Mediaboss Marketing

Adam Kincaid, head of the National Republican Redistricting Trust, joined Bloomberg Governments Kyle Trygstad and Greg Giroux on the latest episode of Downballot Counts to discuss his partys strategy for shaping congressional districts for the next decade.

States have begun drafting and in some cases have finalized their maps in the weeks since the 2020 census results were released.

Kincaids organization helps coordinate GOP data sharing across states and is preparing for what he expects to be an extensive and aggressive stretch of litigation between the two parties over the new maps.

One thing about redistricting that people need to realize is its trench warfare on both sides, Kincaid said.

( Sign up for Ballots & Boundaries, a weekly check-in as states change voting laws and revise political districts.)

Listen to the latest episode of Downballot Counts

Subscribe and Listen to Downballot Counts from your mobile device:

Via Apple Podcasts | Via Overcast | Via Stitcher | Via Spotify

Photo by Sarah Silbiger/Bloomberg

Republicans are seeking to draw congressional lines that can help them win the House majority next year and hold it in the decade to come.

To contact the hosts: Greg Giroux in Washington at ggiroux@bgov.com; Kyle Trygstad in Washington at ktrygstad@bloombergindustry.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Loren Duggan at lduggan@bgov.com

Read the original here:
Republican Redistricting Head on His Party's Strategy (Podcast) | Bloomberg Government - Bloomberg Government

The coronavirus pandemic now has a heavy partisan bias.

COVID-19 hasn't disappeared in blue states like California and New York. But places that have managed to surpass 65 percent vaccination are in a better position than red states like West Virginia, Idaho, or Wyoming, where hospitals are overrun with unvaccinated COVID-19 patients. (Idaho's COVID death rate last week, for example, was seven times that of New York state.) Even at the county level,as David Leonhardt shows at The New York Times, there's a marked partisan bias: Republican counties in blue states have vastly more cases and deaths on average, while Democratic counties in red states are faring better than their neighbors.

A primary reason for this disparity is how right-wing media has come out hard against COVID vaccines. From pundits on Fox Newsto the gutters of Trumpist Facebook, anti-vaccine misinformation is everywhere. As a result, vaccination rates are starkly partisan. Many Republicans aren't getting vaccinated, and a lot of them are dying. Rejecting the vaccines is costing the GOP votes it can ill afford to lose.

Tucker Carlson may be the worst offender: He's the top-rated cable news host in the country and a prolific source of anti-vaccine lies. Ever since President Biden was elected, Carlson has spread false stories that the vaccines don't work and the government is covering it up or that they're killing thousands of people and the government is covering it up or that there are folk remedies like ivermectin which are better than vaccines for treating COVIDand, yes, the government is covering it up.

Carlson's goal is obvious: to harm Biden and his party. As Brian Beutler writesat Crooked, Republicans always do this kind of thing when a Democrat is in the White House. After the 2008 financial crisis, they deliberately hurt the economy with austerity measures to tank then-President Barack Obama's approval rating then happily promoted and passed job-creating stimulus bills after GOP President Donald Trump took office. Now the conservative movement is exacerbating the pandemic and blaming it on Biden.

This behavior is only semi-intentional. Right-wing media is always prone to "reflexive, oppositional demagoguery," as Beutler writes, and the Republican mindset is always gleefully irresponsible, paranoid, and mulishly resistant to doing anything liberals propose. It's as much paranoia in the GOP base driving this as it is deliberate cynicism. The big tell on the cynicism, though, is how top Fox News hosts, GOP members of Congress, and conservativeSupreme Court justices have largely admitted to being vaccinated (or refused to say, which implies the same thing). Meanwhile, the dimmer regional radio hosts who aren't in on the con are unvaccinated and dropping like flies.

As a political strategy, the anti-vaccine stance seems to be working for Republicans, at least for the moment. Biden's approval rating has been steadily falling for months it's hard to say why exactly, but the depressing persistence of the pandemic after a spring in which many assumed the vaccines would finally end it (as they have in many European countries) is no doubt involved.

But in the long term as in, from Election Day 2022 onwardthe strategy carries quite a political risk. Thus far, pandemic deaths have been fairly evenly spread, because COVID-19 hit blue states like New York and New Jersey early. Now conservative Mississippi has shot to the top of the state death rankings, with Louisiana and Alabama not far behind. Biden's 2020 margin of victory in the three key states of Wisconsin, Arizona, and Georgia combined was only about 44,000 votes. Something like 53,000 people have already died in those three states and it seems safe to assume the people dying there and in other swing states are disproportionately Republicans.

Suppose the pandemic finally eases off next year thanks to children becoming eligible for vaccination, various employer mandates, and widespread natural immunity. Suppose the economy then picks up, and Democrats run a successful midterm campaign blaming Republicans for worsening the pandemic on purpose. Carlson's anti-vaccine innuendo won't hurt Biden anymore then. But everyone who died of COVID-19 because they bought into anti-vaccine misinformation will still be dead. The GOP might lose the midterms without their votes.

Occasionally, this possibility becomes apparent even to some on the far-right. Breitbart's John Nolte recently advanced a tortured argument that conservative media turned anti-vaccine because of a liberal conspiracy: "The organized left wants unvaccinated Trump voters to remain unvaccinated. That's what they want," he wrote. In another article, he asked: "In a country where elections are decided on razor-thin margins, does it not benefit one side if their opponents simply drop dead?"

Setting aside the birdbrained idea that timid, milquetoast liberals like Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) would conspire to massacre people to win an election, the argument here implies an astounding and belligerent stupidity in the Republican base. And while Nolte's conspiracy theory is ridiculous, his picture of the base is not. People who will refuse to take a free, life-saving treatment simply because people they don't like urged them to take it are the final form of a politics with no more substance than "owning the libs."

Nolte deserves kudos for trying an innovative pro-vaccine argument. Itcould actually work. His audiencewon't take the vaccine to save their own lives, but they just might getvaxxed to crush the Democrats in the midterms.

View original post here:
How right-wing media is killing its own base - The Week Magazine

There are few better examples of political double-talk than a candidate attempting to present himself as a foe of the party establishment. In the North Carolina Senate race, both viable candidates have laid claim to the insurgents mantleand both are hypocritical in doing so. At the same time that Pat McCrory and Ted Budd portray themselves as the scourge of Washington, each man has courted establishment donors and sought endorsements from well known party figures. The conventional wisdom may have been that McCrory fit the NRSCs establishment mold better than his louder competitors, but the failed ex-governor may not even achieve support from the forces he has spent his life attempting to please.

Evidence of Ted Budds viability in the race for an institutional Republican imprimatur came last week with a slate of endorsements. Over 30 current and former legislators endorsed Budd, a stinging rebuke to McCrory given that Ted Budd has never served in state government. More eye-opening were the names on that list. In addition to the predictable fringe-dwellers like Representative Larry Pittman, consummate insiders like John Alexanderthe most moderate Republican in the General Assembly until his retirement last yearand Jeff Tarte signed onto the Budd effort. Tartes support was especially striking; he served from McCrorys home county of Mecklenburg.

What this reveals is that the Raleigh Republican establishment has little regard for Pat McCrory. As powerful former state Senate rules chair Tom Apodaca once deadpanned, the governor doesnt play much of a role in anything. Apodaca endorsed Ted Budd. In addition to these legislators, Raleigh native and ur-country-clubber George Holding lent his support to Budd. And in the donor space, legendary Raleigh developer John Kane has donated to Ted Budds campaign. Outside of Charlotte, McCrory is anything but beloved by North Carolina Republican panjandrums.

Nor are these power brokers necessarily averse to Ted Budd. The best analogy for Budd would be not to a fringe populist like Alabama Representative Mo Brooks, but to former South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint. Like DeMint, Budd is far rightbut hes also a well liked member of the establishment GOP. If he continues building support across the state, Budd could easily become the establishment choice over a failed one-term governor who left Raleigh as a pariah. Thats a little amazing, but not to a superlative degree in the minds of anyone who watched Pat McCrory bumble through his term as governor.

In fairness, McCrory has lined up some establishment support of his own. Senator Richard Burr endorsed McCrory, calling him the only candidate who could win the race. McCrory landed GOP mega-consultant Paul Shumaker and seems to have maintained enduring support in Charlotte GOP circles. But none of that is necessarily a plus in a party that is rural, that is populist, and that hates Richard Burr for having the courage to vote for Trumps conviction. My view has long been that if you run a well funded campaign against McCrory, youll beat him. Ted Budd has the tools to do that.

Alexander Jones is an original contributor to PoliticsNC.

See original here:
Who Will Be The Establishment Republican in #NCSEN? - PoliticsNC

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

Texas House members on Thursday released the first proposal for a new map redrawing the chamber's 150-member districts. The initial draft would both increase Republicans' strength across the state and the number of districts in which white residents make up a majority of eligible voters.

House Bill 1, authored by Corpus Christi Rep. Todd Hunter, the GOP chair of the House Redistricting Committee, is just the first draft, and it will likely change as it makes its way through the legislative process before its signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott.

The Texas Legislature is in the midst of its third special session. This one is dedicated to redrawing political maps based on the latest census data that showed people of color fueled 95% of Texas population growth over the past decade. The percent of Hispanics is now nearly equal to white people in Texas.

But, the new map creates fewer districts where Black and Hispanic people make up a majority of eligible voters. Black and Hispanic Texans make up two racial groups that along with Asian Texans outpaced the growth of white residents in the state over the last decade.

Currently 83 of the chambers 150 districts are areas in which white residents make up a majority of eligible voters; 33 are districts where Hispanic voters make up the majority, while Black residents are the majority of eligible voters in seven districts.

Under the new proposal, the map adds six more districts where white residents make up the majority of eligible voters while the number of Hispanic and Black districts would each drop by three.

The proposed map would also change the partisan breakdown among the 150 districts, tilting the scale toward Republicans.

Currently, there are 76 districts that went to former President Donald Trump during the 2020 general election while 74 went to President Joe Biden. Among those, 50 districts voted 60% or more for Trump, indicating the district is safely Republican while 40 districts had more than 60% support for Biden indicating strong Democratic support. Under the proposed new map, 86 districts would have gone for Trump, while 64 would have went for Biden. The number of districts that voted 60% or more for Trump or Biden would be tied at 46.

The House draft would also pit several incumbents against one another, including two El Paso Democrats state Reps. Evelina "Lina" Ortega and Claudia Ordaz Perez who would have to vie for the new House District 77.

In statements soon after the initial draft was released, both lawmakers criticized the proposal for pitting two Hispanic incumbents against the other.

Ortega, who referred to the proposal as "a direct attack on our border community," said she was "committed to working for our community to stop this injustice from occurring." Ordaz Perez said she would "refuse to sell out my values or those of the people I represent for political gain," adding that she intends to return to the lower chamber for another term "to fight for the people of El Paso."

In two other cases, state Reps. Jacey Jetton, R-Richmond, and Phil Stephenson, R-Wharton, would have to compete for the proposed House District 26, while state Reps. Kyle Biedermann, R-Fredericksburg, and Terry Wilson, R-Marble Falls, would face off for the new House District 19.

Later Thursday, disagreement emerged between Jetton and Stephenson over whether the latter had been drawn out of his district.

Stephenson's office told the Tribune that Jetton "isn't playing the nicest with this new map" and blamed him for drawing Stephenson out of his district.

Jetton, in a statement to the Tribune, acknowledged that while "there has been some confusion about Representative Stephenson's residence," it was his understanding that Stephenson resides in Wharton County, "so we are not actually paired in HD-26."

As for the other GOP matchup, it appeared later Thursday that the two incumbents could avoid a primary after Biedermann tweeted he may run in another district.

Other incumbent pairings under the House proposal involve a lawmaker who is either running for another office or has already announced their retirement.

In the proposed Dallas-area House District 108, for example, state Rep. John Turner, D-Dallas, who would have to face off against state Rep. Morgan Meyer, R-Dallas, has already announced he will not seek another term to the lower chamber.

And in another North Texas race for House District 63, state Rep. Tan Parker, R-Flower Mound, who would have to compete against his colleague state Rep. Michelle Beckley, D-Carrollton, is running for a seat in the Senate, while Beckley is vying for a spot in Congress.

Beyond the incumbent pairings, the proposed map offered disappointing news for state Rep. Erin Zwiener, D-Driftwood, who was drawn out of her district and into an adjacent, far more Republican one. She told the Tribune on Thursday afternoon that she is "hoping that there's some space to fix it" in the coming days but was not sure. She said she was unlikely to be able to move to follow the newly proposed version of her current district, which would be solidly Democratic.

One Republican incumbent, state Rep. Jeff Cason of Bedford, got especially bad news as he saw his district get redrawn to be a deep shade of blue on that Biden carried by 27 points. Cason did not have an immediate comment.

At least a few other incumbents are looking at proposed districts that would be notably less favorable to them than they currently are. In South Texas, the district of state Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City, would go from one that Trump won by 13 points to one he carried by almost double that margin. In suburban Austin, the district of state Rep. James Talarico, D-Round Rock, would transform from that Biden won easily to one that Trump carried by 6 points.

At the same time, several House Republicans whose districts Biden carried last year received redder districts under the proposed map but probably not red enough to avert another competitive contest next year. For example, in suburban Dallas, Biden had a 9-point margin victory in the district of state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, though the map proposal shifts only to a district that Trump carried by 2 points.

Only two seats flipped last year in the lower chamber both in the Houston area and the proposed map makes each more friendly for the incumbent rather than more competitive. The seat of State Rep. Mike Schofield, R-Katy, would become redder, while the seat of state Rep. Ann Johnson, D-Houston, would become bluer.

This is the first time in decades federal law allows Texas to draw and use political maps without first getting federal approval to ensure that theyre not violating the rights people of color. That federal preclearance requirement in the Voting Rights Act was gutted by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Since the enactment of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, Texas has not made it through a single decade without a federal court admonishing it for violating federal protections for voters of color.

The 2021 Texas Tribune Festival, the weeklong celebration of politics and policy featuring big names and bold ideas, wrapped on Sept. 25, but theres still time to tune in. Explore dozens of free, on-demand events before midnight Thursday, Sept. 30, at tribfest.org.

More:
Texas House proposes map that increases Republican strength and decreases Black and Hispanic majority districts - The Texas Tribune

By Dr. Harold A. Black

blackh@knoxfocus.com

When ProPublica exposed the tax records of some billionaires showing little or no federal income tax paid, predictably many on the left and in the media howled in indignation. No one claimed that the billionaires were engaging in illegal activity but many said that the billionaires should pay their fair share. One socialist in Congress even showed up at a $30,000 per person event with a dress that looked like a Chick-fil-a bag that had written on its back Tax the Rich. What I found striking was that of the billionaires scrutinized most were Democrats or leaned toward the Democrats, one was independent and only one was a Republican. Two of the exposed Democrats were among the ones who give most to the left: Michael Bloomberg (who gave over $60 million to fund Democrat House races) and George Soros who has given more than $550 million for leftist causes.

Yet deep-pocket donors have been vilified by the left. The proposed tax bill of the Democrats in Congress targets the rich and at the corporations. It raises the marginal income tax from 37% to 39.6%. The capital gains tax would increase to 39.6% combined with a 3.8% surtax on investment income making the top federal rate of 43.4% by far the highest among developed countries. It institutes a capital gains tax at death on estates. Perhaps the most knee-jerk reaction to the ProPublica piece is legislation that taxes the unrealized capital gains of billionaires only. Thus, if the value of a billionaires stock holdings rose adding a billion dollars to wealth, that increase would be taxed as ordinary income. This would generate many forms of circumvention, mostly negative. Biden supports the new tax and not surprisingly, the Republicans (for some reason that escapes me) oppose it.

Why are there wealthy Democrats since they are constantly demonized by their politicians and the media? During the last presidential campaign, Wall Streets deep-pocket donors gave more to Democrat campaigns than to Republicans even though their most fierce critics are all on the Democrat side of the aisle in Congress.

There is obviously something going on that I dont understand. Why would the wealthy support a party whose avowed goal is to make the rich poorer? Are the rich that dumb? What is clear is that the Republican party seems to confirm George Wills calling it the Dumb party and needs to reassess its priorities. It should no longer defend the rich and big corporations against the left. It should abandon those who do not support it and announce that it is voting for the billionaires tax, the increase in the corporate income tax, and the increase in tax on the rich. It should concentrate on reducing the burdens on the individuals and the small businesses that constitute its base.

The basic tenets for Republicans are that individual rights and freedom are essential rather than the whims of the government. Private property and free enterprise are the bases of effort and achievement. Individual initiative and ingenuity propel effort and creativity. Government is inefficient and wasteful and should be limited in scope. The Constitution provides the framework of our society and is not a living document.

As to businesses, the Republican party should no longer defend corporate America against rises in the corporate tax rate. Many large corporations are among the wokest in America. Paypal, Disney, Nike, Coca-Cola, Bank of America and others support positions and organizations that are largely opposed by Republicans. When Joe Biden announced his COVID mandates, the Business Roundtable made up of the countrys largest corporations praised the move and support it wholeheartedly as do most Democrats. On the other hand, small businesses, like the majority of Republicans, oppose the mandates and are suing the administration.

Thus it is clear to me that the Republicans should concentrate their support on those individuals, groups and businesses that support Republican values. They should no longer support the wealthy, Wall Street and large corporations. If they do, they will indeed be the Dumb Party.

See more here:
Is the Republican Party Dumb? - The knoxville focus