Mediaboss Marketing

CNN International

Dems' unity against GOP health bill masks dangerous divide Fresno Bee Democrats are showing uncommon unity in fighting Republican efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. But the discipline masks a deep and fundamental divide within the party that could complicate Democrats' efforts to gain ground in the ... Democrats demand Republicans hold hearings on their health care billCNN International Democrats take their turn at improving Affordable Care ActChicago Tribune Democrats want hearings on healthcare bill during delayWashington Examiner LifeZette -Miami Herald all 1,363 news articles »

Read the original:
Dems' unity against GOP health bill masks dangerous divide - Fresno Bee

In an interview late last year, after his narrow loss to incumbent Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) last November, former Missouri secretary of state Jason Kander (D) delivered a bit of truth-telling to the Democratic Party. He did it by way of analogy. Theres a trial with the two opposing lawyers making closing arguments to the jury.

The first lawyer comes out and gives about a 10-minute, very passionate closing argument with a real central theme as to why you should [decide in favor of] their client. Now sometimes, this lawyer wanders off and is kind of incoherent. And oftentimes [that lawyer] is offensive. But at the end of it, you know why that lawyer wants every member, all 12 members of that jury, to find for their client.

Then the next lawyer comes up, and the next lawyer, in front of the entire jury, goes juror by juror and individually makes a very customized and very compelling and very scientific case to each juror as to why that juror should find for that lawyers client. And very conspicuously, [that lawyer] skips about three of the jurors. Just kind of figures, Hey, Im in a state where the rule is you need nine out of 12 in a civil trial, so they say, Well, I only need nine. So [the lawyer] skips three of them, and the whole jury sees that. Well, at the end of those arguments, the jury is going to go, Well, I see what theyre saying to me, but I also see that they said something very different to every other juror, and that they skipped those other three, and by the way, those three arent voting for [that lawyer]. [The jury is] going to really question the authenticity of the argument that was made to them, and theyre going to have a hard time remembering exactly why it is that theyre supposed to find for that client.

I first heard about this from Lanae Erickson Hatalsky of Third Way. The vice president for the social policy and politics program at the centrist think tank recounted it during a panel discussion that pondered the question Is Demography Destiny for Democrats? The short answer is no. And Erickson Hatalsky elaborated as she put a finer point on Kanders comments.

[One Democrat knew Trump would win. Now Debbie Dingell struggles to find a place in her own party.]

Theyll go to the first juror and say, Juror number one. I have a thing for you. Youre Latino. I have immigration. Juror number two, youre millennial. Free college. Juror number three, youre not my people. Can you go get a coffee? Erickson Hatalsky said about how Democrats talk to the electorate. That message was received. The youre not my people. We dont need you was a message we clearly sent and, boy, did it carry.

Changing that message is an existential mission for Democrats and progressives. As Kander and Erickson Hatalsky argue, continued reliance on bespoke messaging tailored for specific demographic groups of the progressive coalition doesnt guarantee Democratic wins at the ballot box. But a new analysis from Third Way, A Tale of Two Districts: Demography and Divergent Partisan Politics, shows that doing so is asking for trouble. Through four case studies, the study illustrates how assumptions based on demography can take you down the wrong path and demonstrate the acute need for a more multi-faceted understanding of the American electorate, writes Ryan Pougiales, author of the report.

Take the first case study, for instance. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Rep. John Carter (R-Tex.) could not be more different. The former is an unabashed progressive, the latter a proud tea party conservative. Yet, Third Way shows that the demographics of their respective districts look remarkably similar. They each have metropolitan hubs that are home to university-attending millennials and big business. Languages other than English are spoken in a quarter of homes usually Spanish. And thousands have moved into those districts from outside the state and country. As Pougiales notes, these two districts could be considered Rising American Electorate country given their demographic makeup. Yet, demography isnt destiny, as they continually send political polar opposites to Congress. The same can be said of the other three case studies in the report.

[The real reason working-class whites continue to support Trump.]

Evaluating individual elections, or the broader national political climate, through a narrow demographic filter risks being blindsided, Pougiales writes. A conclusion proved by President Trumps win. But the Third Way analyst raises a red flag that Democrats should take to heart. To be sure, growing voter groups often tagged as the Rising American Electorate are a core component of a winning Democratic coalition, Pougiales pointed out. But they cant be the entire coalition, and they shouldnt be taken for granted as assumed Democratic votes.

In the next episode of my podcast Cape Up, I talk with pollster Cornell Belcher, whose recent focus groups in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Milwaukee for the Civic Engagement Fund proves Pougialess point. What Belcher found was the newest bloc of swing voters. And youll never guess who they are.

Follow Jonathan on Twitter: @Capehartj Subscribe to Cape Up, Jonathan Capeharts weekly podcast

Follow this link:
'Is demography destiny for Democrats?' The short answer is no. - Washington Post

Democrats are stepping up their criticism of the White Houses voter integrity commission, while trying to stave off panic about the commissions requests for data panic that has already led to thousands of voters asking to be removed from the rolls in key states.

Its Republican overreach, said Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez in an interview. This voter commission exposes the Republicans very clearly for what theyre trying to do, which is simply to suppress the vote. You look at the people on this commission and theyve been the long-term leaders of the campaign to do that. Its not hard to figure out.

The pushback, informed by years of state-by-state voting rights battles, has become part of the DNCs Resistance Summer push that was designed to involve the party in base persuasion and organizing earlier than in previous cycles. ThePresidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, created after President Trumps unfounded speculation that millions of votes were cast illegally in 2016, has created both a threat to organize around, and a problem that could undo the partys voter registration efforts.

In several states, the commissions July 1 request for voter data hasled to a surge of voters trying to dodge the request by deregistering. In North Carolina, hundreds of people contactedthe state elections office to inquire about their personal information, some of them asking about how to pull themselves off the rolls. In Colorado, an estimated 3,000 people have either suspended their registrations or asked that their information be made confidential, for a $5 fee.

Democrats have taken a delicate approach to the self-purgations. Perez said he was coordinating with state parties to urge voters not to take themselves off the rolls; Jason Kander, the former Missouri secretary of state who now runs Let America Vote, has been running a small social media campaign to urge against it.

But Democrats have also worried that giving the voter drop-off too much attention could spur even more of it. Their response is focusing more on the originator of the data request, commission vice-chair Kris Kobach, who has been Kansass Republican secretary of state since 2011. In an interview last week with Breitbart, Kobach speculated that voters taking themselves off the rolls were doing so either because they were caught out, or because they wanted to pull a stunt.

It could be,actually, people who are not qualified to vote, perhaps someone who is a felon and is disqualified that way, said Kobach. Or someone who is not a U.S. citizen saying, Im withdrawing my voter registration because I am not able to vote. It could be a political stunt people who are trying to discredit the commission and withdrawing temporarily because they are politically active but planning to get back on the voter rolls before the election next November.

Perez, who scoffed at the theory that all of the un-enrolling voters had been voting illegally, said that Kobach was making himself infamous, and easy for the party to define.

Our main message is simple this commission is trying to make it harder for you to vote, Perez said. The remedy for what Kobach is trying to do is get out there and register your friends to vote to throw out Trump and his commission.

The commissions first public meeting is scheduled July 19, with access limited to reporters, but a live stream to be published on the White House website.

Follow this link:
Democrats step up campaign against White House elections commission - Washington Post

Not allowing the administration to take over the government is the wrong thing to do, said Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of the Republican leadership. It is unacceptable. Its outrageous. Something has to change.

Here is what is happening: Democrats are requiring that Republicans check all the procedural boxes on most nominees, even those they intend to eventually support. That requires the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, to request a formal cloture vote to move forward.

President Trump has filled far fewer top jobs in cabinet or cabinet-level agencies than President Barack Obama had at this point in his presidency, according to a New York Times analysis.

An intervening day is then required to allow the cloture request to ripen. Next is a vote to impose cloture followed by 30 hours of post-cloture debate before a final vote. Democrats have refused to shorten the debate time to yield back, in the parlance of the Senate though in most cases there is little to debate.

In the end, many Democrats end up voting for the nominee, as each of them did last week on a federal appeals court judge from Idaho.

The level of obstruction exhibited by Senate Democrats on these nominees is just breathtaking, Mr. McConnell said Monday as he castigated Democrats again for forcing needless procedural votes on nominees they actually support.

Republicans engaged in similar procedural combat after Democrats made the 2013 change, tying up the Senate to slow President Barack Obamas push to fill judicial vacancies.

We became pretty good at it ourselves, acknowledged Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Senate Republican. But he and other Republicans say Democrats are employing the tactic to a much greater extent to clog up the Senate and handcuff the Trump administration.

Democrats have required cloture votes on 31 of 52 nominees approved so far. To be sure, the Trump administration was slow to begin making nominations for the top jobs. But there are currently almost 50 people ready and awaiting Senate action, including national security officials who face votes this week. More than 200 Obama administration nominees had been confirmed at this point in 2009, according to the White House.

Democrats are not denying that they are slowing the process to protest how Senate Republicans have handled the health care bill. Its also payback for the way Republicans forced through some early nominees without the proper paperwork.

As weve made clear to our Republican colleagues, if they continue to insist on ramming through a secret health care bill without any public input or debate, they shouldnt expect business as usual in the Senate, said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader.

In objecting to a request last week to speed up approval of high-level Pentagon nominees, Mr. Schumer said, Maybe once things change a little bit on health care, with the consent of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, we can move a lot of things quickly.

Democrats blame some of the holdup on self-inflicted wounds by the White House because the administration was slow to put forward names and withdrew others. They also say that Mr. McConnell has the option to keep the Senate in session more days to advance nominees.

Before the Senate became a setting for nearly nonstop partisan warfare, senators routinely approved most lower-level nominees by voice vote, rarely insisting on the full slate of procedural steps when the outcome was a given. But those days appear to be gone.

Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, who has sought to streamline the nomination process, said he feared that the blockade would encourage the White House to give up on confirmations and instead leave top posts filled with officials serving in an acting capacity without having undergone review by the Senate.

We have never had a situation where several hundred key officials who run the government have not been examined by, and held accountable to, the United States Senate, he said. It makes the president more powerful and the Congress less powerful, and it gives the people less say into who the president is appointing, and what they are doing and how they conduct themselves.

He said that while it might seem like smart politics for Democrats to stall the nominees of a president they strongly oppose, they were actually shooting themselves in the foot by giving the White House incentive to bypass the Senate.

The clash is the latest development in a nomination process that has become politically poisonous in recent years, scarred by regular filibusters, two nuclear explosions altering the rules and a refusal even to consider a Supreme Court nominee. This latest chapter holds the potential for more long-term damage to both the Senate and the government across the board.

More here:
Democrats Perfect Art of Delay While Republicans Fume Over Trump Nominees - New York Times

Were already months into the Trump presidency and Democrats still have no clue how theyre gong to mount a comeback. Admittedly, Im not all that upset about that, but we should always have in the back of our minds that a robust and competent resistance to Donald Trump will emerge on the Left, though it might not occur in time for the midtermsand that can be related across the board. First, The Associated Presss story that shows how Democrats are still chickens running around with their heads lopped off. To complicate matters, there appears to be differing views on how to push back against this White House. We have the laser focused on health care route, health care is important, but dont forget about the Russia section, and the impeach/invoke 25th Amendment because Trump is crazy cohort:

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley hesitated when asked about his partys core message to voters.

That message is being worked on, the New York congressman said in an interview this past week. Were doing everything we can to simplify it, but at the same time provide the meat behind it as well. So thats coming together now.

The admission from the No. 4 House Democrat that his party lacks a clear, core message even amid Republican disarray highlights the Democrats dilemma eight months after President Donald Trump and the GOP dominated last falls elections, in part, because Democrats lacked a consistent message.

The soul-searching comes as Democrats look to flip at least 24 GOP-held seats necessary for a House majority and cut into Republican advantages in U.S. statehouses in the 2018 midterm elections. Yet with a Russia scandal engulfing the White House, a historically unpopular health-care plan wrenching Capitol Hill and no major GOP legislative achievement, Democrats are still struggling to tell voters what their party stands for.

[]

Several liberal groups that had been laser-focused on health care have intensified calls for impeachment in recent weeks, including MoveOn.org, Indivisible and Ultraviolet.

We need to be talking about impeachment constantly, said Scott Dworkin, co-founder of the recently formed Democratic Coalition Against Trump. He warned on Twitter, If youre an elected Dem & youre not talking impeachment or 25th amendment then find a new party.

Yet one of the lefts favorites, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is focusing almost exclusively on health care.

[]

Democrats would make a mistake if we thought pounding Trump and not having an authentic message of our own is a winning strategy, said Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David Pepper. The message of Democrats has to be about issues that matter to people at their kitchen table.

In South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said Democrats dont have to retreat from their opposition to Trump, including talking about Russia, but they must tie it all together with a consistent theme that goes beyond day-to-day news cycles.

The AP quoted Democrat Jason Crow, who says hes getting questions regularly about Russia. Crow is challenging Republican Rep. Mike Coffman in Colorados sixth congressional district, one of the 24 districts that Democrats will try and flip next year, though the notion that Russia is resonating outside of the beltway should be taken with some skepticism. In June, Ed OKeefe at The Washington Post wrote that Democrats running in next years races are saying that the party needs to move on from Russia, which he reiterated on CBS Face The Nation:

Spent most of the week outside of Washington talking to these Democrats who are starting to run, and they made very clear, stop talking about Russia, they said to party leaders. Nobody out here cares. Talk to us about the economy, about how you defend or preserve Obamacare. Let's see whether party leaders actually pay attention to that.

Well, were back on Russia due to the latest and ill-advised meeting Donald Trump Jr. took with a Russian lawyer under the pretense of having dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of the Russian governments efforts to help his father win the election.

The House will be hard to win back. While Democrats are eyeing these 23-24 House Districts that broke for Clinton, but voted for a Republican member of CongressTrump won 12 Democratic House districts. It remains to be seen if Democrats can find solid candidates after the collapse of their recruitment machine. Moreover, based on some reports, if Democrats were able to turnout every 2016 Clinton voter who backed a GOP House member and had them flip, it wouldnt be enough to win the House. The road to the majority for Democrats rests with winning in red districts, which took a punch to the gut when Democrat Jon Ossoff lost to Republican Karen Handel in Georgias sixth congressional district. Even with Democratic turnout the highest in ten years in GA-06, it wasnt enough, meaning that the 2018 electorate could mirror that of the 2016 election, which favored Republicans.

It doesnt get much better for the Senate, where there are fewer pick-ups for Democrats. James Carville, the top strategist for Bill Clintons 1992 campaign, threw a lot of cold water on this one speaking with John Catsimatidis on our own AM970 WNYM station (via Salon):

I think right now most Democrats are trying to focus on the 2018 elections and trying to recruit people and keep incumbents, and you know I would say we have a pretty good chance of taking the House back. The Senate is very, very difficult The problem in the Senate is we have a large number of seats we have to hold in states that Donald Trump carried. Indiana, Missouri, you know, places like that we have to hold seats, Carville added. The only places where we have an opportunity for pick up are, you know, Nevada is pretty good. After that Arizona is less good, then youre down to Texas and Alabama, and for Democrats to win the Senate back, they have to pick up three seats.

Carville seemed resigned that Democrats wont do well next year, saying that the party should focus on candidate recruitment and keeping incumbents in power. He also admitted that the Democratic Party has no leader.

Please read Guys take on this as well. As of now, a majority of Americans think that Democrats are only against Trump and dont stand for anything else by a 52/37 margin. As John Kerry and Mitt Romney found out the hard way, you have to be more than just the anti candidate. You need to offer something else and while Democrats have multiple doors to flesh out a new narrative, along with plenty of avenues of attack against the GOPthey have nothing. Could it be because deep down they know they need to reach out to white working class (i.e. Trump) voters?

Read more:
The Wilderness: Democrats Ponder Revival, While Top Strategist Throws Wet Blanket On Their Senate Hopes - Townhall