Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans who will gather to cast the first votes of the 2024 presidential primary season have one essential responsibility: to nominate a candidate who is fit to serve as president, one who will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Donald Trump, who has proved himself unwilling to do so, is manifestly unworthy. He is facing criminal trials for his conduct as a candidate in 2016, as president and as a former president. In this, his third presidential bid, he has intensified his multiyear campaign to undermine the rule of law and the democratic process. He has said that if elected, he will behave like a dictator on Day 1 and that he will direct the Justice Department to investigate his political rivals and his critics in the media, declaring that the greatest dangers to the nation come not from abroad but from within.

Mr. Trump has a clear path to the nomination; no polling to date suggests he is anything but the front-runner. Yet Republicans in these states still have their ballots to cast. At this critical moment, it is imperative to remind voters that they still have the opportunity to nominate a different standard-bearer for the Republican Party, and all Americans should hope that they do so. This is not a partisan concern. It is good for the country when both major parties have qualified presidential candidates to put forward their competing views on the role of government in American society. Voters deserve such a choice in 2024.

Mr. Trumps construction of a cult of personality in which loyalty is the only real requirement has badly damaged the Republican Party and the health of American democracy. During the fight over the leadership of the House of Representatives in the fall, for example, Mr. Trump torpedoed the candidacy of Tom Emmer, a lawmaker who voted to certify the 2020 election results, to ensure the ascendancy of Mike Johnson, a loyalist who was an architect of the attempt to overturn that election. (Mr. Emmer has since endorsed Mr. Trump.) But some Republicans have set an example of integrity, demonstrating the courage to put their convictions and conservative principles above loyalty to Mr. Trump. Examples include people whom he once counted as allies, like former Attorney General Bill Barr, former Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats.

Voters may agree with the former presidents plans for further tax cuts, restrictions on abortions or strict limits on immigration. Thats politics, and the divisions among Americans over these issues will persist regardless of the outcome of this election. But electing Mr. Trump to four more years in the White House is a unique danger. Because what remains, what still binds Americans together as a nation, is the commitment to a process, a constitutional system for making decisions and moving forward even when Americans do not agree about the destination. That system guarantees the freedoms Americans enjoy, the foundation of the nations prosperity and of its security.

Mr. Trumps record of contempt for the Constitution and his willingness to corrupt people, systems and processes to his advantage puts all of it at risk.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in .

Want all of The Times?Subscribe .

Link:
Opinion | The Responsibility of Republican Voters - The New York Times

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribunes daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

WASHINGTON U.S. Rep. Colin Allred, who is running to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz this year, was among three Texas Democrats who voted on Wednesday to condemn President Joe Bidens handling of the southern border, rebuffing their party as Republicans continue to weaponize the migrant crisis in an election year.

The resolution denounces the Biden administrations open-borders policies and condemns the national security and public safety crisis that Republicans claim the administration has created on the border. U.S. Rep. Nathaniel Moran, R-Tyler, introduced the resolution. All Republicans voted for the resolution.

Allred's vote drew criticism from his electoral opponents from both sides. State Sen. Roland Gutierrez, who is running against Allred for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate, blasted Allred for his vote, saying he sided with GOP extremists.

The Democratic nominee that goes up against Ted Cruz should fight tooth and nail against Trumps dangerous so-called policies. If our nominee agrees with Trump and Ted Cruz's idea of border security then we're in a hell of a lot of trouble, Gutierrez said in a statement.

A Cruz campaign spokesperson meanwhile called the move a "cowardly flip-flopping strategy" after Allred "consistently voted with his party for reckless border policies that benefit the undocumented, while weakening our country and its borders."

Allred responded to the criticism over his vote by touting his own bipartisan legislation that hes cosponsoring called the Dignity Act, which he said would help secure our border, provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and others who are living here and following our laws, and surge resources to our Border Patrol and border communities. U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-El Paso, co-authored the Dignity Act with Florida Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar.

Our immigration system is broken, and we need bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform that reflects our values and meets the needs of our economy not more partisan stunts that lead us nowhere, he said.

U.S. Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez, both centrist border Democrats, also voted for the resolution, however the two of them have previously been much more likely to entertain Republican proposals to harden the border in the past and have criticized members of their party for not giving the issue enough attention.

Migrants continue to arrive in historic numbers while our U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers remain stretched thin, Gonzalez, whose district Republicans are targeting this cycle, said in a statement. This is all at the expense of border communities, like those in the 34th Congressional District of Texas.

Allred has been a reliable Democratic vote, but he has more recently shown a willingness to take harder steps on the border. After Biden announced in October that the administration would open the door to constructing more walls on the Texas-Mexico border, Allred praised the decision as a necessary step.

The border has emerged as one of the biggest Republican attack points against Democrats. Cruz routinely lambastes the administration and Democrats for the number of migrants entering the country and the growth of human trafficking and drug cartels.

Cruz went head to head with Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas during a Senate Judiciary hearing in March where he demanded the secretary resign over his handling of the border. Cruz also introduced a House-passed Republican border bill into the Senate that would increase penalties for illegal immigration, build more walls and expedite deportations. Democrats in both chambers have been emphatic that they would never accept the House Republican border bill.

Despite Allreds Wednesday vote, he has emphasized that he opposed Republicans border plans as too severe and performative.

I have long said we need comprehensive reform. But now more than ever extreme politicians need to stop their political stunts and come to the table to form a real, bipartisan solution, Allred said in a statement last week against both Cruz and Gov. Greg Abbott. That is something Ted Cruz has no interest in and something I will do as Senator.

Continue reading here:
U.S. Rep. Colin Allred joins Republicans to condemn Biden's handling of border - The Texas Tribune

Supporters of former President Donald Trump cheer during his caucus night event in Des Moines, Iowa. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images hide caption

Supporters of former President Donald Trump cheer during his caucus night event in Des Moines, Iowa.

After a year of campaigning and more than $120 million in ad spending in Iowa, the caucuses have come and gone.

And the result was ... what everyone pretty much expected.

Former President Donald Trump won in a landslide.

So, what's it all mean? Here are five takeaways:

Trump won by such a large margin that The Associated Press was able to call the race at 8:31 p.m. ET, just half an hour after voting began. It was able to do so because it conducts a massive voter survey and then it compares that to key precincts in the state, which showed Trump with an insurmountable lead.

So much of this race has been a race for second place, and that held up. Trump finished with more than 50% of the vote, had the most enthusiastic voters in polling, and they showed up despite predictions that they might not because of record cold weather and high expectations that he would win.

The GOP base is pretty much all in on Trump's election lies and conspiracies. According to media entrance polls of Iowa GOP caucusgoers sponsored by CNN, NBC News, CBS News and others:

The signs have been clear. Trump's campaign noticed it, it raised tons of money from these indictments, and Trump's lead has only expanded in the GOP nominating process this year. His lead in Iowa, according to an average of the polls, went up a net of 9 points since May.

With a general-election audience, it's a different story. An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll from October found that majorities of independents and Democrats believe he has done something illegal, and views of Trump haven't budged much Republicans love him, but majorities of everyone else have an unfavorable opinion of him.

So much of this primary campaign has been about the race for second place, but politics is not grenades and horseshoes. And even if coming close mattered, this wasn't a close finish.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was barely ahead of Nikki Haley, and more importantly, he lost to Trump by 30 points. That's the largest margin in Iowa caucus history. (Previously, the widest was 12.8 points.)

DeSantis is vowing to stay in, but it's hard to make the case for a path forward for him. Consider that he and the super PACs supporting him spent millions of dollars on campaign ads, he visited all 99 counties, got the endorsement of the state's popular governor and its most influential religious leader and it still didn't matter.

In fact, his support only went down from the beginning of the campaign. He topped out just shy of 30% in June and he never improved.

DeSantis modeled himself after Trump and tried to sell himself as Trump without the baggage, but Iowa Republicans just weren't buying it, didn't want to move on and went with the original. Now he's going to likely have to balance this campaign with his future in politics.

Trump is the head of the party, and if DeSantis wants a future in it, he is probably going to have to curry favor with Trump. And there's an argument that staying in and denying Haley a one-on-one race with Trump might be a way to do that, at least for a while.

Haley finished within a couple of thousand votes of DeSantis. And she denied Trump a clean sweep of all of Iowa's 99 counties. She won one county, Johnson County in the eastern part of the state by ONE vote.

But the stakes now for Haley in New Hampshire in a week have just gone up.

"Tonight, I will be back in the great state of New Hampshire," Haley said during her speech Monday night. She said the question before Americans "is very clear do you want more of the same or do you want a new generation of conservative leadership?"

Voters are shown checking in at a caucus site at Franklin Junior High on Monday in Des Moines, Iowa. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images hide caption

Voters are shown checking in at a caucus site at Franklin Junior High on Monday in Des Moines, Iowa.

She argued that "America deserves better" because majorities dislike both President Biden and Trump and don't like that they're both 80 or approaching it.

It's not a bad argument. Now she needs to show that in a more moderate state, where independents can vote, she can give Trump a real run for his money.

But there are some red flags for Haley going forward.

Her win in Johnson County is indicative of the problem she faces. The county, home to the University of Iowa, has the highest percentage of college degrees in the state. And look at the groups Haley won in the state overall:

Those are hardly the majority of Republican Party rank-and-file voters.

Plus, Trump won independents and those who said being able to beat Biden was the candidate quality that mattered most.

So, the electability argument Haley has been trying to make didn't resonate in Iowa, and her team spent a lot of money trying to drive that message home.

If she can't prove it to New Hampshire voters by winning or finishing a reasonably close second, it's going to be tough for her to convince donors and supporters that she should continue.

Turnout was low in these caucuses compared to the record-setting 2016 turnout. Only about 110,000 Republicans caucused with 99% of results in, as of 1:30 a.m. ET.

That represents less than 15% of the total number of registered Republicans in the state perhaps not surprising in the record cold. But Trump got almost 900,000 votes in Iowa in 2020.

Put another way, almost $124 million was spent on campaign ads in Iowa by the Republican candidates, more than any other state by far.

That translates to $1,124 per person who showed up to vote.

It's pretty amazing for so few voters to play such a prominent role in the presidential nominating process.

Read more here:
5 takeaways from the Iowa Republican caucus results - NPR

Which issues matter most? Share of likely Republican primary voters who said each issue was among the most important to determining their primary vote

The top {{ top_n }} issues are shown. Other issues are {{ other_issues }}. Respondents could select up to three issues from a list of 20, with additional options for something else and dont know.

Next, we presented likely Republican primary voters with a list of 20 issues and asked them to pick up to three that would be most important in determining their vote. By far, the two most cited issues were getting inflation or costs under control (49 percent) and controlling immigration (48 percent). That was also the case the last four times we conducted this poll, although in the past, respondents were significantly more likely to pick inflation than immigration. The closing gap could be because inflation is easing while immigration officials are encountering a record number of people attempting to cross the southern border. Meanwhile, issues like limiting abortion and improving election security were not cited by even 10 percent of respondents.

Finally, we also asked about several topics that have recently been in the news. For example, 73 percent of respondents said they were very or somewhat familiar with the U.S. House voting to authorize an impeachment inquiry into Biden, and 83 percent said they were very or somewhat familiar with Colorados and Maines rulings that Trump should be disqualified from the primary ballot (those rulings have both been stayed pending a final decision by the U.S. Supreme Court). Unsurprisingly, 84 percent of likely Republican primary voters felt the efforts to remove Trump from the ballot were politically motivated, while just 21 percent thought they were justified by the law (respondents could say both were true). But they dont think those efforts are going anywhere anyway: Only 24 percent of respondents thought it was very or somewhat likely that those rulings would stay in place. In fact, a plurality (47 percent) of respondents thought these efforts would actually make Trump more likely to win in a general election against Biden only 15 percent thought they would make Trump less likely to win.

We also asked about Haleys recent answer to a voters question about what caused the Civil War. She did not mention slavery but rather cited the role of government and what the rights of the people are. (She later clarified that of course slavery was one of the causes of the war.) Our poll found that more likely Republican primary voters thought slavery was a major cause of the Civil War (68 percent) than thought that the role of the federal government was a major cause (56 percent). Only 7 percent thought slavery was not a cause of the war, while 10 percent thought the role of the federal government wasnt.

However, Haleys response may not hurt her much among voters, simply because they didnt hear about it. (The gaffe came during the week between Christmas and New Years Day when many Americans probably werent paying attention.) In the poll, only 46 percent of respondents said they were very or somewhat familiar with the exchange, while 30 percent said they had not heard of it at all.

See the article here:
Where Do Republican Voters Stand Ahead Of The New Hampshire Primary? - FiveThirtyEight

The use of the phrase from the river to the sea has come under particular scrutiny in the last three months. When Palestinians, or anyone on the left, has used the phrase to demand a free Palestineas in the popular chant, From the river to the sea, Palestine will be freethose on the right have disingenuously argued that it is calling for the death of all Jewish people in Israel.

Representative Rashida Tlaib, the only Palestinian American member of Congress, was censured by Congress last year for her use of the phrase. Many Democrats joined Republicans in condemning her, minutes after she used a floor speech to condemn both rising Islamophobia and antisemitism in the wake of Israels deadly assault on Gaza.

From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate, Tlaib wrote in an effort to clarify her language as the bad-faith critics amassed against her. My work and advocacy is always centered in justice and dignity for all people no matter faith or ethnicity.

Read more:
Oklahoma Republican Introduces Shortest, Most Racist Bill You've Ever Read - The New Republic