Mediaboss Marketing

A number of Republicans are already weighing challenges to Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Tester.

Several would-be GOP candidates turned up in Billings over the weekend, suggesting there could be a crowded Republican primary to select a Tester challenger. Montana Republican Party delegates met in Billings last Friday and Saturday to select new party leadership.

The would-be candidates include Troy Downing, of Big Sky; Scott Roy McLean, of Missoula; and Kalispell legislator Albert Olszewski; plus a couple other prospects who are sniffing around.

Yellowstone County District Judge Russell Fagg has only said hell consider a run for public office after retiring from the bench in October. Nonetheless, the former state Republican legislator took the opportunity to introduce himself to convention attendees last Friday.

Montana State Auditor Matt Rosendale kept a close eye on Senate prospects. Rosendale hasnt said whether he will run for U.S. Senate. Asked by The Gazette on May 31 if he would run for federal office, Rosendale said he would first focus on any insurance changes brought about by the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, and then decide.

Another Republican eyeing a run, Kurt Allen Cole of Troy, missed the Billings event, but told The Gazette on Friday hes exploring a candidacy.

Debra Lamm, the newly elected chairwoman of the Republican Party, said conservatives haven't been happy with several Tester votes, including his opposition to Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. Tester's support for the Iran Nuclear weapons deal also rubbed Republicans the wrong way and stirred interest in political challengers.

Downing said the success of President Donald J. Trump and Congressman-elect Greg Gianforte, neither of whom had previously been elected, is a sign that voters are looking for an outsider.

I dont care how smart you are, how good you are, how well-intentioned you are. I think after a certain period you become so institutionalized, you no longer think like a normal American, Downing said.

Not by coincidence, Downing said politicians stop thinking like the electorate after about 12 years. Testers current tenure is 11 years. Downing, who lives in Big Sky, is the head of a California-based self-storage company. He been in the Big Sky area since 1998.

Cole, a former vermiculite miner who suffers from asbestosis after his years working for W.R. Grace in Libby, said there arent enough common men in federal politics. The 64-year-old Montana native has done ranch work, milled lumber and mined coal. Friends encouraged him to turn his practical experience to the Senate.

Scott is a Hamilton attorney specializing in estate and business law. He was previously a law clerk for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he worked closely with Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch.

Olszewski was the first candidate to publicly show interest in challenging Tester. A state legislator, Olszewski is an orthopedic surgeon from Kalispell.

Interest in challenging Tester picked up after Montana Attorney General Tim Fox announced June 5 that he would not run for U.S. Senate. Fox had been considered the most likely Republican pick.

Original post:
Republicans are already lining up to challenge Tester - Billings Gazette

This weeks awkward and fawning Cabinet meeting is no surprise, given the G.O.P.s reliance on the President to distract from the Partys reactionary agenda.CreditPHOTOGRAPH BY OLIVIER DOULIERY / POOL VIA BLOOMBERG

Donald Trump is the first President in history to have a Cabinet meeting go viral. If you havent seen it yet, you must watch thevideo of Trump going around the tableon Monday morning and eliciting gushing testimonials and expressions of loyalty from his own appointees.

Mike Pence set the tone, saying, The greatest privilege of my life is to serve as Vice-President to a President who is keeping his word to the American people, assembling a team that is bringing real change, real prosperity, real strength back to our nation. Elaine Chao, the Transportation Secretary, thanked Trump for getting the country moving again.Sonny Perdue, the Agriculture Secretary, assured the President, I just back got from Mississippi: they love you there.Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury Secretary, described working for Trump as great honor. And Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, thanked the President for the opportunity and the blessing that you have given us to serve your agenda and the American people.

So it wentpart North Korean Politburo rah-rah session and part opening scene from The Godfather. A willingness to genuflect before a thin-skinned egomaniac is the price of serving inor working closely withthis Administration. But why are so many powerful people willing to pay this price?

In his remarks on Monday, Priebus, the former head of the Republican National Committee, offered a clue to the answer. Priebuss use of the word blessing rightly earnedhim some ridicule, but his assurance to Trump that the machinery of government was working to further your agenda was much more significant. Clearly, Priebus and his fellow-Republicans want Trump to believe that the agenda being advanced in Washington today is his, and for the Presidents supporters to believe this, too. But thats not necessarily accurate.

In Trumps campaign speeches, his biggest applause lines came when he promised to prevent people from Muslim countries from entering the United States, when he pledged to build a wall onthe border with Mexico, and when he advocated protectionist measures to save American jobs. Trump generated support and momentum for his campaign by offering voters an inflammatory brew of Islamophobia and economic nationalism. Today, however, this agenda is largely stalled. The courts have rejected the anti-Muslim travel ban, and Congress has rejected the wall. Meanwhile, Trump himself has embraced the Saudi Arabian monarchy, which helped popularize Islamist extremism, and has backed off from his threats to withdraw from NAFTA and impose hefty tariffs on goods from Mexico and China.

In the place of Trumpism, the Trump Administration is promoting and facilitating a much less popular agenda, which will end up hurting many Trump voters: the anti-government agenda of post-Reagan Republicanism.Controversial policies that conservatives have wanted to introduce for years are making their way through legislative and administrative processes.To be sure, the progress has been uneven, and the Trump Administration still hasnt passed a landmark piece of legislation. But look closely.

Inthe Senate, a group of Republicans isquietly working on a health-care bill that, it seems, will largely mimic the toxic American Health Care Act, which the House of Representatives passed last month. (Under the A.H.C.A., subsidies for purchasing health insurance would be reduced; premiums would go up, especially for the sick and elderly; andMedicaid would be slashed.)Just as radical as the contents of the bill is the way that it is being developed in utter secrecy. Evidently, Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, intends to keep it under wraps until a few days before he forces a floor vote, which was the same tactic that Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, used in the lower chamber. If things go according to plan, there will be no committee hearings, no input from outside groups, and no independent scoring of the bill from the Congressional Budget Office.

House Republicans, meanwhile,passed the Financial CHOICE Act, last week, which takes aim at the Dodd-Frank financial-reform act of 2010. The House bill would eliminate or weaken many elements of Dodd-Frank, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which helped uncover that Wells Fargo was ripping off many of its customers.On the campaign trail, Trump promised to crack down on Wall Street. But, after the election, he quickly abandoned that promise. On Monday, the Treasury Department issueda report on financial regulationthat endorsed loosening many of the post-financial-crisis restrictions that banks face.

Legislation is only part of the story. On the Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch is already demonstrating why the Heritage Foundation and other right-wing groups were so giddy about his nomination. And, at regulatory institutions such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, and the National Labor Relations Board, Trump has appointed, or is in the process of appointing, officials who hew to the lines laid down by conservative think tanks and their corporate donors.

About the only areas that Trump has ruled off-limits are Social Security and Medicare. And even here Republicans are exploiting his ignorance, or lack of interest, in order to make cuts. Enacting the American Health Care Act woulddeplete the Medicare Trust Fund. AndTrumps own budgetwouldcut disability-insurance benefits, which are part of the Social Security system.

Trump isnt merely enabling the Republican right; with his daily pratfalls and incendiary statements, he is also drawing attention away from the Partys policy initiatives.Imagine for a moment if a more normal Republicana Marco Rubio or a Jeb Bush or a John Kasichwere in the White House. With no James Comey, Robert Mueller, or Jeff Sessions to chew on, the news networks would surely be focussing on health-care reform and the scandalous manner in which the G.O.P. is trying toram through a piece of legislation that would affect a sixth of the American economy and cause tens of millions of Americans to lose their insurance.

Back in the nineteen-seventies, Lord Hailsham, an eminent British jurist, popularized a term for this type of behavior: elective dictatorship. He applied it to the British system, in which a government that has a healthy majority in Parliament can ride roughshod over the opposition. With Trump in the White House and the Republicans running Capitol Hill, elective dictatorship appears to have crossed the Atlantic.

Small wonder, then, that so many Republicans are willing to kiss Trumps ring. Hes given the G.O.P. what it has long wanted: a White House willing to go along with its reactionary agenda, and a President who provides it with political cover. As long as Trump sticks to his side of the deal, he can expect to receive the loyalty he so prizes.

View original post here:
Why So Many Republicans Still Grovel to Trump - The New Yorker

MSNBC

Republicans lack public support for new health care scheme MSNBC Americans' support for the ACA has never been higher, and the health care reform measure is nearly 10 percentage points more popular than Donald Trump, the Republican president desperate to destroy the law that's lowered the uninsured rate to its ... and more »

Read this article:
Republicans lack public support for new health care scheme - MSNBC

WASHINGTON Virginia Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam squares off against progressive favorite Tom Perriello on Tuesday in the states highly competitive Democratic gubernatorial primary, where the left flank of the party hopes national momentum will carry it to a win.

Thanks to Virginias status as one of two states with gubernatorial races this year (the other is New Jersey), the primary has attracted historic levels of attention and resources from Democrats eager to land a blow against President Donald Trump.

Northam, a 57-year-old pediatric neurologist, had locked up the support of virtually every major elected official in Virginia and was poised to cruise to the nomination until Perriello, a 42-year-old former diplomat and one-term congressman, announced his run in January.

Thanks to the endorsements of Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the countrys leading progressive politicians, and firm stances on several controversial issues, Perriello has excited the states younger and more liberal voters, erasing virtually all of Northams lead in the polls.

As a result, many progressives view the race as a crucial test of whether a more liberal candidate can prevail in a state where moderate Democrats have long ruled the roost.

This primary is really about what foot the Democratic Party in Virginia is going to lean on, said Quentin Kidd, a Virginia politics expert at Christopher Newport University in Newport News, Virginia. Its leaned on the right foot for a decade and a half since Mark Warner evolved this model of a Democrat who can win statewide in Virginia. If Perriello wins it means it will lean slightly to the left foot.

Kidd uses the word lean, because he doesnt think the shift would be any more dramatic than a pivot to the left.

The Washington Post/Getty Images

Nowhere is the potential shift more significant, however, than in the state governments posture toward Dominion Energy, Virginias influential power monopoly.

Perriello has refused to accept contributions from Dominion and opposes construction of the Atlantic Coastal pipeline, which the company is planning to construct across the state. Northam has declined to take a comparable stance against the natural gas pipeline, favoring tight regulation instead.

In the end, approval of the pipeline is a matter for federal regulators, but Dominion clearly views Perriellos vocal opposition as a major threat. The company has mobilized tens of thousands of its employees, retirees and shareholders to campaign in the gubernatorial primaries, using thinly veiled language that makes clear they prefer Northam.

If Northam wins tomorrow, you wont hear much about Dominion any more, because Northam wouldnt make that an issue, Kidd predicted.

When Perriello got into the race, he immediately began to nationalize the contest, claiming he was inspired to run by Trumps election and pitching himself as a bulwark against the effects of the presidents policies for Virginia.

What people want to see right now is that willingness to stand up to Trump and limit those really unconscionable and unconstitutional moves and also have a positive vision, he told HuffPost in March.

Northam emphasizes his legislative experience in Virginias capitol, but has also incorporated Trump, who he dubbed a narcissistic maniac, into his stump speeches.

Whatever you call him, were not letting him bring his hate into Virginia, Northam concludes in one of his television advertisements.

He has also gone toe to toe with Perriello on some of his bolder economic proposals, embracing the $15 minimum wage and putting forward his own free community college plan albeit one that, unlike his opponents, requires community service.

For some progressive activist supporters of Perriello, however, his early involvement in the anti-Trump resistance won them over. Perriellos presence at Dulles Airport to protest Trumps first travel ban in January and participation in subsequent rallies against the executive order made an impression on Virginia Democratic National Committee member Yasmine Taeb, who is now a vocal supporter of his.

He has been very committed to running a grassroots, bottom-to-top campaign, said Taeb, who lobbies on civil liberties issues for a Washington-based liberal nonprofit. He looks to us for guidance, not the other way around.

Taeb, like many of Perriellos most enthusiastic supporters, backed Sanders in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary.

For several reasons though, Sanders insurgent challenge to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is not an apt parallel for the Perriello-Northam matchup.

Perriello spent years ensconced in the Democratic Party firmament, including as head of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. And the bid of Sanders acolyte Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison(D-Minn.), to chair the Democratic National Committeewasactively combattedby former President Barack Obama and his aides. But Perriello has attracted the endorsements of more than 30 Obama White House veterans, including close the former presidents confidante Valerie Jarrett. (Northam appealed to former Attorney General Eric Holder to ask Obama not to intervene in the race himself, according to The New York Times.)

Perriello, a Charlottesville native, became a darling of national Democrats during his time in Congress in 2009-10 for voting enthusiastically for the stimulus package and the Affordable Care Act, in spite of his conservative district, which included a large swath of rural Southside Virginia.

Obama campaigned for him in his 2010 reelection bid, which Perriello has publicized heavily in his current campaign ads. That anger over the ACA ultimately cost Perriello his seat only improved his standing in the party.

The Washington Post/Getty Images

But Perriellos time in Congress was also marked by attempts to triangulate on hot-button social issues. He earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association during his 2010 reelection campaign and received a $6,000 donation from the influential group based in Fairfax, Virginia.

More troubling still for some progressives was Perriellos vote for the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to the ACA, which would have denied federal funding from the new law to any health insurance plans that cover abortions.

Perriello has since dubbed the NRA a nut-job extremist organization and embraced greater gun safety regulations.

He has also expressed regret for his vote for Stupak-Pitts, claiming he was honoring a promise to constituents to ensure the ACA complied with the Hyde Amendment, a law barring federal funding of abortions. Now the former congressman has embraced the complete abortion rights agenda and is proposing enshrining a womans right to an abortion in Virginias state constitution as a backstop against a Supreme Court ruling that overturns federal protections for the procedure.

But some reproductive rights activists still do not trust Perriello, claiming he has yet to be tested by a vote on the matter since his change of heart. Revelations that in 2004, Periello, a practicing Catholic, co-founded Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, a social justice group that has compared abortion to torture and war have only heightened advocates suspicions. The Perriello campaign claims he has nonetheless always been pro-abortion rights.

Northam, by contrast, has a record of only ever supporting abortion rights, and played a key role in the fight to kill the trans-vaginal ultrasound bill as a state senator in 2012. NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia cited Northams record in its statement endorsing him.

This is about trust. I know exactly who Ralph Northam is, and I know exactly what Northam will do as governor. He will not stick his fingers up in the air to see which way the political wind is blowing, said Erin Matson, a Virginia-based reproductive rights activist who supports Northam.

For Matson, the primary is a test of the Democratic Partys commitment to abortion rights at a time when top lawmakers ranging from Sanders to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have loudly proclaimed that Democrats who oppose abortion are welcome in the party.

It is really disturbing to see this play out in Virginia, where the candidate who is considered more progressive has a murky history on abortion rights and Bernie is saying it is an optional part of being progressive, Matson said.

The Washington Post/Getty Images

In a further twist of the races complicated narrative though, Northam has admitted to voting twice for former President George W. Bush, who appointed two anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court. In 2011, he also called health care a privilege. (He claims he was not following politics closely during the Bush years, and now considers health care a right.)

On other issues, like overturning Virginias status as a right-to-work state, which Perriello supports, but Northam has demurred on, the contrast between the two candidates is clearer.

One way or another, Perriellos chances of winning depend on expanding the electorate, since he enjoys the greatest advantages among young people, new voters and Democrats in Southside and Southwestern Virginia who have not voted regularly in primaries, according to Kidd of Christopher Newport University.

Northams support is concentrated in more reliable Democratic constituencies, including older Democrats and black voters, particularly in central and Southeast Virginia, Kidd added. The key battleground, he said, is in the Washington suburbs of Northern Virginia, where Perriello has been campaigning most heavily in the final weeks.

There was this pent up energy in the electorate for an alternative to Northam that Perriello tapped into. And that pent up energy has the capacity to surprise people, if the expanded electorate turns out, Kidd concluded. Thats the key.

View post:
This Virginia Democratic Primary Is A Crucial Test For The Party's Progressive Wing - HuffPost

The letter by Clive Lewis (above) and Caroline Lucas says: Support and votes were lent to Labour, but people can and will take their votes back if they dont see a new politics emerge. Photograph: Martin Pope for the Guardian

Jeremy Corbyn could have been prime minister with a landslide majority if every progressive vote had counted, according to Labours former defence spokesman Clive Lewis and the Green party co-leader, Caroline Lucas.

In a joint article for the Guardian, Lucas and Lewis, who is tipped for a return to Labours frontbench, write of their frustration that so many marginal seats went to the Conservatives in last weeks election because of wasted progressive votes.

They suggest that the result could have been radically different if Labour, the Greens and the Liberal Democrats could have agreed more electoral pacts.

If every progressive voter had placed their X tactically to defeat the Tories then Jeremy Corbyn would now be prime minister with a majority of over 100, Lewis and Lucas wrote.

They added: We felt a profound sense of frustration and dismay when Tories won by narrow margins in places such as St Ives, Richmond Park and Hastings it really could have been so different.

Analysis by Compass, the thinktank that has pushed for a progressive alliance, suggests that 62 seats could have been won from the Tories if progressives had voted for the best placed left-of-centre candidate in each one.

In the election, more than 30 Green candidates stood aside for another progressive candidate who they thought had a better chance of winning. The Liberal Democrats stood aside to allow Lucas herself to comfortably retake her Brighton Pavilion seat. The Greens had offered to stand aside for Labour candidates in 12 other seats in return for Labour standing down in the Isle of Wight, but the Labour leadership refused.

Lewis and Lucas said the short notice of the snap election meant that there was not time to form more pacts. But they suggest that the next election could be different. If we work together there is nothing progressives cant achieve, they write.

Lewis, who was talked about as a possible future Labour leader before Corbyns poll surge, claimed a year ago that the party faced an existential crisis if it failed to embrace progressive alliances with other parties. His article with Lucas stops short of that assessment. But in a message to the Labour leadership, the pair warn that progressives will desert the party if they dont see a change in the way politics is conducted.

Support and votes were lent to Labour, but people can and will take their votes back if they dont see a new politics emerge, Lewis and Lucas wrote.

They added: People in Britain have embraced a more plural and open politics and its critical that what happens next continues to build that vision and listen to their voices. To do otherwise would be both a massive disservice to democracy and to misunderstand that the Corbyn effect is just one wave in the tide of change.

The alternative, Lucas and Lewis argue, is the kind of regressive alliance being negotiated between the government and the Democratic Unionist party.

Labour alone does not have all the answers, Lewis and Lucas argue. They write: Yes, the Labour party has been the main beneficiary of the hunger for change in our country, but this doesnt mean Labour alone owns it. Politics is now so incredibly volatile and complex. If progressives want to win big, not just to peg the Tories back, or be in office for a short period to ameliorate the worst excesses of free-market economics, then we must build a permanent and vibrant progressive majority for change.

View post:
Corbyn could have been PM with 'progressive' votes Lewis and Lucas - The Guardian