Mediaboss Marketing

Vulnerable incumbent Democratic senators like Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire are holding events promoting the landmark legislation they passed over the weekend. Democratic ad makers are busily preparing a barrage of commercials about it across key battlegrounds. And the White House is set to deploy Cabinet members on a nationwide sales pitch.

The sweeping legislation, covering climate change and prescription drug prices, which came together in the Senate after more than a year of painfully public fits and starts, has kicked off a frenetic 91-day sprint to sell the package by November and win over an electorate that has grown skeptical of Democratic rule.

For months, Democrats have discussed their midterm anxieties in near-apocalyptic terms, as voters threatened to take out their anger over high gas prices and soaring inflation on the party in power. But the deal on the broad new legislation, along with signs of a brewing voter revolt over abortion rights, has some Democrats experiencing a flicker of an unfamiliar feeling: hope.

This bill gives Democrats that centerpiece accomplishment, said Ali Lapp, the president of House Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC.

In interviews, Democratic strategists, advisers to President Biden, lawmakers running in competitive seats and political ad makers all expressed optimism that the legislation the Inflation Reduction Act would deliver the party a necessary and powerful tool to show they were focused on lowering costs at a time of economic hardship for many. They argued its key provisions could be quickly understood by crucial constituencies.

It is easy to talk about because it has a real impact on people every day, Jennifer OMalley Dillon, the White House deputy chief of staff, said in an interview. The measure must still pass the House and could come up for a vote there later this week. Its congressional Democrats whove gotten it done with no help from congressional Republicans.

Whether Democrats can keep the measure in the spotlight is another matter. On Monday evening, former President Donald J. Trump said the F.B.I. had searched his Palm Beach, Fla., home, a significant development that threatened to overshadow the news of the Senate deal and that gave already-energized Republicans a new cause to circle the wagons around Mr. Trump.

Still, for younger voters, who polls have shown to be cool to Mr. Biden and his party, the package contains the most sweeping efforts to address climate change in American history. For older voters, the deal includes popular measures sought for decades by Democrats to rein in the price of prescription drugs for seniors on Medicare. And for both the Democratic base and independents, the deal cuts against the Republican argument that a Democratic-controlled Washington is a morass of incompetence and gridlock unfocused on issues that affect average Americans.

Its very significant because it shows that the Democrats care about solving problems, it shows that we can get things done and I think it starts to turn around some of the talk about Biden, said Representative Dina Titus, a Nevada Democrat running in a competitive re-election race, alluding to angst about the president as his national approval rating has hovered around 40 percent.

Adding to the Democratic Partys brightening outlook were the results of the Kansas referendum on abortion rights last week, when a measure that would have removed abortion protections from the Kansas Constitution was overwhelmingly defeated. It was a stark reminder of the volatile and unpredictable political impact of the Supreme Courts overturning of Roe v. Wade.

I can kind of feel it on the streets, that theres some change in momentum, Ms. Titus said.

Indeed, in recent days, Democrats pulled ahead of Republicans for the first time this year when voters were asked which party they would prefer to control Congress the so-called generic ballot test according to polling averages maintained by the data-journalism website FiveThirtyEight.

There is no guarantee of success in selling the bill. Last year, the White House shepherded through a rare bipartisan infrastructure deal. But its passage, which drew great fanfare in Washington, did little to arrest the continual decline in Mr. Bidens approval ratings and many Americans were still unaware that the measure passed months later, polling showed.

Republicans say the new legislation could galvanize their own base against an expansive progressive wish list that has been decades in the making, just as the passage of the Affordable Care Act preceded the Republican wave of 2010.

Thats the sort of thing that could really set a spark to the powder keg in the same way that the midnight passage of Obamacare was the moment that electrified Republican voters and started to really pull independents in our direction, said Steven Law, who leads the main Republican super PAC devoted to Senate races.

Republican assaults on the legislation for bulking up the Internal Revenue Service, for creating a green energy slush fund, as Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, has called it, and for expanding spending programs despite the bills Inflation Reduction Act title have already begun.

How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.

Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who is seen as the chambers most vulnerable Republican in November, dismissed the package, which he voted against, as giving bad policies a nice name. But Mr. Johnsons likely Democratic opponent, Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes of Wisconsin, immediately signaled that he intended to make votes around the legislation an issue in the general election, focusing in particular on insulin costs.

Advisers to both Mr. Biden and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, said a significant difference between this package and the infrastructure one is that the party-line votes on this deal were ready-made for the kind of contrast messaging that campaigns thrive on. After the president signs the bill, Building Back Together, a nonprofit aligned with Mr. Biden, is planning a major television and digital ad buy in multiple battleground states.

The provision that Democrats in competitive races appear most energized about is the long-sought ability for the government to negotiate lower drug prices for Medicare recipients with the pharmaceutical industry. And Democrats said the legislation would help address the spiraling cost of living a defining issue of 2022.

We are dealing with significant economic issues that people are facing, and thats demonstrated by the legislation weve passed, said Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, who is the chairman of the Democratic Senate campaign arm. He called the measure central to Democratic messaging in the final campaign stretch, and crucial to crystallizing the choice between the parties.

The legislation is paid for, in part, through a new 15 percent minimum corporate tax for companies that report more than $1 billion in annual income to shareholders and more funds for the I.R.S. to crack down on wealthy tax evaders. Overall, budget analysts projected it would shrink the deficit even while steering nearly $400 billion in tax credits toward consumers for buying electric vehicles and for electric utilities to adopt renewable energy sources.

Some experts predict reduced energy bills, which top Democrats said they planned to pitch as another cost-cutting element.

For Democrats, the best salespeople may not be the political leaders at all. Advocacy groups for seniors, for instance, might be able to more persuasively trumpet the governments ability to negotiate reduced drug prices and the AARP New Hampshire state director joined Ms. Hassan at an event on Tuesday discussing the new efforts to lower prescription drug prices. Likewise, environmentalists who have long expressed frustration with inaction in Washington would have far greater credibility with liberal voters to declare the package a landmark achievement, even if imperfect.

While there is an inside-the-D.C.-bubble appeal to saying you did a big thing, for voters to appreciate it, you have to sell each of the things individually, said Michael Podhorzer, the former longtime political director of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.

In Georgia, Senator Raphael Warnock, one of the chambers most endangered Democrats in 2022, is able to campaign on the fact that the final package includes provisions of legislation he had pushed, such as the overall annual limit of $2,000 for prescription drugs for those on Medicare an issue he advertised on even when it was just a proposal.

In Arizona, Senator Mark Kelly and two other Western Democratic senators Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, all up for re-election in 2022 announced on Friday the last-minute addition of $4 billion in drought funding.

When it comes to legislation, Im very much of the school that if a campaign isnt or cant communicate on it on television, online, etc. then its not real, said J.B. Poersch, who leads the main Senate Democratic super PAC, which has more than $100 million in television ads reserved in the coming months.

And this package, he said, more than meets that test: lowering drug costs, capping insulin prices for Medicare recipients and protecting the subsidies in the Affordable Care Act that lower premiums all of which Republicans opposed. Thats a pretty good argument if you ask me, he said.

New polling released last week by Data for Progress, a left-of-center think tank, showed why Democrats are so eager to talk about the prescription drug piece, in particular: Allowing Medicare to lower drug prices through negotiations was wildly popular, with 85 percent support.

But the survey had warning signs for Democrats. Only 45 percent of likely voters said they believed the overall package would improve their own familys bottom line at least some or a great deal.

Some frontline Democrats on Monday were reluctant to say the political environment has shifted substantially. With the presidents approval ratings still abysmal, they implored the White House to do its part, with advertising and barnstorming to emphasize the string of recent successes, including a bipartisan bill that sought to shore up Americas competitive edge versus China in manufacturing and technology and ensuring medical care for veterans exposed to toxic burn pits.

Representative Susan Wild, a Pennsylvania Democrat running in a competitive district, praised many aspects of the legislation, especially concerning climate and some health care provisions.

But, she warned, I always think we should be cautious about over-promising.

She added, It is a really important bill, dont get me wrong. But at the same time, you always have to temper your enthusiasm with a huge dose of reality so that people dont think that next time they go fill their prescription, its going to cost less.

Jonathan Weisman contributed reporting.

Original post:
Democrats Enter the Fall Armed With Something New: Hope - The New York Times

When theyre victorious, it will have such a huge impact for so many reasons, said Maurice Mitchell, national director of the progressive Working Families Party. Every week it becomes more and more plausible that the Democrats maintain governing majorities in both houses, and might even expand the governing majority in the Senate. That will mean that we get another bite at the apple of governing. It means that we will no longer be subject to the Sinema or the Manchin veto.

Republicans, meanwhile, see the ascension of Barnes and Fetterman as an opening to pick off independent and suburban voters. During their primaries, many GOP operatives thought they were likely to be less formidable general election candidates than their more moderate opponents.

Democrats nominated the most liberal candidates they could find in states that are struggling because of Joe Biden and the Democrats agenda thats resulted in record gas prices, skyrocketing inflation, crime raging, and a border crisis, said Chris Hartline, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. We look forward to watching Mandela Barnes defend his embrace of defunding law enforcement and John Fetterman defend his support for banning fracking.

Pennsylvania is widely considered to be the best chance for Democrats to flip a seat in the evenly divided Senate, while Sen. Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, Barnes opponent, is viewed as the most vulnerable Republican incumbent in the chamber.

The fact that Democrats are rallying behind Barnes and Fetterman represents a departure from past election cycles, when they typically selected centrist candidates to be their standard bearers in battleground Senate races. That has worried some moderates in the Democratic Party who believe the candidates have baggage that could alienate swing voters.

When Barnes touted Sanders endorsement last month, Matt Bennett, a co-founder of the center-left group Third Way, tweeted, Why would you do this? WHY???

In an interview, Bennett said that Barnes is a very appealing candidate in many, many ways for both wings of the party. Hes dynamic and smart and young and he could be great. But we were nervous we are nervous that some of the things hes done and said are going to make it tough to win in a swing state like Wisconsin.

Senate candidate Mehmet Oz speaks at a rally at the Westmoreland County Fairgrounds on May 6, 2022 in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.|Jeff Swensen/Getty Images

At the beginning of the year, Bennett said he was also concerned that Fettermans progressive bona fides would hurt him in the general election. But in recent months he has been impressed as Fetterman has outpolled and outraised his Republican opponent, celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz: Fetterman offers a pretty good roadmap for Barnes, which is, after he wrapped up the nomination, he has made very clear that hes his own guy. Hes a different kind of Democrat.

The early polling in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin has excited liberals, particularly after suffering losses in several House primaries this year. A Fox News survey found Fetterman leading Oz by 11 percentage points. A Marquette Law School poll put Barnes ahead of Johnson by two points, which was within the margin of error.

Both Barnes and Fetterman are extraordinary candidates who are showing that you can be for progressive policies like Medicare for All and win in battleground states, said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a former co-chair of Sanders 2020 presidential campaign.

Republicans have argued that neither candidate was seriously tested during their primaries, and that voters are just beginning to learn about them. Ozs first TV ad in the general election tied Fetterman to Biden and Sanders and cast his record as soft on crime. The GOP has pointed to Barnes support of the Green New Deal as well as his late payment of property taxes in 2019 as vulnerabilities.

Ben Voelkel, a senior adviser to Johnsons campaign, said Barnes is campaigning on a socialists wish list of the Green New Deal, defunding the police and abolishing ICE.

Brittany Yanick, a spokesperson for Oz, said Fetterman is the most radical candidate in the country.

Democrats have likewise sought to portray Oz and Johnson as too conservative. They note that Oz, who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump in the primary, said we cannot move on from the 2020 election, and Johnson echoed Trumps false claims of voter fraud.

Its Ozs support for banning abortion that is radical here in Pennsylvania, said Fetterman spokesperson Joe Calvello. Oz aides say that their candidate opposes abortion but supports exceptions for rape, incest and to protect the life of the mother.

Lauren Chou, a spokeswoman for Barnes, said, When Ron Johnsons priorities are repealing the Affordable Care Act, slashing Social Security, and shipping American jobs overseas, the only thing he and his allies can do is make up lies about Mandela Barnes.

Barnes and Fetterman have made efforts to appeal to a broad electorate ahead of November. They have declined to make Medicare for All the centerpiece of their campaigns and distanced themselves from some progressive positions. Fetterman has even said recently that he doesnt consider himself a progressive, while Barnes has argued its not about labels.

John Fetterman campaigns for U.S. Senate at a meet and greet at Joseph A. Hardy Connellsville Airport on May 10, 2022 in Lemont Furnace, Pennsylvania.|Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

In his first run for the Senate in 2016, Fetterman backed a moratorium on new fracking. He now opposes a ban on fracking, a controversial method for extracting natural gas. Tens of thousands of Pennsylvania jobs are dependent on fracking. For his part, Barnes, who was once photographed holding an Abolish ICE T-shirt, said he does not support eliminating Immigration and Customs Enforcement or defunding police.

Barnes campaign has been careful to also point out that, along with a nod from Sanders, he has won endorsements from more establishment Democrats, such as House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn. Fettermans team has likewise noted that while he endorsed Sanders in 2016 and Sanders campaigned for him in his 2018 bid for lieutenant governor, he did not support him in the 2020 primary.

Max Berger, former director of progressive outreach for Elizabeth Warrens 2020 presidential campaign, said he doesnt mind that Fetterman and Barnes have put space between themselves and the progressive label.

Its smart for progressives to not limit themselves to being a slice of the party but to claim to speak on behalf of the party as a whole, he said. I think its one of my favorite things about both these guys is that they dont want to be small. Theyre like, I represent the entire Democratic Party.

If either is successful, Berger said he will still consider it a major victory for the left: Its a huge opportunity for progressives to show that we can be part of making sure Democrats are in the majority.

See the article here:
Democrats betting on progressives to keep control of Senate - POLITICO

OPINION:

On his third day in the White House, President Biden stopped a Trump-era plan to lower the price of insulin for low-income and uninsured Americans. It was part of the new administrations blitz to unravel anything and everything related to former President Donald Trump. That blind hatred came at a cost, though. In this case, it was a higher price for life-saving treatments paid by Americans in need.

More than a year later, the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress have still not delivered on their promise to lower insulin prices for our countrys most vulnerable. In fact, they are actively voting against Republican-led efforts to do just that.

On a sleepy Sunday morning, every single Democrat rejected a Republican amendment to provide insulin at $10 per prescription for anyone who is low-income (below 350% of the federal poverty level), including the uninsured. I voted yes because it was common sense. So did every single Senate Republican. Yet the Democrats unanimously rejected the provision.

Later that day, Democrats and their media enablers proclaimed, GOP senators blocked a $35 insulin price cap.

Republicans have just gone on the record in favor of expensive insulin, declared Sen. Ron Wyden. Those lines are factually untrue and totally misleading. Republicans blocked a Democrat counter-amendment, all right, but in doing so they ensured that insulin will become more affordable, not less.

The Democrats grand proposal was to cap the price of insulin at $35. Thats not much of a bargain its more than 300% what low-income Americans would have paid under the Republican amendment. Whats more, that arbitrary price cap would have only applied to the already insured, leaving some of the most vulnerable out in the cold. Most importantly, however, the Democrats plan would have actually made insulin more expensive in the long term.

Though still too high for many Americans, the price of insulin is falling. The annual net cost per insulin treatment decreased by 20% between 2007 and 2021. In Florida, some Medicare enrollees pay as little as $24 for a monthlong supply of the drug. Meanwhile, under private insurance, last years average insulin cost was only $23.19, more than $6 below 2018 levels.

This is happening because of economic competition. Pharmaceutical companies and insurance agencies are jockeying for the lowest price to attract more buyers. Competition will continue to lower the price of insulin as time goes on unless, that is, the federal government implements heavy-handed interventions like price controls.

If Congress mandated $35 insulin, do we really think pharmaceutical companies would keep competing for the lowest price? More likely they would play it safe and congregate around $35. That would raise insulin costs for most Americans, not lower them.

The Democrats price controls would also have stifled innovation in insulin production. In 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the development of generic insulin drugs. Over time, that will bring down the cost of insulin even further. But companies would invest less in the research and development of new drugs under price controls because there would be less incentive to innovate.

In contrast, the Republican plan would have preserved market competition while ensuring people with the greatest need get the treatment they require. That the Democrats rejected it shows they care more about maintaining support from their radical base and scoring partisan points on Twitter than helping real Americans.

If the Democrats have a serious proposal to lower drug prices, Republicans like me will come to the table. But we will not indulge in political gamesmanship or impose medicines that are worse than the disease on the American people.

Marco Rubio is an American politician and lawyer serving as the senior United States senator from Florida, a seat he has held since 2011.

See the rest here:
Democrats reject cheap insulin for the uninsured - Washington Times

Heading into November, look for Republicans to hammer Democratic Gov. Tony Evers on crime and police funding.

Indeed, they already have been.

As Republicans were still picking Tim Michels as their nominee to face Evers, the Republican Governors Association sent an email blast to Wisconsin reporters on July 29, 2022 that contained this quote from spokeswoman Maddie Anderson:

"Wisconsin families are desperate for a leader whose top priority is keeping their communities safe. Instead, Governor Tony Evers gave counties the green light to defund Wisconsin's police departments. Elections have consequences, and Evers will come to find that out very soon."

The email came after a violent week in Milwaukee left a 6-year-old girl dead.

The defund the police angle is an echo of attacks on Democrats that began after the May 2020 murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer sparked protests across the nation. Many protests called for police budgets to be dramatically cut or, in some cases, the departments eliminated and replaced.

We rated False a previous claim by Republican gubernatorial candidate Rebecca Kleefisch that Evers is "a big proponent of this defund the police movement." In fact, Evers has said slashing police budgets "goes too far" and directed $100 million in COVID relief money toward enhancing law enforcement.

So, lets look at the RGA claim that Evers gave cities and counties "the green light" to defund police departments.

A veto and a message

When asked for backup, Anderson pointed to an Aug. 6, 2021, veto by Evers of a bill that would have cut state aid to cities and counties that reduced any part of their police budgets and given that money instead to cities that didnt cut police spending.

He vetoed it on the same day he signed a separate Republican bill to set use of force standards for police departments.

In an Aug. 1, 2022 email, Anderson argued: "He vetoed a bill that would have dissuaded counties from defunding police departments. Sent a clear message to counties that there is no penalty for defunding or reallocating resources from police departments. Hence the green light."

Lets dig deeper.

First, we should note that the veto means there is something behind the claim, even if its now being misrepresented. Despite how Anderson framed it, the Evers veto leaves the status quo in place. In that respect, nothing changes. And, as we know, state aid and local governments, particularly as it relates to police spending, can get sticky.

In his veto message, Evers said he killed the bill because it placed "onerous restrictions" on the ability of local governments to set their budgets.

The bill would have reduced shared revenue payments to municipalities that decreased spending on police, fire and emergency services or reduced the number of people employed in those areas. The legislation specifically targeted municipalities employing at least 30 people in those areas and only applied to portions of the emergency service budget for hiring, training and retaining employees.

The nonpartisan Wisconsin Policy Forum issued reports in June 2020 and August 2021 on police funding trends in Wisconsin. The reports found spending on policing n Wisconsin peaked in 2013 and was trending downward well before the rise of the "defund the police" approach captured national attention.

Even as funding has fallen, spending on police remains the largest piece of municipal spending in the state. The forum concluded those declines in funding are more related to counties and municipalities struggling under state-imposed limits on how much they can collect in the property tax levy and flat state aid. Local governments have largely shielded police and fire services from budget cuts in the past decade, the report found.

Andersons argument that the veto gives a green light on cutting budgets runs counter to the governors own statements and actions.

Just days after the Floyd case, Evers specifically opposed cutting spending on law enforcement in a meeting with Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporters and editors.

In a June 4, 2020 article, Evers was quoted as saying: "We're always going to need police service" and that "to completely defund police departments ... that isn't going to work."

Later, as noted, Evers provided more than $100 million to law enforcement through federal relief funds.

Our ruling

The Republican Governors Association claimed Evers gave Wisconsin counties "the green light" to defund the police.

A spokesperson for the association pointed to a veto of a Republican bill that would penalize counties and municipalities that reduce police budgets regardless of context. So, its not like there is nothing there. But that veto simply kept the status quo it was not a proactive step by Evers to force or encourage cities and counties to cut law enforcement.

Whats more, Evers has flatly stated he does not support defunding the police, and directed $100 million in pandemic aid to law enforcement.

So, the statement "contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."

Thats what we call Mostly False.

Excerpt from:
Democrat Evers didnt give Wisconsin counties 'the green light' to defund police - PolitiFact

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Obama's former senior adviser David Axelrod said that "fear and panic" over their midterm election chances were driving Democrats to grumble about President Biden.

Axelrod told CNN's "New Day" on Friday that the complaints from within his own party were partly from Democrats in Congress worried about losing to Republicans in the upcoming elections.

"Well, fear and panic iswhat's driving it, John [Berman].People are worried about themidterm elections, much of theclamor is coming from Capitol Hill, where, you know, manymembers are up for re-electionin November.So that's part of it," he stated.

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS - OCTOBER 18: David Axelrod, former advisor to President Barack Obama, asks Democratic presidential candidate South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg questions during an event at the University of Chicago on October 18, 2019 in Chicago, Illinois. The event was hosted by the University of Chicago Institute of Politics. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

DAVID AXELROD SEES BAD NEWS FOR BIDEN: THINGS LOOK OUT OF CONTROL AND HES NOT IN COMMAND'

The senior political commentator for the network went on to defend Democrats who wanted "vigorous" action from Biden over the "shocking" Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, while also defending Biden for having a tough job to handle.

"I have great sympathy forthe people in the White House.I was in the White House duringa similarly freighted time back in2010, it is not pleasant to beon the receiving end of all of these very helpful suggestions," Axelrod said. But he claimed Democrats were faulting Biden for not being politically aggressive when he ran on an opposing platform as a candidate.

"But, when Democrats choseJoe Biden, when Joe Biden waselected, he was elected for thevery things he's beingcriticized for.He was elected because he was considered a calm, conciliatoryfigure after the tumultuous years of Donald Trump," he argued.

President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the recent mass shootings from the White House on June 02, 2022 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

DAVID AXELROD URGES BIDEN TO SHOW HUMILITY AHEAD OF SOTU ADDRESS: PROCEED WITH CAUTION IF YOU BOAST RECORD

Axelrod went on to say that Biden's "done better than his numbers reflect" and that criticism from Democrats is mostly a result of Biden not acting quickly or aggressively enough.

But Axelrod himself has contributed to the negativity coming from within the Democratic Party.

Just last week, he told CNN's Jake Tapper that the economy was making Biden look weak. Last month, he earned the ire of "The View" co-host Joy Behar for telling the Times that the president's age was a "major" stumbling block to running in 2024. In response, Behar scolded the former White House adviser to "keep his mouth shut."

President Biden announces a ban on Russian oil imports, toughening the toll on Russia's economy in retaliation for its invasion of Ukraine, Tuesday, March 8, 2022, in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

According to that Times report published in June, Democrats outside the White House are questioning if President Biden run again in the 2024 election, citing his age and ineffective leadership reasons why he shouldn't.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez drew headlines when she dodged answering whether she'd support Biden running again, during a CNN interview.

A Fox News poll in June found 57% of voters view the president negatively.

Kristine Parks is an associate editor for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to kristine.parks@fox.com.

Continue reading here:
David Axelrod tells CNN 'fear and panic' over midterms driving Democrat grumbling about Biden - Fox News