Mediaboss Marketing

In Britain, the Conservative government is in trouble. Boris Johnson has been dogged by domestic scandal of the kind that baffles foreigners. He has accepted responsibility for holding gatherings in 10 Downing Street that contravened Covid-19 restrictions. Each turn of this months long story incenses the public. The war in Ukraine has hardly affected the prime ministers polling.

This might pass, but Sir Keir Starmerleader of the opposition Labour partycould be prime minister soon if Conservative fortunes do not improve. Starmer is worth studying. In office, he would shape Britains relations with the rest of the world.

Akin to President Joe Biden, Starmer wishes to present his foreign policy as a return to normal. Starmer has characterized Johnson as Britains [Donald] Trump.

Starmers individual ideas have some merit, but his prospective foreign policy is still crude. Unlike Jeremy Corbyn, his predecessor, Starmer does not have a decades-long career filled with statements of belief. Starmer is a career lawyer and former director of public prosecutions. His foreign policy is cobbled together from recent history.

Since he was first elected to Parliament in 2015, Starmer has not covered himself in foreign policy glory. He notably opposed British jets fighting the Islamic State group (ISIS) in Syria as well as in Iraq.

Under Starmer, Britain would not lurch into a radical and untested departure from the mainstreamas it would have done had Corbyn been elected prime minister. But Starmers platform still has gaps which will need to be addressed.

Otherwise, Starmers party risks entering government unprepared and without the capacity to make significant decisions. The current UK government produced the Integrated Review, a strategy forGlobal Britain. Starmer has no strategy of similar depth.

Foreign policy is not an overriding concern for him. Most of Starmers day-to-day foreign policy pronouncements are dictated by the advantage they give in domestic politics.

In politics, Starmer emphasizes legalism: process and formality. He does this when addressing Brexit and recent foreign policy crises like the Iraq War and intervention against ISIS in Syria.

Since he became the leader of the Labour Party, Starmer has also shown examples of what I term strategic silence. This consists of saying the right things on international affairs, but proposing essentially no action.

Starmer favors maintaining Britains existing alliances and supports Bidens foreign policy and the European Union. Starmer opposes the revisionist illiberal powers in Europe, including Viktor Orbans Hungary and Vladimir Putins Russia. He wants continued international agreement on climate change.

These are more attitudes than concrete policies.

Starmer has been a consistent and vocal critic of Trump, and British politicians who dealt with Trump in office. His hostility to Trump and the U.S. Republican party might prove a problem. In government, Labour leaders have had to work with Republican presidents, and have found ways to form personal relationships with them. A Republican president in the mold of Trump, like Ron DeSantis, could offend Starmer personally and jeopardize British-American relations. Starmer must show that he is able and willing to work with whoever the American president is, from whichever party he comes.

In recent months, Starmer has become more focused and more activegalvanized by Russian aggression towards Ukraine. Starmers Labour party has become an advocate of arming Ukraine, sanctioning Russia, and revitalizing NATO and European self-defense.

In a speech given at Tufts in March, David Lammy, Starmers shadow foreign secretary, described Putin as taking advantage of the end of American hegemony to invade Georgia, annex Crimea, and keep Bashar al-Assad in power in Syria. Starmers foreign policy and defense team have been serious in relation to Ukraine. This has not yet been replicated in other areas. But it could still be.

But Britains allies must also wonder. Would Prime Minister Starmer help to contain Chinese expansionism, or join new a counterterrorism mission in the Middle East, or intervene to punish the use of chemical, radiological, biological or nuclear weapons? Labour is so far unwilling to be drawn.

There is still time for Starmer to develop a foreign policy. It can be both realistic and just, legalist and pragmatic. It could set up his party for an ambitious and fruitful time in government. But the work must begin now.

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is a Director at the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy in Washington DC and Research Professor at the Strategic Studies Institute US Army War College.

Excerpt from:
Britain's Kier Starmer May Struggle to Work with a Republican Government - The National Interest Online

SHERIDAN Speaking at a Republican Women of Sheridan County meeting Tuesday, U.S. House challenger Harriet Hageman spoke of Wyoming as a shining city on a hill that needs to be protected.

Hageman said she worked to do this in her legal career and would do the same if elected to the House.

What we do, what were able to produce, what we believe in, our faith, our family, our community all those things are very important, and things that we need to protect, Hageman said.

Hageman has practiced law in the private sector across Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska, and ran in the 2018 Wyoming governors race. A former political ally of Rep. Liz Cheney, Hageman chose to run for the House seat following Cheneys public criticisms of former President Donald Trump.

Like many Wyomingites, I supported Liz Cheney when she ran for Congress, Hageman said in a statement announcing her bid last year. But then she betrayed Wyoming, she betrayed this country, and she betrayed me.

A February Wyoming Republican State Central Committee straw poll solidified Hageman as the candidate to beat in the House race this year. Hageman received 59 votes in the poll of Republican party activists. Cheney, her next closest competitor, had six.

Hageman has received Trumps endorsement for the position, and when asked during the meeting who she would support for president in 2024, Hageman spoke kindly of Trump, along with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Donald Trump exposed the dark underbelly of Washington, D.C., and he did a huge public service by doing that, Hageman said. I had some criticism of President Trump when he was running, but Donald Trump did what he said he was going to do, especially on the big issues.

Hageman was critical of about current President Joseph Biden and his administrations energy policies, which she said has led to inflation of gas prices.

Hes destroyed everything hes touched, Hageman said. Ive never seen an administration where every decision they make is not only wrong, its catastrophicI believe, truly, there is a special place in hell for people who adopt policies intended to increase the costs of housing, food and energyand thats what theyve done.

Hageman also spoke critically of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Jan. 6 attack, and their investigations into the insurrection that took place at the U.S. Capitol in early 2021.

One of the important things that has always set our country apart is we believe in equal protection, Hageman said. It doesnt matter who youre connected to or who you are. What were seeing with this is they have selected this group of people and they are persecuting them. It is a tragedy, and when we retake the House and the Senate, I think there will hopefully be some changes with that.

Hageman was one of a long list of Republican political candidates who made an appearance at a Republican Women of Sheridan County meeting Monday.

Joining Hageman at the meeting was governor candidate Brent Bien; Superintendent of Public Instruction candidate Tom Kelly; House District 29 challenger Ken Pendergraft; House District 30 incumbent Rep. Mark Jennings, R-Sheridan; Sheridan County sheriff candidates Zach McLain and Roger Miller; Sheridan County coroner candidate Dr. Robert Byrd; Sheridan City Council candidate Andrew Patceg; and Sheridan County School District 1 board member candidate Bill Adsit.

While the offices the candidates were running for were diverse, all candidates expressed a desire to protect their constituents freedoms and protect Wyoming from the influences of the political left and others who might not have the states best interests at heart.

I feel like city councils job is to stand strong against the constant attempts to import ideas and culture that is contrary to Sheridans history and values, Patceg said. This is the arena I feel called to and where I can make a difference.

I am not running for state superintendent because I am an educational professional, which I am, Kelly said. Im running because this is my home, and I have come from places where the threats to our children have already won. Illinois. Colorado. Its not going to happen here, and thats why Im running.

Like many of the candidates at the meeting, Hageman promised that, if elected, she would fight what she sees as the federal governments efforts to limit citizens constitutional rights.

I never in a million years thought my country would do what my country has done in the last two years, Hageman said. And Im going to tell you right now, we cant tolerate it at all. We have to fight back. We have to fight back in Wyoming. We have to fight back across this country.

The candidate filing period for public office opens May 12 and will continue through May 27.

Continued here:
Hageman, other Republican candidates hope to preserve Wyoming's freedoms - The Sheridan Press

Wilson County residents who want to vote in their county mayors race and a number of other seats will need to cast Republican ballots in the May 3 primary.

Incumbent Randall Hutto and challenger Phillip Warren are running for mayor, both as Republicanswith no Democratic or independent challenger.

Circuit court clerk and several county commission seats are among other contests with only GOP candidates as early voting for the primary begins Wednesday and continues through April 28.

There is only oneDemocratic candidate in the local primary, Belita McMurray-Fite, who is running for an at-large Lebanon Special School District seat.

Wilson County has a handful of independent candidates qualifying for select seats. Independents are not part of the May 3 ballot but will face Republican and Democratic nominees for those respective seats on Aug. 4.

More: Meet the Wilson County primary candidates and your vote now is vital. Early voting starts April 13

The primary leaves area Democrats in an odd place, Bobby Francis of the Wilson County Democratic Party Executive Committee Chair said. I only vote Democrat.

Tennessee is an open primary state.

State law to vote in the primary includes:

Or:

Closed primaries, which require a voter to be a registered party member, would needlegislative action.

We encourage all citizens to exercise their right to vote at every possible opportunity, including the Republican Primary on May 3, Wilson County Republican Party Chair Brad Lytle said. We do have concerns about illicit crossover voting in our open primaries, and we encourage our legislators to consider closed primaries, limiting them to only those who are registered in the appropriate party.

Both Wilson Countys Democratic and Republican parties called for primaries to precede the county general election in August. Primaries have occurred in Wilson County, but have been infrequent overseveral decades in the county.

Francis believes intimidation stopped potential Democratic candidates from running for local seats.Francis believes the landscape under Tennessee Democratic Party Chair Hendrell Remus is changing.

Early voting and election day voting centers will have signs and poll workers to guide voters to look at the sample ballots, Wilson County Administrator of Elections Tammy Smith said.

Voters can change their mind on party affiliation after they request a ballot, but the ballot is final once it goes through the tabulator, Smith said.

The primary has no certified write-in candidates eligible to be counted in the upcoming primary, Smith said. Write-in candidates had to be certified by noon, March 14.

Reach Andy Humbles at ahumbles@tennessean.com or615-726-5939 and on Twitter @ AndyHumbles.

See the article here:
Is voting for Wilson County mayor and multiple other races for Republicans only? - Tennessean

In one of the final acts in a 24-year political career, the Republican chief justice of the Ohio supreme court is defying her party and refusing to let them distort electoral districts to their advantage, a move that has some fellow Republicans calling for her impeachment.

Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardians Fight to vote newsletter

Since January, Chief Justice Maureen OConnor has served as the decisive vote on three separate occasions blocking Ohio Republicans from enacting proposed state legislative maps. She also sided with Democrats to block an initial GOP proposal for congressional districts before going into effect in January. Those decisions have prompted chatter among Republicans about impeaching OConnor, 70, who will leave the court after nearly two decades at the end of this year because she has reached the mandatory retirement age for judges in Ohio.

OConnor has a long independent streak. A decade ago, she joined a dissent when the supreme court upheld the state legislative districts drawn by Republicans. I broke away from the mould in some peoples minds, she would later say of that decision. Party affiliation should not and people have to understand it should not have anything to do with how a judge does their job.

In 2018, she joined with the lone Democrat on the court to dissent from a ruling upholding the forced closure of the last abortion clinic in Toledo. She has backed criminal justice and bail reform, as other Ohio Republicans are pushing to make it harder for someone to be released on bond. She has called for less partisan influence in the way judges are elected in the state. In 2020, just before the presidential election, she blasted the state Republican party for accusing a local judge of colluding with Democrats, saying the attack was disgraceful and deceitful.

Shes no shrinking violet. Shes got sharp elbows, said Paul Pfeifer, a Republican who served on the supreme court with OConnor from when she joined in 2003 until he retired in 2017. No amount of public criticism is going to change her mind if she feels that shes right in the position shes taking.

William ONeill, a Democrat who served with OConnor on the court from 2013 to 2019, said she was the justice he wound up voting with the most. They were the only two members of the court who dissented in 2018 in the Toledo abortion clinic case.

She can be swayed to reasonable arguments, he said. Her legacy is already carved in stone. The stand she is taking is consistent with her entire career.

Shes also one of the most successful politicians in the history of Ohio, said David Pepper, a former chair of the Ohio Democratic party. Shes been elected five times statewide, none of which have been close. The then Ohio governor, Robert Taft, picked the former prosecutor to be his running mate in 1998 to add law enforcement experience to the ticket. Once she was elected lieutenant governor, she oversaw the states department of public safety, taking on a leading role after the 9/11 attacks. She would travel overseas with troops being deployed from Ohio, even though that doesnt typically fall within the responsibilities of her role.

She took the initiative to do that and I would say it was above and beyond what she would have to do in her role, Taft said in an interview. She was part of our team but she was also her own person. She was an independent thinker.

She was elected to the court in 2002, and became chief justice in 2010.

Now, OConnor and the court are not backing down in their refusal to let Republicans in the state get away with one of the most brazen efforts to gerrymander electoral districts to their benefit.

A new provision in the Ohio constitution requires partisan makeup of the states 132 legislative districts roughly reflect the partisan breakdown of statewide elections over the last decade, which is 54% Republican and 46% Democrat. The three plans Republicans have passed so far, and a fourth one currently pending before the court, however, would enable Republicans to win a veto-proof majority in the legislature in a favorable year for the party.

The constitutional violations of the maps that the Ohio redistricting commission continues to pass are obvious, said Jen Miller, the executive director of the Ohio chapter of the League of Women Voters, which is involved in suits challenging the plans.

Republicans have forged a sneaky attempt to enact their maps. The initial plan the court struck down in January would have given them control of 64.4% of districts. They then submitted a new plan to the court that nominally had the required 54-46 split, but several of the districts were barely majority Democratic essentially toss-ups meaning Republicans could still win them in a favorable election. After the court rejected that plan, Republicans came back with a third plan that slightly increased the Democratic majority in those districts, which was again rejected by the court. Last month, Republicans submitted a fourth plan that took the same approach.

Its a pure power play, said Paul Beck, a retired political science professor at the Ohio State University. Its almost like theyre saying we have the power to do this and so were gonna do it.

OConnor has bluntly called out the way Ohio Republicans are abusing the redistricting process. The first time the court struck down the legislative maps, back in January, she went out of her way to write a concurring opinion urging Ohio voters to strip lawmakers of their redistricting power entirely.

Having now seen first-hand that the current Ohio Redistricting Commission comprised of statewide elected officials and partisan legislators is seemingly unwilling to put aside partisan concerns as directed by the peoples vote, Ohioans may opt to pursue further constitutional amendment to replace the current commission with a truly independent, nonpartisan commission that more effectively distances the redistricting process from partisan politics, she wrote.

The standoff has left Ohio at a chaotic impasse. Unlike supreme courts in other states, like Virginia that have stepped in to draw maps, the Ohio supreme court is prohibited from making its own plan. Early voting began on 5 April without state legislative districts on the ballot. Last month, a coalition of civic action groups challenged the maps to request that the redistricting commission be held in contempt for failing to comply with the courts orders.

The hard line from OConnor and three other Democrats on the supreme court, where Republicans have a 4-3 majority, is extremely consequential. This is the first redistricting cycle the partisan fairness requirements are in effect (voters approved them overwhelmingly through a ballot measure in 2015). By refusing to accept the Republican maps, OConnor and the court are setting a precedent that signals how aggressively the justices are going to police partisan gerrymandering.

The consequence of caving would be a disaster. This has gone from a battle over democracy in Ohio to a battle over democracy and the rule of law in Ohio, said Pepper, the former Democratic party chair. No other citizens who violate the law four times get rewarded for it.

After the court blocked Republican maps for the third time, Republicans in the statehouse began openly weighing her impeachment, according to the Columbus Dispatch. Its time to impeach Maureen OConnor now, Scott Wiggam, a GOP state Representative, tweeted. I dont understand what the woman wants, state representative Sara Carruthers told the Dispatch. Ohios secretary of state, Frank LaRose, a Republican who sits on the panel that draws districts, said recently he would not stand in the way of an impeachment effort, saying she has not upheld her oath of office.

Ohios governor, Mike DeWine, a Republican who also sits on the redistricting panel, has been more outspoken against impeachment. I dont think we want to go down that pathway because we disagree with a decision by a court, because we disagree with a decision by an individual judge or justice, he said in March.

Though its unclear if the impeachment effort will move forward, many doubted it would succeed.

Both ONeill and Pfeifer, the former justices who served with OConnor said they were confident the impeachment efforts would not affect her work. What in the world is she supposed to have done that violated her oath of office?, ONeill said.

It will have the opposite effect of what theyre seeking.

View original post here:
The Republican judge blocking her party from rigging electoral districts - The Guardian

Ever since entering Congress, Marjorie Taylor Greene has been making headlines for her long history of peddling conspiracy theories, her blatant embrace of anti-Muslim bigotry and white Christian nationalism, and her aggression against political opponents. The latest escalation came last week, when she smeared her Republican colleagues in the Senate, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney, as pro-pedophile after they voted to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US supreme court; Democrats, she added, are the party of pedophiles.

There is a calculating quality to Greenes polemics. Last fall, for instance, she recorded a campaign video in which she used a military-grade sniper rifle to blow up a car that had the word socialism written on it, promising to do the same to the Democrats socialist agenda. It was over-exaggerated campaign nonsense. But Greene knew the unsubtle insinuation of using violence against a political opponent would demand attention.

The fact that Greenes antics are so clearly designed to keep herself in the spotlight has prompted calls for the media and commentators to stop paying attention to her rather than be complicit in the amplification of far-right propaganda. And if whats on display here were just the extremist behavior of a fringe figure, it would indeed be best to simply ignore her. This, however, isnt just Greenes extremism it is increasingly that of the Republican party itself. Greene and the many provocateurs like her are not just rightwing trolls, but elected officials in good standing with their party. Ignoring them wont work, nor will making fun of them: These people are in positions of influence, fully intent on using their power.

In any (small-d) democratic party, Greenes extremism should be disqualifying. In todays Republican party, shes not being expelled, shes being elevated. Greene is undoubtedly one of the rightwing stars in the country, and thats not just a media phenomenon. Republican candidates crave her endorsement. Democrats stripped her of her committee assignments against the vote of nearly all of Greenes Republican colleagues; if the Republicans capture the House in November, shell probably get those assignments back.

It is true that occasionally, Greenes most egregious actions have led to some measure of symbolic distancing from Republican leadership. After she spoke at the white supremacist America First Political Action Conference (Afpac) in February, where she was enthusiastically introduced and embraced by the well-known far-right activist and Nazi sympathizer Nick Fuentes, minority leader Kevin McCarthy gave her a good talking to but no serious consequences followed.

Overall, Greenes position within the Republican party seems secure. Thats partly because the Republican leadership is surely aware that most of the energy and activism in conservatism is in the far-right wing that stands behind Greene. In fact, Greene is the poster child of a rising group of rightwing radicals: in Congress, she likes to present herself and like-minded allies such as representatives Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz as the future of the Republican party, and they arent shy about their intention to purge whatever vestiges of moderate conservatism might still exist within the Republican party.

Greenes rise is indicative of a more openly militant form of white Christian nationalism inserting itself firmly at the center of Republican politics. America First candidates like Greene are representing the Republican party all over the country. In Arizona, for instance, state senator Wendy Rogers proudly declared herself to stand with Jesus, Robert E Lee, and the Cleveland Indians back in December all of them supposedly canceled by satanic communists; and at the aforementioned AFPAC in February, Rogers suggested building gallows to hang political enemies. In Georgia, gubernatorial candidate Kandiss Taylor runs on a platform of Jesus, Guns, and Babies and openly advocates for the establishment of a Christian theocracy.

The Republican party doesnt just tolerate such extremists in an attempt to appease the fringe this isnt simply a matter of acquiescence out of convenience or cowardice. What we really need to grapple with is the fact that this sort of radicalism is widely seen as justified on the right. The exact language someone like Greene uses might be slightly crasser than what some conservatives are comfortable with, and some Republicans might disagree with specific aspects of the public image she projects. But its obviously not enough for them to break with her, or with any of the Christian nationalist extremists in their ranks.

If anything, most of what Greene is saying actually aligns with the general thrust of conservative politics. Republicans are currently all in on smearing anyone who disagrees with their assault on LGBTQ rights as groomers and declaring any progressive social position adjacent to pedophilia. And its really hard to tell the difference between Greenes propaganda and what much of the reactionary intellectual sphere has been producing. Rod Dreher, for instance, one of the Religious Rights best-known exponents, has called the Democrats the party of groomers and the party of child mutilators and kidnappers lately. Or take the gun-toting militancy that was on display in Greenes campaign video. Republicans have long embraced the gun cult and made it a key element of their political identity. Now candidates up and down the country have the whole family, including young children, pose for heavily armed photos, reveling in the imagery of using guns to fight off those insidious Democrats and their assault on America.

Thats precisely the key to understanding why so many Republicans are willing to embrace political extremism. Greenes central message is fully in line with what has become dogma on the right: that Democrats are a radical, Un-American threat, and have to be stopped by whatever means. Everyone suspected of holding liberal or progressive positions is a fellow traveler with the radical left, as senator Ted Cruz put it; as part of the militant left, Democrats need to be treated as the the enemy within, according to senator Rick Scott; and Florida governor Ron DeSantis declared that Stacey Abrams winning the Georgia gubernatorial election would be akin to a foreign adversary taking over and lead to a cold war between the two neighboring states.

It doesnt matter to the right that Greenes pedophilia accusations lack any empirical basis. What matters is that they adhere to the higher truth of conservative politics: that Democrats are a fundamental threat to the country, to its moral foundations, its very survival. How much more can America take before our civilization begins to collapse? Greene asked last week. There arent many conservatives left who disagree with her assessment. Thats how they are giving themselves permission to embrace whatever radical measures are deemed necessary to defeat this Un-American enemy. Once you have convinced yourself you are fighting a noble war against a bunch of pedophiles hellbent on destroying the nation, there are no more lines youre not justified to cross. Greene and her fellow extremists are perceived to be useful shock troops in an existential struggle for the survival of real America. The right isnt getting distracted by debates over whether Greenes militant extremism or Mitch McConnells extreme cynicism are the right approach to preventing multiracial pluralism. They are united in the quest to entrench white reactionary rule.

I fear that four years of Trumpism in power so inundated us with political stunts and outrageous political acts that we might have become a bit numb to how extreme and dangerous these developments are. Lets not be lulled into a false sense of security by the clownishness, the ridiculousness of it all. Some of historys most successful authoritarians were considered goons and buffoons by their contemporaries until they became goons and buffoons in power.

What we are witnessing is one party rapidly abandoning and actively assaulting the foundations of democratic political culture. Every Western society has always harbored some far-right extremists like Greene. But the fact that the Republican party embraces and elevates people like her constitutes an acute danger to democracy.

Thomas Zimmer is a visiting professor at Georgetown University, focused on the history of democracy and its discontents in the United States, and a Guardian US contributing opinion writer

See the original post:
Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party - The Guardian