Mediaboss Marketing

President Trump sees himself as harassed and abused. True enough. Presidents often feel oppressed. But Trump is protected and defended in a way that he appears to take for granted. It comes from having both houses of Congress controlled by his own party.

The political safety this provides is all he has known in the four months he's been in the White House. But it may not last. Republicans are in jeopardy of losing control of the House in next year's midterm election. If that occurs, Trump would be subjected to far more persecution than even he can imagine.

Should Democrats win a House majority, they would control the committees and what happensor doesn't happenon the House floor. They would have subpoena power. They would be free to investigate Trump on matters far beyond any possible ties he has to Russia. They would have the votes, if they stick together, to impeach the president.

Democrats need to pick up 24 seats to capture the House, assuming they don't lose any of the districts they now hold. This isn't a huge reach, but it's harder than it looks. Democrats dreamed of a House takeover in the 2016 election. They gained six seats.

But they will have advantages in the 2018 election they didn't have last year. Some of these are normal in midterms. Others are related to Trump and the unusual coalition that elected him. The effect of both is to stack the deck against Republicans.

Midterm elections are referendums on the president and what he's done, especially in his first two years in office. And the verdict of voters can be harsh. Democrats lost 54 House seats in 1994 in Bill Clinton's first midterm and 63 in 2010 in Barack Obama's.

In 2002, voters rallied behind George W. Bush after the 9/11 attack. Republicans won eight House seats. That was the exception. The outcome in 2006 proved the rule. With the war in Iraq going poorly and Bush's approval rating in decline, Democrats gained 30 seats and control of the House.

There's also an ideological dimension to midterms. When a Democrat is president, voters tend to tilt slightly to the right. With a Republican president, they shift to the left. Pew Research has already found evidence of this in the aftermath of Trump's election.

In an April survey, 48 percent preferred a bigger government with more services while 45 percent favored a smaller government with fewer services. This was a substantial change from last September, when 50 percent wanted less government and fewer services and 41 percent preferred the opposite.

Another factor is enthusiasm. It's usually on the side of voters from the party that lost the White House two years earlier. Recall the Tea Party voters who led the GOP surge in the 2010 midterm.

For now, Democrats are ferociously opposed to Trump personally and to his presidency. Their fervor could fade in the 17 months between now and the 2018 electionbut probably not by much, because attacks on Trump, including calls for his impeachment, are likely to dominate Democratic campaigns.

A more subtle factor in 2018 is the role of the coalition that put Trump in the White House. He appealed to millions of working-class voters, many of them Democrats or independents or nonvoters in the past. He wouldn't have won Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin without them.

But it's unclear whether they are casual voters attracted solely to Trump. Will they will turn out for Republicans in a midterm election in which Trump isn't on the ballot?

Nationwide, the turnout is smaller in midterms (40 percent) than in presidential years (60 percent). And the midterm electorate tends to be more educated, according to Kyle Kondik of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. If that trend holds true next year, it suggests a chunk of the core Trump vote will be missing.

Democrats experienced this phenomenon both in the Obama years and in 2016. Many Obama voters in 2008 and 2012 didn't vote in the 2010 and 2014 midterms when he wasn't on the ballot. The result: Republicans prevailed. The same was true last year, leading to Hillary Clinton's defeat in critical states.

While concentrating on working-class states, Trump ignored states he had no chance of winning. "That was beneficial to Republicans in last year's general election," Kondik says. But it could backfire in congressional races in 2018 if GOP turnout suffers from last year's neglect in places like Orange County, California.

Neil Newhouse, who has polled House races for many years, says it's too early to make predictions so far ahead of November 2018. But "these midterms look precarious for Republicans," he told me.

He offers "two cautionary notes to those who want to say the reign of the GOP is over in the House." Says Newhouse, "the lion's share of the districts the Democrats need to pick up are uphill for Democratic candidates. And GOP fundraising has never been better."

Republican operatives with the National Republican Congressional Committee know how "to help candidates win elections and they will be fully engaged," he says. "Every GOP professional knows what's at stake in the '18 election."

Trump, while grousing last week about being treated "worse or more unfairly" than any politician in history, may be catching on. "You can't let them get you down," he told Coast Guard Academy graduates. "Adversity makes you stronger. Don't give in. Never back down. ... Nothing worth doing ever, ever, ever came easy." Nor will holding the House.

Fred Barnes is an executive editor at The Weekly Standard.

Read more:
Are Republicans Mid-Terminal? - The Weekly Standard

By BRIDGET BOWMAN and SIMONE PATH

No matter what he did or how much he tweeted during his first four months in office, President Donald Trump has mostly held on to the loyalty of congressional Republicans even those who might have the most to lose at the ballot box next year.

But that deference to the White House has begun to erode, slowly and unevenly, over the past week, with one vulnerable Republican congressman even dropping the word impeachment on national television.

The events of the past nine days including the firing of FBI Director James B. Comey, reports that Trump revealed classified information to Russian officials, and reports that Trump asked Comey to stop investigating his former national security advisers contacts with the Kremlin have rocked Capitol Hill.

Some of the pressure on GOP lawmakers to weigh in on an ongoing investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives was relievedWednesday evening when the Justice Department appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as a special counsel to overseethe probe.

New York GOP Rep. Chris Collins, the first member of Congressto endorse Trump, said the pressure was off House Republicans to answer questions about the need for a special counsel.

The one positive development would be that we dont have to answer that question anymore, said Collins, a 2018 Democratic target.

And some Republicans, including Florida Rep. Brian Mast, who werent calling for a special counsel before, are now suddenly on board.

I don't know that much about him but it will be good to see what plays out with the special investigation, Mast said. But when pressed whether a special counsel was something that hed been supportive of before, Mast dodged.

I always call for transparency. I always say we should be transparency hawks, he said.

The recent turmoilstill hadsome vulnerable Republicans sharply criticizing the administration. Others wanted to wait and see if recent media reports weretrue before commenting but they may not have to wait very long.

Sen. Jeff Flake, a frequent Trump critic, refused to criticize his fellow Republicans for not being as vocal as he is. But, the Arizona Republican said, if the reports prove true, Republicans shouldnt be OKwith that.

Democrats are waiting to see whether the past week inspires a breaking point among Republicans who have generally stood by the White House. Delaware Sen. Chris Coons said he still had not seen many Republicans publicly weighing in on the controversies, but theywould likely face a moment of decision by the end of next week.

Coonspointed out that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will brief all senators on Thursday on Comeys firing. The Delaware lawmakeralso expects Congress to quickly gain access to any transcripts, memos or tapes of conversations pertaining to recent events.

Many Republicans today are calling for Comey to testify, the memos or transcripts or recordings to be given to Congress. Thats not an unreasonable position, Coons said. But once we have all of that, if it confirms the stories and reports to date, to, at that point, fail to act would be grossly irresponsible.

The past weeks events have already caused several vulnerable Republicans, especially those in districts carried byHillary Clintonlast fall,to speak out more forcefully against the Trump White House.

The most significant comments came from Florida Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who dropped the I-wordon TV on Tuesday. In fact, his spokeswomanhas tried to correct the record with reporters who have been identifying Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, a Freedom Caucus member, as the only Republican to have mentioned impeachment.

Congressman Curbelo was actually the first to mention impeachment, the spokeswoman emailed reporters Wednesday.

Clinton carriedCurbelos 26th District handily, and especially after his recent vote for the GOP leaderships health care legislation, Democrats are eager to take him out in 2018.

Another top Democratic target, Virginia Rep. Barbara Comstock, is often cautious about weighing in. But shes been more outspoken of late. She released a strongly worded statement Tuesday after reports that Trump had shared classified information with Russian officialsin which she referred to inexplicable stories coming from the White House.

In a statement in which she said she could not defend Comeys firing last week, Comstock called for an independent investigation that the American people can trust.

Comstock represents a northern Virginia swing district that Clinton carried by 10 pointsand is home to many federal workers. That sometimes requires her to buck her party (most recently, on the health care vote).

But Democrats immediately criticized her for not doing enough.

Barbara Comstock needs to do more than issue vague statements indicating she is troubled by the stories coming out of the White House, said state Sen. Jennifer Wexton, whos challenging Comstock in the 10th District. Wexton called on Comstock to sign the Democrats discharge petition to force a vote on creating an independent commission.

Other vulnerable Republicans have gonefurther, getting more specific in their calls for an independent investigation.

Prior to the Mueller announcement, Rep. Steve Knight, for example, on Tuesday called for a special prosecutor to take over the FBI investigation. The two-term member sits in a southern California district that Clinton won by nearly 7 points.

Nevada Sen. Dean Heller, the most vulnerable GOP senator up for re-election next year, has said over the past week that a independentprosecutor should be on the table if committees in the House and Senate cannot get to answers.

Colorado Rep. Mike Coffmantold The Denver Post last week that appointing a special counsel would help depoliticize the national conversation.

Other Republicans in Clinton districts, like Reps. Darrell Issaof California and Erik Paulsenof Minnesota, have called for an independent investigation in the wake of Comeys firing, but have been less clear about what form it should take.

After finding out about the Justice Department decisionWednesday, Minnesota Rep. Jason Lewis said that if DOJ thought that was the proper thing to do, then let DOJ do it.

But he also expressed some hesitation over multiple ongoing investigations, including in both the House and Senate, and the FBI.

We all want the truth to come out, we all want to go where the facts lead, but I hope we dont get into a situation of Its never good enough and this thing just drags and drags and politics gets in the way, Lewis said. Anything that gets the politics out of it, Im in favor of.

Other Republican members in tight races were still waiting to weigh in on whether a special counselor independent commission should lead the investigations, ahead of Wednesday evenings announcement.

These GOP lawmakers have to strike a delicate balance between courtingTrump voters, and combating Democratic criticism for not standing up to the administration.

Rep. Will Hurdsaid he supported the Oversight and Government Reform Committees push to obtain Comeys memos and testimony. The Texas Republican said the committees actions are important first steps to determine whether a special prosecutor is necessary. Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales rates his race a Tossup.

Rep. John Katko similarly said he needed more information before making a decision about a special counselor independent commission.

I think you follow the facts and let the facts dictate the decision, the New York Republican said Tuesday. You cant make a decision based on emotions. Its got to be based on facts.

Katkos race is rated Likely Republican, and he is one of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committees targets in 2018. Clinton carriedhis district by 4 points.

Who knows what to believe, Katko said. This president has been under attack by the media. And its imperative, now more than ever, to make decisions based on the facts and nothing else.

Even as Republicans continue to face questions about the latest news, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan suggested he was not concerned about how the Russian investigations would affect members up for re-election.

I dont worry about things that are outside of my control, the Wisconsin Republican said when asked at a Wednesday morning press conference about the political effect.

Were going to keep advancing our reforms that we were elected to advance while we do all these other things that are within our responsibility, the speakersaid. And thats what well be judged in 2018.

But some GOP lawmakers are beginning to express fear that the daily drips of news on the Russian investigations slow the legislative agenda they hope to highlight in the midterms.

Florida Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart told reporters that he wanted thorough investigations, but they needed to proceed quickly. Diaz-Balarts race is rated Solid Republican, but he is also a DCCC target, with Trump having carriedhis district by less than 2 points.

Clearly what could be [considered] now as just a distraction, could be an impediment to getting things done, he said.

Lindsey McPherson contributed to this report.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

More:
White House Turmoil Ramps Pressure on Vulnerable Republicans - Roll Call

New York Times

Why Republicans Are Always Looking Over Their Shoulders New York Times The sudden appointment of Robert S. Mueller as a special counsel for the federal investigation into the Trump campaign's relationship with Russia highlights a key question: Which choice poses the greater risk for Republicans in Congress, to support a ... Young Republicans were the most likely to bail on their party over the past yearWashington Post Poll: More young Republicans left GOP during 2016 election than DemocratsThe Hill When Will Republicans Dump Trump?POLITICO Magazine AlterNet -Pew Research Center for the People and the Press all 102 news articles »

Read more:
Why Republicans Are Always Looking Over Their Shoulders - New York Times

Evan Vucci/AP

Following the explosive report that President Donald Trump leaned on then-FBI director James Comey to go easy on former national security adviser Michael Flynnand the explosive report that Trump's transition team knew Flynn was under FBI investigation when Trump tapped him to be his top national security aidean increasing number of congressional Republicans have begun to accept the need for full-scale investigations along with the appointment of Robert Mueller as the new special counsel to examine the Trump-Russia affair. But party leaders have not reached the point where they are willing to truly confront the scandal-plagued president. The GOP establishment can't and won't thoroughly challenge Trump over the assorted controversies brewing within his chaotic administration. To do so would risk a nuclear civil war that could blow their party to smithereens.

Ever since Trump moved into the White House, liberals (and others) have plaintively asked, why aren't Republicans fiercely investigating Trump and his crew and seeking to hold them accountable for various instances of improbity? There's been plenty to choose from: the Trump-Russia scandal, the smorgasbord of financial conflicts of interests involving Trump and his family members in and out of government, other possible ethics violations (including nepotistic hiring), the ever-widening Michael Flynn affair, and so on. In the wake of Trump's firing of Comey, the guy in charge of a FBI investigation that could land on Trump's doorstep, and the subsequent report (denied by the White House) that Trump pressured Comey on Flynn, some GOPers on Capitol Hill have gently called for probes into these matters. But by and large, Republican leaders have not dared to take on Trump vigorously. "The last thing I'm going to do is pre-judge anything," House Speaker Paul Ryan said Wednesday.

One reason Republicans have been reticent to criticize Trump is obvious: they care more about working withthat is, usingTrump to attain their most beloved policy desires: generous tax breaks for the wealthy, draconian budget cuts for government programs (including those that assist low- and middle-income Americans), and the repeal-and-replace-or-whatever of Obamacare. But there's a related reason: if congressional Republicans were to challenge Trump in forceful fashion, it could destroy the GOP.

Pop quiz: who's the most vengeful politician on the scene today? Yes, it's Trump. As I reported before Election Day, Trump is completely obsessed with revenge. For years, Trump often said in paid speeches that a key to success is that you have to be a merciless SOB when dealing with foes. Here's how he spelled it out: "Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back 10 times as hard. I really believe it." Another time, he elaborated:

One of the things you should do in terms of success: If somebody hits you, you've got to hit 'em back five times harder than they ever thought possible. You've got to get even. Get even. And the reason, the reason you do, is so importantThe reason you do, you have to do it, because if they do that to you, you have to leave a telltale sign that they just can't take advantage of you. It's not so much for the person, which does make you feel good, to be honest with you, I've done it many times. But other people watch and you know they say, "Well, let's leave Trump alone," or "Let's leave this one," or "Doris, let's leave her alone. They fight too hard." I say it, and it's so important. You have to, you have to hit back. You have to hit back.

With the president showing signs of narcissism and paranoiaon Tuesday, he declared, "No politician in history...has been treated worse or more unfairly" than he has beenRepublican politicians who dare to confront Trump can expect to be targeted and mowed down by Trump.

Prior to the recent Comey and Flynn controversies, many GOPers were scared of Trump. A House Democrat a few weeks ago told me of a conversation he had with a Republican colleague whom he was close to persuading to sponsor a piece of legislation that would likely be popular in the GOPer's district but not fancied by the Trump White House. "I just can't do it," the Republican finally admitted to the Democrat. "He'll come after me on Twitter." The wrath of Trump was something this Republican feared deeplyjust over a policy disagreement.

Imagine if Republicans squared off against Trump regarding a matter involving his integrityor one that could pose an existential threat to his presidency. (Examining the Comey issues as possible acts of obstruction of justice could well lead to the question of impeachment.) Trump certainly would not consider such action kindly. And if he were going to screw them back 10 times as hard, what would that mean for congressional Republicans?

It would be quite improbable that a raging and revenge-seeking Trump would be able to collaborate with Republicans on legislative priorities. What would be more important for Trump: working with Republicans to achieve tax reform or extracting payback?

If the going gets tougher, Trump will insist on fealty from his fellow Republicans. Yet if some opt to join the forces of investigation, a dividing line would be created within the party: you're with Trump, or you're not. Of course, Trump and his minions would be keeping score. During the the first and chaotic effort of House Republicans to gut Obamacare, the Trump White House considered compiling an enemies list of those GOPers who opposed the Trump-backed bill. Republicans who threatened his presidency could expect much worse than being placed on a roster of unfriendlies.

This is far more than an inside-Washington affair. Trump's base is the party's base. Despite all the screw-ups, false assertions, broken promises, and flip-flops of Trump's still young (but exhausting) presidency, he remains hugely popular among Republicans84 percent of Republicans still approve of Trump in the latest Gallup pollwho presumably buy his "fake news" attacks on media reports that cast him as an autocratic, truth-challenged, and bumbling president. If Republicans on Capitol Hill turn against Trump they could well encounter the fury of their most dependable voters. In the fight for the soul of the party, could GOP leaders (Washington insiders!) best the demagogic Trump? Sen. Mitch McConnell or Rep. Paul Ryan would be no match for him. The idea of a President Pence would likely be little consolation for the base during a clash between Republicans and Trump.

The Republican establishment has already demonstrated that political calculations, not principles, are its driving force. And one calculation is easy to process: if the GOP breaks rank with Trump on any of these scandals, there will be no turning back. An irate (and irrational?) Trump would demand retribution. A base already suspicious of GOP insiders could become furious. Tax cuts and the like would be at risk. The party itself would be endangered. Of course, as is so often noted, if the Republicans start to feel Trump-related electoral painsay, they lose one of the upcoming special House elections in GOP-leaning districtsthey might reevaluate their situational loyalty to Trump. But the smart ones know the costs of such a courseeven if necessary for survivalcould be exceedingly high.

There is no good answer for congressional Republicans facing the dilemma of what to do about Trump. They long ago decided to lash themselves to a man with a decades-long record of dishonesty, arrogance, bullying, sleazy deal-making, and score-settling. There are no easy escape routes. No convenient off-ramps. No lifeboats on this ship. He made the bed, and they leaped into it. (Oh, Donald!) Now they're screwed. The old clich is that you don't go after the king unless you can kill the king. But for Republicans, the situation is worse that that: it may not be possible for them to battle their king without razing their kingdom.

See more here:
There's No Way Republicans Will Truly Confront Trump on His Scandals. It Would Destroy Their Party. - Mother Jones

One of the more regular lines that Latino Republicans peddle to their audience is that they or their families came from countries with despotic rulers and so cherish their new home in the United States because we live by the rule of law. But these Latinos have been largely silent while President Donald Trump has trampled on the norms of democracy that have been established for centuries in this country.

Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, for instance, weaves heroic stories of Cubans living under Fidel Castro who come here seeking refuge and then built a better life under the institutions of a benevolent United States.

Rubio is particularly talented in this storytelling, and, in turn, has been rewarded with a position at the highest levels of representative government. If you have not seen his speech at the Reagan library, you should. It's a fantastic speech, but it is also an indulging fantasy that feeds the narrative to his audience that the United States is unique, a "city on a hill", from which all other countries should see as a model of good governance.

Coming from a Cuban-American family, Rubio validates the stereotypes his audience has of Latinos and feeds the notion that Latin countries are despotic regimes largely because they are incapable of self-governance. What Rubio, and other Latino Republicans leave out, is the role that the United States has played in these countries that have driven them to despots.

One of the more approachable overviews of the U.S. role in this is by Juan Gonzalez's book, Harvest of Empire, where he lays out American support for strongmen in pursuit of corporate interests. From the rich sugar crops of Puerto Rico, to bananas in Central America, the United States has turned many of these countries upside down.

RELATED: Trump Establishes Voter Fraud Commission

But these warriors for freedom, such as Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, have stood largely silent when Trump has flaunted the norms of democracy. Only now that former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been appointed as a special counsel in the Russian investigation does Rubio acquiesce with the inevitable, saying "special counsel will lead us to the truth."

But from Trump's refusal to release his tax returns, to suggesting that journalists be put in jail, Cruz and Rubio have stood idly by. Trump has appointed Kris Kobach to a commission on "voting integrity" that by all accounts is a turkey hunt meant to justify further barriers to participation for minorities. Kobach has been behind the anti-immigrant legislation, SB 1070, in Arizona, and he has also been the tip of the spear poking the administration to get it to create a registry of Muslims in the U.S. But those so endeared to democratic principles have a way of not showing it.

RELATED: Trump Immigration Adviser Kris Kobach Wrote the Book on Muslim Registry

The president of Turkey, Tayyip Erdoan, himself an authoritarian consolidating power in his own country, recently drove through our nation's capital and his bodyguards assaulted American citizens protesting him. There was no action taken by Latino Republicans in defense of American citizens. Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, was under investigation for being on the payroll of a foreign country while performing his duties to his country, and yet Cruz and Rubio do nothing.

One is often asked what they would do in the face of authoritarianism, and we all fashion scenarios in which we would valiantly resist. Indeed, Cruz and Rubio, have largely painted this picture of themselves while stroking their audiences' fantasies of Hillary Clinton's authoritarian tendencies.

But it is not often that we get to actually see how we would react should we be faced with an actual threat to our democratic institutions. But now, we may know.

If Rubio and Cruz were party members of the Cuban regime while Castro rose to power, would they have drawn the line or would they, out of self-interest and fear of losing their comfortable positions within government, play the fool?

Follow NBC News Latino on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

Go here to read the rest:
Opinion: Latino Republicans are Silent in the Face of Authoritarianism - NBCNews.com