Mediaboss Marketing

Bruce Kleinschmidt, Opinion contributor Published 12:57 p.m. ET Oct. 20, 2020

Whether it is the debate over the grand jury findings regarding the killing of Breonna Taylor or the confirmation battlefor Amy Coney Barrett, one thing is apparent. A great many people, on both sides, are unhappy with legal precedent.

In the Taylor case, there is a call for a grand juror to be able to share his views with the public. The attorney general strongly opposes that. With Judge Barrett, there is a widespread wish (or fear) that her attitude will change the courts Roe v. Wade decision. As Bob Heleringer wisely noted, legal precedent includes an abundant trove of shipwrecks.

I want to look back to English common law for a minute.On June 22,1772, four years before the Declaration of Independence was signed, an English case, Somerset v. Stewart decided that a Black man named James Somerset, bought as a slave in Boston, Massachusetts,by Mr. Stewart, became free when he was relocated to England. Specifically, Stewart could NOT sell Somerset to a planter in Jamaica.The court acknowledged that Massachusetts colonial law allowed slavery, but asserted that since neither Parliament or English common law recognized it,Somerset was freed.The judge made the narrowest decision he couldand avoided dealing with the morality of slavery generally and certainly avoided the question of human bondage in the American colonies or Jamaica.

The case was widely known in the U.S.During the American Revolution, at least four states decided that slavery was inherently incompatible with the natural rights of men.In the Southern states where slaveholding was more widespread, there was a decided pushback to make sure that slavery continued to be legal. School children are drilled with ideas of the Boston Tea Party and the Stamp Act or No taxation without representation as the reasons the American colonies rebelled against England.Yet it is equally fair to say that one reason many in the American colonies wanted independence from England was to ensure that the ownership of other humans continued to be lawful.Slavery was specifically permitted under the United States Constitution.Curiously, King George III, whom Americansmock, was concerned about slavery.In 1788, ONE YEAR AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, he personally forbade slavery from ever being introduced into Australia. Maybe he wasnt as mad as we were taught?

Opinion: We all are responsible for Breonna Taylor's death

So where does that leave us?Frankly, we are stuck because forcenturies people have ducked the issue. And as with any form of cancer, it has metastasized.It gets harder to cure as time passes.The bodies continue to pile up, and the anger grows.

Of course, some people are going to pretend there is nothing wrong, just keep moving, the status quo is fine. And usually someone blamesthe victim.Well, if you werent so lazy, your life would be better.Other voices think the answer is in financialreparations.You stole the labor of our ancestors and we want it back.To which some say, hey, no one alive caused that problem.How do you prove who is descended from someone listed in a census slave roll by only their age and gender?Slaves were counted like livestock.First names got recorded for some of them.

The truth is, we cant even agree on a starting point for this conversation, much less on an outcome. The excuses come in sweeping generalizations.We avoid personal responsibility. I dont want any of my grandchildren dealing with it.I wantus to deal with it.The divisive language and the death threats have got to stop.We literally need a national time of repentance, prayer and healing.We need to say, I KNOW WEVE DONE WRONG AND I BELIEVE WE MUST DO BETTER.No matter if your ancestors owned slaves or were slaves.No matter if your ancestors just got here.The stain of slavery and the false ideology that whites are inherently superior has got to be faced and we all have to repent for the sake of our country.The division from this issue truly affects everyone.

There are many examples throughout Scripture where repentance requires both the rejection of the wrongdoingand the reparation and restoration of the wronged party. The Civil War didnt solve this problem. Reconstruction didnt solve this problem.Jim Crow didnt solve this problem.Marching with Dr. King didnt solve this problem. Simply throwing money will not solve this problem.It seems like we have tried everything but listening and responding in love.We need an effort at reconciliation.And hopefully from that will come collective approaches leading to healing and restitution. The answer is not going to come from the law, but out of a moral response that reflects the greatness of this country.

Bruce Kleinschmidt is an attorney and advocate for diversity and inclusion.

Read or Share this story: https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2020/10/20/breonna-taylor-case-law-cant-fix-racism-we-need-listen-love/5983079002/

Follow this link:
The law can't fix racism. We need a moral response that reflects this country's greatness - Courier Journal

When Congress welcomed a record number of women in 2018, the triumph was attributed to wins in the Democratic Party. It was also a year of historic firsts for Democratic women of color.

Rep. Veronica Escobar, one of the first Latinas to represent Texas in Congress, told ABC News that 2018 was a watershed year because women know what's at stake."

The 116th class became the most diverse group of lawmakers in U.S. history and 2018 was dubbed the year of the woman.

On election day, 115 women of color will be on the ballot for House seats a record for American politics. Deborah Roberts spoke with 8 of those women across the aisle in a roundtable discussion.

2018 is the year that many, many women, and especially women of color, not only broke a ceiling [but] broke a concrete ceiling, Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, one of only two Muslim women in Congress, told ABC News. We sort of shattered the perception of what it meant to run and who in politics can be a successful candidate.

Theres people who maybe never thought they would see someone who looked like them having a seat in Congress, New Mexico Rep. Deb Haaland told "Good Morning America." I wore my native dress ... my pueblo clothing on swearing-in day. I just felt like I needed to express the honor I have for my family.

Reps. Deb Haaland, right, and Rashida Tlaib, left, are seen in the Capitol's House chamber before members were sworn in on the first day of the 116th Congress on Jan. 3, 2019 in Washington.

As of 2020, only 75 women of color have served in the U.S. House of Representatives: 71 Democrats and four Republicans. Five women of color, all Democrats, serve in the Senate.

According to Kelly Dittmar, director of research at Rutgers Universitys Center for American Women and Politics, The fact that it's 2020 and we're still celebrating those firsts [is] reflective of the progress left to make.

Escobar, Haaland and Omar said money largely keeps women of color out of politics. These three women -- all first-time candidates for Congress in 2018 who prevailed in competitive primaries -- shared lessons on what it takes to level the playing field.

Women of color are often discouraged from running for politics because they don't have war chests that rival their male counterparts.

Before she ran for Congress, Escobar had deep roots in her community, where she served as a county judge from 2011-2017.

In the 2018 primary race for Texas' 16th district -- a solidly blue, majority Hispanic urban area that includes the city of El Paso -- she was up against five other challengers. She had to raise more money than her challengers and battle a Republican super PAC that got involved in her primary.

Rep. Veronica Escobar speaks during a House Judiciary Committee markup of Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump in Washington, Dec. 12, 2019.

Someone like me, you know, I'm not connected to wealth," Escobar said. "My friends are not wealthy, my family is not wealthy, and we're a family that depended on my income. So in addition to having to raise that money, I also had to figure out how my family and I would live without my income because I had to resign my position in county government to run."

Part of what has prevented lots of women from running for Congress is that it is so incredibly expensive, she added.

Leah Wright Rigueur, a professor of U.S. history at Brandeis University, said that sexism and racism have historically shut women and women of color out of the political system. When they do run, they are often overwhelmingly outspent by white men who have access to networks and war chests of wealth and power.

One of the things that we know is that women of color are often discouraged from running for politics because they don't have war chests that rival their male counterparts, Rigueur, who studies race and politics, said.

Asked about those challenges and what helped her win, Escobar pointed to the expansive network of organizations -- largely on the Democratic side -- that are set up to boost female candidates in both networking and fundraising early on in the primaries. She named groups like Emily's List, which boosts pro-life Democratic women, Poder Pac, a group founded by Latinas to help Latinas get elected to Congress, and the Latino Victory Fund.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (3R) speaks with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (2R) as Rep. Veronica Escobar (4R) and Rep. Ayanna S. Pressley (R) look on during a hearing on "The Trump Administration's Child Separation Policy on July 12, 2019 in Washington.

What I found was, thankfully, there are groups that have been established to help women like me that were instrumental in my success, Escobar said.

Escobar said that tapping into those networks, which have been built over the past few decades, give a new generation of Democratic female candidates incredible advantages that our foremothers did not have.

Without them, it would have been a significantly more challenging race ... I've been very fortunate and very blessed, she added.

Haaland, who represents New Mexicos first congressional district, is a member of the Pueblo of Laguna. When she ran for Congress in 2018, her 2018 campaign slogan was, Congress has never heard a voice like mine.

There had never been a Native American woman in Congress, she said. I didn't have anyone in Congress -- a Native woman -- I could call to say, how did you do this? What did you do? Will you help me? It was me just feeling like, you know, I am setting a precedent here, she said.

When Haaland jumped into a crowded primary field with five other candidates, she did not have a savings account, so fundraising was a challenge from the start. And because there was another Democratic female challenger in the race, groups like Emilys List did not get involved in the primary.

Representative Veronica Escobar speaks as Representative Deb Haaland waves during an El Paso Strong Community Action event in El Paso, Texas, Aug. 7, 2019.

I didn't have a lot of support in the primary, initially. I had to work very hard and earn that support, she said.

We shouldn't say only rich folks can run ... we need people who know what it's like to struggle, she added, calling for campaign finance reform and the repeal of Citizens United -- a landmark 2010 Supreme Court decision that eliminated limits on political spending by outside groups.

Asked what helped her overcome the challenges of fundraising, Haaland cited her participation in a program at Emerge New Mexico -- a chapter of a national organization that trains Democratic women to run for office.

One of the things they taught us about fundraising [is] start with the people who love you, who care about you the most, Haaland said.

Reps. Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib and Deb Haaland take part in a panel discussion during the Netroots Nation progressive grassroots convention held in Philadelphia, July 13, 2019. The discussion touches on the changes of the face of power in the United States after a history making number of diverse members were elected into Congress.

Before running for Congress, Haaland worked on several campaigns and served as chair of the New Mexico Democratic Party. She was also the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor in 2014. She said that her network -- along with her relationships with Indian tribes -- was key in gaining the grassroots fundraising support that she needed.

After being on the ground, knocking on doors, making phone calls, volunteering for campaigns for a very long time in New Mexico, I just felt like I had a strong network, and I had as good a chance to win as anybody, she said. So I worked hard, I ran a campaign that I was proud of. And now I do have a seat at the table to stand up for those who have never had a voice.

When Omar entered a crowded primary field in 2018, facing off against five Democratic challengers, including two women, she did not have the advantage of fundraising support from various organizations.

That's something that we need to work on, something that we need to change. They tend to not get involved until ... it's almost inevitable that we are going to win, which, in my case, they endorsed me in the general election, Omar said, adding that for women of color, support during the primaries from these groups does make a big difference.

Rep. Ilhan Omar rallies with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the U.S. Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington.

Omar, who represents Minnesotas 5th district -- a majority white Democratic stronghold -- largely relied on small individual donations to fund her campaign.

Unlike Haaland and Escobar, she faced a fierce primary challenge in 2020 -- one that spotlighted the fight against big money in politics.

Omars primary opponent Antone Melton-Meaux capitalized on the several controversies that marred the congresswoman's first term.

Much of his fundraising came from large donors and pro-Israel political action committees, while the vast majority of Omar's fundraising came from small grassroots donations.

Nevertheless, Omar prevailed, winning one of the most closely-watched and most expensive primaries in Minnesota, beating Melton-Meaux by more than 29,300 votes and capturing 57.4% of the vote.

We always say, you know, organized people beat organized money, Omar said, adding that she hopes her primary win will serve as an inspiration for people to not back down, to have principles and values [that] put people over profits.

Rigueur said the successes of Democratic candidates like Omar, and to some extent, the rise of the Tea Party in 2010, showed that it is entirely possible to win through small, individual donations.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (C) joins her fellow House Democratic women for a portrait in front of the U.S. Capitol Jan. 4, 2019 in Washington.

She cautioned that while this may be an especially salient strategy for women of color, it is only a stopgap measure.

Ultimately, even if you raise millions of dollars from small donors across the country, it is no match for billions that are poured in through big-money donations big money buys elections, and it shouldn't be that way, she said.

Asked what advice she has to offer women who face fundraising challenges, Omar urged candidates to reject big money and be courageous and bold in their advocacy on behalf of their constituency.

The candidates that are relying on corporations to fund their campaigns often speak to the interests of those corporations, she said. And those of us who rely on the people to fund our campaigns have to speak for the people people are looking for someone who believes in them, [someone] that they can believe in.

'A terrible problem for democracy'

The House of Representatives passed a bill in March 2019 that would significantly overhaul the U.S. election and campaign finance system.

"We are ending the dominance of big, dark, special interest money in politics. We are ensuring clean, fair elections with Congressman John Lewis, our hero, with his Voter Empowerment Act to increase access to the ballot box," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said while introducing the "For the People Act."

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stands with all the female House Democratic members of the 116th Congress for a photo opportunity outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 4, 2019.

Among other things, the bill targets "dark money" -- political spending by nonprofit organizations that are not required to disclose their donors -- by requiring them to share that information. It also directs presidents, vice presidents and candidates in the general election to release their tax returns, which is currently not required by law.

The bill did not receive any Republican support and passed along party lines, 234-193. It has not been taken up for a vote by the GOP-controlled Senate.

In the meantime, Rigueur said big money continues to have "an outsized influence on politics" by giving an edge to the rich and powerful who seek political office.

The network of organizations that recruit and provide early support in fundraising for Democratic women in primary races has grown extensively over the past couple of decades, but Republicans remain at a disadvantage because groups that help GOP women remain few and far between.

Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) conduct a press conference at the Capitol on July 15, 2019.

Stephanie Schriock, the president of Emily's List, told "Good Morning America" that the rising cost of running for office is a "terrible problem for democracy" and a barrier that particularly impacts low-income women and women of color, who are often primary caretakers and breadwinners in the families.

"The campaign season lasts so long. These women are so often told they cannot work and if you're running for U.S. Senate, forget about it ... that's a full-time job. If you're running for the U.S. House, it's practically a full-time job," she said.

According to Schriock, the problem is even worse in legislative races because in many states legislators make very little or don't get paid a salary at all.

"If you want good leaders, you've got to give them some financial support, so they can do this to these jobs," she said. "And we will lose our best, particularly women of color, if we don't fix the structural problem inside of these government institutions."

Continued here:
On the money: How 3 women overcame a broken system and made history in Congress - ABC News

Democrats dismissed it as a fringe group of conspiracy-minded zealots. Moderate Republicans fretted over its potential to hurt their partys image, while more conservative lawmakers carefully sought to harness its grass-roots energy. Sympathetic media outlets covered its rallies, portraying it as an emerging strain of populist politics a protest movement born of frustration with a corrupt, unaccountable elite.

Then, to everyones surprise, its supporters started winning elections.

That is a description of the Tea Party movement, which emerged in 2009 from the right-wing fringes and proceeded to become a major, enduring force in American conservatism.

But it could just as easily be a description of QAnon, the pro-Trump conspiracy movement that has emerged as a possible inheritor to the Tea Partys mantle as the most potent grass-roots force in right-wing politics.

This week, QAnon most likely got its first member of Congress: Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia who won a primary runoff in a heavily Republican district on Tuesday. Ms. Greene has publicly supported QAnon, appearing on QAnon shows and espousing the movements unfounded belief that President Trump is on the verge of breaking up a shadowy cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles. Other QAnon-affiliated candidates have won primaries at the federal and state level, though few in districts as conservative as Ms. Greenes.

QAnon, which draws its beliefs from the cryptic message board posts of an anonymous writer claiming to have access to high-level government intelligence, lacks the leadership structure and the dark-money connections of the early Tea Party. It also lacks realistic goals or anything resembling a coherent policy agenda. Its followers are internet vigilantes gripped by paranoid and violent revenge fantasies, not lower-my-taxes conservatives or opponents of the Affordable Care Act.

But following Ms. Greenes primary win, some Washington insiders have begun to wonder if QAnons potential influence is being similarly underestimated. They worry that, just as the Tea Party gave cover to a racist birther movement that propelled conspiracy theories about President Barack Obama into the Republican mainstream, QAnons extreme views which have led some followers to commit serious crimes may prove difficult to contain.

Theyre delusional to dismiss it as a powerless fringe, said Steve Schmidt, a longtime G.O.P. strategist and campaign veteran who has become a Trump critic. The Republican Party is becoming the home to an amalgam of conspiracy theorists, fringe players, extremists and white nationalists that is out in the open in a startling way.

To be clear: QAnons ideas are far more extreme than the Tea Partys ever were. Tea Party supporters objected to Wall Street bailouts and the growing federal deficit; QAnon adherents believe that Hillary Clinton and George Soros are drinking the blood of innocent children. While Tea Party supporters generally sought to oust their political opponents at the ballot box, QAnon supporters cheer for top Democrats to be either imprisoned at Guantnamo Bay or rounded up and executed.

But there are more parallels than youd think, especially when it comes to how the political establishments of their times reacted to each groups rise.

When the Tea Party emerged in early 2009, many commentators mocked the idea that it could ever achieve political power, calling it a display of hysteria by frothing right-wingers. Michael R. Bloomberg, then the mayor of New York, characterized the Tea Party as a passing fad, comparing it to the burst of support for Ross Perots 1992 presidential campaign. Republican Party leaders took it more seriously, but they, too, seemed to think that they could harness its energy without indulging its more extreme elements.

Then, in January 2010, Scott Brown, a little-known Republican lawmaker from Massachusetts, won a Senate seat in a shock upset over his Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley, partly because of support from the Tea Party. And it became clear to members of both parties that they had been wrong to underestimate the Tea Partys potential.

Today, pundits tend to portray QAnon as an extreme but marginal movement a kind of John Birch Society for the 4chan age. And some polling has suggested that the movement remains broadly unpopular.

But QAnon followers have left the dark corners of the internet and established a large and growing presence on mainstream social media platforms. Twitter recently announced it was removing or limiting the visibility of more than 150,000 QAnon-related accounts, and NBC News reported this week that a Facebook internal investigation into QAnons presence on its platform found thousands of active QAnon groups and pages, with millions of followers among them.

Even after Ms. Greenes primary victory this week, few lawmakers have acknowledged QAnon directly. (One Republican lawmaker, Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, called it a fabrication that has no place in Congress on Wednesday.) But its followers have routinely used social media to push extreme views including opposition to mask-wearing, false fears about child exploitation, and the Spygate conspiracy theory into conservative media. At least one Fox News commentator has spoken approvingly of the movement. And dozens of QAnon candidates are running as anti-establishment outsiders in Republican primaries this year, just as Tea Party candidates did in the 2010 midterm elections.

The similarities between QAnon and the Tea Party arent just historical. Some of the same activists are involved in both movements, and organizations like the Tea Party Patriots have provided fodder for QAnons social media campaigns, such as a recent viral video of doctors making false claims about Covid-19.

One notable difference is that while the Tea Party gained influence during a period when Republicans were out of power, QAnon is growing during the Trump administration, with the presidents tacit blessing. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump congratulated Ms. Greene on her primary win, calling her a future Republican star. (He made no mention of the video in which she called Mr. Trump's presidency a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to take this global cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles out.)

Vanessa Williamson, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-author of The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism, said that QAnon represented, in some ways, an extension of the Tea Partys skepticism of mainstream authorities.

The movement of conspiratorial thinking to the center of the Republican Party isnt totally new, Ms. Williamson said. But the centrality of that conspiratorial thinking was something striking about the Tea Party, and its something even more striking about QAnon.

One advantage QAnon has over earlier insurgent movements is improved technology. John Birch Society members had to resort to pamphleteering and newspaper ads, and the Tea Party which kicked off with a CNBC anchors televised rant relied heavily on the existing conservative media apparatus to spread its message.

But QAnon is native to the internet, and moves at the speed of social media. Since 2017, QAnon followers have built out an impressive media ecosystem encompassing Facebook groups, YouTube channels and Discord servers. These spaces serve both as sources of news and as virtual water coolers where followers socialize, trade new theories and memes, and strategize about growing their ranks.

The other big difference, of course, is whos in the Oval Office. Mr. Trump has not directly addressed QAnon, but he has conspicuously avoided denouncing it, and has shared dozens of posts from believers on his social media accounts.

Geoffrey Kabaservice, director of political studies at the Niskanen Center, a libertarian think tank, said that while QAnon would likely not take over the Republican Party as thoroughly as the Tea Party did in 2010, it could continue growing if top Republicans were unwilling or unable to contain it.

It wont naturally be flushed out of the system, he said. The Republican Party would have to take active steps to flush it out of the system. And that likely wont happen under President Donald Trump.

Bill Kristol, the conservative commentator and critic of Mr. Trump, was more skeptical about QAnons influence on the Republican Party. He pointed out that there had always been extreme outliers in both parties of Congress whose influence tended to be diluted by more moderate voices over time.

But that was in the pre-Trump era, he admitted. Who knew what QAnon might become, with a presidential stamp of approval?

Trumps embrace is what makes this different, and more worrisome, Mr. Kristol said. If Trump is the president, and hes embracing this, are we so confident that its not the future?

Read the original here:
Think QAnon Is on the Fringe? So Was the Tea Party - The New York Times

The Bostonians roundly abused the soldiers. One was informed the crowd intended to tar and feather him. They would afterward affix his head to the highest post in town. Others were pelted with stones and dirt and pieces of brick, dragged by the hair, punched in the face, struck with bludgeons. Or so they reported. The insults flew in both directions. They returned, according to a former judge, compliments for compliments, and every blow was answered by a bruise. Townspeople were abused and assaulted, women harassed. Bloodshed ensued, as might be expected between an armed force and a people who felt they had nothing to lose other than their self-esteem, their freedom and their future.

Already the British knew the drill: A bonfire would flare; a whistle would sound. And out of nowhere 400 or 500 youngsters would materialize. On the night of March 5, 1770, they pelted soldiers with ice and oyster shells, bricks and broken glass bottles. No one thought to dance naked in the street it was winter, in Boston but they could hardly have been more provocative. Damn you, fire, fire if you dare, they taunted. Damn them, where are they, knock them down, a soldier was heard to swear.

Ultimately someone pulled a trigger. Five townspeople lay dead. Blood stained the street. A Black American was the first victim. For the most part the soldiers would be acquitted of wrongdoing. They had acted in self-defense. More important, the scuffle turned not into the Boston Riot or the Boston Uprising, but the Boston Massacre.

Several years later, after long December days of town meetings, after endless speeches and equally protracted negotiations, over a thousand colonists headed, early on a damp evening, to Griffins Wharf. Three hundred and forty-two troublesome chests of East India tea sat aboard the ships on which they had sailed from England. Hatches were opened, holds entered, chests hoisted on deck. In a few hours, every leaf of tea steeped in Boston Harbor. By 9 p.m. the town was still. Boston had not known a quieter night for some time.

No one was hurt. No gun was fired. No property other than the tea was damaged. The perpetrators cleaned up after themselves. In the aftermath, the surgical strike was referred to plainly as the destruction of the tea. To the indignant Massachusetts governor, it constituted nothing less than a high handed riot.

He had a point: There is a difference between burning a draft card or toppling a statue and tossing someone elses goods overboard. This was an assault on property rather than on a symbol. Expertly choreographed, it qualified as a blatant act of vandalism. It was difficult to dress up, though John Adams would privately declare the dumping of the tea the grandest event since the dispute with Britain had begun. He thought it sublime.

To the occupiers it proved to be a particular mortification. The king demanded an immediate prosecution. It did not seem too much to ask: After all, thousands had watched the tea rain into the water, even if only several dozen men had actually boarded the ships. No one, however, seemed to have seen a thing. In all of Boston only one witness could be found and he refused to testify unless transported out of the colony.

See the article here:
The Boston Tea Party Was More Than That. It Was a Riot. - The New York Times

The Tea Party Express just hopped on the Byron Donalds train.

The conservative group endorsed the Naples Republican days out from a hotly contested Republican primary in Floridas 19th Congressional District.

Byron Donalds is precisely the successful businessman and Tea Party leader we need in Washington fighting to drain the swamp and helping President [Donald] Trump advance his conservative agenda, said Tea Party Express Co-Founder Sal Russo.

Billed as the largest Tea Party PAC, organizers stressed a long history with Donalds.

We first met Byron when he spoke at our rally in 2014, and we were impressed by his commitment to Tea Party principles. He will be an effective and principled Congressman for Southwest Florida, Russo said.

Donalds later won election to the Florida Legislature in 2016 and was reelected in 2018. He decided this year to forgo a third term and run for the open Congressional seat.

Long tied to the conservative movement, many Florida leaders within the Tea Party Express network praised Donalds.

Ive gotten to know Byron through the Tea Party movement, which he joined in 2010, and through interaction at local Republican clubs, said Tea Party activist Michael Thompson. As a leader in East Lee County Republican circles, Ive had an opportunity to track Rep. Donalds voting record in the Florida Legislature and have no doubts that he is the proven conservative in this race. He was willing to take on leadership and stand for our Second Amendment Rights when it mattered most.

Thats a reference to Donalds vote against the Parkland bill, something hes used to set himself apart from Dane Eagle, the other state lawmaker in the race.

Republicans also took shots at liberal House members like New Yorks Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in their endorsement.

Hes a dynamic speaker and a tough debater, said Tea Party supporter Andrew Sund. He will have AOC and the squad on their heels if they are foolish enough to even think about coming after him in debate. Byron is what the party needs right now.

Go here to see the original:
Tea Party Express gets on the Byron Donalds train - Florida Politics