Mediaboss Marketing

JERSEY CITY The Hudson County Democratic Organization on Wednesday officially announced the candidates the organization is supporting in the upcoming June primary. According the HCDO Chairman/Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto, the slew of candidates will fight to represent the interests of the heavily blue county. The HCDO also formally endorsed former U.S. Ambassador to Germany Phil Murphy in his pursuit of the governorship.

The announcement included few surprises with the majority of primary support favoring incumbent candidates. The decision of Hudson County Clerk Barbara Netchert to not pursue re-election did create a bit of a shakeup, however. Current Freeholder Junior Maldonado will run with HCDO support to replace Netchert. Joel Torres will run for Maldonados current freeholder position.

The Wednesday announcement also put to rest rumors that state Senator Sandra Cunningham was mulling a challenge against incumbent Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop for his position. Her endorsement by the HCDO as well as Fulops presence at the event suggests that the county party organization has avoided discord ahead of the June election.

This team is going to do something that it always does we are going to win, Cunningham said.

According to Hudson County Executive Tom DeGise, the county party is completely united.

We are at peace again, we are going to stay at peace, DeGise said of the HCDO as he credited Prieto with successfully navigating the political waters in the county.

In June, the entirety of the New Jersey state legislature will be up for election. In Hudson County and around the state, there will also be county and municipal elections. While the announcement only focused on state and county candidates, a number of mayors including Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer, Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, West New York Mayor Felix Roque and Weehawken Mayor Richard Turner were also present.

See the list of endorsements below:

Phil Murphy for Governor

Senator Sandra Cunningham for District 31 senator

Senator Nick Sacco for District 32 senator

Senator Brian Stack for District 33 senator

Assemblywoman Angela McKnight and Assemblyman Nick Chiaravalloti for District 31 Assembly

Assembly Speaker Prieto and Assemblywoman Angelica Jimenez for District 32 Assembly,

Assemblyman Raj Mukerji and Assemblywoman Annette Chaparro for District 33 Assembly

Junior Maldonado for County Clerk

Kenneth Kopacz, William ODea, Jerry Walker, Joel Torres, Anthony Romano, Tilo Rivas, Caridad Rodriguez, Anthony Vainieri and Al Cifelli for freeholder

Original post:
Hudson County Democrats Announce Primary Candidates - Observer

Hawaii lawmaker Beth Fukumoto, ousted last month as Republican leader of the state's House of Representatives after publicly criticizing President Donald Trump, resigned on Wednesday from her party to seek membership as a Democrat.

Fukumoto, 33, the youngest Hawaii legislator to serve as House minority leader, said divisive campaign rhetoric during the 2016 elections convinced her the Republican Party no longer reflected her political values or the interests of her state's diverse population.

"This election, I saw members of my party marginalizing and condemning minorities, ethnic or otherwise, and making demeaning comments towards women," she said in an open letter of resignation to the Republican Party.

Fukumoto, who is of mixed Japanese and Irish ancestry, said she found Trump's comments about banning Muslim immigrants and the possibility of establishing a registry of Muslim-Americans to be especially troubling.

"I wanted very badly to see the Republican Party denounce his comments, and that didn't happen," she told Reuters, saying a Muslim registry struck her as "one step away" from internment camps.

"That for me was the issue that really changed how I felt."

A self-described political moderate, Fukumoto was the first Republican in 26 years to represent the largely middle-class central Oahu district outside Honolulu, capital of the predominantly Democratic state.

She said she originally joined the Republicans out of a sense that Democrats were the status quo party, but she grew gradually disillusioned with the Republicans.

She recounted a fellow Republican caucus member admonishing her last year that they should be considered the "party of middle America" despite Hawaii's diverse demographics.

Before making the switch, Fukumoto sent out a questionnaire to constituents seeking their opinions. Of those who replied, 76 percent said they would support her regardless, while most of the remainder opposed her changing parties, she said.

First elected to the state legislature in 2012, Fukumoto became leader of the state's tiny House Republican caucus two years later, only to be removed by her peers in February of this year after she spoke out against Trump during the Women's March in Hawaii the day after his inauguration.

As of Wednesday, Fukumoto, became the lone independent among 45 Democrats and five remaining Republicans in the state's lower House, as she launches a process of applying for membership in the state's majority party.

(Reporting by Steve Gorman; Editing by Joseph Radford)

WASHINGTON The Republican chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives intelligence committee set off a political firestorm on Wednesday when he said the communications of members of Donald Trump's transition team were caught up in incidental surveillance targeting foreigners.

WASHINGTON Jay Clayton, the Wall Street attorney tapped by President Donald Trump to lead the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, will face questions on his vision for the agency at his confirmation hearing on Thursday before the Senate Banking Committee.

See the article here:
Hawaii lawmaker resigns from Republican Party to join Democrats - Reuters

Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., speaks beside House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., at a news conference on Capitol Hill on Jan. 5, 2017.(Photo: Michael Reynolds, European Pressphoto Agency)

Rep. Louise Slaughter ofNew York has been out sick and its unclear whether shell be back Thursday to vote against a Republican proposal to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, according to her office.

Slaughter, the top-ranking Democrat on the House Rules Committee, was absent Wednesday as the committee took up the bill and has been out since late last week. The attendance of another Democrat, Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois,is also in question following the death of his wife, Carolyn.

Democrats are all expected to oppose the bill. With every one of their absences, Republicans can afford to lose another vote from their party and still pass the bill. But conservative Republicans say they likely have enough votes to kill it, regardless.

On Monday, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said during a committee meeting that Slaughter, 87, was treated over the weekend with antibiotics for an infection.

Getting sick is the price many of us pay for flying twice a week, but Im happy to report that Louise is now feeling much better," McGovern said. "I spoke with her this afternoon and in her words shes 'ready to fight a tiger,'so as soon as her doctor gives her the green light shell be back in action.

McGovern reported Wednesday that he had spoken with her again that morning. I can assure you shes watching all of us today and taking notes, he said.

A spokeswoman for Rush, Stephanie Gadlin, said she wasn't able to say what Rush would do. His wife died on March 13 at age 67 of congestive heart failure. Funeral services are on Friday, she said. He tweeted that a celebration of her life would be held on Saturday in Chicago.

Of course he wants to be there to vote, but hes literally dealing with the death of his wife, she said.

Read more:

Freedom Caucus claims enough votes to kill Obamacare repeal

The House health care battle: What's at stake?

With conservatives in revolt on health care, moderates might be Trump's new best friends

Joe Biden says Republican health care is a giveaway to the rich

Rules Committee slogs through Obamacare replacement

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2mRCAwj

Read more:
Two Democrats may miss House vote on GOP health care bill - USA TODAY

In their drive to resist President Trump, Democrats so far have put a lot of political eggs into one basket: immigration. Their strident defense of immigrants past, present and future certainly satisfies the base -- but its a strategic mistake that can only lead to electoral disappointment.

Lets recall why Trump won in November. He is the first president since 1876 to lose the popular vote by more than 2% and still win an electoral college majority. He did so by winning five swing states Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin with less than 50% of the vote. In each case, he attracted large numbers of whites without a college degree who had voted for President Obama twice. Meanwhile, many Republicans who had voted for Sen. John McCain and former Gov. Mitt Romney threw their votes away on write-ins or third-party candidates rather than vote for Hillary Clinton.

If Democrats want to win again, they must do one of two things: Attract back the Obama-Trump voter or win over the Romney-non-Trump voter. Their protestations against border security and the travel ban are not likely to do either.

Surveys show that Obama-Trump blue-collar voters like Trumps anti-immigration stance. These voters are likely to have felt competition from immigrants legal and illegal, and they want that competition to stop. Even though many of these voters agree with Democrats on traditional economic issues like taxes and entitlement spending, their primary concern now is to protect their livelihoods and standard of living by reducing competition from foreigners living at home and abroad.

Loud opposition to Trumps immigration policies reminds those voters every day why they no longer feel at home in todays Democratic Party.

Wavering Romney-McCain Republicans, for their part, may be sympathetic to the plight of economic migrants, but are quite possibly worried about terrorism. By just saying no to Trumps travel bans, the Democrats give nothing to the Republican or GOP-leaning independent who wants a more balanced attitude.

The Democratic Party approach, such as it is, is anything but balanced. In the partys 2016 platform, immigration enforcement is at best an afterthought. The platform emphasizes a path to citizenship, reuniting families and ensuring that as few current immigrants as possible are removed from the country. It also denounces Trumps proposed religious test for immigration as well as what it called his vilification of Muslims.

While a platform is not binding, the partys behavior since inauguration day suggests that it accurately expresses Democrats sentiments. Everything the party and its leaders in Congress have done since the inauguration simply restates these beliefs without modification.

It seems Democrats remain stuck in the rut that led them to electoral disaster in the first place. Firmly convinced that Middle America shared their fear and loathing of Trump, the party ran one of the most issue-free campaigns in modern history. In paid ads, campaign stops and in the debates, Clinton rarely gave people who werent already committed Democrats or progressives a reason to vote for her. That failure explains the most telling and unexpected result on election day: Trump beat Clinton handily among the 18% of Americans who told exit pollsters they disliked both candidates.

Democrats are either unwilling to see the truth or unable to acknowledge it: They cannot win back the presidency without attracting people who disagree with some of their views. Doing that does not mean singing the same old songs louder and more clearly.

When it comes to immigration, Democrats need to ask themselves some hard questions. Can they acknowledge that the large number of immigrants in the country illegally, many of whom are relatively unskilled, gives rise to economic competition that harms job and wage prospects for voters who used to be part of their base?

Can they be pro-Muslim immigration without being blind to the fact that the very few Muslim immigrants inclined to terror can undermine public tolerance with just a few fatal attacks?

Can they admit that one can have concerns about either type of migrant without being prejudiced or racist that there might just be some rational reason for Americans to be wary of a lax or overly trusting approach to immigration?

If Democrats can entertain and act on these thoughts, then they can begin the hard work of uniting the anti-Trump majority into a political majority. If they cannot, their resistance will be futile.

Henry Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He is the author of the forthcoming book, The Working Class Republican: Ronald Reagan and the Return of Blue Collar Conservatism.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion or Facebook

MORE FROM OPINION

The most relevant dystopian novel for our time is not '1984' it's 'Lord of the Flies'

Trumps vehicle emissions plan: Make California smoggy again

How the GOP healthcare plan would worsen the opioid crisis

Go here to see the original:
The Democrats' stance on immigration will lead to electoral ...

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says the proposed Republican health bill would lead to an enormous transfer of wealth from poorer Americans to richer ones. Marian Carrasquero/NPR hide caption

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says the proposed Republican health bill would lead to an enormous transfer of wealth from poorer Americans to richer ones.

When Democrats held a majority of the seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi was the House speaker, she helped pass the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Now, after more than six years in the minority party, she is watching House Republicans move to repeal and replace parts of the law.

She says that although Democrats don't have the votes to stop the GOP legislation alone, they can still show their opposition to it.

"In my office I have a painting of Abraham Lincoln, who said, 'Public sentiment is everything,' " Pelosi told NPR's Robert Siegel. "Regardless of the number of Democrats in the House, the number of people who are affected, 24 million [people] who would lose their care, I'm depending on public opinion. ... The fact is the more we point out the shortcomings of the legislation, the fewer votes [Republicans] will have."

The interview below has been edited for length and clarity.

On the shortcomings of the Affordable Care Act

Let's go back to where we were before the Affordable Care Act, because that was a time where [some people] wouldn't even be able to have any insurance. So what was the purpose of the Affordable Care Act? [It was] threefold. One, to lower cost. Two, to improve benefits. And three, to expand access for millions more people. And it's done all three. ...

Look, there hasn't been a bill ever passed of this magnitude, whether it was Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, voting rights, civil rights bill, that was not revisited. Some of the improvements we [could] have [had] in the Affordable Care Act were there, but the Republicans prevented them from happening. So you can be a self-fulfilling prophecy and say, "I'm gonna make sure this doesn't work now. Now see, it didn't work."

On whether the Democrats could work with President Trump or House Speaker Paul Ryan on health care legislation

We have a responsibility to the American people to find as much common ground as we can. There has to be sincerity, though. ... I don't think he has the faintest idea the president about the health care thing.

[But Rep. Paul] Ryan ... is [a] philosophical, right-wing, anti-government [person], and so an act of mercy for him is to reduce the government's role. So we're talking about two different things. They're debating whether it's "Trumpcare" or "Ryancare," but neither of them wants it identified with themselves because it's such a failure in the public mind.

On Trump's knowledge of health care

The more the president might learn about [health care], then he might see where there's a path [to working with Democrats], because to tell you the truth, the Affordable Care Act is a private sector initiative. It contains many Republican ideas.

Understand this about Republicans, and then you'll understand part of what our challenge is here: They always are gearing whatever they do to benefit the high end. This is the biggest transfer of wealth in the history of our country, in terms of hundreds of billions of dollars going into the pockets of the top 1 percent of the people in our country, at the expense of the good health of our middle class and those who aspire to the middle class.

See the original post:
Nancy Pelosi Says Democrats Must Try To Work With Republicans ...