Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald Trump, in his comments Friday on the lack of coronavirus tests, said, I dont take responsibility at all because we were given a set of circumstances and we were given rules, regulations, and specifications from a different time.

On Fox News Sunday this morning, Chris Wallace spoke with Dr. Anthony Fauci and played that clip, asking, The president said the Obama Administration set up rules and regulations that made it impossible to do testing. You were in the same position under the Obama administration. Is that true? Is that what stopped it?

To be honest with you, Im not sure what regulations and when it was that theyre talking about. I really mean that, he said. Im trying to figure out what it is that these things were in place that were able to or inhibiting, but one thing that I do know now is that the ability to get a test had some regulatory and other restrictions on it but the FA now has just gotten rid of.

They could have done that day one, Wallace pointed out.

They could have but that problem is they didnt so instead of looking back, looking at where were going, Fauci responded.

You can watch above, via Fox News Sunday.

Have a tip we should know? [emailprotected]

Originally posted here:
Chris Wallace Presses Fauci on Trump Going After Obama-Era Regulations: Is That True? - Mediaite

From the beginning of the presidential race, I have been fascinated with Joe Bidens campaign, but not because of his inevitable gaffes, appeal to white Midwestern voters, electability, or even his policies. Bidens campaign has been amazing to watch because the unofficial, unspoken ethos from day one has been, Im best friends with the black president you love. Give me a shot.

Biden is not generally thought of as terribly progressive of course and, on paper, hes not. But seeing a white man campaign for, and possibly win, the highest office in the land based mostly on his friendship with a black man and their shared accomplishments may be one of the most progressive things I have ever seen.

The fact that I have labelled Bidens campaign as progressive has befuddled my friends and will probably inflame social media. But I do not see how the ethos of Bidens campaign could be anything but progressive. Not only is it obviously progress, but this is the type of progress that Americans who arent racist love to see.

Americans love the narrative of the black and white male partnership with a redemptive arc. Normally, the trope consists of a crazy, wild, and/or racist white male who becomes a better person through his friendship with a black man. Think about the Lethal Weapon movie series. Mel Gibsons character, Martin Riggs, is crazy and troubled, and his partnership with Danny Glovers character, Roger Murtaugh, who is a mature and stable family man, helps Riggs become a better man.

The hit television show Miami Vice was also a celebration of the black-and-white male partnership. There, the white guy, Sonny Crockett (Don Johnson), was the main protagonist, but the black ex-New Yorker Rico Tubbs (Philip Michael Thomas) was an indispensable partner who at times served as Sonnys conscience. The 2018 film Green Book, which won the Oscar for Best Picture, also employs this trope, and so do countless other films.

Many of Sidney Poitiers films from the 1950s and 60s speak to Americas need for a black-and-white redemption narrative. In the Heat of the Night (1967) is obvious here, as Poitier teaches small-town Southern sheriff Rod Steiger a few things about race in America; less obviously, go watch The Defiant Ones (1960), in which Poitier co-stars with Tony Curtis. In both cases, the black man provides the moral frame, and the white man, hopefully, learns something.

The problem with this cinematic narrative has been that it never matched up with the reality of America. These films represented images of the America that white Americans say they want to see but do very little to create.

However, as America became more integrated, authentic friendships across our racial divide become more possible. Sports has taken the lead here. The rivalry and friendship of Magic Johnson and Larry Bird revitalized the NBA. John Stockton and Karl Malone became a Hall of Fame duo for the Utah Jazz. Even today, NBA fans celebrate that Alex Caruso is an integrated part of the Los Angeles Lakers, and not just a boring, isolated white NBA player who can only shoot threes.

Obama and Biden represent the pinnacle of the black-and-white male bromance. During Donald Trumps presidency, author Andrew Shaffer even reimagined the Obama-Biden bromance and published two satirical mystery novels, Hope Rides Again and Hope Never Dies, where Obama and Biden team up to fight crime and solve mysteries. They became another Lethal Weapon, and both books reached The New York Times bestseller list.

America loves this narrative, but Bidens campaign has taken it to a new level. Bidens all by himself. His partner in crime cant fight this fight with him, but Biden is still campaigning as one half of a dynamic duo.

At the beginning of his campaign, I wondered how effective this strategy would be. Would Bidens eight years as Obamas sidekick withstand the gaffes that undid Bidens previous presidential bids? Surely, campaigning as Obamas best friend would not protect him against attacks from Kamala Harris and Cory Booker as they sought to win support amongst voters of color, right? Also, at some point, he would inevitably take a position that was critical of Obama that could help him win support amongst progressive and Latino voters.

Yet he never did. Debate after debate, Biden got attacked for many of his unpopular pre-Obama policies and statements. Other Democrats attacked the immigration policies of the Obama administration, and Biden never criticized or broke from Obama. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren challenged him over health care, too. By Iowa, Biden was an old-school moderate who had been beaten up by the new wave of the Democratic Party, and was nearly down for the count.

Despite his decades of public service, white voters had moved on from Biden. They found a newer, younger model in Pete Buttigieg instead. Or they clamored around a more economically progressive candidate in Sanders. Or they had grown tired of white men and instead supported Warren or Amy Klobuchar.

Trust matters more than policy in the black community.

The black-and-white redemption narrative got very little real-world support at first. Specifically, it got very little support from white Americans. Incredibly, it took black voters to save his campaign and keep the story alive.

As I watched the results roll in in South Carolina, I obviously thought about how the Democrats had unintentionally given Biden a boost, but I also thought about some subtle differences between black and white voters that Ive noticed during this election.

Plenty of black voters might have policy disagreements with Biden. But his friendship with Obama and his pre-Obama connections to the black community make many African-Americans confident that they can trust Biden. Weve had countless white politicians try to win our votes via great policies, only to let us down. So trust matters more than policy in the black community.

Regarding policy, I align much more with Sanders than I do with Biden, but Bernies and his supporters emphasis on class and not race meant that he would never get enough support among black voters to win the nomination or presidency. Bernie is anything but a racist, but he hadnt spent as much time developing trust or creating a brotherhood for black voters to support him over Biden.

Bidens big win in South Carolina showed that black voters, young and old, trusted Obamas No. 2. Race and trust matter more than class and policy for many black voters, and Bidens quietly revolutionary campaign of celebrating black and white brotherhood speaks to this unspoken and rarely manifested American need.

America has never had a white person campaign for the highest office in the land based primarily on their brotherhood and friendship with a black man. But Joe Biden is. And while other candidates invoke revolution and he does not, this might actually be the revolution America needs the most.

Read the original post:
Why Biden-Obama Is the Ultimate White Guy-Black Guy Buddy Movie - The Daily Beast

DES MOINES It has become political lore, repeated on cable airwaves and by Democratic campaign consultants, even presidential candidates. In 2008, as the story goes, black voters were uncertain about Barack Obamas presidential candidacy until he won the Iowa caucuses, after which they rallied around him over the onetime front-runner, Hillary Clinton.

Some Democrats had suggested that a win in next Mondays Iowa caucuses could have a similar influence among black voters in South Carolina and elsewhere, to the detriment of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who leads among African-Americans in polls. But in reality, according to historical polling data and interviews with some advisers from the Obama campaign, Mr. Obamas political strength with black voters was stronger than many remember even as Mrs. Clinton was ahead in many polls in late 2007 and early 2008.

The persistence of the narrative that Iowa made Mr. Obama has long irritated some of his advisers, who said that this recollection from 2008 had led campaigns astray since then, discounted the agency of black voters and minimized the robust grass-roots strategy that Mr. Obamas team undertook in the South.

Cornell Belcher, Mr. Obamas chief pollster in South Carolina, said internal campaign polling data showed Mr. Obama surpassing Mrs. Clinton among black voters in South Carolina as early as November 2007, and leading throughout the entire state before Iowa voted. Public polling shows Mr. Obama with clear leads among black South Carolina voters through that November and December, with his numbers growing further after the Iowa caucuses.

Black voters arent waiting for white people to tell them what to do, Mr. Belcher said. Its racist. Its racial paternalism.

He added, Iowa gave Barack Obama the same thing it will give any candidate that surges and that beats the presumptive front-runner. It gives bounce and credibility but thats not just among black voting.

In applying lessons from Mr. Obamas Iowa victory to the current Democratic primary, Mr. Belcher and other political operatives have grim news for candidates hoping that a win in Iowa can reverse their luck with black and Latino voters across the country: dont count on it.

This includes Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who have showed little traction with black voters in state and national polls. In a new national poll released by ABC News and The Washington Post, 51 percent of black voters were behind Mr. Biden. The next closest candidate was Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who was at 15 percent.

Another recent poll of black voters from The Washington Post and Ipsos, showed Mr. Biden ahead by 60 percentage points with black voters aged 65 and older.

Mr. Belcher said campaigns seeking to challenge Mr. Biden in South Carolina had made a mistake waiting for this magic Iowa.

Its lazy thinking, he said. They think they dont have to put resources behind it, and is, in fact, taking a key constituency that they need for granted.

Valerie Jarrett, the former senior adviser to Mr. Obama, said any candidate looking to replicate their 2008 strategy required not only an organizing vision, but also significant resources.

Ms. Jarrett echoed Mr. Belcher, saying she thinks theres a good chance Mr. Obama would have won the black vote in South Carolina even if he hadnt been competitive in Iowa.

Him winning an overwhelming white state sent a message across the nation, she said. But was it the only factor? I dont think so.

How much the first nominating contest in Iowa truly matters as a political kingmaker has been debated for decades. In Iowa, it is common for voters to mention Mr. Obamas 2008 win as a point of pride, a justification for a state whose primary importance is under intense scrutiny. This election cycle, Iowans who support Mr. Sanders, Mr. Buttigieg, Ms. Warren or Ms. Klobuchar cite Mr. Obamas first campaign as a ready-made antidote to their candidates lagging status among black and Latino voters. Just do well in Iowa, they argue, and the other voters will follow.

But even as one of Mr. Bidens senior advisers describe South Carolina and black voters as his launching pad, there are signs his position may be more precarious than Mrs. Clintons in 2016 and Mr. Obamas in 2008. Mr. Biden also has below average favorability ratings and has struggled in particular with younger black voters. His polling lead among black voters is about 30 points, commanding but less than the 60-point advantage that Mrs. Clinton experienced in 2016.

Briahna Joy Gray, the national press secretary for Mr. Sanderss campaign, has said she believed that winning in the early states would help Mr. Sanders overcome skepticism.

For legitimate historical reasons, black voters tend to want to back the person they see as the most electable, Ms. Gray said late last year. And it sometimes takes a little bit longer to convince people that you are the right person to take out someone like Trump.

Mr. Sanderss campaign has been one of many to deploy this line of thinking. Former presidential candidates such as Senators Kamala Harris of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey, both of whom are black, had hoped to unlock support in South Carolina through strong Iowa finishes. At the end of her stump speech during her campaigns final months, Ms. Harris would tell Iowans about coming to the state during Mr. Obamas first run, and implored them to help her recreate that historic moment.

Mr. Buttigieg, who has gained traction among white liberals and moderates in Iowa and New Hampshire but has struggled to replicate his support nationwide, has cast himself repeatedly in the mold of Mr. Obama, also alluding to him during speeches on the trail.

The same state that took a chance on a young guy with a funny name, who a lot of folks didnt think could win 12 years ago, Mr. Buttigieg said in Council Bluffs recently, this state could help us make history one more time.

Ms. Jarrett said the importance of Iowa should be viewed through a broader lens. For Mr. Obama, it did not change the minds of black voters, but provided a stamp of legitimacy that was important for a first-time presidential candidate. In other races, including in 2004 when Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts won the Democratic primary, Iowa has been a springboard for the eventual nominee.

There were people looking for early signals that he was a competitive candidate, Ms. Jarrett said of Mr. Obama.

She also said campaigns should take other lessons from Mr. Obamas success, including his campaigns reliance on grass-roots organizing, digital advertising tools and modern voter targeting. She also said Mr. Obamas campaign had financial resources to sustain the operation a luxury some candidates this cycle had not had.

Ultimately, its a combination of strategies, Ms. Jarrett said. Being able to raise money is important as well, and you cant support a field organization if you dont have the money.

In South Carolina last week, at an event held by the Democratic Womens Council of Darlington County, voters expressed an openness to voting for someone other than Mr. Biden. But they were looking to be wooed, by a candidate and a message that spoke directly to their concerns not someone who had proven the ability to win by succeeding in Iowa.

This is on the individual person, Caroline Hannatt, 67, said. Why is Iowa so important? Iowa doesnt have any bearing on who I vote for.

Jannie Lathan, 69, said the priorities of Democrats in Iowa, an overwhelmingly white state, were not the same as those of Democrats in South Carolina.

Ill stick with the criteria I laid out, Ms. Lathan said.

This is about our issues, she added, meaning black people. Not about whos popular in the moment but our issues.

Originally posted here:
The One About Iowa, Black Voters and Barack Obama - The New York Times

Former Vice President Joe Biden is the Democratic candidate best fit to defeat President Donald Trump in the general election in November, says former Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, who served with Biden in the Obama administration.

Biden is the man to win the presidency, says Pritzker, in a newly released interview with Yahoo Finance Editor-in-Chief Andy Serwer.

Besides Bidens electability, Pritzker pointed to his experience under Obama and as a U.S. Senator.

I think the vice president has the experience, both in domestic policy and politics, as well as globally the respect, in order to put the United States rightfully in the place it ought to be, says Pritzker, a major Democratic fundraiser who spoke to Serwer at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week.

Former Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker interviewed during Yahoo Finance's Influencers.

Whether it's a leader in our economic policy, a leader in terms of our attitude towards multilateralism, or a leader in terms of the stature of the United States around the world, all of which are extraordinarily important, she adds.

Pritzker, a billionaire heir to the Hyatt Hotel fortune and sister of Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, endorsed Bidens candidacy earlier this month. In recent weeks, Biden has faced a difficult stretch in the campaign, as the impeachment trial has drawn attention to false but widespread allegations about misconduct committed by his son Hunter Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders surges in the polls.

Democratic primary voters will cast their first ballots on Monday, Feb. 3 in Iowa, followed soon after by contests in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina all of which will take place in February.

Pritzker made the comments during a conversation that aired in an episode of Yahoo Finances Influencers with Andy Serwer, a weekly interview series with leaders in business, politics, and entertainment.

After serving as national finance chair for Barack Obamas 2008 presidential campaign, she took a seat on Obamas Council on Jobs and Competitiveness and his Economic Recovery Advisory Board. From 2013 to 2017, she held the position of Secretary of Commerce. Currently, she sits on the Microsoft (MSFT) board and is chairman of PSP Partners, a private investment firm.

The international standing of the U.S. has declined under Trump, Pritzker said.

I stay close to my peers, when I was in government, both in the United States and outside the United States, she says. Right now, many would say to me, the United States is off the playing field, or we don't think about what the United States is going to react if we take action whereas we used to.

Such circumstances require a reliable, longstanding leader like Biden, she added.

The vice president is the person with the integrity and the experience to deal with the situation that our country faces today, she says.

Max Zahn is a reporter for Yahoo Finance. Find him on twitter@MaxZahn.

Read more:

The rest is here:
Why Joe Biden is 'the man to win the presidency, says former Obama official - Yahoo Finance

What if it were President Barack Obama who was the subject of the Senate impeachment trial? How would we feel then?

Cass Sunstein, a professor at Harvard Law School, suggests a question along those lines in his book Impeachment: A Citizens Guide. Its one of several thought experiments that I suggest in order to step back from the hurly-burly in the Senate and interrogate our own principles and motivations.

The first approach, as Sunstein puts it, is this:

Suppose that a president engages in certain actions that seem to you very, very bad. Suppose that you are tempted to think that he should be impeached. You should immediately ask yourself: Would I think the same thing if I loved the presidents policies, and thought that he was otherwise doing a splendid job?

Alternatively, if you oppose impeachment and removal, Sunstein suggests you ask yourself: Would I think the same thing if I abhorred the presidents policies, and thought that he was otherwise doing a horrific job?

In practical terms, this amounts to: What if it were Obama who had been caught in this Ukraine scandal?

My guess is that if it were Obama, Republicans would be demanding witnesses (as they did in the 1999 trial of Bill Clinton). Given how aggressively Republican members of Congress pursued the Benghazi events multiple investigations, eventually finding no evidence of wrongdoing by either Obama or then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Im confident that the G.O.P. would be insisting that Obama be removed, with frequent chants of lock him up.

Yet I suspect that many Democrats would also switch sides, finding it easier to excuse misconduct by someone they admired and seeing it as more important in that situation to preserve executive privilege and leave it to voters to decide the matter in the fall. Thats why we owe it to ourselves, as a matter of intellectual honesty, to think through how we would react if it were the other guy on trial.

(Progressives may be scoffing that this exercise is unrealistic: Obama was meticulous in avoiding scandal and ethical conflicts. He checked with the Justice Department before accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, and for him a scandal was something like wearing a tan suit. The Ukraine mess would have been out of character for Obama, while it is entirely in character for Trump. But Republicans will see this differently.)

The second thought experiment comes from another distinguished lawyer, Neal Katyal, in his new book Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump.

Imagine if it had worked, Katyal suggests. Imagine if our president had leveraged his role as commander in chief to convince a foreign power to open an investigation into his political opponent. Imagine if the presidents rival lost the primary because news broke that he was under investigation. Imagine if that meant the president faced a weaker candidate in November 2020 and won re-election as a result.

The foreign country could then blackmail our president by threatening to expose the corruption, gaining leverage over our foreign policy. Meanwhile, the president might abuse presidential power in other ways in the belief that impunity was complete. If all this eventually became public, and truth does have a way of trickling out, this would have devastating consequences for the legitimacy of American elections.

This thought experiment perhaps isnt so far-fetched. We know now that Trumps pressure on Ukraine caused alarm in the White House and the intelligence community, with National Security Adviser John Bolton likening it to a drug deal. Yet for all that uproar, it almost didnt become public. It was only because of a whistle-blower that the information began to emerge, and the military aid to Ukraine was released only after the White House became aware of the whistle-blower and was being pressured by Congress.

In short, Trumps plan almost succeeded and in any case, he will get away with it in the sense that he is sure to be acquitted by the Senate. When Republicans suggest that Trump did nothing wrong, what message does that impunity send to Trump and to future presidents?

The third thought experiment is simple: What if Trump werent president, but was like almost any other person in America?

What if he were a high school vice principal who ensured that a police detectives son would be accepted in advanced placement classes and then added, Id like you to do us a favor, though. The favor would be an investigation of the vice principals ex-wife before their upcoming child custody hearing, in hopes of tilting the outcome in his favor.

In that situation, the vice principal would be fired. We all recognize that no school official or other person in a government bureaucracy should use public power for private benefit.

So a last query: Shouldnt we have as high a standard for the president of the United States as for a school vice principal?

Read the original:
What if It Were Obama on Trial? - The New York Times