Mediaboss Marketing

A pickup truck decorated with conservative- and Trump-supporting bumper stickers sits at a Republican campaign event in 2018. On Saturday, conservative political analyst Shermichael Singleton wonders where he fits in that party. Win McNamee/Getty Images hide caption

A pickup truck decorated with conservative- and Trump-supporting bumper stickers sits at a Republican campaign event in 2018. On Saturday, conservative political analyst Shermichael Singleton wonders where he fits in that party.

Shermichael Singleton isn't sure where he fits in the Republican Party anymore.

That didn't used to be the case. Singleton is an experienced conservative political analyst who has worked for plenty of prominent Republicans, including Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Ben Carson.

But as a black man, he says he has watched with grief and disappointment as the GOP and many of its supporters have struggled to grapple with the recent protests over racial injustice and policing in the U.S. under President Trump.

"It leaves me wondering: Why am I a Republican?" he said in an interview Saturday with NPR's Weekend Edition. "What is the Republican Party even attempting to conserve that I believe is consistent with my values as an American, with my values as an African American, with my values as a Christian? And unfortunately ... I hate to say this, but I don't know anymore."

For example, both before and after George Floyd's killing by Minneapolis police officers incited protests nationwide, Trump has made it clear that he supports and defends the Confederate memorials that have reemerged as flashpoints of controversy in the demonstrations.

Earlier this week, he vowed to block bipartisan congressional efforts to rename military bases that bear the names of Confederate generals, saying they stand for "a history of Winning, Victory, and Freedom."

Here is how Singleton who has been a vocal critic of Trump explained how he came to feel he is in a "no-man's land," alongside "many right-leaning and conservative individuals who are slowly finding themselves in that same position."

What are your feelings right now, as a human being, as a black man in America?

I am gravely disappointed about this moment in time we find ourselves in. I often have been taught by my parents ... that despite our differences differences of race, that is that our hopes and dreams in this country have always been the same. And that is to be free and explore every opportunity and to do things that those before us weren't capable or able to do.

And it appears to me in this particular moment that there still remains a significant percent of people who are traveling on a road so far removed from where I think many of us are, that it's heartfelt, it makes me grieve, it makes me sad, it makes me confused. ...

But I still have hope. I have to have hope in this country, because I know that the country that my grandparents and my great-grandparents lived in is no more; there's still remnants. And so my hope is that this time, we can clear those remnants so that as we go forward, there will be no more. So that when I have children, they won't have to deal with or imagine the things that I am currently dealing with now not only as an African-American, but simply as as an American.

These things should stress us all out. They should give us all anxiety that we have not quite reached the pinnacle of what we are capable of reaching.

Has the Republican Party, which after all, founded in 1854 to expose the expansion of slavery, the party of [Abraham] Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Jackie Robinson, Sen. Edward Brooke, Colin Powell and you, how did they become the party that defends the Confederate flag?

Again, this just goes to the greatest disappointment that I have and I think a lot of people in the Republican Party have become so reactionary in their views.

To be a conservative doesn't necessarily mean that one wants to go backwards. To be a conservative is to understand that there are certain things that we have inherited that are good, that we must preserve as we move forward, because to move forward is an innate part of human nature.

But it is also to understand, Scott, that there are some bad things that we have inherited, such as the Confederacy, and that those are things that we should throw away, that we should discard, things that we recognize we cannot keep if we are to move forward in the right direction.

And it seems that the Republican Party under President Trump doesn't seem to recognize that. That is not conservative; that is reactionary. And I don't think we can tolerate those types of sentiments as we move forward. I just don't see how it's consistent with a country that's becoming so diverse demographically.

Read this article:
'Why Am I A Republican?' Conservative Analyst Questions GOP's Response To Protests - NPR

We Republican state legislators have different ideas on policies and programs. We run the gamut from strictly adhering to the Republican platform, to viewing it as a guideline. There is, however, a commonality: we are there because we want to serve the state and make it the best place possible.

In 2013 legislative spending really ramped up. I then realized that there was no group to turn to or bounce ideas off to try and be stronger on the party platform. A group was formed in which legislators could associate and discuss policies within the framework of the platform. All legislators were invited. The name given to the loosely-affiliated group of legislators is the Bastiat Caucus.

Over the years, there has been occasional squabbling between the Bastiats and the non-Bastiats (I want to say moderates, but thats not fully accurate, since some conservative legislators simply prefer not to caucus with the group). Much like with siblings, that squabbling is entirely natural. Its even healthy, for how can we get to the best outcomes if everyone simply agrees without challenge or discourse?

RELATED

Enter Gov. Doug Burgum, and witness that the referenced family squabbling isnt what took place in the June primary. In 2016 Burgum did not receive the Republican party endorsement, nevertheless he ran in the primary election as was his right to do. What I didnt realize, was that his decision to break from party protocol was but a glimpse into his view of North Dakota politics.

He claimed he wanted to break up the good ol boys club in Bismarck, (which sounds good if one believes that a group of elected bureaucrats arent doing right by the citizens of the state), but it turns out Burgum wasnt looking to do that. He was simply intending to take complete control. The good ol boys he was referring to was anyone who doesnt conform to what he wants.

Burgum thinks of himself as CEO of North Dakota. The upside is he might be more likely to look for efficiencies of government, and to think outside the box. The downside, and what became clear in this election, is that he has no regard for the importance of the separation of powers, or his limited role as the executive. He has no respect for the process by which local people ought to be able to choose their representatives without intense manipulation by the executive. The root of the problem is that a CEO often confuses himself as king.

Sadly, through his PAC, Burgum dragged us through the mud with severe negativity and a daily bombardment of ugly mailers. He has shown that he cares nothing for the political process in general, and much less for his own party. He is a Republican by convenience only. North Dakota deserved better.

Becker, R-Bismarck, serves in the North Dakota House of Representatives.

See the original post:
Becker: Burgum is a Republican by convenience only - Grand Forks Herald

Republicans expect to move their national convention from Charlotte, N.C., to Jacksonville, Fla., a shift planned after President Trump told officials in North Carolina that he did not want to use social distancing measures aimed at halting the spread of the coronavirus, according to three senior Republicans.

The decision could change, the Republicans cautioned, but as of now, officials are on track to announce the new location as early as Thursday.

Jacksonville has been Republicans top choice for days, after Mr. Trump told the governor of North Carolina, Roy Cooper, a Democrat, that he needed an answer about whether Charlotte could accommodate the convention in August with a promise that there would not be social distancing.

Jacksonville is the most populous city in Florida, where Ron DeSantis, a Republican and an ally of Mr. Trump, is the governor. Jacksonvilles mayor, Lenny Curry, is a longtime Republican official.

Once they decided to uproot the convention, Mr. Trumps aides and Republican officials had wanted to relocate to a state, and a city, controlled by Republicans. Jacksonville also may have enough hotel rooms to accommodate the gathering, people familiar with the discussions said, and it is a comparatively easy drive from Charlotte.

New reported cases of the coronavirus are on the rise in both North Carolina and Florida.

What exactly the event will look like remains unclear. Conventions normally last for four days, with thousands of party officials, delegates, donors, members of the news media and others coming together for speeches and votes.

Aides to Mr. Curry declined to comment.

In a statement posted on Twitter, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, Joe Gruters, said, While no final decision has been made by the RNC we understand Jacksonville is a frontrunner. This certainly has been generating a lot of attention and excitement. We continue to believe that Florida would be the best place for the convention.

Officials have said some party business will still be conducted in North Carolina, even with the move, but that the presidents nomination will be celebrated at the new site. Whether any additional business is conducted there remains to be seen.

One idea being discussed is to have the first lady speak on Tuesday, Vice President Mike Pence deliver a speech accepting his nomination on Wednesday, and Mr. Trump deliver his acceptance speech on Thursday, a person familiar with the discussions said.

But it remains unclear whether there will be the typical slate of floor speeches from Republicans looking to get attention for their own political futures. Under Mr. Trump, the party has increasingly functioned as a reflection of his desires.

The president is also set to return to the campaign trail on June 19 with a rally in Tulsa, Okla., for the first time since the coronavirus outbreak forced most of the country into quarantine, a campaign official said Wednesday. There are unlikely to be any social distancing measures, or a requirement to wear masks.

Some of the partys business that is typically handled at its national nominating convention was taken care of remotely on Wednesday. The Republican National Committee notified members that its executive committee had voted unanimously to adopt the 2016 rules and platform for 2020, a reflection of concerns about whatever business is conducted in Charlotte being done by a small number of people.

The presidents son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, had been working to make changes to the platform to remove some of the language about gay rights, such as opposition to same-sex marriage, which will now remain in the platform. The platform in 2016 also weakened the partys position on support for Ukraine against Russian aggression.

Mr. Cooper had repeatedly told Mr. Trump that it was too early to make any promises about social distancing, and state health officials said the R.N.C. and the host committee in Charlotte had not provided a requested plan for safely holding the event.

Jacksonville is among the dozens of cities and towns where protesters have called for changes in the treatment of black people by law enforcement. On Tuesday, Mr. Curry walked with protesters who were demonstrating outside City Hall. Early Tuesday morning, city officials took down a confederate statue there.

Party conventions are often the focus of protests, and an event in Jacksonville is unlikely to be an exception.

Its a little too early right now to plan, but I can guarantee youre going to see some protesting, said Isaiah Rumlin, the president of the Jacksonville branch of the N.A.A.C.P.

This is a bad time for the president to think of coming here to host the R.N.C., Mr. Rumlin said, citing the ongoing fight to contain the spread of the coronavirus and the protests across the country against police brutality and systemic racism.

With Trump coming here, its just going to be another major problem here in this city, Mr. Rumlin said. He should not be coming here. He should be working this out in Charlotte.

Mr. Rumlin noted that Jacksonville residents had been holding their own demonstrations for weeks, and that there have been multiple controversies in the city over police shootings.

All of this is going to come into play with the rhetoric the president is going to bring to Jacksonville, he said.

Original post:
Republicans Weighing New Convention Options as They Eye Move to Jacksonville - The New York Times

I didnt grow up in that political pipeline, he said. I think I scare the hell out of people because I just say, 'Hey, thats corrupt. Dont do that.'"

The convention, initially set for April 25, was moved due to the coronavirus pandemic. Melvin Adams, the chairman of the 5th Districts committee, pushed back against claims the process was engineered to disadvantage any candidate.

"My responsibility is not to any campaign," he said, stressing that there is no rule against committee members working for campaigns. "It is to the party, our party plan, which is essentially a bible for our party that guides us. It's the rulebook. I can't make things up as I go. I don't care how bad campaigns want me to.

Good is projecting confidence in his prospects, declaring last month that he has support from 62 percent of the delegates to the convention, a claim that Riggleman refutes.

The road to Saturdays convention began in July 2019, when Riggleman officiated the wedding of two men who had volunteered for his campaign. His wife posted a picture of the wedding on her Facebook page.

Several GOP county committees in the district later voted to censure the congressman. The 5th District committee also debated a censure motion, but it did not pass. Good entered the race last September and has said he was recruited by Republicans in the district.

The vote will be a signal about whether socially conservative positions out of step with the majority of Americans are still considered wedge issues for GOP voters. But Good, who stepped down from the Liberty University athletic department to run, has said his opposition to Riggleman extends beyond his willingness to officiate a gay marriage.

What does Denver stand for? Good said in a radio debate between the two candidates last month. What conservative Republican issue is he strong on? What can you point to? Hes out of step with the base of the party on life. Hes out of step on marriage. Hes out of step on immigration. Hes out of step on health care, on climate, on drug legalization.

Good and his campaign did not respond to multiple requests for an interview for this story. His campaign told a Lynchburg TV station that the candidate "will not be taking interviews this week as we prepare for Saturday's convention."

Rigglemans quick rise to Congress gave him little opportunity to cultivate relationships with power players in his district. Former Rep. Tom Garrett (R-Va.) decided to retire in 2018 after securing renomination amid claims that he treated members of his congressional staff like servants. Garrett, who only served one term, cited an ongoing problem with alcoholism.

The 5th District committee chose Riggleman to replace Garrett on the ballot, and he won election in November by 7 points, beating Leslie Cockburn, an author and the mother of actress Olivia Wilde. Garrett has endorsed Good as has former Rep. Virgil Goode, who held the district until he was ousted by Democrat Tom Perriello in 2008.

Despite his prominent opponents, Riggleman has a powerful ally in Jerry Falwell Jr., the president of Liberty University and Goods former employer.

Your guide to the permanent campaign weekday mornings, in your inbox.

I really think the people who are opposing him over social issues are misguided, Falwell said in a brief interview with POLITICO. The Supreme Court, not Congress, he said, makes decisions pertaining to the legality of marriage.

Hes a congressman whos proven he can win, he said. Hes already done it once, and hes a successful businessman and I cant say that about his opponent in any way, shape or form.

President Donald Trump, who also backed Riggleman in December and has touted the undefeated record of his endorsed candidates in GOP primaries this year, won the district by 11 points in 2016. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee placed the district on its target list.

Cockburn is not running again, but there is a contested Democratic primary, which will be held on June 23. Top contenders include physician Cameron Webb, Marine veteran RD Huffstetler, who ran for the seat in 2018, and Claire Russo, another Marine veteran backed by EMILYs List.

Part of Rigglemans pitch is that he will be a stronger contender to hold the seat in November. Good has not proven to be a prolific fundraiser. He had raised less than $200,000 as of late May.

But privately some Republicans fear whoever secures the nomination will need outside help to hold the seat. Good is relatively unknown and will need to introduce himself to the district beyond the several thousand delegates. If Riggleman wins, he will have to quickly refill his coffers and try to unite a divided party.

Whether Denver wins or loses, national Republicans are going to have to spend money to retain the seat," said one longtime GOP operative in the state. "And they shouldn't have to."

Read the rest here:
The Republican congressman who could get booted for officiating a gay wedding - POLITICO

Voters wait in line to cast their ballots in the state's primary election on Tuesday in Atlanta. Ron Harris/AP hide caption

Voters wait in line to cast their ballots in the state's primary election on Tuesday in Atlanta.

Republicans and Democrats seldom agree on much in 21st century politics but one issue that divides them more than ever may be voting and elections.

The parties didn't only battle about whether or how to enact new legislation following the Russian interference in the 2016 election. They also differ in the basic ways they perceive and frame myriad aspects of practicing democracy.

Republicans' and Democrats' vastly different starting points help explain why the politics over voting and elections have been and likely will remain so fraught, through and beyond Election Day this year.

Sometimes it seems as if the politicians involved barely live in the same country. It has become common for one side to discount the legitimacy of a victory by the other.

And the coronavirus pandemic, which has scrambled nearly everything about life in the United States, makes understanding it all even more complicated. Here's what you need to know to decode this year's voting controversies.

The Rosetta stone

The key that unlocks so much of the partisan debate about voting is one word: turnout.

An old truism holds that, all other things held equal, a smaller pool of voters tends to be better for Republicans and the larger the pool gets, the better for Democrats.

This isn't mathematically ironclad, as politicians learn and relearn regularly. But this assumption is the foundation upon which much else is built.

Traditionally, Republicans have tended to support higher barriers to voting and often focus on voter identification and security to protect against fraud. All the same, about half of GOP voters back expanding vote by mail in light of the pandemic.

Democrats tend to support lowering barriers and focus on making access for voters easier, with a view to encouraging engagement. They support expanding votes via mail too.

The next fight, in many cases, is about who and how many get what access via mail.

All this also creates a dynamic in which many political practitioners can't envision a neutral compromise, because no matter what philosophy a state adopts, it's perceived as zero-sum.

Or as former Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, told NPR, there are no "fair" maps in the discussion about how to draw voting districts because what Democrats call "fair" maps are those, he believes, that favor them.

No, say voting rights groups and many Democrats the only "fair" way to conduct an election is to admit as many voters as possible. Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams, who has charged authorities in her home state with suppressing turnout, named her public interest group Fair Fight Action.

Access vs. security

The pandemic has added another layer of complexity with the new emphasis it has put on voting by mail. President Trump says he opposes expanding voting by mail, and his allies, including White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, call the process rife with opportunities for fraud.

Even so, Trump and McEnany both voted by mail this year in Florida, and Republican officials across the country have encouraged voting by mail.

Democrats, who have made election security and voting access a big part of their political brand for several years, argue that the pandemic might discourage people from going to old-fashioned polling sites.

If there's rough agreement about that away from the White House, there are many disputes about the specifics what practices will be permitted based on what the parties perceive as beneficial for them.

A study by Stanford University found that voting by mail yielded a small but roughly equal increase in turnout between the parties.

It isn't clear yet how much voting by mail might expand by Election Day, but it's the subject of lawsuits across the country; apart from the politics, absentee ballot-printing is a boutique business and its capacity will be tested as may that of the Postal Service.

How common is voter fraud?

It exists, but it's very rare.

Despite anecdotal cases of people voting fraudulently in person or suspicious ballots appearing in the mail, most of the time, in most places, the way elections in the U.S. are processed is legitimate.

Since the pandemic, some Republican officials at the state level have acknowledged that the party's language around fraud may now be putting voting at risk by amplifying fraud concerns out of proportion.

Read more from NPR's Miles Parks about the integrity of voting by mail.

Trump sometimes says that large numbers of people vote illegally in the United States, but a panel he appointed to investigate that ostensible problem could not substantiate it. Listen to an interview with a member of that commission.

Still, anecdotal cases of fraud crop up across the country.

Voter suppression

Activists frequently call out what they term suppression.

In a dispute this spring in Nevada, for example, Democrats sued to stop the state from sending mail-in ballots only to people who had voted in recent elections rather than to all registered voters.

Democrats said the state's plan would disenfranchise some citizens by leaving them out of the primary; Republicans argued that states' voter rolls are often inaccurate and that sending out ballots to everyone could lead to the ballots getting lost or winding up in the wrong hands opening up the prospect for fraud.

Voter rolls are often the focus of disputes for these reasons.

People die, move and move out of state and so authorities periodically need to delete names. How frequently that happens, and for what reasons, can become controversial and the kernel of legal and political warfare between the parties.

Likewise with voter identification documents.

In Texas, for example, the Republican-dominated state legislature deemed that handgun licenses were acceptable identification at the polls but student IDs, even those issued by the state's own universities, were not.

For all the discussion about the effect of voter ID laws, however, a study last year found that whatever impact those laws might have is offset by increased organization and activism by nonwhite voters leading to no change in registration or turnout.

Another battleground is early and absentee voting. Rules vary by state, with some requiring more explanation than others as to what's permissible.

Bitter lessons

The parties today have arrived at this moment after years of what they would argue were bad experiences with elections at the hands of their opponents.

Republicans, among other things, sometimes point to what they believe was cheating in the 1960 presidential race. Alleged Democratic chicanery, in this telling, threw the results to John F. Kennedy and cost the race for Richard Nixon.

Fraudulent IDs, undocumented immigrants voting, people being "bused in" on Election Day remain consistent themes when Republicans talk about elections.

Democrats look to the decades of Jim Crow discrimination that kept many black voters out of elections.

More recently, they look at the Supreme Court's 2000 decision that handed the outcome of that election to George W. Bush over Al Gore. The court halted the counting of ballots that Democrats argued could have changed Florida's results, swinging the state to Gore.

Abrams' group perceives what it calls a deliberate campaign by the establishment to purge Georgia voter rolls of mainly black or Democratic voters.

Problems with voting in Georgia's primary in June underscored those problems and that history, Abrams and other critics said.

Matters of principle

Many party leaders describe at having arrived at their positions based upon principle. Republicans are more likely to argue that casting a vote is a privilege of citizenship to be earned and safeguarded with restrictions and security.

They also point to what they call the principles of federalism and the need for people to be engaged at the state and local level with the conduct of elections not for broad mandates from Washington.

Democrats are more likely to argue that voting is a right and that the barriers to casting a ballot should be as low as practical. President Lyndon Johnson and Democrats in the 1960s used the Voting Rights Act and federal power to dismantle racist state laws designed to prevent African Americans from voting, but those actions were later weakened by the Supreme Court.

Some current Democrats, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, have called for new action by Congress and the federal government that could involve new funding, legislation and administration from Washington.

Whatever the outcome of this year's election, these disputes over elections themselves likely will continue well into the future.

Read the original:
Why Democrats And Republicans Disagree About Voting Rights - NPR