Mediaboss Marketing

Rep. Deb Haaland has yet to be confirmed as President Joe Biden's new secretary of the interior, but already plenty of people want her old job assuming the senate gives her the OK.According to records filed with the Federal Election Commission, nine candidates eight Democrats and one Independent have indicated they are raising money to try to win her seat.Three of the candidates have reported receipts of about $333,000 combined. But the majority of these candidates will not actually appear on any ballot.Ultimately, a relatively small group of people both in the Democratic and Republican and Libertarian side are going to make the choice of who their nominee will be, KOAT political expert Brian Sanderoff said.So who is in this group?Each county's party sends people to represent them to the state central committee. They decide who gets to be put on the ballot for the special election. But it is only those members who live in the that are represented by Haaland's congressional seat who get to decide.That's as many as 200 Republicans and Democrats making the decision."Right now the primary objective is just to get the support of the central committee members of each party, Sanderoff said.That committee then decides whose name will appear on a ballot for a special election that is likely to happen a few months after Haaland is confirmed.So why are people trying to raise money now before we even know if there will be a special election?"Different candidates will use different approaches to demonstrate to the central committee members that they have the clout and strength among the party faithful to be considered for the nomination, Sanderoff said.Special elections dont happen often in the Land of Enchainment. The last time New Mexico had a special election was 24 years ago.

Rep. Deb Haaland has yet to be confirmed as President Joe Biden's new secretary of the interior, but already plenty of people want her old job assuming the senate gives her the OK.

According to records filed with the Federal Election Commission, nine candidates eight Democrats and one Independent have indicated they are raising money to try to win her seat.

Three of the candidates have reported receipts of about $333,000 combined. But the majority of these candidates will not actually appear on any ballot.

Ultimately, a relatively small group of people both in the Democratic and Republican and Libertarian side are going to make the choice of who their nominee will be, KOAT political expert Brian Sanderoff said.

So who is in this group?

Each county's party sends people to represent them to the state central committee. They decide who gets to be put on the ballot for the special election.

But it is only those members who live in the that are represented by Haaland's congressional seat who get to decide.

That's as many as 200 Republicans and Democrats making the decision.

"Right now the primary objective is just to get the support of the central committee members of each party, Sanderoff said.

That committee then decides whose name will appear on a ballot for a special election that is likely to happen a few months after Haaland is confirmed.

So why are people trying to raise money now before we even know if there will be a special election?

"Different candidates will use different approaches to demonstrate to the central committee members that they have the clout and strength among the party faithful to be considered for the nomination, Sanderoff said.

Special elections dont happen often in the Land of Enchainment. The last time New Mexico had a special election was 24 years ago.

More here:
Candidates are raising money to try to win Haaland's seat - KOAT New Mexico

Former President Donald Trump reportedly wants to form a new political party. For the first time in my sentient life, I say: Proceed, Mr. Trump. As he may or may not know, what he would almost certainly accomplish is to ensure that Democrats held the White House and the House of Representatives for as long as his party existed.

As many Americans already know, third parties dont really work in the United States. Mr. Trumps effort brings most readily to mind Theodore Roosevelts effort to re-seek the presidency in 1912, under the banner of his newly formed Progressive Party, better known to us as the Bull Moose Party. Roosevelt was furious with his protg and successor, President William Howard Taft, who had strayed from Roosevelts reform agenda. He and his people formed their party and split the Republican vote enough that the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, won the White House, with about 42 percent of the vote.

So people know they dont work, but not many people know exactly why they dont work. At bottom, it has to do with the way we elect our House of Representatives. We use a system variously called winner-take-all, single-member district or first-past-the-post. It means that states are divided into congressional districts, and each district is represented by one person.

To Americans, this seems as natural as the sun rising in the east. But other countries do things differently. According to the nonprofit group Fair Vote, 90 democratic countries use multimember districts, 54 use single-member districts like ours and 38 use a hybrid.

Maurice Duverger, a French political scientist of the mid-20th century, gave the best explanation for why this matters. In 1951, he wrote an enormous book called Political Parties, in which he surveyed political parties across the world (including those in Communist countries). Out of that work emerged Duvergers Law, which holds that single-member districts tend to produce two-party systems. Duverger wrote that of all the hypotheses in his book, this one approaches the most nearly perhaps to a true sociological law.

Lets say six candidates representing six different parties are running in a winner-take-all legislative district. Parties A, C and E are on the left, and parties B, D and F are on the right. Lets say candidates from A and B lead the way, while candidates from C and D trail somewhat, and candidates from E and F lag behind badly.

After a couple of elections in which their candidates finish dead last, the party leaders from E and F will realize they cant win. Theyll go to the party leaders of A and B and say something like: Look, we disagree on some things, but if you adopt X from our platform, well throw our support to you, because at least we have in common that we hate the other guy.

So E and F will disappear. In time, C and D will come to the same conclusion and cut the same deal. The single-member district will have winnowed six down to two. This doesnt happen in proportional representation systems, where all six parties can get seats in proportion to their share of the vote. But it does happen in winner-take-all systems like ours.

Weve had third parties over the years, and sometimes, at moments of great instability like the 1850s, fourth and fifth and sixth parties. But they dont last. The reason for that is the remorseless logic and inevitable direction of Duvergers Law. Lets say Mr. Trumps Patriot Party or whatever he calls it, since there might be legal issues with that name runs congressional candidates in certain targeted districts. And the party wins, say, 17 seats. Pretty good, for a new party.

But given that Trumpy candidates arent likely to do very well in blue or even most purple districts, the net effect is probably going to be that theyll be unseating 17 Republicans. And whats the effect of that? To ensure that the Democrats the radical left socialists! hold a House majority.

Likewise, lets imagine the Patriot Party running a presidential candidate, most likely Mr. Trump himself, while the Republicans and Democrats run their candidates. Mr. Trump will get a lot of votes. He may even beat the Republican, as indeed Roosevelt bested Taft in 1912. But he will split the center-right vote in two, while the Democrat will get a typical 48 or so percent. Result? The Democrat will carry a lot of states with a plurality and thus win the Electoral College. And in the long run, the inexorable machinery of Duvergers Law will ensure that the Patriot Party is folded back into the Republican Party.

If Mr. Trump were serious about building a third party, one real approach would be to mount a campaign to do away with single-member districts. Our method of electing Congress isnt in the Constitution. Its a matter of law. For our first five or six decades, a number of states elected all their members of Congress on an at-large basis. So Congress can change the law if it wants to but members of Congress are loath to change laws that might affect their own employment.

One should never say never on these matters. The Whigs split in the early 1850s when their internal divisions over slavery became unbridgeable, which helped lead to that decades multiparty mayhem. That mayhem led to the rise of a new two-party system and, in 1860, elected the savior of the Republic. So it has happened. Most recently, about 165 years ago. (The Bull Moose Party, by the way, fizzled out in six years.)

But Mr. Trump would basically be creating a party that would make Democratic dominance much more likely.

He probably doesnt know all this. Or maybe he does, and he still wants to do it. If the latter, it would be what the Republicans so richly deserve for embracing someone who wasnt really one of them to begin with and who practically has shaken our democracy to its core with their acquiescence.

See the rest here:
Opinion | Why a Trump Third Party Would Be a Boon for Democrats - The New York Times

WASHINGTON (NewsNation Now) House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy met late Tuesday with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as Republicans discussed how to handle a bipartisan outcry over her embrace of conspiracy theories, including suggestions that mass shootings at the nations schools were staged.

Aides to McCarthy and Greene offered no immediate comment after the two spent around 90 minutes together in his Capitol office. Their session came as the GOP faced unrest from opposing ends of the Republican spectrum over Greene and Rep. Liz Cheney, who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump.

Without action by Republicans, Democrats were threatening to force a House vote Wednesday on removing Greene, R-Ga., from her assigned committees. She had been named to the education committee, a decision that drew harsh criticism because of her suggestions that school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and Parkland, Florida, could be hoaxes.

A spokesperson for House Republican leader KevinMcCarthysaid last week that he was disturbed by Greenes comments and planned to have a conversation with her about them.

The House GOP Steering Committee, a leadership-dominated body that makes committee assignments for the party, also met late Tuesday.

On social media, Greene has also expressed racist views and supported calls for violence against Democratic politicians, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. McCarthy, R-Calif., has stopped short of criticizing the first-term congresswoman, who was dubbed a future Republican Star by Trump last summer and has remained a firm Trump supporter.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and others have boosted pressure this week on the House GOP to act.

In a statement that didnt use Greenes name, he called her loony lies a cancer on the GOP.

In addition, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., whos been trying to combat the GOPs pro-Trump wing, said he favored removing Greene from her committees, saying Republicans must take a stand to disavow her.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, a Trump critic and the GOP 2012 presidential nominee, said Tuesday that Republicans must separate ourselves from the people that are the wacky weeds.

On the GOPs furthest right wing, lawmakers were pushing to oust Cheney, a traditional conservative and daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, from her post as the No. 3 House Republican after she voted to impeach Trump last month. McConnell praised Cheney, R-Wyo., as a leader with deep convictions and courage, but House GOP lawmakers planned to meet privately Wednesday to decide her political fate.

John Fredericks, who led Trumps Virginia campaigns in 2016 and 2020, warned that there would be party primaries against Cheney defenders.

Weve got millions and millions of woke, motivated, America-first Trump voters that believe in the movement, Fredericks said. If youre going to keep Liz Cheney in leadership, theres no party.

Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., a leader of the effort to oust Cheney, says he has enough support to succeed.

Shes brought this on herself, Rosendale said. He said Cheney, who was joined by only nine other Republicans in backing impeachment, was wrong to not forewarn colleagues about her decision.

Republicans have said that GOP members would unite against a Democratic move to remove Greene from her committee assignments and that such an effort would help Greene cast herself as a victim of partisan Democrats.

As if to illustrate that point, Greene herself tweeted fundraising appeals Tuesday that said, With your support, the Democrat mob cant cancel me, beneath a picture of herself standing with Trump. She tweeted later Tuesday shed surpassed her fundraising goal and was raising it to $150,000.

They are coming after me because like President Trump, I will always defend conservative values, she said in a statement last week.

McCarthy has said he supports Cheney but also has concerns, leaving his stance on her unclear.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report

Read more:
McCarthy meets with Rep. Greene over conspiracy theories as Democrats push for committee removal - WANE

WASHINGTON (AP) The Democratic push to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour has emerged as an early flashpoint in the fight for a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package, testing President Joe Bidens ability to bridge Washingtons partisan divides as he pursues his first major legislative victory.

Biden called for a $15 hourly minimum wage during his campaign and has followed through by hitching it to a measure that, among other things, calls for $1,400 stimulus checks and $130 billion to help schools reopen. Biden argues that anyone who holds a full-time job shouldnt live in poverty, echoing progressives in the Democratic Party who are fully on board with the effort.

With the economic divide, I mean, I want to see a $15 minimum wage. It should actually be $20, said Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.

Some Republicans support exploring an increase but are uneasy with $15 an hour. They warn that such an increase could lead to job losses in an economy that has nearly 10 million fewer jobs than it did before the pandemic began. Moderates such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rep. Tom Reed of New York are urging Biden to split off the minimum wage hike from COVID-19 talks and deal with it separately.

The more you throw into this bucket of COVID relief thats not really related to the crisis, the more you risk the credibility with the American people that youre really sincere about the crisis, Reed said. Including the wage increase, Murkowski said, complicates politically an initiative that we should all be working together to address.

The resistance from moderates has left Democrats with a stark choice: Wait and build bipartisan support for an increase or move ahead with little to no GOP backing, potentially as part of a package that can pass the Senate with Vice President Kamala Harris tiebreaking vote. Democratic leaders appear to be moving toward the latter option, with no guarantee of success. Even if raising the wage can get past procedural challenges, passage will require the support from every Democrat in the 50-50 Senate, which could be a tall order.

Leading the charge is Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who unveiled $15 wage legislation this week with the backing of 37 Senate Democrats. His bill would gradually raise the wage to $15 over a period of five years. The federal minimum is $7.25 and has not been raised since 2009.

Sanders, the incoming chair of the Senate Budget Committee, said it was fine with him if Republicans were not prepared to come on board. He said the government needed to pump money into the economy to make sure people are not working on starvation wages.

Democrats are moving toward using a tool that allows certain budget-related items to bypass the Senate filibuster a hurdle requiring 60 votes and pass with a simple majority. Sanders is confident that a minimum wage increase fits within the allowed criteria for what is referred to in Washington lingo as budget reconciliation, though the Senate parliamentarian has final say on what qualifies.

As you will recall, my Republican colleagues used reconciliation to give almost $2 trillion in tax breaks to the rich and large corporations in the midst of massive income inequality. They used reconciliation to try to repeal the Affordable Care Act and throw 32 million people off the health care they had. They used reconciliation to allow for drilling in the Arctic wilderness, Sanders said. You know what? I think we can use reconciliation to protect the needs of working families.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Senate as early as next week will begin taking the first steps toward getting the COVID-19 relief bill passed through the budget reconciliation process. The goal would be passage by March.

The latest sign that a $15 minimum wage is popular with voters came in November, when more than 60% of voters in conservative-leaning Florida approved an amendment to the states Constitution that will raise the minimum wage there from $8.56 an hour to $15 an hour by 2026.

The House passed legislation to gradually increase the minimum wage in the last Congress, but it went nowhere in the GOP-controlled Senate. Opponents argue that a large increase in the minimum wage would lead many employers to cut the number of workers they have on their payrolls.

A 2019 study from the Congressional Budget Office projected that an increase to $15 an hour would boost the wages of 17 million Americans. An additional 10 million workers making more than $15 an hour would see a boost as well. However, about 1.3 million workers would lose their jobs.

Theres no question that raising the minimum wage, especially to $15, will put some small businesses out of business and will cost a lot of low-wage workers their jobs, said Neil Bradley, the chief policy officer at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Bradley said there should be a separate debate on the minimum wage, and while the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes $15 an hour, were open to a reasonable increase in the minimum wage and that ought to be a topic of discussion. But, you know, including that in the COVID package just imperils the whole thing.

Mary Kay Henry, international president of the Service Employees International Union, said that increasing the minimum wage would benefit many of the people who have been working on the front lines of the pandemic. Thats why she supports including it in the COVID-19 relief package.

Theyve been called essential, but they all believe theyve been treated as expendable or sacrificial because they dont earn enough to be able to put food on the table and keep themselves and their families safe and healthy, Henry said.

Henry says nursing home workers, janitors, security guards and home health workers are among the unions 2 million members.

The real way to appreciate this work is to raise the minimum wage to $15, she said.

Most states also have minimum wage laws. Employees generally are entitled to the higher of the two minimum wages. Currently, 29 states and Washington, D.C., have minimum wages above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

Read more:
[AP] Biden, Democrats hit gas on push for $15 minimum wage - The Associated Press

How about Ted Cruz slams Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey over censorship at Senate hearing USA TODAY

Despite repeatedcharges of anti-conservative bias from former President Donald Trump and other GOP critics, Facebook, Twitter and Googles YouTube are not slanted against right-leaning users, a new report out of New York University found.

Like previous research, False Accusation: The Unfounded Claim that Social Media Companies Censor Conservatives, concludes thatrather than censoring conservatives, social media platforms amplify their voices.

Republicans, or more broadly conservatives, have been spreading a form of disinformation on how they're treated on social media. They complain theyre censored and suppressed but, not only is there not evidence to support that, what evidence exists actually cuts in the other direction, said Paul Barrett, deputy director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights, which released the report Monday.

Conservatives Twitter purge: Trump allies and Republican lawmakers lost thousands of followers in Twitter purge after Capitol riots

Censorship or conspiracy theory?Trump supporters say Facebook and Twitter censor them but conservatives still rule social

The report lands as a unifying argument is taking shape that major forces in American society big media, big government, big business are muzzling conservatives. That argument intensified after the major social media platforms suspended Trump out of fear he would incite violence following the U.S. Capitol attack.

There is a broad campaign going on from the right to argue that theyre being silenced or cast aside, and that spirit is what is helping to feed the extremism that we are seeing in our country right now, Barrett said. We cant just allow that to be a debating point. Its not legitimate. Its not supported by the facts.

Many groups across the political spectrum feel their opinions and perspectives are under siege whensocial media platforms moderate content, researchers say, but its difficult to make the case that these platforms are biased against any one group since the platforms disclose so little about how they decide what content is allowed and what is not.

Facebook, Twitter and Googles YouTube are not slanted against right-leaning users, a new report says.(Photo: LIONEL BONAVENTURE, AFP/Getty Images)

For their part, Facebook and Twitter say their platforms strike a balance between promoting free expression and removing hate, abuse and misinformation. They acknowledge making enforcement errors but insist their policies are applied fairly to everyone.

Conservative author Denise McAllister does not see it that way. And shes called on the social media platforms to stop moderating speech altogether.

This is a platform, right? You don't need to act like mama Twitter or mama Facebook. Just let people say what they are going to say, whether its true, false, whatever, she recently told USA TODAY. You have to just trust the people as individuals and not to try to impose power because you are going to do it inconsistently.

CEO Mark Zuckerberg said last week that Facebook would no longer recommend political and civic groups to users and would downplay politics in people's News Feeds.

A recent poll shows that majorities in both parties think political censorship is likely occurring on social media, but that belief is most prevalent on the political right.

Nine in 10 Republicans and independents who lean toward the Republican Party say its at least somewhat likely that social media platforms censor political viewpoints they find objectionable, up slightly from 85% in 2018, according to an August report from the Pew Research Center.

CEO of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg appears on a monitor as he testifies remotely during a congressional hearing to discuss reforming Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act .(Photo: MICHAEL REYNOLDS, POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

The perception that social media platforms censor conservatives is regularly circulated by Fox News hosts, GOP lawmakers in congressional hearings and online pundits. That, in turn, has intensified GOP calls to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields social media companies from legal liability for what their users post and gives platforms immunity when moderating objectionable content.

Bipartisan support to restrain the vast power held by a handful of large corporations grew during the Trump administration and shows no signs of ebbing as Democrats retake the White House.

Social media platforms have been judged harshly by both parties for how they policed content over the past year, from the COVID-19 pandemic to election-related misinformation and disinformation.

Oversight board to review Trump ban: Facebook refers Donald Trump indefinite suspension after Capitol attack to oversight board which could overturn it

YouTube Trump ban:Google extends suspension of former President Trump's channel

Democrats, including Biden, say the social media platforms dont restrict or remove enough harmful content, particularly hate speech, extremism, hoaxes and falsehoods. They have called on companies to play a bigger and more responsible role in curating public debate.

Those on the right say these platforms have too much latitude to restrict and remove content and target conservatives based on their political beliefs.

Those grievances boiled over when Facebook, Twitter and YouTube suspended Trumps accounts, citing the risk that he would use his social media megaphone to incite more violence before the end of his term.

After being permanently suspended from Twitter, Trump accused the company of banning free speech in cahoots with the Democrats and Radical Left.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2021/02/01/censorship-conservatives-trump-facebook-twitter-youtube/4316155001/

Read the original post:
Do Facebook, Twitter and YouTube censor conservatives? Claims 'not supported by the facts,' new research says - USA TODAY