Mediaboss Marketing

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

Republicans are not in good shape for the 2018 midterm elections. The party in general is at 53 percent disapproval in the polling averages, which has been getting steadily worse since the election. Democrats should be in a strong position to make large gains in the midterms, just as they did in 2006.

But that's only assuming there are free and fair elections.

There are already signs that Republicans might try to cheat their way to victory. Exhibit A is Thursday's announcement that the White House is setting up a commission to "investigate" voter fraud in the United States one helmed by the most notorious electoral cheater in the country, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

Cheating is going to be sorely tempting, given the depth of political problems Republicans face the party disapproval rating isn't the half of it. President Trump is only slightly more popular than the party as a whole making him the least popular recently elected president in the history of polling. Only 21 percent approve of the most recent Republican health-care bill, an already paltry number that will drop precipitously if the bill passes and the reality of throwing tens of millions off their insurance sinks in. And the Comey scandal is already tainting the party yet more.

While I have no doubt that the party's base will stick with Trump to the bitter end, even if he airholes a Supreme Court justice during a State of the Union address, there aren't enough of them to win national elections.

Indeed, that's part of the reason Republicans will cheat they likely would not have won the presidency in 2016 without doing so. A non-peer reviewed estimate conducted by a Democratic-aligned organization found that voter suppression reduced voting by 200,000 in Wisconsin alone, where the margin of victory was just under 23,000. A similar study by the Government Accountability Office found voter ID laws cut turnout by over 100,000 votes in Kansas and Tennessee in 2012. Felony disenfranchisement probably won them Florida.

Now, that sort of thing isn't quite the same thing as stealing an election outright.

Electoral fraud exists on a spectrum. On one pole, you have a full-blown dictatorship, where all parties but the ruling one are banned, journalists who criticize the dictator are locked up or killed, and any elections that happen are one-choice affairs where armed secret police look over your shoulder at the voting booth. On the other, you have the scrupulous parliamentary democracy, where citizens are free to vote for any party or form new ones, all adult citizens have the right to vote, electoral mechanics are non-partisan, and there is due process, freedom of the press, assembly, and so forth.

But there are quite a lot of intermediate options in between those two extremes. For one, you can set up voting qualifications to selectively disenfranchise opposition voters. Republicans do this with felony disenfranchisement, voter ID, and other onerous regulations most of them aimed squarely at black people. For another, you can gerrymander district boundaries to make it nearly impossible for the other side to win. Republicans have done this to give themselves a roughly 7-point advantage in the House of Representatives, and to a far greater extent in state legislatures.

There is a difference between a 7-point handicap and an "election" where men with guns tell you how to vote. But gerrymandering, partisan disenfranchisement, and vote suppression are without question an attempt to overturn the will of the people by rigging the electoral system. The fact that it doesn't disenfranchise everyone only makes it somewhat less horrible.

Gerrymandering obviously has to be done by state legislatures. But Kobach is the national champion at vote suppression:

Mr. Kobach has been the driving force behind a Kansas law requiring new voters to produce a passport, a birth certificate, or naturalization papers as proof of citizenship or be denied the ability to cast ballots. He worked last year to disqualify the state and local votes of thousands of people who did not meet the criteria. He has advocated the proof-of-citizenship requirement at the federal level as well, citing rampant voter fraud without producing proof of a widespread problem. [The New York Times]

He produces no proof because there is none. Large studies not to mention an investigation by Kobach himself have found, at most, a tiny handful of cases of possible in-person voter fraud thousands or millions of votes short of actually swinging an election. You steal an election by controlling the count, or by rigging the procedures, not by getting city-sized groups of people to commit serious felonies en masse. It is absolutely beyond question that the motivation here is partisan advantage for Republicans.

Kobach will almost certainly recommend national-level measures to suppress liberal votes, and will enable state-level efforts to roll back democracy as well. Whether there are meaningful elections next year may depend on whether such measures can be stopped.

Go here to read the rest:
Are Republicans going to try to steal the 2018 election? - The Week Magazine

Image via Facebook: Nick Castanes

Students are eagerly anticipating President Trumps upcoming commencement speech at Liberty University, so local residents are stepping in to supply the vitriol.

According to the The News & Advance, members of the Seven Hills Progressive Society are planning to hold a Trumps Non-Welcoming Committee demonstration just outside one of the main entrances to the university Saturday morning for four hours leading up to the start of the commencement ceremony.

It is our goal to send the message that even in Lynchburg, Trump is not going to find a space without dissent.

Honestly, we have deep ideological differences with Donald Trump and with Liberty University to be honest, said Nick Castanes, the chairman of Seven Hills. We want to make sure there is a voice of dissent to at least send a message through the media.

[RELATED: ND students feel unsafe about Pence giving Commencement]

We stand in opposition to Donald Trumps oppressive policies and divisive rhetoric, a flyer advertising the protest proclaims.

We condemn Liberty Universitys support of his administration, it continues, ending on a note of grandiosity with a call to Join us in showing President Trump and the rest of the world that not all of Lynchburg stands for hate.

This protest is a non-violent act of civil disobedience directed toward the Trump administration, and his presence in Lynchburg, Virginia, states a Facebook page for the protest. It is our goal to send the message that even in Lynchburg, Trump is not going to find a space without dissent.

Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr., who endorsed President Trump in the primary, is excited about the address, noting that the event is a significant moment in Libertys history.

Its something not many schools can boast about, Falwell told the News & Advance earlier this week, adding that we just want to make it comfortable and for it to go as smooth as possible.

[RELATED: Only one arrest, at most, made during Berkeley riot]

Although the protesters say that they will not be disrupting the graduation in any way, shape, or form, and are simply exercising our First Amendment right to free speech, some students are still worried that their plans will disrupt the ceremony.

I'm all for people exercising their rights to free speechin fact I would normally encourage peaceful protestshowever, this is a graduation ceremony, a day where students celebrate years of hard work and special accomplishments together, and I think that the protestors should keep that in mind, graduating senior Amanda Kieffer told Campus Reform. Adding to the chaos is really more disrespectful to the graduates and their families than it is effective as a protest against Trump.

LU students have earned praise for their respectful treatment of high-profile liberal speakers in the past, including Democratic Senators Bernie Sanders and Tim Kaine.

The protesters plan on parking at the nearby Central Virginia Community Colleges lower parking lot, although CVCC Police Chief Russell Dove notes that they will have to park there as individuals, because the campus will not be offering space for people to protest.

If they park there as an individual, theyre an individual parking there, Dove stated matter-of-factly.

[RELATED: University stands by DeVos despite petition, protests]

Conversely, the Lynchburg Democratic Committee will be conducting a day of community service during the address as a way to register its disapproval without interfering with the commencement proceedings.

"We feel strongly in education and regardless of who the Commencement speaker is, going to protest a graduation simply stands against our values, explained Lynchburg Democratic Committee Vice Chair Maria Childress, who acknowledged that this is a big day for the students.

Liberty Universitys commencement regularly draws around 35,000 guests, although this year the number is expected to be much higher.

Associate Registrar for Operations Lori Baker said that she hopes things will go smoothly, but advised attendees to show up as early as 6:00 a.m., rather than waiting until 10:00 a.m. to arrive on campus.

My goal is to not only make sure that its a great program and great event but that our graduates and our guests have a great experience when they come to the stadium as well, Baker said, noting that there will be food trucks, a bathroom trailer, and even a wireless signal-booster to accommodate early birds during the hours they will spend waiting for the event to commence.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @AutumnDawnPrice

Read the original:
Local 'progressives' plan to protest Trump commencement at LU - Campus Reform

An outburst of sanity occurred Ontario, Canada: The Niagara Catholic District School Board (NCDSB) canceled performances of a play about gender identity booked in five elementary schools withstanding the inevitable accusations of transphobia that followed.

The play, Boys, Girls and Other Mythological Creatures, was produced by the St. Catharines-based Carousel Playhouse, an organization that touts its commitment to inclusive and diverse stories that contribute to a dialogue about how youth interact with their peers, their friends, their families, teachers, education system and society at large. One of their listed community partners is Pride Niagara, which identifies itself as a celebration of Niagaras sexual and gender diverse community and its supporters.

Thus it should surprise no one that the play features an eight-year-old boy who dresses as a girl and questions his gender. And given the progressive appetite for indoctrinating children, it should be even less surprising is that it was scheduled to be shown to students in the first though fourth grades.

In fact, it was shown in one Catholic grade school, and officials there came to the conclusion that the material was not age appropriate. A statement released by the district also explained the play was not originally presented as a play about gender identity.

NCDSB education director John Crocco echoed that sentiment, insisting the play was not age-appropriate for a predominantly primary audience. But he apparently felt compelled to defend the cancellations with the usual boilerplate bromides. Thus, while he explained the boards decision to defer showing the play was to afford time for further discussion and preparation with age-appropriate students and how the message links to curriculum expectations, he insisted the board was fully inclusive, accepting and supportive, and in alignment with recent changes to the Ontario Ministry of Educations health and physical education curriculum.

Its a curriculum based on the principles of inclusive education in which all students, parents, caregivers, and other members of the school community regardless of ancestry, culture, ethnicity, sex, physical or intellectual ability, race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, or other factors are welcomed, included, treated fairly, and respected. Diversity is valued, and all members of the school community feel safe, comfortable, and accepted [emphasis added].

Including gender identity means the school district taking its directives from openly-gay Premier Kathleen Wynn and her Liberal Party has completely capitulated to the LGBT communitys transgender agenda. The one where chromosomal reality is irrelevant and self-identification is the only factor determining whether one is male or female.

Furthermore, impatience is part of that agenda. As Crocco reveals, the curriculum that speaks to cultural values, beliefs, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc, isnt supposed to be imposed on students until Grade 3. Nonetheless students in Grade 1 and 2 attended the plays performance at Mary Ward Catholic Elementary School.

The subsequent cancellations have drawn the predictable fire from those who believe one either kowtows to the LGBT agenda or one is a bigot for refusing to do so. Carousel Playhouse artistic director Jessica Carmichael and playwright Mark Crawford posted open letters at the theaters website, replete with the requisite board-bashing epithets. Carmichael was concerned the cancellations may be based on misinformation, grown out of fear, intolerance, transphobia, homophobia and misogyny, while Crawford insisted he was apprehensive when the motivating factor for canceling performances of this play is a few adults' own fear, prejudice, and hatred.

Campaign Life Coalition member Clinton Somerton, a staunch opponent of the government-imposed curriculum, defended the NCDSBs decision. Pope Francis condemned attempts to indoctrinate children into gender ideology, expressing outrage over such sexual propaganda by saying Today children children! are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex. And this is terrible! Somerton explained, adding that the board was wisely following the Holy Fathers guidance by protecting its students from the psycho-sexual molestation of this theatre groups propaganda-in-a-play.

He also had some sage advice for faint-hearted people like Crocco and others, insisting they should not to be afraid of the bludgeon-words homophobe, transphobe and the like, that are too often used to intimidate decent people into silence and acquiescence to the mental and spiritual molestation of their children. On the contrary, he wrote, "NCDSB needs to be bold and outspoken in its commitment to protecting children, and in calling out these pan-sexual ideologues as child abusers.

By contrast Carmichael, who insists the board knew what the play is about, also insisted the Liberal Partys curriculum begins in Grade 1, and that gender nonconformity and gender fluidity are parts of it.

She further asserts Catholic schools cannot resist it. They are publicly funded, they cant just make their own decisions, otherwise they shouldnt be taking public funding, because this is mandated across the board, she declared. Its something they have to uphold in their schools; they cant pick and choose how they are going to do that.

Tanya Granic Allen, executive director of the Ontario-based parents' rights group Parents As First Educator, wasnt buying it. Its appalling for any school board, let alone a Catholic one, to use a cutesy play to force gender ideology, and whatever the latest social fad is, on kids who are nowhere near equipped to process this information, she stated.

Unfortunately, indoctrinating children too young to think for themselves is the agenda. One that begs an essential question: How can the LGBT agenda simply be imposed on entire school systems, turning them into what Fox News columnist Todd Starnes refers to as playgrounds for the gender and sex revolutionaries?

Playgrounds is a very apropos description of an agenda where puberty blockers for boys as young as 12 and girls as young as 10 are recommended by Boston Childrens Hospital endocrinologist Norman Spack despite extensive data collated by Dr. James Cantor revealing 60-90% of trans-kids change their minds upon entering adulthood. Administering life-altering hormones to children, knowing a substantial to vast majority will no longer need them, reeks of medical malpractice. And the reality that 41% of transgender individuals attempt suicide at some point in their lives, compared to only 4.6% of the general public, suggests a large degree of mental instability among transgender individuals.

Yet schools should be normalizing transgenderism in the minds of children?

Abiding the LGBT agenda and the authoritarian way it is imposed can only happen when parents would rather surrender their own children to a politically correct worldview than defend traditional family values.

Values for which no apology whatsoever is necessary.

It is our collective failure to resist the sexual militants that has allowed the situation to deteriorate to the point where such groups can virtually demand access to little children while fearful adults stand gaping and blinking helplessly, Carmichael warns.

Schools should not be repositories for un-rebuttable progressive ideology, which is every bit as faith-based and proselytizing as any religion. Should it thus require the same court-mandated religious restrictions with regard to schools? When a school nurse cant give an aspirin to a minor without parental permission but can direct that same child to an abortion clinic without parental knowledge perhaps its an idea that needs exploring.

See the original post:
Culture, Science & Faith Leave the Kids Alone, Progressives - Patriot Post

A Theresa May election victory would be a disaster for Britain. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

The election of Emmanuel Macron was met with relief by liberals and progressives across Britain. Not that they were necessarily in love with all the ex-bankers policies, but it meant that at least France, and Europe, was saved from a hard rightwinger whose election would have sowed division and inflamed tensions.

Given such a stark choice, the idea that some on the French left could have abstained or spoiled their ballot papers was, on this side of the channel, met with some bafflement.

So why do so many of these same liberal or progressive voters not use the same logic when considering their own vote in the forthcoming UK election?

With every passing day its clear we are facing a huge choice on 8 June. Theresa May has channelled her inner Dalek for the past three weeks; strong and stable; strengthen my hand; coalition of chaos. Shes maxed-out on the idea that this election is all about competence, and has virtually nothing to say on how shed actually run the country, or deal with the contradictions brought about by Brexit: access to the single market, the damage to the economy, the Irish border.

In these past few days, though, weve been starting to learn what shed do. Its a powerful reminder why a May election victory would be a disaster for Britain, even if she is obviously not as extreme as Marine Le Pen. She wants to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands, even though this would mean cutting off the supply of labour that has helped Britain recover from years of austerity. Where would the nurses, care workers, builders and high-skilled employees come from or the overseas students who bring in so much revenue?

Amid all the crises Britain will face over the next few years, May thinks its time to promise a vote on foxhunting. She wants more grammar schools even though its clear to anyone who considers the evidence that this does nothing for social mobility. The only liberal policy May has on energy pricing is one she nicked from Labour and was trashing only two years ago.

The prime minister says only she can get a good deal from Europe, but shes been making enemies across the Channel. Her scurrilous accusation that the EU is interfering in a British election will win her no friends, and no concessions, in Brussels. She may talk tough, and think it plays well in the UK to be a bloody difficult woman, but in Europe, where it really counts, she has set back Britains cause and could end up with no deal at all.

So why are so many progressives so keen to help her by instead of focusing on all the negatives of a future May government, directing their anger at Jeremy Corbyn?

Yes, hes flawed too; hes not a great performer, and so far the signs of him rescuing the party are patchy, to say the least. But on 8 June we have a simple choice. Itll be either Labour or Conservative. And in terms of policy theres only one of these two parties that any liberal or progressive could want running the country. The party of the rich, of the bankers, of austerity for the many and tax breaks for the few? Really? The party that leaves the NHS on its knees, cuts back on schools and access to universities, bashes the working poor and people with disabilities, demonises the jobless, and fuels fears about migrants?

And all of this in lockstep with its cheerleaders at the Daily Mail, which sees the party as a partner for its vile agenda of scapegoating minorities and taking Britain back to the 1950s.

Forget Corbyns personality and his problems of cut-through. What is it about his policy proposals that progressives can dislike especially now we have the leaked manifesto, with its pledges on rail nationalisation, workers rights and education? Many might prefer a Labour pledge to stay in Europe, but that would be electoral suicide given last years referendum result and where the partys working-class base is right now.

The Liberal Democrats would reverse Brexit which I would love too but a vote for this party, which made no progress in last weeks local elections, would in effect be wasted. The party will have a maximum of 40 MPs after the election (and even that seems unlikely) and will in no way be able to keep a Conservative prime minister in check.

On tax, Labour will not touch the 95% of the workforce earning below 80,000. But by taking money from those high earners, and corporations too, it will give a cash injection to schools and the NHS. It will also build a million new homes, introduce a real living wage, and protect pensioners (most of whom are living on the breadline rather than living in mansions, as the popular stereotype would have you believe). I could go on.

The next four weeks will determine who runs the country for the next five years. We all know its very likely to be Theresa May, but theres still a lot to play for no one can tell how big her majority might be. If its under 40 then an opposition can hold her to account and put pressure to get the worst aspects of her agenda off the statute books.

But if progressives sit on their hands, and spend the next month whingeing about why they want another Labour leader, May could end up with a landslide and her nasty, divisive politics will be embedded into our way of life. No, shes not Le Pen, but five years is a very long time; imagine spending that period having to listen to endless stories of public services being slashed, of the growing numbers on low wages and zero-hours work, of Britains isolation from our closest neighbours, seeing more of May cosying up to Donald Trump (that state visit is still planned for the autumn).

It boils down to what kind of future you want to see for your country. If you think itll be a tough choice on 8 June then just think of France. Really, in truth, its all very simple.

Read this article:
Why Corbyn-bashing liberals must vote Labour on 8 June - The Guardian

Liberal groups reacted with anger to President Trump's choice of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to be a member of a presidential advisory commission on election integrity.

Kobach has been the leading advocate in the conservative movement for tougher laws to combat voter faud, including voter ID laws. He has reportedly been the source of Trump's claim that there was widespread fraud in the 2016 election, an assertion that the administration has not been able to prove.

Kobach has not officially been nominated to the commission by the White House, but Kobach's office tweeted Thursday that he would be co-chairman of the commission. Vice President Mike Pence will be the chairman. The executive order creating the commission was signed Thursday.

"We need to #StopVoterFraud and ensure the integrity of our election system," Kobach tweeted Thursday.

Kobach has used his Kansas office to make the case that fraud does occur but is usually overlooked by a legal system that doesn't police it properly. His office was given invetigatory powers by his state and has convicted nine people of voter fraud, including one non-citizen.

Civil rights groups have long contended that that there is no proof that widespread fraud occurs and that voter ID laws serve only to discourage minorities from voting. "We are deeply troubled by the inclusion of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach as vice-chair of the commission. His discriminatory and regressive views on voting rights are well known and render him too biased to neutrally assess voting issues. While the commission may include Democrats and Republicans, it completely lacks the bipartisan credibility of past commissions," said the Leadership Council on Civil Rights, a coalition group.

The National Council of La Raza echoed the sentiment. "Today's appointment of Kris Kobach to head the Presidential Commission on Election Integrity is the equivalent of the fox guarding the hen house. Kobach has a long and undistinguished record of disenfranchising eligible voters, particularly minorities, in the name of preventing voter fraud, which every available research shows is virtually nonexistent."

Continued here:
Liberals angered by Trump pick of Kobach for election commission - Washington Examiner