Mediaboss Marketing

The liberal coalition Win Justice sidelined its usual army of clipboard-wielding activists who swarm neighborhoods to register voters and build a get-out-the-vote database for 2020.

The coronavirus crisis also put a crimp in the plans of political activists and advocacy groups across the political spectrum, with fundraising dried up by the economic lockdown and traditional voter contact strategies stifled by social distancing.

But political activists, by definition, are not easily deterred.

Win Justices network of activists from Planned Parenthood, Service Employees International Union and other left-wing groups this week retooled its voter turnout operation into a $30 million effort emphasizing personalized mail and phone banks.

The Committee to Unleash Prosperitys Stephen Moore said he estimated his income would drop 70% this year because of canceled conferences and speaking engagements, and fewer economic consulting opportunities.

Mr. Moore, a member of President Trumps task force to reopen the economy, said he is poised to weather the economic storm without hardship but he knows others in the policy-advocacy arena are not as fortunate.

The biggest problem for what were doing now frankly is everybodys poorer, Mr. Moore said. I talk to donors and they say I just lost 30% of my money in the stock market.

The inability of activists to put boots on the ground nationwide has affected conservatives and liberals alike. The Club for Growth said it hopes to resurrect its door-knocking campaigns if and when state and local officials allow it.

Club for Growth President David McIntosh said the biggest difference now than before the coronavirus shutdowns is that the group has focused more on digital engagement with its members and its new fellowship program.

Weve held a number of town halls with our friends including Sen. [Ted] Cruz, [pollster] Frank Luntz and more, and weve been getting great feedback, Mr. McIntosh said. We are continuing to be very engaged with TV, cable, and digital ads and mail even with many primaries being pushed into the summer.

Win Justice leaders said they want to do in-person field organizing if it is safe. But in the meantime, they are combining traditional methods with newer digital tools for their campaigns in Florida, Minnesota, Nevada and Wisconsin.

We need to reach the communities who have been targeted and silenced by this administration and the people in power from voters of color to immigrants, to young people, to women, said Planned Parenthoods Jenny Lawson. Enough is enough: While our countrys health care needs continue to rise in the face of a global pandemic, its time for the politicians who attack our health care and our reproductive rights to lose their jobs.

The SEIU said it sees Win Justice as the beginning of its chance to fundamentally alter the American economy.

Workers and communities of color cant afford to return to normal we need to reject the inequality and economic pain that defines COVID but was present long before COVID, said Mary Kay Henry, SEIU international president. Thats what this election is about. Win Justice is the first step toward a better future where we rewrite the rules, rebuild the economy based on workers power, and reinvest in communities.

See the article here:
Liberal coalition Win Justice retools strategies for voter turnout - Washington Times

For weeks, liberals insisted that women who accused then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct must be believed, no matter how flimsy, uncorroborated, politically motivated, or implausible they were.

The same liberals have been forced to resort to one of two tactics when confronted with the story of Tara Reade, who has accused presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden of sexual misconduct dating back to 1993 when Biden was in the Senate: 1. Ignore the existence of the accusations entirely, as most of the media has done; or 2. lamely state that they believe Joe Biden's denials but are not turning their back on "believe all women" because reasons.

Liberal writer Katha Pollitt, writing at The Nation, has decided to state what we all know to be true: For most liberals, it doesn't matter whether the allegations against Biden are true, just like it didn't matter whether the accusations against Kavanaugh were actually true. What matters is the politics of the accused.

It should be noted, in fairness, that the bulk of Pollitt's article is devoted to an attempted debunking of Reade's account. But the debunking material contained therein might well be taken with a grain of salt given the author's frank admission in the article's subtitle that "I would vote for Joe Biden even if I believed Reade's account."

She follows that up with even more emphasis in a remarkable opening paragraph:

Interestingly, a significant portion of the debunking material provided by Pollitt consists of evidence that Reade has publicly espoused bizarre and unsavory positions (e.g., support for Vladimir Putin in 2018) and therefore her stated facts should be considered suspect. Apparently, one should not apply the same standard to the material contained in Pollitt's article, given Pollitt's explicit admission up front that she has an axe to grind.

Pollitt has been widely criticized on Twitter by conservatives for her over-the-top opening paragraph. But the reality is that she is just saying aloud what most liberals think: It doesn't matter whether Tara Reade's story is true or not, all that matters is denying Trump one of his goals. This was just as true, and as transparent, during the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, and nothing has changed since.

Here is the original post:
Refreshing honesty: Liberal writer 'would vote for Joe Biden even if I believed Reades account' or even 'if he boiled babies and ate them' -...

OTTAWA The role immigrant labour is playing to keep the country moving during the COVID-19 pandemic is proof of why robust immigration must continue in the aftermath, federal Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino said Friday.

While the health and safety of Canadians must be assured before the doors of the country can be opened as widely again, they will be, Mendicino said.

He believes Canadians would want it that way.

Immigration is fundamentally about people coming together to build a stronger country, and that is an enduring value that I believe in, that I have faith in Canadians that they believe in, that we will see endure long after COVID-19 is behind us, he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

Just as the COVID-19 pandemic was beginning to force travel bans and border shutdowns in March, Mendicino had released the Liberals next three-year plan for immigration.

It called for the admission of 341,000 permanent residents in 2020, 351,000 in 2021 and 361,000 in 2022, record highs.

They follow annual increases to immigration levels by the previous Conservative government as well, as politicians of all stripes have moved to address chronic job shortages in certain sectors of the economy.

But with domestic unemployment nearing historic levels, questions are already emerging about whether those increases are sustainable.

Given that the economic crisis will linger long after the health crisis has passed, can Canada accommodate an additional one per cent of immigrants and refugees added to our population in the foreseeable future? Conservative immigration critic Peter Kent asked Mendicino during a recent appearance at a House of Commons committee.

Mendicino told the committee an update on the levels would be provided in the fall. On Friday, he wouldnt say whether the targets remain feasible, even from a logistical point of view, given the border and travel restrictions in place around the world.

But he said the pandemic has showcased the essential nature of the work newcomers do.

We could not put food on the plate of Canadians at an affordable price without immigrants, we could not support our front-line workers without immigration, he said.

So its vitally important that we continue to immigrate today in a manner that is safe and orderly and also to drive that future that we all believe will be underpinned by immigration as it has been in the past.

Temporary foreign workers who are largely employed by the agriculture industry were initially shut out from Canada when a decision was made to close the border to all but citizens or permanent residents.

The government moved swiftly to reverse that decision after an outcry.

The fact that people considered so essential, however, often work in less-than-optimal conditions and with grave uncertainty around their futures has also raised questions about whether the program itself needs to be rethought.

Mendicino said the government has moved to create better roads to permanent residency for temporary foreign workers.

A new program that opened Friday is aimed at those working in meat processing, mushroom and greenhouse production, as well as livestock-raising industries. It would give them the ability to settle in Canada permanently.

The program had been announced a year ago and was expected to open for applications earlier this year, but that was delayed due to the pandemic.

The planned resumption of the parent and grandparent sponsorship program in late April is also on hold, and theres also a question about the future of the international student program.

With international students pouring an estimated $21.6 billion into the economy, their absence this fall as borders remain closed could be a huge blow.

The government is trying to alleviate that by making some tweaks to keep students connected to Canada. One change announced this week has been to allow those who will now be taking courses online to still qualify for the student working visas that previously required a certain amount of time in Canada.

Another program on pause is refugee resettlement.

The Liberals were heavily criticized for shutting down that stream of new arrivals when they shut the borders in March. Advocates continue to argue that the worlds most vulnerable need the assistance now more than ever.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Friday that the health and safety of Canadians must come first, but Canada remains committed to upholding its refugee resettlement obligations under international conventions.

We will always make sure were getting that balance right, he said.

But first and foremost, my job is to look out for the well-being of Canadians.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 15, 2020.

Follow this link:
Immigration will be key in post-pandemic era: Liberal Minister Mendicino - National Post

Many colleges brag about how diverse they are, but the faculties are mainly staffed by an overwhelming majority of liberals who contribute mainly to the Democrat Party, no diversity there. Photo credit Shutterstock licensed

DELRAY BEACH, FL First off, lets define what we mean by diversity. According to Merriam-Webster, diversity is the inclusion of different types of people (such as people of different races and cultures) in a group or organization it also includes a diversity of opinion,

Now, with that definition in mind, lets see how the liberals use it in trying to further their political agenda.

It seems that the Democrats (a/k/a liberals, Progressives) think that diversity is the be all and end all that should happen in our society, not the intelligence, the work ethic, or the experience of the person, but whether or not he/she fits the diversity parameter that they constantly use in what they think is good for our society. According to the liberals, they want us to look different but think the same. You see this in college campuses around the country.Many colleges brag about how diverse they are, but the faculties are mainly staffed by an overwhelming majority of liberals who contribute mainly to the Democrat Party, no diversity there. Also, many of these colleges give preference to enrolling students with diversity in mind, rather than accepting prospective applicants on the sole basis of their academic credentials.

Giving preference to one group over another, to me, is un-American and contrary to the principles set forth by our Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Shouldnt everyone be judged as an individual and not as part of a group? That doesnt mean we shouldnt encourage people from some group from gaining credentials and experience to be able to compete for admission to aschool or college, but by blatantly discriminating in favor of a person from a certain group, that should be considered unfair, especially to the other person being denied even though better qualified.

Our founding fathers, in their eminent wisdom, have written that everyone should have the opportunity to better themselves, not the guarantee of success. Thats what they stated in our Declaration of Independence that we, as citizens, are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness as you can see they did not say the guarantee of happiness (or in other words, success), because when you give something to someone you have to take something from somebody else.Thats what seems to happen when someone gets accepted (because of diversity) for a slot in a college admission over someone who doesnt fall into that diversity category. That is called reverse discrimination and should not be tolerated.

The diversity goal is also used in the business world as the government has set up rules and procedures that authorize companies and businesses to hire people, not on the basis of merit for performing the job, but on the basis of their ethnicity, race, or gender. Should the government be the arbiter as to who some business should (or must) hire or should that be left to the business itself?Liberals, in the main believe that the government should get involved, whereas the Conservatives, in the main, say the government should stay out. Yes, there may be some who might discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, race, and gender, but most businesses are in business to make a profit so they will hire the person who will be the most productive for their business and will add to the bottom line (a/k/a profit).

So, the idea that diversity can be the be all and end all of how we run our lives, it can work in ways that bring more problems to society than in solving the problems of society. Forcing people to do or not to do certain things, in the name of diversity is never the way to go.Educating the people to do the right thing might take some more effort than passing a law, but in the long run it will create less animosity among the citizens who think that they are being discriminated against in the name of diversity.

Chuck Lehmann is a graduate of St. Johns University with his graduate work done at Hofstra University. He has an illustrious journalistic career, writing editorials for the Canada Free Press, Delray Sun and Boca Forum, supplement publications in the Sun-Sentinel newspaper and has been the editorialist-in-chief at the Chuck on the Right Side blog for the past 10 years.

View original post here:
The Liberals and Diversity The Published Reporter - The Published Reporter

Progressives are embracing super PACs with newfound vigor as they look to put their political influence and organizing tactics to use in the aftermath of Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersBiden wins Oregon primary Joe Rogan announces exclusive deal with Spotify Author: Biden 'completely different' from FDR MOREs (I-Vt.) presidential campaign.

A handful of new liberal outside groups have cropped up in recent weeks, many of them founded by former aides and allies of Sanders and other prominent progressives. Their goals range from boosting the presidential campaign of former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenPro-Trump outside groups raise .8 million in April Biden wins Oregon primary Graham to release report on his probe into Russia investigation before election MORE to patching what they see as electoral holes in the Democrats organizing strategy.

But the proliferation of super PACs has come at a cost for some in the progressive movement, which has long denounced the existence of such groups and the influence of money in politics.

Sanders himself has privately expressed frustration with one such super PAC, originally called Future to Believe In PAC after the Vermont senators campaign slogan. The group was formed late last month by a handful of former aides to Sanderss campaign, including senior adviser Jeff Weaver, to boost Biden among progressives.

Sanderss displeasure with the formation of the super PAC prompted its founders to change its name this week to Americas Promise PAC to avoid the appearance that it is tied to Sanders or his campaign.

For Weaver and others, the decision to form a super PAC appears to stem more from a sense of urgency than a genuine comfort with such groups, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money so long as they do not coordinate with a candidate or campaign.

In a memo issued on Friday, Weaver warned that lagging support and enthusiasm for Bidens candidacy among progressives has the potential to sink the former vice presidents chances of ousting President TrumpDonald John TrumpPro-Trump outside groups raise .8 million in April Biden wins Oregon primary Graham to release report on his probe into Russia investigation before election MORE in November. Americas Promise PAC, he wrote, could help Biden make up that ground.

[D]espite best intentions, the Biden campaign and the [Democratic National Committee] are far behind on digital organizing, Latino outreach and progressive coalition building all critical to reaching and winning over Sanders supporters, Weaver wrote.

Chuck Rocha, a former senior adviser to Sanders who is involved in Americas Promise PAC and is spearheading the creation of another group, Nuestro PAC, said that super PACs are simply a means to an end: helping Democrats and progressives win up and down the ballot.

Unlike traditional political action committees and political nonprofits, super PACs can act as a partisan hammer, Rocha said, a role that traditional campaigns and PACs cant necessarily fill.

I am anti all this money in politics and if we can operate without super PACs, I would vote for that everyday, Rocha told The Hill. But Ive got to do something right now. I dont have the privilege to be able to wait around until there arent super PACs on either side.

Rocha and his political consulting firm Solidarity Strategies launched Nuestro PAC last month to turn out Latino voters in the fall using the same playbook that helped Sanders win broad support among Latinos during his primary campaign. Rocha himself is currently the largest donor to the super PAC. He said that hes courting other progressive and Democratic-leaning groups to help fund the effort.

Rocha said he wont accept contributions from corporate interests or business executives.

Super PACs arent the problem. The problem is corporate money in super PACs, he said. I dont know any corporations who would give Chuck Rocha or Nuestro Pac any donations anyway.

Still, the move towards super PACs has received blowback from some progressives. Rocha said he has lost thousands of followers on Twitter since started Nuestro PAC last month. And after Americas Promise launched in late April, the grassroots collective The People for Bernie Sanders advised its followers: Dont give them a dime.

One of the basics of the Bernie campaigns was a refusal to go there in terms of anything like a super PAC, Norman Solomon, a longtime activist and the co-founder of the progressive online initiative RootsAction.org.

I think thats in harmony with the politics that if youre opposed to huge money running the political show then you dont take huge money in super PACs.

Solomon is among a group of advisers to the newly-formed Once Again PAC, a traditional political action committee focused on helping Sanders win delegates in upcoming Democratic presidential primaries in order to exert influence over the partys platform and rules at its national convention this summer.

Also involved in that effort is Nina Turner, a former co-chair of Sanderss presidential campaign, and Winnie Wong, a former adviser to Sanders.

While Solomon said that most activists on the left share Bernies detest for super PACs in general, he also emphasized that progressive super PACs are a relatively small part of the terrain, especially given the massive outside groups funded by ultra-wealthy donors that often back Republicans or more centrist Democrats.

Its David vs. Goliath, he said. Even David needed a slingshot and I think thats how some people see it.

Sanderss former aides arent the only ones formingoutside political groups. Earlier this month, Justice Democrats, the progressive groupaligned with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezOvernight Defense: Pentagon memo warns pandemic could go until summer 2021 | Watchdog finds Taliban violence is high despite US deal | Progressive Dems demand defense cuts The Hill's Campaign Report: Biden leads Trump by 6 points in new poll Ocasio-Cortez primary opponent Caruso-Cabrera goes on fierce attack in online debate: 'AOC is always MIA' MORE (D-N.Y.), filed paperwork with the Federal Election Committee (FEC) to create a hybrid PAC also called a Carey Committee similar to a super PAC.

Sanders himself has benefited from super PACs in the past. Vote Nurses Values PAC, the super PAC funded by the nurses union National Nurses United, spent more than $700,000 in support of the Vermont senator during the 2020 presidential primaries.

To me, theres a big difference between a labor lobbyist who is an advocate for working people versus a corporate lobbyist for Goldman Sachs or General Electric, said Jonathan Tasini, a progressive strategist and former surrogate for Sanderss 2016 presidential campaign. I sort of see super PACs the same way.

Tasini said that the end goal for Democrats should be to get rid of all this money in the U.S. political system. But he added that progressives should be practical in their approach to super PACs.

I dont think we should be so ideologically rigid about this, he said. Everyone would love to get rid of all this money. But that isnt the reality today.

One of the draws of super PACs in addition to being allowed to raise and spend unlimited sums of money is that they promise political operatives freedom that they often dont get within the rigid and bureaucratic structure of traditional campaigns, said Linh Nguyen, a former presidential campaign staffer for Sen. Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerBipartisan Senate group offers new help to state, local governments Liberals embrace super PACs they once shunned Trump and Biden signal bitter general election with latest attack ads MOREs (D-N.J.) and former New York City Mayor Michael BloombergMichael BloombergLiberals embrace super PACs they once shunned .7 billion expected to be spent in 2020 campaign despite coronavirus: report Bloomberg wages war on COVID-19, but will he abandon his war on coal? MORE.

Nguyen and other former campaign staffers filed paperwork with the FEC late last month creating PAC That A$$ (PTA), a super PAC aimed at boosting Democrats up and down the ballot, while aggressively mocking GOP incumbents. The group isnt tied directly to the progressive movement, but is "very much anchored in the idea that we are trying to fix the system," Nguyen said.

In an interview this week, Nguyen said the group isnt only going to be run by political operatives, but is also hiring writers and comedians particularly black and brown creatives with the goal of reaching young voters and communities of color online ahead of the 2020 election.

Our donors that are funding this have specifically said we want you all to try different things, Nguyen said. Experiment and figure out how to break through the noise.

Nguyen said that PTA is built around the notion that super PACs are detrimental to the political process. The groups website touts that if their efforts to get Democrats elected are successful, there wont be any more Super PACs.

We want to fight fire with fire. This is something that Republicans are very, very comfortable in, and as Democrats, we shy away from it or we take the higher road, she said. We want to lean into it. Were going to get a lot of criticism, but we dont want to shy away from it.

See the original post:
Liberals embrace super PACs they once shunned | TheHill - The Hill