Mediaboss Marketing

Former Surrey mayor Dianne Watts, the Conservative MP for South Surrey - White Rock, in the Commons. In the provincial Liberal party, the right-wing is arguing it is their turn to hold the leadership and hopes to recruit Watts. But others in the party say it is time for a leader from outside Metro Vancouver. Bernard Thibodeau House of Commons / Vancouver Sun

VICTORIA The race to succeed Christy Clark was just getting underway last week when I began hearing from Liberal party members why such and such a contender was a poor choice for the leadership.

Target: Todd Stone, the Kamloops MLA and recent minister of transportation and infrastructure.

Objection: Poor communicator. Ticked off Metro Vancouver with his clumsy handling of tolling policy and the transit referendum. And remember that brief flap in the 2013 campaign over him not displaying Christy Clark or the party name in large-enough type on his election signs?

Next up: Andrew Wilkinson, Vancouver MLA and former minister of advanced education.

Objection: Smartest guy in the room just ask him. Overbearing. Not ready for the world beyond Cambie Street, never mind upcountry.

Before the weekend was out, the dissing was in full swing among Liberals.

Jas Johal, rookie MLA from Richmond: Who does he think he is anyway? Just joined the flock and already wants to be shepherd.

Mike Bernier, Peace River. Lightweight, indecisive.

Mike de Jong, Abbotsford, ex-finance minister: Short-changed the party election platform, best-before date long gone.

Kevin Falcon, second place in last leadership: No time for Liberals to play back to the future.

Rich Coleman and George Abbott: ditto and ditto, though by the time the partys trash-talkers got around to them, theyd already taken themselves out of the running.

All in all, the first round of recriminations served to confirm an observation by B.C. journalism legend Bruce Hutchison: You can learn to dislike anyone in politics but for those feelings to develop into full-blown hatred, the person will usually be a rival for power and position within your own party.

Already, too, one can see a couple of fracture lines emerging, one factional, the other geographical.

The B.C. Liberals are one party, albeit including people with roots in the federal Conservative and Liberal parties, as well as the old B.C. Reform and Social Credit provincial parties.

Between elections, the parts work well comparatively together, particularly if the party is in power. But when the leadership is open, the components tend to come unstuck.

The leadership race in 2011 came down to a showdown between Christy Clark, whod come up through in the federal Liberal party and its old provincial counterpart,and Kevin Falcon, whose connections were all federal Conservative and provincial Socred.

Clark edged Falcon by about four percentage points in the popular vote and afterward had to work hard to staple the two halves of the coalition back together.

She did so with assistance from prominent Conservatives, including former federal cabinet ministers Stockwell Day and Jay Hill, longtime provincial Socred and federal Tory John Reynolds, and then prime minister Stephen Harper himself.

The effort helped put the party on a winning footing in the 2013 election. But with Clark now giving up the leadership after blowing the government majority in this years election, some of the Conservatives in B.C. Liberal ranks are saying it is time to put one of their own into the leadership.

Thats not the only factor with those who discount Todd Stone and Andrew Wilkinson, both of whose roots are on the Liberal side of the party equation.

But Tory proclivities do account for the push to recruit former Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, now serving as a federal Conservative MP.

Another Tory name to conjure with is retired MP and former cabinet minister James Moore, now a business consultant, policy adviser and chancellor of the University of Northern B.C. The still-youthful Moore (hes 41) quit politics in 2015 in part because of the precarious health of his infant son and for personal reasons, so may not be in a position to return to the arena.

The other potential dividing line in the Liberal leadership is urban-rural or to be more precise, candidates from Metro Vancouver versus those from the North and Interior.

Since Kelownas Bill Bennett retired as premier 30 years ago, the office has been inhabited for all but a few months by leaders whose home base was Metro Vancouver, including two former mayors of the city itself.

Another group of Liberals making the its our turn argument are from the North and Interior, where the party added to its strength in the recent election even as it lost nine seats and four cabinet ministers in and around Vancouver.

Others argue that far from going with a leader like Stone or Bernier from regions where the party is already well entrenched, Liberals should pick a candidate like Watts or Johal from a region where the party lost ground this year.

Based on the formula set out in the party constitution, the Northern and Interior ridings will have about 28 per cent of the voting strength at the convention, the Island and Coast should get 17 per cent, and the rest, about 55 per cent in total, will be allocated to the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley. In that regard at least, Metro would appear to have the edge.

But its too soon to say how all this will shake out. The two dozen or so members of the partys governing executive have yet to meet to set all the membership and voting rules and date for a convention that is expected to be held early in the new year.

Until then, speculation and recriminations will rule the day.

vpalmer@vancouversun.com

Go here to see the original:
Vaughn Palmer: Fault lines show as BC Liberals slag own potential leaders - Vancouver Sun

Photo: JGI/Tom Grill/Getty Images/Blend Images

Rapid Resist is the latest in a growing series of political mass-texting platforms.

Rapid Resist is the latest in a growing series of political mass-texting platforms.

From Rapid Resist's press deck.

From Rapid Resist's press deck.

The app's strategy.

The app's strategy.

From Rapid Resist's press deck.

From Rapid Resist's press deck.

The app functions as way to connect constituents with other constituents in Republican districts.

The app functions as way to connect constituents with other constituents in Republican districts.

Oakland app gives liberals an alternative to canvassing mass text messages

Rapid Resist is the latest in a growing series of political mass-texting platforms. The Oakland-based organization has developed a text-messaging platform for users to reach out to people in targeted Republican districts and invite them to local organizing events in their areas.

Volunteers for Rapid Resist are given a list of people to reach out to who range from registered Democrats to other volunteers already on the app. Rapid Resist also works in tandem with activist groups. At present, Rapid Resist volunteers are in contact with the organizers of West Virginia's women's march to help recruit peaceful protest volunteers (President Trump is visiting later this week).

"I found that when you want to organize someone, it helps if you're doing so as a representative of their community," Rapid Resist founder and former White House Staffer Yoni Landau said. "It helps if you're affiliated with folks who are actually rooted in their community."

Mass-texting as a political tool became popular with both the Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton campaignsand is continuing to be used in current efforts to organize.Resistbot, a messaging service launched in March, helps constituents rapidly compose succinct text messages to members of Congress. 5 calls asks people to allocate a mere five minutes a day to make five calls to local and national elected representatives.

Landau says since the organization's launch six months ago, Rapid Resist has supported 190 different actions and sent 1,456,058 text messages. They've also recruited 28,949 people total across the nation.

Landau said the choice to using a mass-texting platform came not only because of its attention-grabbing quality but also because of its great power to expand participation. The app is designed to include people of all kinds, from already politically active folk to rocket scientists who still want to help out (but may not have the time to call or knock on doors).

"You can text from the hospital. You can text if you're disabled, or elderly, or sick," Landau said. "The movement is about tolerance and inclusivity and it needs to be model that."

The peer-to-peer messages are sent through another Bay Area app called Hustle. Rapid Resist provides step-by-step instructions for using Hustle on its website, and training in various cities. On a day when cell service is a good, a Rapid Resist volunteer can send 300 texts in 10 minutes.

But are they effective?

Some say social media is wiping out the need for door-to-door and phone banking. According to TechCrunch, Hustle's research says 75 percent of millennials prefer texts to calls. In fact, less than five percent of millennials pick up calls from unknown numbers (compared to 10 percent on average for non-millennials).

Others contend that social media, including text messages, can't fully encapsulate the nuance of in-person persuasion (and oftentimes read like spam). Rapid Resist says they are aware of that challenge; while they offer scripts and and suggestions for text messages, volunteers are mostly free to improvise.

Mainly, they hope to use their coastal position to unlock into what Landau calls "untapped potential." He analogized the organization as the "immune-system of the resistance."

"On the coast, we have extra resourcesextra sort of white blood cells," Landau said. "And when there's this really critical moment where a legislator could be persuaded to stop Trump from taking away our health care or taking away our Democratic rights, we facilitate that connection."

See the rest here:
Oakland app gives liberals an alternative to canvassing mass text messages - SFGate

Then-Senate candidate and now Sen. John Kennedy speaks at a get-out-the-vote rally on December 9, 2016, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. DON EMMERT / AFP - Getty Images

"Until we can fix it, we cant let the system collapse and, I think, if you dont fund the CSRs, the system will collapse," said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La.

While the outlines of a bipartisan bill are becoming easier to spot, its still not clear the new moves will produce actual legislation. The White House is weighing its options and Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La. and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are pushing an alternate bill that would provide health care funding to states in the form of block grants.

House Speaker Paul Ryan has also indicated hes not willing to give up on health care yet and conservative groups are expected to resist any deal that further entrenches Obamacare and makes it more difficult to repeal down the line.

"I dont know how this Problem Solvers plan goes anywhere," one Republican House aide said, suggesting it was more of a messaging effort for its organizers than a viable plan.

Read the original here:
Republicans and Democrats Suddenly Want to Fix Obamacare - NBCNews.com

Democrats are calling for harsh new punishments on companies that outsource jobs and a crackdown on currency manipulation, embracing a more populist economic agenda as they seek to win back control of Congress in next year's midterm elections.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York is slated to announce the plan Wednesday morning with fellow party Rust Belt lawmakers such as Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana.

It represents the second phase of Democrats' new platform dubbed "A Better Deal" aimed squarely at the blue-collar workers that helped propel President Donald Trump to victory.

"This plan would level the playing field for American workers by ensuring our workers aren't competing in a race to the bottom on wages and labor protections," strategy documents state.

Democrats' proposals include penalizing businesses that move jobs or their headquarters out of the United States. Companies would have to pay a corporate tax rate of 35 percent on any profits held overseas before relocating. Currently, businesses are able to defer those taxes until the money is brought back to the country.

Companies would also be prevented from deducting the expense of moving those jobs. On the other hand, businesses that bring jobs back to America would receive a tax credit for 20 percent of those costs.

Government contractors would face more stringent requirements under Democrats' plan, including a public "shame list" for those that regularly send jobs overseas. In addition, the proposal would require companies that outsource to add as much as 10 percent to their estimated costs, making them less competitive.

"U.S. companies need incentives to in-source production that has already been lost and be forced to pay an exit tax when outsourcing" the documents read.

The proposal also tackles one of Trump's favorite targets: China. Democrats are calling for a new law that would allow the federal government to impose duties on countries that undervalue their currency a move essentially directed at China. Under the existing system, only the Treasury Department can designate a nation as manipulating its currency.

Schumer has long been a vocal critic of China's currency and trade policies, and Democrats have traditionally been skeptical of the benefits of globalization. But Trump appealed to working-class voters particularly in typically blue states by breaking with Republican orthodoxy and verbally pummeling America's largest trading partner.

Some of the proposals in Democrats' new platform echo not only Trump's campaign promises, but efforts already underway in his administration: renegotiate NAFTA, create a "jobs security" council and tighten rules requiring the federal government to buy American. The plan would also establish an independent trade prosecutor.

Democrats are set to announce the new trade agenda amid reports in The Wall Street Journal and Axios that the White House is readying aggressive new enforcement actions against China for intellectual property theft.

Trump has also recently stepped up his rhetoric against the country as progress appears stalled on a hundred-days plan on trade and economic issues while North Korea ramps up ballistic missile tests.

"I am very disappointed in China," Trump wrote in two tweets last week. "Our foolish past leaders have allowed them to make hundreds of billions of dollars a year in trade, yet they do NOTHING for us with North Korea, just talk. We will no longer allow this to continue. China could easily solve this problem!"

Democrats began rolling out their "Better Deal" agenda last week with vows to scrutinize big corporate mergers and bring down prescription drug prices. The platform is also expected to include proposals on the cost of higher education and infrastructure.

Link:
Democrats call for new 'outsourcing tax' - CNBC

Its true that the left will have to choose (and soon) between absolute ideological purity and the huge numbers required to seize the rudder of the nation and avert global catastrophe. But abortion is not valid fodder for such compromise, nor is racism, nor is L.G.B.T.Q. equality, nor is any issue that puts peoples fundamental humanity up for debate. Abortion is not a fringe issue. Abortion is liberty.

I hear from some people on the left that Donald Trumps victory was at least partially the fault of identity politics of feminists pushing too hard, of Black Lives Matter being too aggressive, of trans people needing to go to the bathroom as though the violent suppression of a movement points more toward its irrelevance than its necessity. What the Democrats need to do, I often hear, is to move away from issues of identity and toward purer, broader issues of economic equality.

But there is no model of economic equality that does not reckon with identity politics. There is no economic equality without the ability to terminate a pregnancy. There is no economic equality without the overthrow of white supremacy. What good is an economic opportunity if large swaths of the population cant access it? Telling minority groups that its their responsibility to sit back and wait, to subordinate their needs for the good of the party that implies that the party is not theirs as much as everyone elses. And it sounds a lot like the people were trying to defeat.

Abortion is normal. Abortion is common, necessary and happening every day across party lines, economic lines and religious lines. Abortion is also legal and, contrary to what the pundit economy would have you believe, not particularly controversial. According to the Pew Research Center, nearly 70 percent of all Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade, while 75 percent of Democrats believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases. These are not numbers that indicate controversy.

Yes, abortion does draw certain groups to the polls. Trumps success among evangelicals can almost certainly be attributed to their belief that he will appoint justices who will bring about the end of Roe v. Wade (a promise that, it seems, with the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, he intends to fulfill). But that is why Republicans vote; its not why Democrats vote.

Abortion is not controversial on the left. So what does it say that so many lefty men are willing to scrap it in an attempt to pander to some vague fantasy of a vast, disgruntled, anti-choice center? What kind of cringing, bewildered invertebrates roll over and capitulate to the losing side of a debate at a time when theyve never had more leverage? What contortionist of logic came up with the proposal that alienating 75 percent of ones constituents, and declaring half to not deserve control over their bodies, can strengthen a partys numbers? This is not broadening our coalition; its flagrantly shrinking it.

There has never been a more opportune moment for the Democratic Party to demand compromise not from the left but from the center. What are anti-choice Democrats going to do? Become Republicans? Now? Jump into the abattoir of clown meat whose top policy priority seems to be poor people deserve to die of preventable diseases?

Come on, Democrats. Be something. Unite and move left. The center will follow or lose.

The rest is here:
Of Course Abortion Should Be a Litmus Test for Democrats - New York Times