Mediaboss Marketing

Its not surprising to find an Arizona Republican smack in the middle of a poke-in-the-eye dust-up with the powerful. The only surprise these days is that the Republican in question isnt John McCain.

McCain is in a fight of his own, having cast the final blow against the healthcare plan crafted by his fellow Senate Republicans and President Trump. In his home state, references to that vote prompt a shoulder shrug and a common Arizona refrain: Just McCain being McCain.

The newest set-to, however, involves the states junior Republican senator, Jeff Flake, a first-termer who may have blasted a big hole in his reelection campaign next year by publishing a book.

And not just any book. A book that swiped its name from one published a generation ago by Arizonas revered veteran Sen. Barry Goldwater: Conscience of a Conservative. A book that vented about the Republican Party and what he calls his colleagues abdication of their responsibility to stand up against the partys embattled president.

Republicans are in denial about Trumps erratic executive branch, Flake wrote, saying that the partys unnerving silence would be as if Noah had watched the flood rising and decided to focus on other things. At a certain point, if one is being honest, the flood becomes the thing that is most worthy of attention, he wrote. At a certain point, it might be time to build an ark.

For Arizonans, that has set up a question: Will the president, who famously punches back when hit, seek revenge on Flake by summoning a Senate challenger?

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders would not rule out that possibility when asked about it Wednesday.

Im not sure about any potential funding of a campaign, she said. But I think that Sen. Flake would serve his constituents much better if he was less focused on writing a book and attacking the president, and [more on] passing legislation.

In Arizona, Republican strategists believe that Trump has the power to engineer Flakes defeat, particularly if he were to clear the field to a single challenger and vouch for that person to his network of supporters.

If he did get involved, the money would not be an issue, said one Republican strategist. Like several others, he spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid being caught in a dicey internal party fight.

Typically, presidents back away from primary battles to focus on the opposing party. The entire mechanics of a political party are set up to protect its incumbents. Attempting to overthrow Flake would put the president at odds with the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which is working to preserve the partys narrow margin in the Senate.

But when the president is Trump, nothing is typical.

It would seem to be a break in form if the president, himself, did something like that, but he has certainly shown a willingness to buck certain positions, said Constantin Querard, a GOP consultant in Phoenix.

Were the president to put his imprimatur on a candidate, it would set up a roaring battle between the ascendant Trump wing of the Republican Party and a senator who has more or less been an establishment conservative, particularly when it comes to fiscal matters.

One problem for Flake is that hes not necessarily seen that way within the state party.

Flake has long been suspect among Trump Republicans for his membership in the Gang of 8, the group of senators who worked to craft an immigration reform bill in 2013 that included a path to citizenship for those in the country without proper papers. While McCain also has had moderate leanings on that topic, Arizona often has rewarded political figures who vehemently favor harsher strategies.

Flake drew further suspicion when he sided with President Obamas effort to liberalize relations with Cuba; Trump has since taken steps to partially reverse those policies. And Flake was open about his opposition to Trump during last years campaign.

Theres also the matter of Flakes demeanor, a softer approach that doesnt quite mesh with the rougher tones favored by Republicans in the era of Trump.

Jeff Flake is just not the street fighter that McCain is, said one Arizona strategist to say nothing of Trump.

Flakes defenders note that he has voted to support Trumps positions 93.5% of the time, according to a calculation by FiveThirtyEight.com.

That reflects shared conservative views on a number of topics. But its not as strong as it might seem: By FiveThirtyEights accounting, Flake is 41st among the 52 Republican senators when it comes to voting Trumps way. Or, as some in Arizona put it, more or less a moderate by todays calculations.

Polling shows Flakes relative weakness in the state. A survey released in July by Morning Consult showed that Flake was underwater in Arizona compared to Trump.

Overall, 50% of Arizonans backed Trump, compared with 45% who did not. Only 36% favored Flake, while 42% did not. Among Republicans the bulk of next Augusts primary voters Trump was favored by 84%, and Flake by 51%.

But polls a year in advance of an election are notoriously iffy; McCain was thought to be endangered for part of his 2016 reelection campaign, but he won the primary by more than 12 points en route to reelection to his sixth term. Its also impossible to know Trumps trajectory between now and then; if his presidency remains highly troubled, Flakes criticism may be seen in a more charitable light.

For now, Arizonans are mulling the shape of the Senate field. McCains primary opponent, former state Sen. Kelli Ward, has announced she will challenge Flake. Two other Republicans, state Treasurer Jeff DeWit and former GOP chairman Robert Graham, also are considering the race.

Both have ties to Trump DeWit served as the Trump campaigns chief operating officer and they appear to have agreed that only one will run. But multiple challengers say, Ward and one of those pondering the race, or unknown others would shift the advantage to Flake by splitting the opposition vote.

McCains recent brain cancer diagnosis may further complicated the decision-making. While his seat normally would not be open until 2022, McCains illness has raised the odds of an earlier open seat that might strike some candidates as a better option.

All of that leaves Flakes fate or at least the contours of his reelection campaign uncomfortably in the hands of Trump, the president who Flake asserts in his confessional has made the government dysfunctional at the highest levels.

Arizona pollster Mike Noble said that if Ward remains Flakes only opponent, hell cruise to easy reelection.

A vendetta causes more harm than good, he said, adding that Trumps got bigger fish to fry: Russia, North Korea.

Whatever shape the conflict takes as the primary nears, it strikes some as pointless given Flakes conservative voting record.

If youre the Trump administration, you dont like Jeff Flake but you need to work with Jeff Flake, Querard said. All of the ingredients were there for some sort of peace treaty.

But then came the book, or, as Querard calls it, the effort to poke your opponent in the eye literally for the point of poking him in the eye.

One thing defeats Jeff Flake for certain, he said, and that is if Trumps team blesses a solid opponent. Hes really gone out of his way to encourage them to come and get him.

For more on politics from Cathleen Decker

cathleen.decker@latimes.com

Twitter: @cathleendecker

ALSO:

Mueller convenes criminal grand jury for Russia investigation

Their relationship at a low, Trump and Congress blame each other heading into break

The latest from Washington

Updates on California politics

Continue reading here:
In Arizona, a potential showdown between a Republican senator and the Republican president - Los Angeles Times

Texas House Speaker Joe Straus at the state Capitol in April 2017. Straus opposes efforts by other powerful Republicans to pass a 'bathroom bill' that would affect transgender people. Martin do Nascimento/KUT hide caption

Texas House Speaker Joe Straus at the state Capitol in April 2017. Straus opposes efforts by other powerful Republicans to pass a 'bathroom bill' that would affect transgender people.

During this month-long special legislative session, Texas Republicans are hoping to pass several red meat campaign promises, such as a ban on transgender bathroom access. But in a state where every statewide elected official is Republican and the party controls the legislature, there's one Republican trying to slow those efforts.

Texas House Speaker Joe Straus had made himself enemy number one among the state's most conservative voters. His crime? Bipartisanship.

"I try to encourage cooperation. I try to encourage bipartisanship. I know that's not a very fashionable thing today," Straus said.

It's not just unfashionable, for some Republicans it's downright treasonous. When Straus focuses on bipartisan efforts, like a plan to increase public school funding, he's attacked by some for doing so at the expense of "real" conservative priorities.

"There's a growing number of conservatives in the House that don't understand why Speaker Straus is blocking a conservative agenda," said one critic, state Rep. Matt Schaefer.

The GOP divide

That line "blocking a conservative agenda" may sound familiar. From the Republican Senators who blocked a repeal of Obamacare to fights in Republicans state legislatures around the country, votes against the party line have brought a swift and often angry response. Straus has always said that if something doesn't come up for a vote in the Texas House, it's because the bill didn't have enough support. But, he admits he has blocked some legislation.

"I use the office and the authority that the members have given to me, on occasions, where I think it's necessary," Straus explained. "This bathroom bill is a perfect example of that."

The bill is also a perfect example of the divisions among Republicans and the business interests that have backed the GOP over the years. And in Texas, those business leaders, from local chambers of commerce to giants like IBM and ExxonMobil, want nothing to do with the bathroom bill.

That's because of what happened in North Carolina, where a similar bill led to consumer boycotts and prompted some companies to avoid investing in the state.

Straus quotes from a recent editorial from a North Carolina newspaper.

"Why would Texas after seeing the example in North Carolina want to walk headfirst into a giant cactus? I think it's a good question and I hope that we don't go there," Straus said.

But the governor, lieutenant governor, state Senate and some in the House do want to go there. Jim Henson, who directs the Texas Politics Project at UT-Austin, says that tug-o-war between activists and business groups shows up in Straus's record as speaker.

"What you see is an ability to balance what different factions of the Republican Party want," Henson said, "while acknowledging that some of the issues that he may not put at the top of his list, are at the top of Republican primary voters lists."

Straus points to opposition from business groups and law enforcement, when explaining why he's kept the bathroom bill from getting a vote. But those same groups opposed another bill that priority for Republicans that Straus did help pass this spring.

"The House delivered anti-illegal immigration and border security measures, that are their most important issues for primary Republican voters in Texas. Full Stop," Henson said.

Election backlash?

But right now it's all or nothing for the most conservatives Republicans. To them, passing an anti-sanctuary cities bill is great but unless Straus passes the bathroom bill, nothing else he's done matters. And Representative Schaefer says that's what voters will focus in primary elections in 2018.

"Are you with Lt. Governor Patrick and Gov. Abbott? Or are you with Joe Straus who's blocking a conservative agenda," Schaefer said. "He's really making it simple for people to understand."

Straus intends to run for re-election, and support in his Northern San Antonio House district remains strong. But if he returns to the House, Tea Party members and even the lieutenant governor, appear ready to support someone else for speaker.

The rest is here:
Texas Republican Bucks His Party To Block 'Bathroom Bill' - NPR

One day after signing a bill imposing new sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea, President Donald Trump lashed out at his own party inone of his signature morning tweetstorms, blamingRepublican members of Congress for the deteriorating relations between Russia and the United States.

The accusation follows several messages from Russian officials needling Trump after he signed the sanctions bill,messages seeminglytailor-made to get under his skin.

On Capitol Hill on Thursday, senators were confused and irritated at the presidents finger-pointing, noting that the sanctions bill passed by a large, veto-proof margin on a bipartisan basis and was signed by President Trump himself. Republican lawmakers stressed to TPM that it was the Russian actionsthat inspired the sanctions, not the sanctions themselves, that are to blame.

We have bad relations with Russia because theyve done bad things, emphasized Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC). What were trying to do is put pressure on a nation that has interfered with our elections, that is trying to relive the Soviet Union days, and its absolutely appropriate for a co-equal branch of Congress to make it very clear that the American people we represent think that Russia needs to be held in check. The president rightful takes the lead on the issue, but thats not to the exclusion of us asserting our own position on Russia and their bad actions.

Defending the steps Congress took last week, Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) said Russias meddling in other nations as well as the U.S. spurred them to act. The fact that it refuses to get out of Ukraine. The fact that it violated any number of international norms with its behavior and cyberattacksplain and simple, he said.

Even lawmakerswho usually defend the president, such asSen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), hit back Thursday over the Russia blame. I think our strained relationship with Russia started in 1917, didnt it? With the Communist Revolution? Shelby quipped to reporters. Its ebbed and flowed since, but I dont see how its Congress fault.

Its completely Putins fault,Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) added.

If Trump thought the legislation was so damaging to international relations, several senators wondered, why didnt he veto the bill when it came to his desk?

I think he signed it, didnt he? Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) told TPM with a smile when asked about the presidents tweet. His grin fading, he added more soberly: The bottom line is that Russia is to blame with for the relations with Russia deteriorating.

Read more here:
Bewildered Senate Republicans Hit Back At Trump For Russia Blame - TPM

Joe Manchin has been and always will be a proud West Virginia Democrat, said Jonathan Kott, Mr. Manchins communications director.

In his first months as governor, Mr. Justice, a colorful and hulking figure who stands over six feet, seven inches, drew headlines beyond West Virginias border for bringing a plate of cow excrement into the state capitol to express his anger at a Republican-passed budget proposal.

What we have is nothing more than bunch of political bull you-know-what, Mr. Justice said, pulling the lid off a silver platter to reveal the scented prop atop a printed copy of the budget.

But the governor, who found his fortune with coal and now owns The Greenbrier resort, has also been dogged by some of the same financial issues that Republicans sought to use against him in last years campaign. The state tax department has filed four liens this year against of one of Mr. Justices companies, Tams Management Inc., citing nearly $1 million in unpaid taxes, interest and penalties related to his coal mines.

In West Virginia, Representative Evan Jenkins, one of the Republicans seeking Mr. Manchins Senate seat, said he would welcome the governor to his party.

I simply couldnt be a part of a liberal agenda that was so contrary to who we are and what we believe in West Virginia, said Mr. Jenkins, who switched parties several years ago.

Shaking hands with constituents at a meet-and-greet at a hotel next to the stadium where Mr. Trump is scheduled to speak, Mr. Jenkins said he would understand if Mr. Justice felt the same way.

If Jim Justice is the next to change his party registration to Republican, I welcome him to the Republican party, he said.

Chris Goertler, a retired consultant from Williamstown, W.V., who was at the stadium to see Mr. Trump, said that he used to be a Republican but is now nonaffiliated. Told of Mr. Justices expected announcement, Mr. Goertler shrugged and said: I could never be a Democrat myself.

Russell Lucas, an electrician from Kenova, W.V., who was also in line waiting to see Mr. Trump, said he would welcome Mr. Justice to the Republican Party, but added that he supported him even though he was a Democrat.

Doesnt matter to me, he said. Hes done a lot for this state already. Hes a mine owner, and I know guys that work in the mines, and all of them like him. They said hes for the people.

Continued here:
West Virginia Governor to Switch from Democrat to Republican - New York Times

By Joshua J. Dyck, Francis T. Talty, Hannah Daly, Patrick Martin and Jasmine Polanco By Joshua J. Dyck, Francis T. Talty, Hannah Daly, Patrick Martin and Jasmine Polanco August 3 at 8:00 AM

Do Americans support basic democratic values? Themajor U.S. political parties have lately beenquestioningeach others commitment to the core principles like freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Whos right? We decided to check.

Heres how we did our research.

We designed a survey to test how much Americans consent to democratic values and tolerance. Democratic values are the fundamental aspects of government that all Americans, in theory, should support. They are those beliefs that support the central parts of constitutional design, including freedom of speech and expression, freedom of the press, judicial independence, separation of powers and checks and balances. Tolerance for the opinions of others has traditionally been defined as the protection of rights and liberties for members of an individuals least-liked group.

[Is democracy on the decline? Not as much as some pundits want you to believe]

The nationally representative survey of 1,000 American adults, supported by the Center for Public Opinionat the University of Massachusettsat Lowell, was conducted from June 27 to July 6 by YouGov.

Most Americans support democratic values, but both Republicans and Democrats doubt the other partys commitment to those values.

We find that overall consent, especially among partisans, is quite high, with a few caveats.But here are two notable findings: Democrats and Republicans arent confident about the others adherence to democratic values. And when we gave them examples, both groups were more likely to support freedom for their own side and less likely to support it for the other side.

Consider the answers to six questions about minority expression of rights, majority voting, free speech for all, due process/legal protections, expression of unpopular opinions and media censorship.

We found widespread majority and bipartisan support for these six values. Partisans whom were defining as those who identify with one party or the other, and those independents who say they lean toward one party or the other more strongly support democratic values than those who are entirely political independent. But then, political independents also tend to be less politically informedand therefore more likely to say dont know to survey questions.

[This survey finds warning signs for American democracy]

Democrats more strongly support two of these values minority expression and majority-rule voting than do Republicans, by 13 percent and 11 percent, respectively.

We also asked whether Democrats and Republicans would uphold core components of the democratic creed no matter what or whether they were unlikely to defend them if not in their interest.

Large majorities of both groups see members of their own party as defenders of free speech, press, religion, assembly, separation of powers and due process rights and simultaneously say the opposing party wouldnt support democratic values if it would contradict their interests. For instance, on the question of freedom of the press, 80 percent of Democrats say their party will defend that principle no matter what but only 28 percent say the same of Republicans. Meanwhile, 72 percent of Republicans say that others in their partywill defend the freedom of the press no matter what but only 28 percent of them say the same of Democrats.

So do Democrats and Republicans actually support those values equally for those they like and dislike?

We presented a control group with questions about four circumstances: 1) whether colleges should allow controversial speakers to speak on campus; 2) whether a sitting president should openly criticize members of the judicial branch; 3) whether a group that uses derogatory language at a rally should lose the right to protest; and 4) whether elected officials should be able to compel journalists to name their sources.

For another two groups, we varied the wording of each question in two ways. On allowing controversial speakers on college campuses, we asked either about controversial speakers like conservative activist Ann Coulter or liberal activist Michael Moore. On presidential criticism of the judicial branch, we gave an introduction that referred either to Donald Trumps criticism of judges or Barack Obamas criticism of the Supreme Courts Citizens United decision. On groups losing their right to protest, we referred to the group as either members of Black Lives Matter or the Alt-Right. And finally, on journalists ability to protect their sources, we asked this question in the context of whether it was the Trump administration or the Obama administration. (You can find our experiment wording and results here.)

[Both Democrats and Republicans care about states rights when it suits them]

We discovered several interesting patterns in these experiments. First, even in the control group, these issues are already clearly politicized. About half of Democrats and Republicans think that there are legitimate reasons colleges might prohibit speeches on campus. On the other three issues,Democrats were more likely than Republicans to saya sitting president should not criticize judges; that there is an absolute right to freedom of assembly; andthat journalists should beabletoprotect theirsources.These differences likely reflect baked-in responses to current events.

In the other two groups, when presented with information cues, partisans react in predictable ways. Identifying Ann Coulter as the controversial speaker on college campuses increased Republicans support for her right to speak by 19 points, when compared to the control group; identifying Michael Moore as the speaker increased Democrats support by 10 points. For presidential criticism of the judicial branch, 74 percent of Democrats said such criticism is appropriate if told Obama was the president criticizing the Citizens United decision, while only 22 percent thought so if Trump were criticizing judges individually; only 30 percent of Republicans supported criticism of the judicial branch if the president mentioned was Obama, while 47 percent did if it was Trump.

Meanwhile,10 percent more Democrats say they support freedom of assembly if the group identified is Black Lives Matter compared to the control, while 11 percent more Republicans say they support freedom of assembly if told the group is the alt-right. Finally, 16 percent more Democrats say they support journalists right to protect anonymous sources if told that Trump is pushing to find out sources, while 29 percent more Republicans support this right if told Obama is forcing journalists to reveal sources.

Supporters of both parties say they recognize the importance of democratic values. But both sides find it easier to support those values when its their side and harder when its the other side under threat.

Joshua J. Dyck is associate professor of political science and co-director of the Center for Public Opinionat the University of Massachusetts, Lowell.

Francis T. Talty is assistant dean in the College of Fine Arts, Humanities and Social Science and co-director of the Center for Public Opinionat the University of Massachusetts, Lowell.

Hannah Daly, Patrick Martin and Jasmine Polanco are seniors majoring in political science atUniversity of Massachusetts, Lowell.

See more here:
Republicans and Democrats both say they support democratic freedoms but that the other side doesn't - Washington Post