Mediaboss Marketing

How much is a dollar worth?

To Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota, quite a lot.

Mr. Burgumis one of several Republican presidential candidates going to great lengths to reach a crucial threshold to qualify for the partys first primary debate on Aug. 23 the requirement that only candidates with at least 40,000 individual donorsto their campaignswill be allowed on the stage.

A long-shot contender at the bottom of recent polls, Mr. Burgum is offering $20 gift cards to the first 50,000 people who donate at least $1 to his campaign. And one lucky donor, as his campaign advertised on Facebook, will have the chance to win a Yeti Tundra 45 cooler that typically costs more than $300 just for donating at least $1. The unusual offer was earlier reported by FWIW, a newsletter that tracks digital politics.

Mr. Burgums push to prioritize donors over actual dollars is a sign of some candidates desperation to make the debate stage and to seize some of the national spotlight from the Republican front-runner, former President Donald J. Trump, and his top rival, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida.

Former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, another Republican candidate, recently ended a campaign ad with a direct plea that flashed on the screen to Donate today, get Chris Christie on the debate stage.

Mr. Burgums campaign acknowledged that its requests were directly tied to the debate and spun the gift-card giveaways into attacks on President Biden.

Doug knows people are hurting because of Bidenflation, and giving Biden Economic Relief Gift Cards is a way to help 50,000 people until Doug is elected President to fix this crazy economy for everyone, said Lance Trover, a spokesman for the Burgum campaign.

Mr. Trover added that the efforts allowed the campaign to secure a spot on the debate stage while avoiding paying more advertising fees to social media platforms who have owners that are hostile to conservatives.

Kyle Tharp, the author of the FWIW newsletter that reported on the solicitations, said that as part of his reporting process, he had donated $1 to the Burgum campaign. He did not receive any follow-up information about how he would receive the gift card, he said. The campaign laterclarified on Twitterthat 50,000 donors would receive a Visa or Mastercard gift card to their mailing address.

The campaign did not respond to a request for comment about how many donors had contributed so far.

The campaigns donations-for-cash strategy could raise potential legal concerns, said Paul Ryan, a campaign finance lawyer. Voters who make donations in exchange for gift cards, he said, might be considered straw donors because part or all of their donations are being reimbursed by the campaign.

Federal law says no person shall make a contribution in the name of another person, Mr. Ryan said. Here, the candidate is making a contribution to himself in the name of all these individual donors.

Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, who specializes in election law, said that typically, campaigns ask the Federal Election Commission when engaging in new forms of donations.

The Burgum campaigns maneuver, he said, certainly seems novel and raises concerns about whether it violates the prohibition on straw donations.

But some of the legal uncertainty, Mr. Hasen added, stems from the fact that functionally, campaigns spend a lot of money to get small donations, especially in cases like this where theyre trying to reach a debate threshold.

Mr. Burgum isnt alone in using his immense wealth hes a former software executive who sold a company to Microsoft in a $1.1 billion stock deal to bolster his campaign.

Perry Johnson, a businessman who also announced a hopeful bid for the Republican presidential nomination and who ran for Michigan governor last year, has spent $80,000 to $90,000 on ads promoting $1 hats that read, I identify as Non-Bidenary, Facebook records show. His campaign said in a recent ad that it had reached 10,000 donors.

To qualify for the first presidential debate, candidates must have a minimum of 200 unique donors per state or territory in 20 states and territories, according to the Republican National Committee, which set the rules. They must also garner at least 1 percent in multiple national or early-voting state polls recognized by the committee.

Shane Goldmacher contributed reporting.

Continue reading here:
Desperate to Debate: Why a G.O.P. Candidate Is Offering $20 for $1 Donations - The New York Times

Longshot Republican presidential candidate Doug Burgum is offering to pay people to donate to his campaign as he races to meet the criteria to qualify for the first Republican debate in Milwaukee next month.

In text message and emailed solicitations to voters this week, Burgum, former software executive and governor of North Dakotawho has a reported net worth of more than $1 billion, according to some sourceshas been offering donors to his campaign a $20 gift card if they give money to his campaign, even for donations of a single dollar.

"The burden on American families caused by the Democrats is unruly, and Joe Biden is doing nothing to fix it," his campaign wrote on a WinRed page soliciting donations. "We want to help, so we're offering YOU a $20 gift card, and all YOU have to do is contribute $1 to claim it."

The program was first reported by FWIW, a Substack newsletter that covers campaign spending and strategy.

It's unlikely a move made out of a need for funds. Burgum is independently wealthy and made a reputation of lavish spending from his own pockets against his political opponents in North Dakota, the Associated Press reported, often to the chagrin of his own party. However, the spending could be a sign of the Burgum campaign failing to gain traction as it races to meet the qualifications they need to make it onto the debate stage in a crowded Republican field.

According to rules set by the Republican National Committee, qualifying candidates will have received contributions from a minimum of 40,000 individual donors, including at least 200 unique donors in 20 or more states. Those candidates also must earn at least one percent in a trio of high-quality national polls (or a mix of national and early-state polls) between July 1 and August 21.

They also must sign a loyalty pledge promising to support the party's eventual nomineea quirk in the process that could prevent figures like former Texas Congressman Will Hurd and frontrunner Donald Trump from participating.

While it is unclear how many donors Burgum currently has (a number that won't be made public until his Q2 campaign finance report becomes public in the next week), Burgum has also failed to register with voters nationally, rarely appearing in national polls.

And when he does, he often polls poorly; In a CWS Research poll for the conservative Defend Texas Liberty PAC late last month, Burgum polled at less than one percent out of a group of 10 candidates in the Lone Star State ahead of its primary next spring, while a national poll by Echelon Insights on June 29 had Burgum sitting at just 1 percent nationally.

Newsweek has reached out to the Burgum campaign for comment. However, he's not alone in his struggle to qualify.

Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas governor, has already been quoted publicly saying he was having difficulty meeting the RNC threshold for the debate, while Vivek Ramaswamyanother candidate in the Republican fieldrecently launched a program to give donors a 10 percent cut of whatever they raise for his campaign.

Others, like Hurd, have made qualifying for the debate stage a central part of their recent campaign messaging, consistently urging his supporters on social media and in the press to give him at least a dollar to see him on the debate stage.

"I am working in order to get to 40,000 donors and making the case to 40,000 individual donors that, 'Hey, if you want to see someone on the debate stage who has experience in foreign policy, domestic policy, and technology, go to hurdforamerica.com and give me at least $1 to get me on there," Hurd said in a recent interview with MSNBC before answering a question about his willingness to sign the RNC loyalty pledge.

See more here:
Republican Candidate Is Paying People to Donate to His Campaign - Newsweek

Less than a month after a deadlocked Iowa Supreme Court left a six-week abortion ban unenforceable, lawmakers returned to the State Capitol on Tuesday to consider a nearly identical set of restrictions on the procedure.

With large Republican majorities in both legislative chambers and a Republican governor who has decried the inhumanity of abortion, the new restrictions seemed very likely to pass.

I believe the pro-life movement is the most important human rights cause of our time, Gov. Kim Reynolds said last week when she called the special session on abortion. She also lamented the courts deadlock, saying the lack of action disregards the will of Iowa voters and lawmakers who will not rest until the unborn are protected by law.

The session was expected to further cement Iowas sharp political shift to the right and end its increasingly rare status as a Republican-led state where abortions are allowed up to 20 weeks of pregnancy. The new limits would add Iowa to a list of conservative states, which includes Indiana, North Dakota and South Carolina, that have passed abortion restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court ended the national right to abortion last year.

Iowans on both sides of the abortion debate gathered at the Capitol in Des Moines on Tuesday, holding signs with messages like My Body, My Choice and wearing T-shirts with slogans like Unborn Lives Matter. Every seat was claimed inside a public hearing before a House committee, with scores of others standing in the hallways and chanting Abortion bans have got to go.

The call for a special session infuriated but did not surprise Iowa Democrats, who celebrated the courts deadlock a few weeks ago but knew that Republicans were likely to try again. The Iowa Supreme Courts deadlock left in place a lower courts injunction that blocked enforcement of a six-week ban, but it also left unsettled the broader question of whether such restrictions are permissible under the states Constitution. Supporters of abortion rights said the new limits being considered by lawmakers endangered womens health and ran counter to public opinion.

We knew this would happen, Senator Pam Jochum, the leader of the Democratic minority, said in a statement, adding that Republicans were rushing to take away Iowans established rights and personal freedoms and that they hope they can do it fast enough that Iowans wont even notice.

The new bill introduced by Republicans allows for abortions up to about six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant. The bill includes exceptions after that point in situations involving rape or incest, in circumstances when the womans life is in serious danger or she faces a risk of certain permanent injuries or when fetal abnormalities incompatible with life are present.

Such restrictions on abortion in Iowa would further erode access to the procedure in the Midwest, where it is already limited. But a new law would almost certainly face a fresh legal challenge, and the outcome in the courts would again be uncertain.

Abortion is banned in almost all cases in the bordering states of Missouri, South Dakota and Wisconsin, and a new 12-week ban recently passed in Nebraska. Illinois and Minnesota, which are led by Democrats, have permissive abortion laws and could become destinations for Iowa women seeking abortions. More than 3,700 abortions were performed in Iowa in 2021, according to state data, most of them by medication.

A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll from this year found that 61 percent of adults in the state believed abortion should be legal in most or all cases, while 35 percent believed it should be illegal in most or all cases.

But last year, when Democrats nationally ran on abortion rights, retaking state legislative chambers and holding governorships, the party floundered in Iowa, which not so long ago was viewed as a state where voters might swing to either party. Governor Reynolds won re-election in a landslide, Republicans swept the states congressional seats and voters unseated the attorney general and treasurer, both Democrats who had held office for decades.

Though Iowans voted twice for Barack Obama, and Democrats held a majority in the State Senate as recently as 2016, the state is now solidly Republican. Only one Democrat, Auditor Rob Sand, still holds statewide office, and the national Democratic Party has moved to push Iowas coveted first-in-the-nation caucuses later in the nominating calendar.

Republicans, for their part, have wasted no time remaking Iowa in a more conservative image. Ms. Reynolds signed laws this year that banned hormone therapy for transgender children, loosened child labor rules and limited the powers of Mr. Sand. And with Republicans keeping Iowa at the start of their nominating calendar, presidential hopefuls have been flooding the state.

State Representative Jennifer Konfrst, the leader of the Democratic minority in the Iowa House, said the state was not as conservative as recent election results suggested. Although Democrats are not likely to retake a legislative chamber next year, she said they saw an opportunity to expand their statehouse numbers in 2024 and regain a foothold in the congressional delegation. New abortion limits, she said, would have the potential to mobilize Democratic voters who sat out the last election.

Our best case is going to be to hold Republicans accountable for going against what Iowans want, said Ms. Konfrst, who represents parts of suburban Des Moines. The fact that theyre hurrying it through in July, a year before an election, shows that politically they know this is unpopular.

But Iowa Republicans have made no efforts to hide their support for abortion restrictions, and they have kept winning elections anyway. Matt Windschitl, the majority leader in the House, said, Iowans have elected us on the promise to defend the unborn, and we will continue to follow through on that promise.

The same poll that showed broad support for abortion rights this year also showed that more Iowans approved than disapproved of how the State Legislature was doing its job. And nearly two-thirds of those surveyed disapproved of President Bidens job performance.

Link:
Iowa Republicans Aim to Sharply Limit Abortion in Special Session - The New York Times

The historian and scholar who hosted a lecture at the Alabama Department of Archives and History on LGBTQ+ history responded to Republican lawmakers threats to defund ADAH by calling their actions fascist.

The individual who said that is Dr. Maigen Sullivan, co-founder of the Invisible Histories Project. Sullivan specified that she isnt calling anyone a fascist, but, that the calls to restrict historical discussion of marginalized communities are fascist.

Restricting marginalized history is textbook fascism, Sullivan told APR. As a historian 100 percent, you cant get any clearer that erasing and prohibiting marginalized history in public spaces is fascism.

Sullivan noted that the first book burning that occurred in Nazi Germany, was for a sexuality clinic that focused on Trans and Queer studies.

Sullivans comments come after Sen. Chris Elliott, R-Josephine, said that he has a proposal to strip back a $5 million supplemental appropriation to ADAH because of the lecture that Sullivan gave. The lecture was not funded by ADAH, only hosted in their building.

My issue is, the underlying issue is sex, Elliott said as reported by Alabama Daily News. And I just dont know that we need to have that conversation with our children right now. Its just not stuff we ought to be talking about at Archives and History.

However, Sullivan stated that the discussion was not targeted towards children and there were not any children in attendance to the best of her recollection. Sullivan also said that the talk was not explicitly or overtly about sex it still does mention sex which she thinks we should not shy away from.

However, it is about sex I dont think we should shy away from that, Sullivan said. Just as much as genealogy, or were talking about the heir to the throne, children or marriage or anything is about sex, because that is who we are as people. This event was also not for children. It was an archive. I mean, how many kids do you know go to a lunch and learn at an archive?

Sullivan also said much of this outrage was manufactured for political points to rile up voters in a culture war but was dangerous because of the continued hate targeted towards queer people.

You can watch the presentation on YouTube here.

Read more:
A historian calls Republican threats to defund Alabama Archives ... - Alabama Political Reporter

Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question youd like an expert to answer, send it to curiouskidsus@theconversation.com.

Why does it have to be Democrat vs. Republican in elections? Why cant it be Republican vs. Republican or Democrat vs. Democrat? Gianna, age 13, Phoenix, Arizona

Americans are used to having a lot of choices. What to wear today? What to eat? What to read?

Yet in so many elections when picking a president, state governor or mayor we seem to have only two choices: Vote for the Democrat or the Republican.

Why does the United States have a two-party political system?

As a political scientist who studies political parties particularly the Libertarian Party I can tell you there are other options.

Political scientists like me have a simple explanation for the United States two-party system: Duvergers law, named after French political scientist Maurice Duverger. It states that only two major parties will emerge whenever elections follow a set of rules known as single-winner plurality voting.

Single-winner means only one candidate can win a given election. Plurality voting means whoever gets the most votes wins. Under this system, a party is most likely to win if it runs (or nominates) only one candidate rather than allowing party supporters to split their votes among multiple candidates.

Many voters who prefer an independent or minor-party candidate might decide that it would be more practical to choose among the major-party candidates who have better odds of winning the election. Thus, even when more than two candidates appear on a ballot, voters often believe that they only have two choices: the Republican or Democrat.

Think of it this way: Suppose a teacher threw a class party and agreed to order whatever food the students wanted. There are just two rules: The teacher will order only one food item for the whole class (single-winner), and whichever food gets the most votes wins (plurality vote). Rather than 10 pizza lovers splitting their vote with six for cheese and four for pepperoni leaving seven ice cream fans to scoop up the victory they can unite behind one pizza flavor and win.

The same logic explains why the U.S. has a two-party system. When there can be only one winner, and the winner is whoever gets the most votes, people with similar but not identical preferences have good reason to find common ground and work together or else theyll lose. They must try to build a coalition of voters that is bigger than any other. In turn, that groups opponents will try to counter by enlarging their own coalition.

Thus, the rules for voting dictate that we end up with two large parties competing to be big enough to win the next election. While other options exist, many voters decide to pick between the only two that can win.

While a Democrat or Republican wins most elections in the United States, that doesnt mean voters can only have two choices. Consider these three points.

First, the U.S. Constitution does not allow for only two political parties. In fact, the Constitution says nothing at all about parties. Many of the Founding Fathers were skeptical of such factions, fearing that they would divide the American people and serve the interests of ambitious politicians. Yet many of those same visionaries soon helped to form the first political parties, after realizing the importance of coordinating with like-minded people to win elections and advance a common policy agenda. With a few brief exceptions, the United States has had a two-party system ever since.

Second, plenty of candidates run for office every year as something other than a Republican or Democrat. These include independents who are not affiliated with any party or minor-party nominees for instance, from the Libertarian or Green Party. Its just that these candidates typically do not garner many votes and rarely win an election.

Take the nations third-largest political party, the Libertarian Party. As my research shows, Libertarians generally agree with the Republican Party on economic issues and the Democratic Party on social issues. This makes the Libertarian Party appealing to some voters who consider themselves fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Third, in states such as California that have a top-two primary system, elections sometimes come down to two candidates from the same party. This process begins with an open primary in which voters may choose among multiple candidates from various parties at the same time. The top two vote-getters go on to the general election months later even if they are both Democrats or Republicans.

Other states, such as Maine and Alaska, use ranked-choice voting. This system allows voters to rank all candidates Democratic, Republican, independent or minor party from their favorite to least favorite on the same ballot. The winner is whichever candidate gets more than 50% of the vote, either at first or after eliminating the last-place finisher and reallocating that candidates voters to their second-choice candidates.

So voters often do have more options than simply Democrat vs. Republican. The problem is that people feel as if only one party or the other has a chance to win and cast their votes accordingly. It all comes down to the rules for running elections. If you want more choices, youll have to change those rules.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question youd like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

And since curiosity has no age limit adults, let us know what youre wondering, too. We wont be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

Visit link:
Why do voters have to pick a Republican or a Democrat in the US? - The Conversation Indonesia