Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON Republicans, hoping to flip control of Congress in the November elections, appear to have decided against campaigning on a unified abortion platform that would specify exactly what conservatives plan to do if given control of the U.S. House and Senate.

Yet Republicans in Congress have written dozens of proposals that, if passed, would restrict abortion nationwide. GOP lawmakers this session have introducedmore than 153 abortion-related billsthat party leaders could point to as evidence of what Republicans would try to pass on the national level if they trounce Democrats at the polls.

They include legislation that would define life as beginning at the moment of fertilization, prohibit insurance coverage for abortions, and make it a crime punishable to up to five years in prison for doctors who perform abortions after a heartbeat is detected, generally at about six weeks.

But so far, Republicans have opted against a cohesive national campaign strategy on abortion, following the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in June tooverturnthe landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case. Many Senate Republicans are brushing aside questions about whether they would take up a nationwide abortion bill, citing as a hurdle the Senate filibuster that means bills need 60 votes to advance.

Republican leaders are leaving it up to each House or Senate candidate to tout their own bills and views while the party wrestles with whether the matter should be left solely to state lawmakers or if Congress has a role to play.

Its one thing that we are debating within the conference, Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst said of a nationwide abortion bill. But at the same time, most of us do believe that the Dobbs decision was the right decision, and its returning that authority to our state and local governments. Thats our system of federalism.

Georgia Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker declined to take a concrete position on a nationwide abortion ban during an Athens appearance Wednesday Walker has previously indicated he would support an abortion ban without exceptions.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Washington Republican who has become one of her partys leading voices on abortion, said during a brief interview the GOP wont put forward a nationwide abortion policy ahead of the midterms.

Were not in a position to move anything and the U.S. Supreme Court really sent it back to the states, she said.

But McMorris Rodgers didnt rule out Republicans pushing nationwide legislation after the election if they regained control of Congress.

Not before the election, she said, later adding Well, yeah, when asked if Republicans would put forward legislation afterward if they won.

Some Republicans have repeatedly said their opinion of the ruling on abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization is that it sent the issue back to the states. Others have said its a topic for Congress to debate as well.

The Supreme Courtsdecisionoverturning the constitutional right to an abortion that stood for nearly 50 years said the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.

House GOP Whip Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, said during a press conference in June shortly after the ruling was released that the decision finally allows states and Congress to pass new abortion legislation.

But House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy, of California, when asked what exactly Republicans would do on abortion, was vague,sayingwe will continue to look wherever we can go to save as many lives as possible.

McCarthy did mention a bill from Missouri Republican Rep. Ann Wagner, though he didnt say exactly which of her bills hed bring up.

Wagner is the primary sponsor oflegislationthat would require doctors to provide health care to any infant born alive after an abortion or attempted abortion. But shes also sponsored several other bills related to abortion.

Congress passed a similar bill, from Ohio GOP Rep. Steve Chabot, two decades ago. Thelegislation, titled the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002, passed the House on a voice vote and the Senate by unanimous consent.

Senate Republicans insist theres little chance of abortion legislation moving ahead.

Florida GOP Sen. Rick Scott, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said he expects every candidate will decide how they want to talk about abortion.

Fellow Floridian Sen. Marco Rubio, who is in a tight race against Democratic House Rep. Val Demings, said Republicans will have different views about what restrictions and what the law should be.

There are issues that are relevant to it that we can have a debate on here, but we have a filibuster that would make it impossible to pass a bill into law, Rubio said.

Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy, who faces a relatively easy reelection campaign in the deeply red state, agreed with Rubio that any GOP abortion legislation is unlikely to move past the filibuster.

There arent 60 votes to do anything on the floor of the United States Senate with respect to abortion, pro abortion, anti-abortion, just anything to do with abortion, Kennedy said.

What folks who feel strongly on both sides of the issues need to do now is go back to their states and, not put on a show, but put on the case, he continued. Theyve got to convince their state legislatures.

Retiring Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt said the issue belongs at the state, not the federal level.

Ive always thought the best place to deal with this was at the state legislative level and thats what I still think, Blunt said.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, has said its possible that a GOP-controlled Congress could pass a nationwide abortion ban, though hes sought to downplay the likelihood.

McConnell said he would absolutely keep the chambers legislative filibuster in place, meaning the only way a nationwide abortion bill could get through is with a Republican super majority or some Democratic support.

We dont want to break the Senate and thats breaking the Senate, he said of removing the filibuster.

The vastly different views on abortion as well as party leaders approach to campaigning on the issue has led Democrats to turn the midterm elections into something of a referendum on abortion.

This fall, Roe is on the ballot, President Joe Biden said the day the Supreme Court released its decision overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that established abortion as a constitutional right. Personal freedoms are on the ballot. The right to privacy, liberty, equality, theyre all on the ballot.

Biden added that this November, voters must elect more senators and representatives who will codify a womans right to choose into federal law once again, elect more state leaders to protect this right at the local level.

Tying the results of the midterm elections to abortion could be risky for Democrats, especially considering the presidents party almost always loses seats during the midterm elections.

But the vast majority of Democrats have echoed Biden, telling voters that this November has become about more than who controls the U.S. House and Senate.

This is the future that MAGA Republicans clamor for; where women and same-sex couples are branded as second-class citizens, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the floor. If they succeed, theyll take our country down a dark path from which there may be no return.

Democrats in Congress have voted on bills showing exactly how the party hopes to ensure patients throughout the country can terminate a pregnancy, or travel freely to states where the procedure remains legal.

Theyve also brought up bills toensurethe right to same-sex and interracial marriages as well as the right to decide if and how to use contraception.

Republican leaders, for the moment, dont plan to say exactly which bills theyd vote on if they regain control of Congress.

Theyre very nervous, Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine told States Newsroom. And their polling should tell them that, because were seeing this as dramatically affecting the polls in a number of our races.

Kaine played down the idea that making the midterms something of a referendum on abortion access could be problematic if Republicans regain control of Congress and then say the results show American voters want a nationwide abortion law.

Oh, theyre gonna do that anyway. Rock solid guarantee, no matter how the election goes, Kaine said. Were very certain thats coming and were trying to do all we can electorally and otherwise to head that off.

While Kaine expects voters will pick representatives based on more than abortion, he does expect the Supreme Courts decision will drive voter turnout for Democrats.

And thats why my Republican colleagues do not want to be talking about this or create any kind of a party plan that everybodys supposed to go for, he said.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, criticized Republicans for not being clear with voters about how they plan to address abortion if given control of Congress.

The Republicans, if youll notice, have been surprisingly quiet, in my estimation, in reaction to Dobbs, Durbin said. I think they understand that these opinions may serve their base, but they dont serve the party or the electorate at large.

Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen said the abortion ruling is one of a number of critical issues that voters will focus on this year, though he added, its not the only issue on the ballot.

I think the Dobbs decision is one of them, reproductive freedom is certainly a part of that. But it will also be a referendum on the kind of government you want, whether you want extremists like the MAGA crowd in the Congress, Van Hollen said. And its also going to be a debate on what were doing thats within our power to reduce prices, like cutting the costs of prescription drugs.

Sen. Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, said most Americans know theres a fork in the road and theres basically two choices.

So far this Congress, Republicans have introduced 153 bills addressing abortion, with 94 in the House and 59 in the Senate.

Wagners bill has the most co-sponsors with 203 GOP backers.

Other legislation with broad Republican backing includes abillfrom New Jersey Rep. Christopher Smith that would permanently prevent the federal government from spending money on abortions with an exception for rape, incest or the patients life. The legislation would also prohibit qualified health plans from including coverage for abortion, according to a summary.

West Virginia Rep. Alexander Mooney sponsored abillthat would define life as beginning at the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual comes into being. The bill clarifies that nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child.

Andlegislationfrom Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Kelly would make it a crime for health care providers to perform abortions after a heartbeat is detected, typically around six weeks. Doctors who perform the procedure would face up to five years in prison, a fine, or both if convicted.

The bill creates an exception for a patient whose life is endangered by a physical diagnosis or injury, but not a psychological or emotional one.

Georgia Recorder Editor John McCosh contributed to this report.

Visit link:
Republicans in Congress shy away from campaigning on national abortion platform - Georgia Recorder

Rusty Bowers, the Arizona house speaker who testified to the January 6 committee about how he resisted Donald Trumps attempt to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden in the sun belt state, has been formally censured by his own Republican party.

Kelli Ward, chair of the Arizona Republican party, said on Tuesday its executive committee formally censured Rusty Bowers tonight he is no longer a Republican in good standing and we call on Republicans to replace him at the ballot box in the August primary.

Ward released a copy of the formal censure, which included killing all meaningful election integrity bills among Bowers alleged misdeeds and called on Arizona voters to expel him permanently from office.

Bowers testified to the House January 6 committee on 21 June. Discussing Trumps claim that Bowers told him the Arizona election was rigged, Bowers said: Anyone, anywhere, anytime I said the election was rigged, that would not be true.

Bowers also recalled a conversation with Rudy Giuliani in which Trumps personal lawyer, a key player in the attempt to prove mass electoral fraud, allegedly said: Weve got lots of theories but we just dont have the evidence.

Bowers also spoke about how his Christian faith motivated his defiance of Trump, and described threats made to his safety by Trump supporters while his daughter lay mortally ill.

Like Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the January 6 committee and its vice-chair, Bowers was given a Profile in Courage award for his resistance to Trump.

After the hearing at which he appeared, though, it emerged that Bowers had previously told the Associated Press: If [Trump] is the nominee [in 2024], if he was up against [Joe] Biden, Id vote for him again. Simply because what he did the first time, before Covid, was so good for the country. In my view it was great.

This month, Bowers told the Deseret News he might have changed his mind.

I dont want the choice of having to look at [Trump] again, he said. And if it comes, Ill be hard pressed. I dont know what Ill do.

But Im not inclined to support him. Because he doesnt represent my party. He doesnt represent the morals and the platform of my party

That guy is just hes his own party. Its a party of intimidation and I dont like it. So Im not going to be boxed by, Who am I gonna vote for? Because thats between me and God. But Im not happy with him.

And Im not happy with the thought that a robust primary cant produce somebody better than Trump, for crying out loud.

He also told Business Insider: Much of what [Trump] has done has been tyrannical, especially of late. I think that there are elements of tyranny that anybody can practice on any given day, and I feel like Ive seen a lot of it.

Read this article:
Arizona Republican censured by party over testimony on resisting Trump - The Guardian US

PoliticsFormer state Rep. Geoff Diehl and businessman Chris Doughty sparred on Howie Carr's show on Wednesday.Chris Doughty, left, and Geoff Diehl. John Tlumacki, Globe Staff / Steven Senne, AP Photo

In their first debate on Wednesday, Republican gubernatorial primary candidates Geoff Diehl, a former state representative, and Chris Doughty, a businessman, quibbled over what their respective resumes would mean for the corner office and punctuated their squabbles with attacks questioning Diehls electability in Massachusetts and jabs at Doughtys businesss run-ins with state environmental regulators.

But moments of common ground shone through, with both candidates expressing an urgent concern for the Bay States ability to maintain a competitive edge in attracting and retaining businesses and to provide an affordable economy for families, lest their differing opinions in how to tackle those issues.

Indeed, the hour-long segment on The Howie Carr Show, the conservative talk-radio program, moderated by the shows namesake, brought into view just how much the race exhibits rivaling factions of the state party and, by extension, the climate of the national party in the age of Trump politics.

Diehl, who scooped up an endorsement from former President Donald Trump last fall, positioned himself as a dedicated conservative who will support law enforcement and take on culture-war battles, including through making sure inappropriate material for young kids is no longer in the classrooms.

Like Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, Diehl said he wants to make the state government more efficient but also with a strong hand, which I thought President Trump had, which was unafraid to take on the powers that be.

Whether it was the Democrats or whether it was the media, he absolutely put America first, and Im gonna make sure we put Massachusetts first, Diehl said.

Meanwhile, Doughty, president of metal gear manufacturer Capstan Atlantic and a first-time candidate who voted for Hilary Clinton in 2016, said Diehls candidacy itself was among the reasons he entered the race.

Diehl is running a campaign thats targeted to Alabama voters and here we are in Massachusetts, he said.

Doughty offered that Diehl, if victorious in the Sept. 6 primary, would certainly be unable to eek-out a victory over Democrat Maura Healey, the presumed Democratic nominee.

Hes going to lose. I know it. We all know he is going to lose, Doughty said. We need someone like myself because we are on the cusp of going to a single-party state and the disaster that will create.

Were already getting the feelings of it weve got to have a governor that can go in, hold the line, put a break on it, and begin rebuilding our party, Doughty continued. It does no good to select a candidate that is going to get creamed in the election.

Heres what the candidate said on three key topics:

From the first seconds of his opening statement, Doughty said his 30 years of creating local jobs have given him the expertise of what it takes to ensure Massachusetts has a booming economy across all sectors and make the state more affordable.

He vowed to reduce bureaucracy and wasteful regulation to help free up more tax dollars to cities and towns to fund essential services.

Itll allow us to begin to introduce a more competitive tax policy in Massachusetts, Doughty said. We cannot afford to lose more businesses like Raytheon.

Raytheon Technologies, the aerospace and defense giant currently headquartered in Waltham, announced last month the company will build a global headquarters in Arlington, Virginia.

The company has said, however, it will maintain its presence in Massachusetts. A press release announcing the new project also said it did not accept or seek any financial incentives from Virginia or Arlington for the new headquarters.

But the emphasis on Virginia over Massachusetts follows news last year that firearms manufacturer Smith & Wesson will leave behind its Springfield headquarters after operating for nearly 170 years in the commonwealth due, in part, to a state bill seeking to ban assault rifle production.

We need to make sure that youve got someone (in the governors office) who has a track record of trying to make sure the money comes back to the district and also lowers taxes so that we reduce the burden, increase the job growth, and make sure that businesses arent leaving not just Raytheon, but Smith and Wesson out in Western Massachusetts, Diehl said. We need to make sure they are there.

Doughty underscored his executive position in his company as proof he knows how to manage in a competitive industry, while Diehl pointed to his previous stint crafting the state budget on the Ways and Means Committee as well as the small business he owns with his wife and his job as director of business development for TRQ Auto Parts in Pepperell.

The work Ive been doing as a manufacturers rep. takes me out of state, takes me around the country working with partnerships, and of course I would like to take those businesses to Massachusetts to replace what were losing, Diehl said.

Doughty said he worries that without action, Massachusetts could see residents slip away because of affordability woes and, in turn, damage the states economy.

I worry that states like Virginia and Tennessee, New Hampshire and Florida are becoming more and more competitive against us, and because of that, were losing citizens and population, he said.

Though neither candidate mentioned the controversial critical race theory that has become a flashpoint of national political debate, both Diehl and Doughty expressed appetites for providing pathways to make the states education system and what its teaching students more accessible to parents and families.

Diehl said the next governor needs to ensure parents have a say in what is taught in classrooms.

He also voiced opposition to COVID-19 measures such as masks and vaccine mandates in schools. (The states mask requirement lifted in February, though some school districts opted to keep the policy in place past that point. Students are not required to be vaccinated against COVID-19 to attend schools.)

We cant have the masks keeping kids out of schools. We cant have the vaccines being forced on kids, Diehl said. Were seeing an increase in homeschooling an 11 percent increase in Massachusetts youre seeing parochial schools, Catholic schools, getting massive enrollments because parents are tired of the baloney thats going on in the (public) schools.

He added sexual preference material from ages kindergarten through third (grade) is totally wrong.

Diehl didnt provide specific context for the comment, but he made a similar remark in May after talking to parents in Billerica who were concerned about very inappropriate books allowed in elementary schools.

A handful of states have prohibited or limited how and when teachers can cover gender identity and sexual orientation, particularly with young students, with more states considering following suit. Florida, for example, passed a law in March banning teachers from covering those subjects from kindergarten through grade 3 in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.

I have two daughters. I was not going to talk sex ed with them that was my wifes role, Diehl said during Wednesdays debate. There is no way a teacher, someone outside the family, should be talking to our kids about sexual preference, especially at that young an age.

Diehl said he would appoint a Department and Elementary and Secondary Education commissioner who shares that view.

He also expressed a desire to make sure local school committees are more representative of parents.

A lot of the times they have teachers on there, former administrators they have people who have ties to the school itself, the administration, he said. It should be parents for the most part. I want to support those people getting on the boards and then being able to speak up. Theyve been shut down.

Doughty, though, noted there are limitations to what a governor can do.

But, one of the things the states top executive does have the power to do is select a secretary of education who is focused on education, not activism, Doughty said.

Its an important part of hiring, he said. Ive been hiring people for 30 years. Im very good at picking out who are the right candidates. Ill give them the right mission, the right objective. Ill measure them as I would one of my employees are we performing the way parents expect from us?

Doughty said he would also establish a phone hotline parents can call when they feel like their child is being taught something that is inappropriate.

I would like to commend all the teachers. I have been absolutely amazed by the quality of our teaching and our administrators, he said. But I think there are cases where there (should be) a line you can call when you feel like your child is being taught something that is inappropriate.

Lastly, Doughty vowed to roll out a gap analysis to take the pulse of the states public education system.

On day one, Im going to start a 100-day gap analysis of our schools to make sure parents are satisfied (and) know what were doing, he said.

At times during Wednesdays debate, Doughty sought to cast Diehl as incapable of giving Republicans a fighting chance at beating Healey in November.

Doughty noted his opponent lost a bid for state Senate in 2015, three years before his subsequent and unsuccessful run for U.S. Senate against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a statewide election Diehl lost by over 20 percentage points.

Geoff wont win the general election Its already over, Doughty said in his closing statement. A vote for Geoff Diehl is a vote for Maura Healey. You can love him, embrace him. But when you go to the voting box, you and I know, we vote for Geoff, hes going to get killed in the general and we end up with the disaster known as Maura Healey.

Diehl fired back: Theres your loyal Republican coming in out of the blue and running for governor.

And when you lose, he said to Doughty, youre going to be gone Im sure again.

Earlier in the debate, Diehl noted Baker didnt win the first time he ran for governor, but did so the second time.

I can tell you this though: A vote for Chris Doughty is going to be a vote for the next Democrat, Diehl said in his closing remarks, before turning his remarks to Doughty specifically. I mean, Hilary Clinton is thinking about running again for president. In 16 you voted for her, maybe shell get your support if youre governor, right?

Diehls attacks on Doughty, meanwhile, centered on Doughtys claim that, if elected, he would run the state like he runs his business.

Diehl pointed to over a dozen environmental violations allegedly committed by Doughtys company, Capstan Atlantic, and claimed the company has 18 out-of-court settlements with employees.

As governor, you need to be someone who you can trust in government to make sure that you are looking out for workers, Diehl said.

In April, The Sun Chronicle reported the company, in February, entered an administrative consent order with the states Department of Environmental Protection to agree to correct the issues and pay a penalty of $1,380.

A company representative told the newspaper at the time Capstan Atlantic was speaking with state officials to resolve other problems, but that the violations were minor in nature.

Doughty, in his response to Diehl, said he runs a large and complicated business, which boasts 300 employees.

There are issues that come up with the state all the time, he said. This is why Im running. This is why the state of Massachusetts needs me because we are not business friendly.

Diehl rebutted: Im glad you want to help out your business and make sure you have more legal loopholes so you dont have these environmental violations. Thats a great goal.

It was unclear Thursday whether the two will meet again before Sept. 6.

Doughty said Diehl has not agreed to another debate.

The Diehl campaign earlier this month, in the face of another debate challenge from Doughty, however, affirmed it has only committed to two radio debates: one on Carrs show and another on Jeff Kuhners The Kuhner Report on WRKO.

Kuhner, notably, has supported Diehl before, having, at least,appeared with Diehl for a campaign fundraiserduring Diehls unsuccessful U.S. Senate run and havingendorsed him in 2020 for the Republican State Committee.

Stay up to date on all the latest news from Boston.com

Read more from the original source:
3 key moments from the first, and maybe only, Republican gubernatorial debate - Boston.com

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a former constitutional law professor, has made a habit of laying into his Republican colleagues for their moronic interpretations of American law.

Perhaps you remember: In March, he schooled former Trump White House staffers Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino with an explainer on why Donald Trump has no authority as a former president to claim executive privilege and bar them from testifying before the House Jan. 6 committee.

At this point, Republicans goading Raskin into a constitutional law debate is like poking a black belt in the chest while wearing a gi. They know what they're signing up for.

Of course, that hasnt deterred Republicans from testing their hands anyway. On Wednesday, Raskin dispensed with the tired GOP argument that gun restrictions are unlawful because the framers of the Constitution wanted Americans to be able to wage war against their government. He had to teach Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., a similar lesson in June. This time around, it was Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who set it off.

The clip of Raskin telling off Roy is quite gratifying and he even got an applause at the end.

Check out the clip below. And welcome, once more, to Raskin's Constitution 101. Class is in session.

Ja'han Jones is The ReidOut Blog writer. He's a futurist and multimedia producer focused on culture and politics. His previous projects include "Black Hair Defined" and the "Black Obituary Project."

Read more from the original source:
Rep. Raskin: Jan. 6 committee will strongly oppose witness tampering, obstructions of justice - MSNBC

Until just the other day, Republicans and conservative media loved, just loved talking about the price of gasoline. Indeed, Remember how cheap gas used to be under Trump? became a sort of all-purpose answer to everything. Is there now overwhelming evidence that the former president conspired in a violent attempt to overthrow the 2020 election? Real America doesnt care about the January 6th Committee. Gas is over $5 a gallon! declared Representative Jim Jordan.

But now gas prices are falling. Theyre down more than 50 cents a gallon at the pump; wholesale prices, whose changes normally show up later in retail prices, are down even more, suggesting that prices will keep falling for at least the next few weeks. And theres a palpable sense of panic on Fox News, which has been reduced to whining about how the White House is taking a victory lap.

Actually, from what I can see, Biden administration officials are being remarkably restrained in pointing out the good news (which is probably a result of a slowing global economy). The larger point, however, is that Republican politicians focus on gas prices is profoundly stupid. And if its coming back to bite them, thats just poetic justice.

Why is focusing on gas prices stupid? Let me count the ways.

First, while presidential policy can have big effects on many things, the cost of filling your gas tank isnt one of them. For the most part, gasoline prices reflect the price of crude oil and crude prices are set on world markets, which is one reason inflation has soared around the world, not just in the United States. Government spending in the Biden administrations early months may have contributed to overall U.S. inflation we can argue about how much but has hardly anything to do with gas prices.

Second, while gas was indeed cheap in 2020, it was cheap for a very bad reason: Global demand for oil was depressed because the world economy was reeling from the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Third, even before the pandemic struck, gas prices were unsustainably low.

Little-known fact: Prices at the pump plunged during President Barack Obamas second term, falling from about $3.70 a gallon in mid-2014 around $4.50 in 2022 dollars to $2.23 on the eve of the 2016 election. News reports at the time marveled at Obamas diffidence about claiming credit.

What happened? Mostly a boom in fracking, which increased U.S. oil production so much that it drove prices down around the world. As it turned out, however, that production boom didnt make financial sense. Energy companies borrowed huge sums to invest in new drilling but never generated enough revenue to justify the cost. The fracking industry lost hundreds of billions even before the pandemic struck.

So high gas prices werent President Bidens fault, and given the disappearance of the forces that used to keep gas cheap, its hard to think of any policy short of creating a global depression that would bring prices down to $2 a gallon, or even $3 a gallon. Not that Republicans are offering any real policy proposals anyway.

But the G.O.P. nonetheless went for the cheap shot of trying to make the midterm elections largely about prices at the pump. And this focus on gas is now giving the party a bellyache, as gas prices come down.

It is, after all, hard to spend month after month insisting that Biden deserves all the blame for rising gas prices, then deny him any credit when they come down. The usual suspects are, of course, trying, but its not likely to go well.

Some right-wing commentators are trying to pivot to a longer view, pointing out that gas prices are still much higher than they were in 2020. This happens to be true. But so much of their messaging has depended on voter amnesia on their supporters not remembering what was really going on in 2020 that I have my doubts about how effective this line will be.

More broadly, many Wall Street analysts expect to see a sharp drop in inflation over the next few months, reflecting multiple factors, from falling used car prices to declining shipping costs, not just gas prices. Market expectations of near-term inflation have come way down.

If the analysts and the markets are right, were probably headed for a period in which inflation headlines are better than the true state of affairs; its not clear whether underlying inflation has come down much, if at all. But thats not an argument Republicans, who have done all they can to dumb down the inflation debate, are well placed to make.

This has obvious implications for the midterm elections. Republicans have been counting on inflation to give them a huge victory, despite having offered no explanation of what theyd do about it. But if you look at the generic ballot which probably doesnt yet reflect falling gas prices rather than Bidens approval rating, the midterms look surprisingly competitive.

Maybe real Americans do care about violent attacks on democracy, overturning Roe v. Wade and so on after all.

If we continue to get good news on inflation, November may look very different from what everyone has been expecting.

Go here to read the rest:
Opinion | Why Republicans Are Having Gas Pains - The New York Times