Mediaboss Marketing

This version of patriotism links criticism of our countrys failings with a commitment to changing them. It cleaves to principles of freedom and equality because they are right, and also because they are ours, they are us. It addresses Americas worst aspects, not as enemies to be eliminated (as in our many domestic wars on this or that) but as we would approach a friend or family member who had lost their way. In this spirit, even the harshest reproach, the most relentless list of wrongs, comes with a commitment to repair and heal, to build a more just and decent country. It also entails a practical faith: As long as change might be possible, we owe it to one another to try.

These may sound like the gentle tones of a more nave time. Dont we know more now than earlier generations did about the cruelty and complexity of history, the intensity of white supremacy in the early Republic, the constitutional compromises with slavery? Havent we outgrown complacent patriotism? But this is wrong and, really, embarrassingly parochial. We do not know more about American injustice than King, or, for that matter, Johnson, the son of bigoted East Texas who became a complex but effective civil rights champion. There was nothing complacent in their patriotism.

They insisted that every American ought to shoulder some of the responsibility for their countrys crimes and failings, whether or not they had personally benefited or suffered from them. And, for Johnson and King, everyone deserved to take some pride in American progress toward justice. Patriotism was a practical task: to appreciate and preserve what is good, work to change what is bad, and remember that part of what is good in a country is that citizens can change it. Patriotic effort came with no guarantee of success, but it was an obligation nevertheless a duty akin to what the philosopher William James once called the moral equivalent of war.

Today, America faces threats to national well-being and even survival: climate change, racial inequity, oligarchy, the economic collapse of whole regions. But the enemy is not an invader: These slow-moving crises pit us against one another. Spewing our carbon, living in our economically and ideologically segregated neighborhoods and regions, trading accusations of bigotry and bad faith, we are one anothers problems. In these conditions, it is hard to find threads of commonality. At some point, a liberal gets tired of saying, We are better than this, when we seem resolutely not to be.

But there is something beyond both one last We are better than this and your preferred update of Garrisons a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell. Progressive patriotism justifies risks and sacrifices to try to create a country that deserves them. Loyalty to the country, in this light, means faith that you and other citizens can still build better ways of living together.

Progressive frustrations such as climate inaction, gun proliferation and the erosion of reproductive freedom are rooted in ways our political system stops majority opinion from ruling through the Senate, the Electoral College, and the Supreme Court, for starters. Earlier political transformation, such as the New Deal and the civil rights movement, had to shift political power and make the country more democratic in order to make it better. Because democracy is power, and power is scary and dangerous, political trust and a generous vision of the country are especially important in making a country more democratic.

Here is the original post:
Opinion | Democrats Need Patriotism Now More Than Ever - The New York Times

What a difference a year makes.

President Biden strutted into the Fourth of July a year ago on solid political footing, declaring the nations independence from the coronavirus.

Twelve months later, Mr. Biden is stumbling into the fireworks and festivities battered and bruised and struggling to convince voters he can right the ship.

Larry Jacobs, a political science professor at the University of Minnesota, said the change in the political landscape over the last year is night and day.

Optimism among Democrats took a hit by the failure to pass the Build Back Better agenda and the subsequent Democratic fighting, Mr. Jacobs said. The situation has only gotten worse for Dems inflation haunts all Americans and will likely go up in the coming months.

Inflation climbed to a 40-year high last month. The stock market and 401(k) retirement accounts have been in a tailspin, and the cost of gas and groceries has soared.

SEE ALSO: Independence Day on track to be a conservative holiday, experts say

The rate of people dying from COVID-19 has slowed, though the death toll surpassed 1 million in May and continues to climb.

Russias war with Ukraine has made things worse, adding to disruptions in the supply chain brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.

It is creating a hairy political environment for Democrats four months out from the midterm elections where they are defending their fragile House and Senate majorities.

Kevin Sheridan, a GOP strategist, said things started going bad for Mr. Biden after the chaotic pullout of military troops from Afghanistan, which drew condemnation from across the political spectrum, and led his approval rating to slip and stay below 50%.

Hes never going to recover from that disgraceful exit, Mr. Sheridan said.

Since last July, gas prices have jumped from $3.13 a gallon to $4.868 this week, according to AAA. Inflation, meanwhile, has jumped from 5.4% to 8.6% and Republicans have been happy to complain about the baby formula and tampon shortages.

SEE ALSO: Supply chain problems, wildfires dent Fourth of July fireworks after two years of pandemic slumps

Every single policy Biden and Democrats have accomplished has made Americans daily lives worse, not better, and thats why voters are going to fire them into the sun in November, Mr. Sheridan said.

Democrats hoped things would start to turn around in the fall after Mr. Biden signed the $1 trillion infrastructure bill into law, delivering on a campaign promise.

But the momentum from the bipartisan agreement was not enough to unlock enough support for Mr. Bidens $1.75 trillion social safety bill dubbed the Build Back Better plan.

The failure further frustrated liberals, whove been lukewarm on Mr. Biden from the beginning.

Democrats say Republicans are the real problem.

After opposing job-creating infrastructure investments and much-needed pandemic assistance, voting to overturn election results because they didnt like the outcome, and pushing a nationwide abortion ban, House Republicans have given voters zero reason to trust them with control of Congress, said Helen Kalla, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

History shows the presidents party often loses seats in the midterm elections, and the magnitude of the losses is directly tied to the political climate and the seats that are in play.

Out of the 40 midterm elections since the Civil War, the presidents party has lost ground in the House in 37 of them.

In a recent analysis, Kyle Kondik, of the University of Virginias Center for Politics, said the presidents and their parties in the three other races benefited from some sort of extraordinary occurrence.

President Franklin Roosevelt and Democrats bucked the trend in the 1934 midterms after passing the New Deal during the Great Depression. President Bill Clinton and Democrats made gains in 1998 thanks to a strong economy, and in 2002 President George W. Bushs popularity soared after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Democrats are praying the Supreme Courts recent ruling overturning Roe v. Wade could be that sort of seismic event.

Mr. Biden ratcheted up things this week after he called for a filibuster carveout to protect abortion rights, pressuring Senate Democrats to codify Roe into federal law.

Mr. Kondik said the question is whether the abortion issue is enough to overcome the fact that Mr. Biden is unpopular, and voters dont trust him on the issues they care about most a list that includes inflation, the economy and crime.

The Real Clear Politics average of polls shows, by a 38% to 57% margin, most voters disapprove of the job Mr. Biden has done as president. It marks a major drop from a year ago when more than 51% approved and 41% disapproved.

Those numbers are worse than Donald Trumps at a comparable time in his presidency, Mr. Kondik said.

The drop in support includes Democrats, and spills over into his handling of most issues.

Republicans are predicting victory in November.

Democrats agenda of failure has left Americans worse off in every aspect and thats why Nancy Pelosi will be fired in four months, said Michael McAdams, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Continue reading here:
A tale of two July Fourths: No fireworks for Democrats this year - Washington Times

Abortion rights demonstrator Elizabeth White leads a chant in response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022. Brandon Bell/Getty Images hide caption

Abortion rights demonstrator Elizabeth White leads a chant in response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022.

The rage among pro-abortion-rights protesters in front of the Supreme Court over the weekend was palpable. Plenty of that anger was aimed at the high court, but there was also quite a bit reserved for Democrats.

"I'm not hopeful at this point that this is something that will be federally protected. I have as little faith in Democrats at this point as I did in Republicans," Carolyn Yunker said Saturday. She traveled down to the court from her home in D.C.'s Maryland suburbs.

"Democrats have used this for 50 years to fundraise. They had opportunities to codify Roe," she said. "They chose not to because being the pro-choice candidate in an election helps you raise money. And frankly, I'm pretty disgusted with a lot of our representatives right now."

Since the May leak of Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, Democrats' main message to their voters has been that abortion is on the ballot in November. But many who support abortion rights have been voting, and, like Yunker, they're frustrated that electing Democrats hasn't produced more results.

In the fall, House Democrats did pass a bill that would have made Roe's protections federal law. But it failed in the Senate in May, where it would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

Some abortion rights supporters want the Senate to blow up the filibuster, but Democrats haven't unified behind that idea, and President Joe Biden hasn't pushed for it. He has also resisted calls to expand the court.

Biden is the leader of the party that supports abortion rights, but since the ruling, his visibility as part of the response has been limited. Immediately after the ruling, he gave a statement, but the White House also canceled the daily press briefing, and he left for a major summit in Europe.

His fellow Democrats are not satisfied. Over the weekend, 34 senators urged Biden in a letter to lead a national response.

A White House official emphasized that the administration will support medication abortion and cited dozens of discussions with abortion-rights stakeholders. The White House also says policy action is coming this week.

Meanwhile, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday afternoon that House Democrats are exploring legislation to protect data on period-tracking apps and protect the right to travel between states. She also said the House may again vote on legislation to codify Roe.

Long-term change, however, will be the result of more voting. That means winning over new voters like 19-year-old Pryia Thompson, who went to the Supreme Court on Saturday with her grandmother. As a new voter who supports abortion rights, she's feeling ambivalent about her vote.

"Honestly, I'm just getting started, and all of this is happening, so it's hard to make decisions and know who to vote for, who's really for us," she said.

For years now, the overwhelming majority of Democratic candidates have been running as supporters of abortion rights. With Roe overturned, Democratic candidates like Sarah Godlewski, running for Senate in Wisconsin, will be working to have a stronger message to tell voters that they truly will prioritize protecting abortion rights if elected.

"This is one of the reasons why I stepped up to run for the U.S. Senate, was that I was getting sick of reproductive freedom being treated like some sort of extra credit project," she said.

While this anger is prominent in the abortion rights movement, there's also an acknowledgement that some supporters grew complacent during the half century that Roe was in effect.

"There is a tendency for people who've had a right to sort of assume that that's the way it is and it won't be challenged," said Aimee Allison, founder of She The People, which promotes women candidates of color. "And even when we heard that the Supreme Court was planning to overturn Roe v. Wade, it didn't sink in for many people that this was actually a threat realized and it was going to have an effect on our lives."

Right now, she's focused on electing Senate candidates who could help eliminate the filibuster and ease the way for abortion protections to pass.

"If we can elect these women of color, we'll have the votes in order to pass the legislation that went through the House and a sitting at the Senate to restore abortion rights and make reproductive justice a reality," she added.

In the short and medium-term, some are focused on abortion access. Laura Kriv was among a small group protesting in front of Justice Brett Kavanaugh's house on Saturday night.

"Just like the Janes started this movement years ago and and took it upon themselves to make sure women had safe access to abortion, we're going to have to do the same thing," she said, referring to the Jane Collective that helped women seeking abortions in the 1960s and 1970s. .

Kriv added that that is going to be more of a focus for her than watching what politicians say.

"I'm not going to wait for the politicians. I'm certainly not going to wait for Biden," she said. "I would love it if he would expand the court so that more of our rights aren't taken away. But I'm not going to sit back and wait."

With activists motivated to do so much to protect abortion access right now, it's not clear how much they see voting this November as a solution.

Read this article:
Abortion-rights supporters vent their frustration at Biden and Democrats - NPR

Abortion access in North Dakota is about to change dramatically. On July 28, a 2007 law banning the procedure with narrow exceptions for rape, incest and the mothers life will take effect.

Its a 15-year-old law, written and passed in a bygone era, when the right to an abortion secured by Roe v. Wade seemed ironclad. Passing the law had no immediate consequences then, and existed as little more than a signal to pro-life voters that the state was on their side. But after a late June Supreme Court decision ending the right to abortion, that law will now reshape the politics of North Dakota womens health care.

And without Democrats support, it wouldnt have been possible.

When the 2007 abortion ban passed, it came with remarkable bipartisan backing. The state House passed the bill 68-24, with 14 of its 33 Democrats lending their votes. In the Senate, the measure passed 29-16, and eight of the chambers 21 Democrats supported it enough to have blocked it, had those senators voted the other way.

A handful of Democrats who backed the bill are still in the Legislature. Senate Minority Leader Joan Heckaman, D-New Rockford, is one of them.

State Sen. Joan Heckaman

I think all of us value life. And I think that's probably one of the reasons I voted for that bill, Heckaman said. Pressed on whether she believes its a good law, Heckaman said its debatable.

I don't want any abortions to happen, she said But at the same time, the Legislature has been negligent of its job of fulfilling the health care for women and newborns. We don't take care of the young moms, we don't make sure that they have what they need. And I think we've got a long way to go there.

State Sen. Tim Mathern, D-Fargo and an elder statesman among a shrinking Democratic caucus, was another supporter of the bill. He said hes proud of work he did in 2007 to insist on several exceptions that make the law less strict such as exceptions for cases of rape and incest and to protect the mothers life. Like Heckaman, he said hes disappointed in a lack of systems that support infants and new parents.

There is also concern about the child the other life that we're dealing with here. That life is also worthy of our society's attention and concern, he said. He added that the legislative process involves compromise, and lamented that its become more of a black and white process that is often driven by the outer edges of debate.

Mathern acknowledged, though, he sees a shift since 2007.

I think society has changed in terms of the concept of bodily integrity as being a concept wholly independent from the issue of the life of another person, he said. And I think that has more energy today from the public than it did 15, 20 years ago.

In one respect, Mathern is clearly correct: quite a lot is different from where it was 15 years ago, when rural Democrats were not yet a rarity and when abortion was less of a partisan debate. In fact, the two leading sponsors in the House were Democrats.

Since then, the Democratic-NPL has been decimated by advances the GOP has made in rural areas, as the country increasingly polarizes into more urban, left-of-center enclaves and more sparsely populated conservative zones.

In North Dakota, Democrats are hardly competitive west of Interstate 29 anymore. Nationally, its hard to imagine a modern Democratic caucus split on the issue of abortion and for a lot of voters, thats what matters. To hear Mathern tell it, North Dakota Democrats cant outrun the reputation of those national Democrats.

I don't think your rank-and-file Democrats changed, he said. But I think the national narrative about what Democrats believe and what Republicans believe has become taken in by North Dakotans.

Mac Schneider, active in North Dakota Democratic politics from 2008 to 2018, has watched a lot of those changes happen.

When I started (as a state senator) back in 09, the Tip O'Neill saying that all politics are local I think that was largely true, Schneider said. Now I think it's largely true to say all politics are national.

Much of North Dakotas modern abortion debate traces to 1991, when an anti-abortion measure with exceptions for rape, incest and to save a mothers life passed the North Dakota Legislature. It was met with a veto by Gov. George Sinner, who once aspired to the Catholic priesthood.

"I am a Catholic and ... I agree with the current Catholic judgment that abortion is wrong," Sinner said at the time. "The issue here, however, is the role of the law."

But Sinner signed a bill that imposed a 24-hour waiting period on abortions, and required women receive information on medical risks and alternatives.

1991 was a year of intense conflict over abortion. The Associated Press also recalls that days after the passage of the abortion bill, 26 people stormed a Fargo abortion clinic, and that 10 North Dakota anti-abortion protests saw 210 people arrested over the course of the year.

Sinners choices slowed the success of the anti-abortion movement. But it couldnt mask that the Legislature was overwhelmingly opposed to the procedure; the ban had passed in the Senate 32-21, and in the House 64-39.

The fact that it did pass showed the majority of our legislative representatives did speak out against abortion, Renee Klein, leader of the North Dakota Right to Life, told the Associated Press that year.

By 2007, Gov. John Hoeven now the states senior Republican U.S. senator was ready to sign an abortion ban, and did. It still left critics unsure what would come next, and raised questions that more politicians will surely face in coming years.

"Assume you're undergoing chemotherapy and found yourself pregnant. What would you do?" Rep. Kenton Onstad, D-Parshall, wondered in 2007. "What does this law allow you to do?"

The state confronted the issue just seven years later, though, when in 2014 North Dakota voters shot down a personhood ballot measure that would have added language to the state constitution noting that the inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected. Politico recalls that critics had worried the measure might restrict access to abortion even before viability, criminalize in-vitro fertilization or limit end-of-life treatment choices.

One of the largest questions now about Roe v. Wade is mostly about how its aftermath will unfold; its already messy and unclear. In Florida, a judge this week moved to block a 15-week abortion ban, citing the state constitution. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joe Manchin, D-W.V., suggested in the aftermath of the ruling that justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch misled them.

Former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., suggested something similar. Heitkamp, who in 2018 lost her seat to Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., had voted for Gorsuch but against Kavanaughs confirmation.

I believed that Brett Kavanaugh repeatedly lied under oath, so I trusted nothing he said about his position on Roe v. Wade, Heitkamp texted a reporter this week. She added on Gorsuch that I think he knew at the time that he testified that he was a likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade but hid behind veiled language on establish precedent to just get through the confirmation process.

Because I have more respect for Justice Gorsuch, its a greater disappointment that he wasnt more transparent, she said.

State Rep. Josh Boschee, D-Fargo is the House minority leader. He lamented the absoluteness of the Supreme Courts decision, he said, worrying that doctors might hesitate in some parts of the country to perform essential care on pregnancies dangerous to a pregnant mother.

But he also pointed out that the Democratic-NPL welcomes all kinds of candidates, especially when a reporter pointed out that Mark Haugen, the partys U.S. House candidate, is pro-life .

Our caucus, compared to the Republican caucus, isnt a caucus that sits down and says, you have to vote this way, Boschee said. He acknowledged, though, that there are supporters who want more litmus tests for politicians on abortion and the rights of sexual minorities and more.

But part of governing is being able to take the information you have and trying to make the best decision you can, he added. What I would say to Democratic voters is that you need to have conversations with candidates, both Republican and Democrat, about the issues that are important to you.

See original here:
15 years later, Democrats reckon with votes supporting North Dakota abortion ban - Grand Forks Herald

Here are seven things to watch in Colorado, Illinois, Mississippi, New York, Oklahoma and Utah:

Its pretty clear that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and other Democrats didnt want to face Richard Irvin in November.

The mayor of suburban Aurora, Ill., Irvin has been bolstered by an extraordinary $50 million in donations from conservative billionaire Ken Griffin. But despite Griffins largesse, Irvin is expected to fall flat on Tuesday, in large part because of Pritzker and the Democratic Governors Association, which have blasted Irvin on the airwaves for months mostly with ads intended to dissuade GOP voters from supporting him, calling him soft on crime and insufficiently conservative.

The ultra-wealthy Pritzker has already spent nearly $33 million on advertising, according to AdImpact, and the DGA has kicked in another $19-plus million, mostly in the pricey Chicago media market. Its all been designed to sink Irvins campaign below that of Darren Bailey, a state senator seen as less able to win over the sizable share of Democrats any Illinois Republican would need to prevail statewide.

The coup de grace likely came three days before the primary, when Trump endorsed Bailey, who had already surmounted Irvin in the polls. It gives Trump a chance to improve his spotty primary-endorsement record in governors races after losses in Georgia, Idaho and Nebraska but the stat-padding former president will hardly deserve any credit.

Meanwhile, Democratic groups are also meddling in three Colorado primaries, trying to bolster the reelection prospects of Gov. Jared Polis and Sen. Michael Bennet and the partys chances of winning a newly drawn House seat.

In the Senate race, a new group called Democratic Colorado has spent $4.2 million in an effort to deny businessman Joe ODea the GOP nomination to face Bennet. The groups ads target Republican primary voters: One highlights state Rep. Ron Hanks conservative credentials, while the other says ODea is a phony for supporting President Joe Bidens $1.2 trillion spending bill and making campaign donations to Bennet and then-Gov. John Hickenlooper, even after he signed new gun safety measures into law.

Its the same story in the governors race: A newly created group, Colorado Information Network, has spent $1.7 million on ads elevating the underfunded Greg Lopez over Heidi Ganahl, a member of the University of Colorado Board of Regents whos seen as a more credible Polis opponent.

And in the new, 8th Congressional District, House Majority PAC, a super PAC with ties to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is running ads calling Weld County Commissioner Lori Saine a conservative warrior, in an apparent effort to elevate Saine over state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer.

The races represent an escalation of Democrats meddling efforts after previous attempts to lock GOP Reps. David Valadao and Young Kim out of the general election in Californias top-two primary last month fell flat. With Baileys likely victory in Illinois, Democrats would succeed in denying Irvin the nomination but wins by Hanks, Lopez or Saine in Colorado would further vindicate Democrats strategy.

Trump visited Illinois last weekend to campaign for freshman GOP Rep. Mary Miller against one of her colleagues, in a race that highlights the divide among Republicans on Capitol Hill.

In one corner are Trump and Miller, who earned almost-instant infamy when she said Hitler was right about one thing in a speech in front of the Capitol on her second full day in office. Miller courted more controversy at the Trump rally, when she called the Supreme Courts ruling last week dismantling federal abortion rights a victory for white life a campaign aide said after that Miller misspoke and meant to say right to life.

On the other side is GOP Rep. Rodney Davis, a five-term congressman whos set to become chair of the House Administration Committee if Republicans win control of the House. Unlike Miller, Davis voted against objections to the 2020 election results and for a bipartisan commission to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. But his ads attacking Miller mostly focus on her anti-establishment votes against government-funding bills hitting her for voting against increased defense spending, for example, along with some liberal Democrats.

The race is a major test of Trumps sway and, given Millers various controversies, his judgment. Trump-backed Rep. Alex Mooney easily defeated fellow Rep. David McKinley in West Virginia in the only previous member-versus-member primary this year. But in Illinois, Davis has outspent Miller on advertising by a roughly three-to-one margin, and the race is more competitive.

Further north, Democratic Reps. Sean Casten and Marie Newman are squaring off for one Chicagoland seat after redistricting. Newman ousted then-Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski in a primary two years ago over Lipinskis opposition to abortion rights.

But campaigning for the seat has essentially stopped after Castens 17-year-old daughter, Gwen Casten, died unexpectedly two weeks before the primary.

And theres one more Illinois incumbent with a tricky primary: Democratic Rep. Danny Davis is facing a rematch against liberal challenger Kina Collins, whom he easily defeated last year. But progressives have targeted Davis Chicago district anew, and Collins has outraised the 13-term incumbent, who got a late endorsement from President Joe Biden last weekend.

When then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo resigned in disgrace last year, it looked like his successor, Kathy Hochul, would face a difficult battle for the Democratic nomination. There was state Attorney General Letitia James, building a national profile as a thorn in Trumps side, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, working to lock down the left, and even the possibility of a Cuomo comeback attempt.

But it all mostly fizzled out. James quit the campaign, Cuomo didnt run, and polls show Hochul way ahead of Williams and Rep. Tom Suozzi.

Now, it appears the only question is who Hochul will face in November between a crowded field of Republican men.

The establishment pick is Rep. Lee Zeldin, who is giving up his Long Island House seat. Hes the choice of state GOP insiders but despite being a top Trump ally in Congress, he hasnt received the former presidents backing: Trump hasnt endorsed in the race.

The list of Zeldin opponents includes businessman Harry Wilson, whos spent nearly $7 million on ads promoting himself as a private-sector turnaround expert; 2014 nominee Rob Astorino; and famous-named Andrew Giuliani, the son of the now-controversial former mayor, who became a national celebrity as a child mugging for the camera at his fathers official events.

Of the 35 House Republicans who supported a bipartisan Jan. 6 commission last year, five are on the ballot on Tuesday: Davis and GOP Reps. John Curtis (Utah), Stephanie Bice (Okla.), Blake Moore (Utah) and Michael Guest (Miss.).

Guest edged his leading opponent in Mississippis June 7 primary, former Navy fighter pilot Michael Cassidy, by just 268 votes but with only 47 percent of the total votes cast, he failed to reach the threshold to win the nomination. The two men are now facing off head-to-head in the lower-turnout runoff, and Guest and House Republicans top super PAC, Congressional Leadership Fund, have spent the past 21 days knocking down Cassidys conservative bona fides in hopes of overcoming voters skepticism of the incumbent.

Of Curtis, Bice and Moore, Curtis has taken his primary most seriously, spending nearly $400,000 on advertising, according to AdImpact.

Two other House Republicans to watch on Tuesday: Reps. Steven Palazzo (Miss.) and Doug Lamborn (Colo.).

Palazzo is in imminent danger. He finished first in the June 7 primary but only earned 31 percent of the vote. That was ahead of Jackson County Sheriff Mike Ezell (25 percent), but Palazzos paltry percentage is a sign of dissatisfaction with the incumbent, who has faced allegations of misusing campaign and official funds.

Lamborn, meanwhile, has had primary problems before, despite being among the most conservative members of Congress. He could face another close shave this year against state Rep. Dave Williams.

Thirteen Republicans appear on the ballot in the special primary election to replace Sen. Jim Inhofe when the 87-year-old incumbent resigns at the end of the year a crowded contest for what is widely seen as a safe GOP seat.

The favorite is Rep. Markwayne Mullin, but there are other bold-faced names in the race. Theres Scott Pruitt, the former state attorney general and Trump-era EPA administrator who resigned from that office amid myriad scandals, and former state House Speaker T.W. Shannon, who was the runner-up in the last special election for Senate in Oklahoma. He came in behind now-Sen. James Lankford in the race to replace then-Sen. Tom Coburn.

Originally posted here:
Democrats' big bets on GOP primaries come due: What to watch in Tuesday's elections - POLITICO