Mediaboss Marketing

The Liberal Party contains moderates like George Brandis, Christopher Pyne and Malcolm Turnbull, and conservatives such as Tony Abbott, Eric Abetz and Peter Dutton.

Do politicians read history any more? Liberal MPs who have not read Robert Menzies Afternoon Light: some memories of men and events (1967) should get it from the Parliamentary Library and read Menzies chapter on my humiliation of 1941. He writes:

There was a strong view that, having regard to our precarious parliamentary position, my unpopularity with the leading newspapers was a threat to the survival of the government. It followed that, although they had a warm appreciation of what I had done as prime minister, a change in the leadership was called for.

Menzies resigned, and Country Party leader Artie Fadden succeeded him as prime minister. Five weeks later the government fell: two previously supportive independent MPs switched their allegiance after Menzies was pushed from office. Labor was in power for the next eight years.

Key participants in the current Liberal leadership drama know a similar dynamic is at play. If Malcolm isnt PM, Shorten will be, one says. If Abbott took over, several people would retire and the government would fall.

This echoes the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd turnstile, redolent with the same animus. But with fringe right parties feasting on the margins of conservative political discontent in Australia, deeper questions are being asked about whether the Liberal Party itself is at risk.

Menzies famously welded several conservative political entities into a new one, the Liberal Party, in 1945. He then led it to victory at its second general election outing in 1949. Its lineage, Old Testament-style, is this. The Free Trade Party and the Protectionist Party of the early Federation era fused into the Commonwealth Liberal Party, which begat the Nationalist Party of Australia, which begat the United Australia Party which, with Menzies as midwife, begat the Liberal Party of Australia.

Thus party reconfigurations on the conservative side of politics in Australia, while only occurring around the edges post-second world war, were common before it and could be so again. Despite the sulphur and brimstone being whipped up by some commentators, however, this does not seem to be one such moment.

Fringe party flare-ups are common in Australian politics. Since the second world war the Democratic Labour Party (DLP), Liberal Movement, Australian Democrats, the Greens, and Pauline Hansons One Nation Party have all influenced the major parties room for policy and political manoeuvre. In this context, the latest, Cory Bernardis Australian Conservatives, is not unusual.

Nor is having to rely on minor parties or independents to form government unusual. Every federal Liberal government has been a coalition government, in league with the National Party (before the mid-1970s called the Country Party). This is despite Menzies private hatred of his coalition partner.

On the rare occasions the Liberal Party has had enough MPs to govern in its own right, it remained in coalition, mindful that forming government in more normal political times is impossible without it.

English academic David Runciman recently observed in the London Review of Books that Britain is now a 40:40:20 nation (where) deal-making is the essence of politics the 20 being MPs returned to Westminster from the Scottish National Party, the Liberal Democrats, and the Democratic Unionist Party, among others.

Since governments rarely have a majority in both houses of parliament in Australia, coalition-building and deal-making have always been everyday life in our polity. Minor parties come and go in such equations.

It is ironic that Tony Abbott, singularly incapable of acquiring and practising those skills as prime minister, should so successfully destabilise his successor Malcolm Turnbull who, with the Gonski 2.0 school funding legislation, seems finally to have worked out how to govern.

There is irony, too, in the fact that, as Liberals soul-search about whether to move further to the right, Labor strategists see the Coalitions vulnerability as not moving quickly enough to the new centre on issues like marriage equality and, especially, the environment.

Affluent, educated, urban Liberal voters children are, in increasing numbers, not reproducing their parents voting behaviour but rather going Green. Abbotts drive to double down the Liberals alignment with climate denialism could only compound this.

Christopher Pyne is as much a Liberal MP as Tony Abbott, and attempts to portray him as a pinko outlier are a travesty of conservative political history in Australia. Menzies called it the Liberal Party, not the Conservative Party, for a reason: he intended it to be a broad church of conservatives and liberals, not least because he understood how difficult it is to win office without bringing the centre along with you.

While mouthing broad church rhetoric, John Howard drove liberals out of the Liberal Party, and persecuted those, like Pyne, who survived the scouring. This shrank the liberal ballast protecting the party from an even sharper lurch rightwards.

Turnbull isnt very good. We limp towards defeat, one Liberal wanly puts it. But that could be so much better electorally than the alternative. If Abbott again becomes the public face of the Liberals, prepare for it to become a very small party indeed.

Follow this link:
Note to Liberals: on the leadership front, best to keep calm and carry on - The Conversation AU

During a Tuesday press opportunity in the Oval Office, President Trump told a reporter that she had a nice smile. As a result, liberals are calling Trump out for what they call a classic case of sexual harassment and are asking that the president be punished.

While on the phone with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, Trump told the PM that some Irish journalists were in audience and, while on the phone with the PM, called one of them over.

We have all of this beautiful Irish press, Trump told Varadkar. Referring a reporter in attendance by the name of Catriona Perry, Trump said, She has a nice smile on her face so I bet she treats you well.

Liberal womens advocacy organization, UltraViolet, took issue with the presidents sentiments and claimed that the incident was simply sexual harassment.

In a letter to White House Counsel Evan McGahn, Ultraviolet called on the Counsel to investigate the incident.

The women who work in the White House, whether on staff or as members of the press, should be able to do their jobs without the threat of harassment, UltraViolets letter read. We also hope you agree with us that no one, and especially not the President, is above the law.

The letter read:

We write to you today to urge you to investigate an incident that occurred yesterday in the Oval Office between President Donald Trump and a female reporter from RTE, Caitriona Perry, which appears to be a classic case of sexual harassment.

The incident, which has been widely shared online, happened as President Trump wasspeaking to Leo Varadkar, the Irish Taoiseach, on the phone. While speaking on the phone. President Trump said we have all of this beautiful Irish press and then singled out a female reporter in the women and commented on her nice smile.'

The letter featured a link to a video documenting the exchange, and continued:

As you may be aware, prior to being President, Mr. Trump has a long and well documented [sic] history of sexual harassment and numerous women have come forward to accuse him of sexual assault. We are particularly concerned about the incident yesterday in the Oval Office because it is eerily familiar to the behavior that President Trumpin the Access Hollywood tape that came out during the campaignhas himself stated is acceptable. In that tape, President Trump stated that when youre a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.'

The letter concluded:

Given this, we ask that you immediately and aggressively investigate this incident and hold those responsible accountable.

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus was also copied on the letter.

The journalist herself, Perry, shared a video of the incident on Twitter, calling the moment bizarre.

Liberal Twitter users gleefully took to the social media platform in order to decry Trumps latest gaffe.

See some of their reactions below.

View original post here:
See the moment that caused triggered liberals to attack Trump for Oval Office 'sexual harassment' - TheBlaze.com

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) accused Senate Democrats on Wednesday of being Russias best friend for refusing to approve a measure making technical corrections to a bill on sanctions for Russia and Iran until they get assurances that the House will pass the measure.

Senate Democrats do not trust that House Republican leaders will put the measure on the floor in its current form, according to a senior Senate Democratic aide, who explained that many of them suspect House leaders are using the procedural complaint as a delaying tactic or an excuse to alter the bill in deference to President Trump, whose administration opposes the measure.

The bill steps up sanctions against Iran for its ballistic missile tests and against various sectors of the Russian economy for Moscows aggressive moves in Ukraine and Syria, and charges that Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections. The Senate passed a version of the bill last week, 98 to 2, before House leaders complained that the bill had the potential to affect government revenue and constitutionally had to be tweaked before they could take it up.

The measure is controversial for the White House because of a provision giving Congress the right to review any attempts the president makes to change the Russia sanctions before he can go ahead restraining him, in effect, from rolling back existing sanctions against Russia.

Its in that section of the bill that the Houses technical complaint arose and although members of both parties say they have found an acceptable fix, some Democrats are still suspicious.

Corker, however, has lost his patience with Democrats.

Its a ridiculous position to take that youre not going to let our bill go to the House in an appropriate manner until you know exactly how the House is going to deal with a bill that weve passed. That is a losing strategy, he said. The added delay, Corker continued, is actually accommodating Russia.

House leaders have not offered to take up the sanctions bill without the Senate acting first, although House committee leaders have indicated they are eager to move ahead with the legislation. In an appearance on Fox News on Wednesday, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.) said: Our goal is to pass this measure as soon as possible. We need to send this message to Putin and to Russia that there will be consequences.

Not all Senate Democratic leaders seem worried that the House wont make good on its word.

Wed love to see them do it, we want to get them into a position where they can do it, said the committees ranking Democrat, Benjamin L Cardin (D-Md.), who added that there was never a request for a commitment.

Cardin speculated that the Senate could repass the new version of the sanctions bill by weeks end, cuing it up for the House to vote on the measure shortly after Congresss week-long Independence Day recess.

Read more at PowerPost

Original post:
Democrats want House guarantee on Russia sanctions; top Republican accuses them of being 'Russia's best friend' - Washington Post

And perhaps most important, Mr. Trump has rarely bothered to ask.

I am a moderate from a state Trump won, said Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who is up for re-election next year in a state where Hillary Clinton received just 38 percent of the vote. Youd think they would have called me sometime.

I am ready to work with President Trump on things like infrastructure. I happen to agree with him on the water rule, she added, referring to a regulation that Mr. Trump is seeking to roll back. These are just lower priorities for them, I guess.

Rather than trying to bring Democrats to his side, Mr. Trump has instead waged a war of Twitter insults against lawmakers who oppose his agenda. He has picked fights with allies, proposed giant budget cuts to programs dear to many in his own party and inserted himself into the health care fight in ways that hurt congressional Republicans efforts, all under the cloud of a federal investigation into possible connections to Russian meddling in the election.

All this has undermined the notion, born just six months ago, that Mr. Trumps surprising win had rewritten the political map, as Ronald Reagan did in 1980, in a way neither party could ignore. Confident that the political order is largely intact, Democrats have been emboldened to oppose his agenda, and Republicans, who adamantly refused to help Mr. Obama, are learning what turnabout feels like.

Early in new administrations, members look to work together where they can, said Scott Mulhauser, who served in senior roles for several Democrats and committees in the Senate over the past decade. There was a postelection moment where this president might have reached toward the center, delivered on priorities like infrastructure that cut across party lines and reconfigured the electoral math. Instead, he made little effort to collaborate, lurched rightward to his base while taunting the center and the left, and is now feeling the consequences. You reap the discord you sow.

Some Democrats, including Mr. Schumer, tried to appeal to Mr. Trump early on.

I told him infrastructure and tax reform should have been the first thing out of the box, said Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, whom both parties expected to be an early ally of Mr. Trump. But, Mr. Manchin said, the president chose a more partisan agenda. Someone got to him, he said.

Mr. Manchin spoke with the president early in his administration leading to speculation that he might even land a job within it but has since been largely ignored by White House officials and Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, who has mostly iced out Democrats in this Congress.

Mr. Manchin has no interest in the Senate health care bill, which would greatly cut the Medicaid program in his poor, rural state, a concern shared by his Republican counterpart from West Virginia, Shelley Moore Capito. Mr. Manchin has largely voted against Mr. Trumps agenda and nominees. (He was the one Democrat who voted to confirm Jeff Sessions as attorney general, but that was out of friendship with Mr. Sessions more than fealty to Mr. Trump.)

The country has a long history of senators from the opposite party working to help pass a new presidents agenda. Former Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, supported President George Bush on a broad trade agreement, and sided with President George W. Bush on a large tax cut and the expansion of a prescription drug benefit for older Americans, infuriating his own party.

Both Bushes were very deeply experienced, as were their cabinet officials, Mr. Baucus said in a telephone interview from Paris on Wednesday, noting that the White House had courted him on every measure he ultimately supported. Jim Baker took the cake, Mr. Baucus said, referring to George H. W. Bushs chief of staff, who called him to wheel and deal on the North American Free Trade Agreement. Donald Trump and his people have no public policy experience, and it shows.

Congressional leaders, emboldened by the total Republican control of Washington, are now pursuing a partisan agenda largely through methods that require no help from Democrats. Senate committees, where bipartisan bills have historically been forged, are not developing big bills right now, which have been left to leadership teams instead.

Mr. Baucus, who served in leadership roles on the Senate Finance Committee, met with his Republican counterpart, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, every Tuesday at 5:30 for 12 years, even if it was just to talk about our kids, Mr. Baucus said, and that helped pave the way for bipartisan legislation.

The most successful bills have historically come out of committees, because successful committee votes provide evidence of a policys ability to pass the full Senate, and pressure members of both parties to participate. I know this sounds corny, Mr. Baucus said, referring to votes for bills that cross party lines, but if you do whats right, its a terrific shield against critics.

Should the Republicans health care bill fail in the Senate, there is already nascent talk of bipartisan bills to fix the existing law.

At the same time, Democrats have sought a parallel unity, coming up with their own infrastructure and child care plans to lay down markers if the White House decides to bargain on bills that, unlike health care and the next item up, tax reform, will need 60 votes, and therefore the support of at least some Democrats, to pass.

We Democrats have set the goal posts, Mr. Schumer said. If President Trump is going to talk the talk on these issues, then we look forward to him working with us and walking the walk.

Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and in the Morning Briefing newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on June 29, 2017, on Page A15 of the New York edition with the headline: Spurned by Trump, Conciliatory Senate Democrats Take a Harder Line.

Read more here:
Senate Democrats Sought to Work With Trump. Then He Began Governing. - New York Times

As Democrats begin to rebuild in the wake of their 2016 presidential election defeat, the partys official political organ is tapping Raffi Krikorian, a former top engineer at Ubers self-driving-car program, to be its next chief technology officer.

The hire, confirmed by multiple sources on Wednesday, comes as the Democratic National Committee looks to improve its tech tools in a bid to reach more voters while preventing another major cyber breach, the likes of which by Russian-backed hackers in 2016 helped sink Hillary Clintons campaign.

Krikorian departed Uber in February; he had served as the senior director of engineering at Ubers Advanced Technologies Center in Pittsburgh. He then briefly joined New America, a nonpartisan policy think tank, as the director of engineering focused on public-interest technology. He did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment, nor did the DNC. And he previously spent five years as vice president of platform engineering at Twitter.

When he assumes his new role, though, Krikorian will face no shortage of endemic tech troubles to tackle beginning with shoring up the DNCs cyber defenses after Russian hackers targeted Democrats in 2016, stole their private emails and shared them with WikiLeaks.

The DNCs new leader, former Labor Secretary Tom Perez, has specifically said that the party needs its own in-house cyber security officer not just to help the DNC, he told Politico in January, but to support local political officials as they also try to fight off future breaches.

Beyond that campaign-changing, narrative-shaping cyber incident, many believe the DNC has fallen behind in supporting and deploying tech tools to target voters, raise money and send those supporters to the polls on Election Day.

Even Hillary Clinton has criticized the DNC for disorganization, stressing at the Code Conference in June that it was bankrupt and on the verge of insolvency when she won the partys presidential nomination.

Its data was mediocre to poor, Clinton said.

Clintons comments quickly drew sharp rebukes from DNC veterans. Many also charged that the partys next challenge is corralling and harnessing the myriad tech-focused groups that have sprung out of Silicon Valley to oppose Trump.

Update, 1:14 p.m. ET: Hours later, Kirkorian confirmed the hire.

i'm so excited for this new role as the CTO for @TheDemocrats. let's do this.

Read the original post:
Democrats have hired Raffi Krikorian, a former Uber exec, as their ... - Recode