to see the simple distinction.

This is why Im confused, Alexander said to Waters.

No, no, youre not confused, Waters responded, dropping a subtle hint that she believed the NBC reporter was being deliberately obtuse.

The California congresswoman then explained it as simply as possible:

The president of the United States who has a history of firing people who get close to him and his allies like [Michael] Flynn, and like Miss [Sally] Yates he will fire them if he believes somehow theyre getting too close to him in these investigations. I believe that the president of the United States should not have done this in the middle of an investigation. Thats it.

That is indeed it.

Being able to distinguish relatively simple nuance is not hypocrisy. News reporters shouldnt allow such facile spin to go unchecked.

Continue reading here:
Democrats aren't hypocrites on Comey: Trump's firing of the FBI director is cause for outrage - Salon