Mediaboss Marketing

Instead, Perez was welcomed into his new job on Saturday by jeering progressive activists, who for the second time in a year, saw their preferred pick to lead the party defeated after a protracted and unexpectedly feisty campaign. Supporters of Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, the choice of Sen. Bernie Sanders, painted Perez's election as another victory for an establishment they blame for ceding the White House to Donald Trump by alienating young and working class voters. Minutes after the results were announced -- Perez prevailed on a second ballot after falling one vote short on the first -- the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Adam Green, a vocal Ellison backer, leaned back and ruminated on the contentious scene.

"This was not an ideological battle between a corporate Democrat and a progressive," he said, noting that Perez too would have been his choice for attorney general in a Clinton administration. "We agree with him on policy and thought he would challenge big corporations like he did as (President Barack Obama's) labor secretary."

The problem, Green suggested, was that Perez did not -- at least not yet -- have "his finger on the pulse of progressive resistance" to the new administration. Across the ballroom, one young and frustrated Ellison supporter, Alexa Vaca, put it simply: "This shows that the Democratic Party didn't learn their lesson."

While Democrats clawed at each other in Atlanta, the festivities at the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, were beginning to wind down. Over the previous 48 hours, the annual conservative gathering had welcomed its first sitting Republican president in his first year in office since Ronald Reagan.

A year before, Trump skipped the conference, backing out the day before his scheduled appearance. The American Conservative Union, which organizes the gathering, bit back in response, saying Trump's decision "comes at a critical time in our movement's history. His decision sends a clear message to grassroots conservatives."

"I think that Trump is a different type of conservative than, perhaps, the mainstream conservative, and I think that's why he got so far in the primaries," said Wesley Dalton, a student at Brigham Young University in Utah.

Matt Batzel, the national executive director of American Majority, a conservative organization that trains grassroots activists, described Trump as a "Patriotic Conservative" before grinning and confessing, "I just made up that term."

Even what remained of the GOP's dedicated libertarian wing, which had been transformed by the rise of Trumpism from an ascendant force to a CPAC afterthought, sought to parlay the presidential moment by passing out caps that read, "Make Taxation Theft Again."

"People don't notice it as much here, because if we wear it around they just assume it's the (Make America Great Again) hat," said Zach Garretson, donor relations officer for the libertarian Stonegait Institute, "but when we're not at an event like this and you wear that hat, people will look at it and be like, 'Oh! What does that say?'"

Conservatives' willingness to look beyond their unlikely standard-bearer's ideological inconsistencies have been rewarded in the early running. They routinely made glowing reference to the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to be a Supreme Court justice -- proof, many insisted, that Trump, whatever he actually believed, was firmly on track to govern like they hoped.

"I want to thank you for finally inviting me to CPAC," Bannon said at the outset. The former Breitbart boss had previously hosted "The Uninvited," a parallel gathering for fellow out-of-favor right-wingers. "I know there are many alumni out here in the audience."

Schlapp nodded to the awkward moment, then declared: "Here's what we decided to do at CPAC with the uninvited. We decided to say that everybody's a part of our conservative family."

And with that, they were off. Bannon railed against the media -- "the opposition party" -- and drew cheers as he outlined plans for the "deconstruction of the administrative state."

More applause interrupted his description of Trump's decision to withdraw the US from Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, calling it "one of the most pivotal moments in modern American history."

For observers of a party and movement that has traditionally embraced free trade, the scene was instructive. Not a year ago, the idea of a Republican administration's scuttling of a massive free trade pact (and promise to take apart or narrow other existing deals) being met with rapturous ovations might have seemed absurd.

But the presidency has a certain affect on people and political parties.

With Barack Obama in the White House and Hilary Clinton, it seemed, poised to follow him, Democrats enjoyed nearly a decade of relative peace. On the eve of the election, as progressives put the finishing touches on strategies for nudging the new administration to the left, many confided that, for all the tumult of the primary, they fully expected the Clinton administration to offer them a seat at the table.

At CPAC on Saturday, the results of its annual survey ran in stark contrast to the scenes in Atlanta.

Eight in 10 of those polled agreed that Trump was "realigning the conservative movement" -- and 86% approved of the job he has done since taking office in January.

"I love this place," Trump said at the top of his speech a day before. "Love you people."

And they loved the President right back. For Democrats, down in Atlanta, that kind of affection seemed a long way off.

See more here:
Trump unites GOP as Democrats bicker - CNNPolitics.com

Sarker Haque, a Muslim originally from Bangladesh who has lived in Queens for 30 years, was attacked in his store by a man who allegedly said he wanted to "kill Muslims." Haque will be a guest of Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., at President Trump's speech to Congress. Seth Wenig/AP hide caption

Sarker Haque, a Muslim originally from Bangladesh who has lived in Queens for 30 years, was attacked in his store by a man who allegedly said he wanted to "kill Muslims." Haque will be a guest of Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., at President Trump's speech to Congress.

When is a guest list more than a guest list? When politicians bring a plus-one to a presidential address before a joint session of Congress.

Each member of Congress can invite a guest to tonight's speech, and many members will use the occasion to send a pointed political message to President Trump and the public about the issues that matter to them.

For a number of Democrats, their guests of honor are immigrants, a rebuke to Trump's executive orders to halt refugee entry, expand the pool of unauthrozied immigrants who are likely to be deported and ban travel by people from seven majority-Muslim countries.

Rep. Nydia Velazquez of New York will bring Hameed Darweesh, who was detained at JFK International Airport for 18 hours when Trump's travel ban was enacted. Darweesh is an Iraqi who worked as an interpreter for the U.S. Army and an engineer for the State Department and Army Corps of Engineers.

Rep. Joseph Crowley of New York is chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, and his guest is Sarker Haque, the victim of an alleged anti-Muslim hate crime. Crowley told reporters that he didn't anticipate any disruptive protests from House Democrats during the speech.

"I think as much as we have nothing in common with the present president, we do respect the office of the presidency," said Crowley. "Keeping that in mind, we'll be polite. We'll show very little, if any enthusiasm at all, for what I anticipate his speech will be about."

Other congressional Democrats are bringing guests who they hope underscore the importance of the Affordable Care Act, which Trump and congressional Republicans say they plan to repeal and replace. Rep. Brad Schneider of Illinois, for example, has invited Tracy Trovato, whose husband has leukemia. Trovato says that if not for the ACA, "our family could have been bankrupted by the cost of the care he needed."

Many Democratic congresswomen said they'll wear white to tonight's address. Rep. Lois Frankel of Florida tweeted, "Tonight, Democratic Members will wear suffragette white to oppose Republican attempts to roll back women's progress."

A number of outlets are reporting that Rep. Maxine Waters of California won't attend the address, reportedly telling the House Democratic Caucus that "anyone who can't sit still shouldn't go."

And to the ever-growing list of traditions that are being upended by Trump's presidency, add this one: New York Rep. Eliot Engel, for the first time in his 29 years in Congress, says he won't get an aisle seat and shake the president's hand.

For its part, the White House released the names of special guests that President Trump and first lady Melania Trump have invited to the address. Like those invited by the Democrats, the White House guests were also carefully chosen to illustrate political points with their biographies. Among those who will sit with Melania Trump are Jessica Davis, Susan Oliver, and Jamiel Shaw Sr. each of whom had a family member killed by an immigrant in the country illegally, according to the White House. Maureen McCarthy Scalia, the widow of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, will also be a guest in the Trumps' box. Trump recently nominated federal Judge Neil Gorsuch to replace Scalia, who died just over a year ago. Republicans blocked former President Obama's nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland.

Democrats have tapped Astrid Silva to give the party's Spanish-language rebuttal following Trump's address. Silva is an activist and DREAMer, an immigrant who was brought to the U.S. illegally as a child a life story with relevance that will be lost on no one.

Read the original post:
Some Democrats Will Bring Muslim Guests To Trump's Speech - NPR

Jewish community centers across the United States are operating in a climate of fear after a fifth waveof bomb threatsaimed at Jews on Monday that targeted at least 13 community centers and eight schools in a dozen states.

A top Trump surrogate hedge funder Anthony Scaramucci, who fundraised for theTrump campaign, joined his transition team, and was in the runningfor a senior role in the White House took to Twitter on Tuesday to imply that these threats could be coming from Democrats, rather than from a radical far-right wing that has been emboldened by Trumps rhetoric and staff choices.

In his first tweet, he referred to a report about Democratic Party-aligned activists who staged raucous protests at Trump events a far cry from calling in bomb threats against a religious minority.

Scaramuccis tweetsare only the latest sign that the Trump administration, those close to the president, and the wider Republican Party are fundamentally unwillingto either acknowledge or challenge the wave of far-right hate crimesin the United States that has in recent monthstargeteda wide set of religious and racial minority groups.

Part of their strategy has been to deny any links between Trumps rhetoric, far-right ideology, and the recent hate crimes.

Trump ally and former Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick Santorum appeared on CNN last week to imply, without evidence, that the wave of antisemitic hate crimes is largely coming from Muslim-Americans. Following a neo-Nazi march in Montana, Republican lawmakers there are advancing legislation to crack down on the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that seeks to hold Israel accountable for human rights abuses an implication that the Arab American-led movement is responsible for anti-Semitism.

The Trump administration reacted callously last week following a hate crime in Kansas that gained global attention, where a man shot and killed a man of Indian origin and wounded two others, believing them to be Iranian.

When asked whether there was any link between the shooters beliefs and Trumps harsh rhetoric against Muslims, the White House declined to even consider the possibility.Any loss of life is tragic, Press Secretary Sean Spicer replied, but Im not going to get into, like, that kind of to suggest that theres any correlation [to Trumpsrhetoric] I think is a bit absurd.

Spicer was also asked last week if Trump condemns Islamophobia in general, and he offered no comment, instead making an awkward and telling pivot to the administrations agenda against radical Islam.

If you come here or want to express views that seek to do our country or people harm, hes going to fight it aggressively, he replied to a question about Islamaphobia. So theres a big difference between preventing attacks and making sure that we keep this country safe, so that there is no loss of life.

Top photo: Scaramucci at Trump Tower on Jan. 4, 2017, in New York City.

Read more:
Trump Surrogate Suggests Democrats Could Be Behind Bomb Threats Against Jews - The Intercept

The Democratic Party, with Thomas Perez as its new chair, vows to seek unity, transparency, Trump resistance, grassroots participation, and most importantly, make sure we talk about our positive message of inclusion and opportunity... to that big tent of the Democratic Party.

But this message is shrouded with myths that must be challenged if we are to take back the country from financial and corporate elites... and from Trump.

For the Clinton Democrats, party unity means that the Sanders forces recognize that they lost. For the sake of unity, the Sanders rebels should moderate their relentless attacks on the super-rich and runaway inequality so that the party can concentrate its fire on Trump.

The goal must be to win back the moderate suburban Trump voters who may soon suffer from buyers remorse. Now is not the time to scare voters with anti-corporate rhetoric and broad social democratic programs like free higher education and Medicare for all. Uniting against Trump is all that matters.

The energy of the Democratic party comes precisely from those who cherish the hard-hitting vision that Sanders put forth. There is a reason why the Sanders rallies were ten times the size of Hillarys campaign events. Sanders and his followers want to take on the corporate elites both inside and outside the Democratic Party. It would be a disaster to bury that battle under the milquetoast mantra of party unity.

Myth #2: The moderate middle is the key to victory

The party establishment is still clinging to the triangulation model perfected by Bill Clinton as he cuddled up to the Wall Street. Ever since, the Democratic Party has tried to tailor its program to independent suburban voters and wealthy donors.

That model no longer works.

The Tea Party turned the Republican Party to the right by totally obliterating moderate Republicans. The 2016 election further shows that the battle for the center is history. Instead elections are won by reaching those who reject the established order that has left them behind. Sanders expressed that revolt from the left and Trump rode that revolt from the right to win Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Myth #3: Economic empowerment

The mantra of the corporate Democrats is economic empowerment making sure that everyone has the opportunity to succeed. Their position is based on the following assumptions, all of which are wrong:

Myth #4: The Sanders Program is too radical for America

Sanders-style socialism will not be accepted in America. It will be red-baited to death, leading to the defeat of any politician who supports such programs. So the Democratic Party should not promote the Sanders agenda.

The Cold War is over. Young voters could care less about the socialist label. The Sanders campaign out-polled Hillary among every shade and color of under-30 voters. Free higher education sounds pretty good to those loaded with student debt.

Similarly, the time has passed for merely defending Obamacare and its dependence on private insurance companies. Medicare for All is a much sounder and cheaper program. Does anyone care about their private insurance company? Only those who work for them.

Even the Clinton wing understands the attraction of the Sanders agenda. But they waddle up to it with so many qualifications that the appeal is lost.

Myth #5 Americans really dont care about income inequality

Americans cherish the idea of getting rich, admire those who become so, and therefore dont want to upset the income ladder.

Its certainly true that most people hold conflicting opinions about wealth in America. However, it is also true that most Americans just dont have access to information about how extreme inequality really is.

For example, surveys show that the typical American thinks the CEO/average worker wage gap is about 45 to 1. That means if the average worker could afford one home and one car, a CEO could afford 45 cars and 45 homes. Not bad.

Well, the 45 to 1 ratio is true....for 1970. Today the ratio is an incomprehensible 844 to 1 (844 homes to your one!).

Once Americans understand the depth of the runaway inequality problem, they want to reverse these obscene gaps. (If you want to help spread the word see here.)

Myth #6: The Party needs donations from the wealthy

To compete with the well-heeled Republicans it is imperative that the Democrats curry favor with wealthy donors. They have no choice.

The Sanders campaign raised more money than the Clinton machine by relying on an enthusiastic army of small donors. To do so again would require having the party and its candidates take on runaway inequality rather than wishing it away.

Myth #7: Write-off the white working class

The path to victory no longer depends on white working class voters and their declining unions. While white working people wont be ignored entirely, U.S. demographics are trending to people of color. Besides, theres an inherent nationalistic/racist streak that runs through white working people that makes them prone to Trumpism.

Arguably, this is the most pernicious myth. The white working class is far from monolithic. To use the term as a blanket phrase (as liberal columnist Paul Krugman does regularly. see here) is just plain wrong.

While some white working people are indeed anti-immigrant and prone to racism, most are not. In fact millions of these voters supported Obama twice, voted for Bernie in the primaries and then voted for Trump out of sheer frustration. Those Obama-to-Sanders-to-Trump voters are why Hillary lost so much of the Rust Belt (see here.)

These voters can be reached but only if the Democrats break away from their corporate backers and adopt a Sanders-like program. Rather than writing them off, the Party should develop a vast educational effort to engage these disaffected voters in discussion. TV ads and vacuous platform proposals wont work. We need live discussions in educational settings to open up a real dialogue. (If youd like to join in such efforts, see here.)

Will Tom Perez and the Democrats break through these debilitating myths? The jury is out.

Les Leopold, the director of the Labor Institute, is currently working with unions and community organizations to build the educational infrastructure of a new anti-Wall Street movement. His new book Runaway Inequality: An Activist Guide to Economic Justice serves as a text for this campaign. All proceeds go to support these educational efforts.

Read more:
7 Myths That Plague The Democrats - Huffington Post

5506943

Its time for Democrats to admit without equivocation that they lost the 2016 national election. Donald Trump, a man they find utterly contemptible, is Americas 45thpresident. Barring catastrophe, he likely will occupy the White House for the next four years.

Democrats also need to abandon their self-defeating campaign to polarize the American electorate and to block progress on legislation in the new GOP-dominated Congress.

A recent Harris poll has found that nearly three-quarters of the American public wants the Democrats to work with Trumps fledgling administration not to resist it. Thats actually a sobering message for both parties and for Trump.

It means the public wants the politicians to stop the finger-pointing and to begin working together in a bipartisan fashion to get Americas business done.

For Democrats, the risks associated with continued obstructionism are high.GOP dominance of American politics now extends to every level and branch of government from state legislatures and governors mansions (32, one short of the number needed to call for a Constitutional Convention) to the White House and soon, very likely, the US Supreme Court.

And the Democrats short-term prospects are bleak:In the 2018 mid-term elections, the Party faces the prospective loss of 10 or more Senate seats in states that Trump won five of them by double-digits.

But Democrats could actually get back in the game if they decided to work with Trump.Despite his conservative rhetoric, his governing agenda is not in lockstep with the GOPs and they know it.

Trump ran as a Republican, and naturally owes strong allegiance to the GOP. But hes no die-hard Republican and never has been. Why drive him into the arms of the GOP by refusing to work with him in areas where mutual compromise is clearly possible?

Of course, on hot button issues like abortion and immigration, Democratic base groups, including feminists and Latinos, see Trump as anathema. The very thought of cooperation of normalizing Trump is repugnant

But it shouldnt be.

Take foreign policy. For all his bombast and apparent Russophilia, Trumps instincts are decidedly non-interventionist. Like Obama, and unlike Bush, he clearly eschews the use of U.S. invasion forces to topple oppressive regimes. Like Obama, he is fond of US special operations forces and clandestine intelligence operators to do Americas military bidding when necessary.

Shorn of its hyper-nationalist sloganeering, America First looks a lot like Smart War, in fact.

On entitlements, Trump, unlike the GOP, is no big fan of reform. He largely supports the current Social Security system. In fact, thats one of the reasons he ran away with the over-55 vote last November.

And unlike most Republicans, Trump has said repeatedly that he supports womens reproductive health just not federal monies for abortion. Planned Parenthood, to its credit, is trying to figure out how to hold Trump to his promise.

On immigration, Trumps agenda even the wall shows more continuity with past bipartisan proposals than Democrats care to admit. Trump rightly cites the 1996 Jordan Commission on Immigration Reform instituted by Bill Clinton as well as 2006 legislation supported by the likes of Obama and Hillary Clinton for inspiration.

Democrats should strike a deal:Agree to a complete overhaul of the visa system plus expanded border and especially workplace enforcement the latter, long a missing pillar. But insist that Trump give the Dreamers the children of illegal immigrants who arrived in the US as children through no fault of their own a chance to stay.

Trump has already decided not to rescind Obamas executive order. Its an opening, Take it, and try to expand the groups including the 20-year long-stayers, illegals with deep roots in American society to which it might also apply.

And what of the wall?As Trump well knows, there are sections of the border that will not permit construction of a physical barrier, not even a fence.But through a combination of measures, and by drawing Mexico into expanded joint enforcement, outstanding gaps in the current border security system can be filled.

Labor rights is another area for potential cooperation.The GOP insists on a sweeping right-to-work agenda, but Trump is already on record supporting an increase in the minimum wage. He seems ready to give Americas building trades and other unions a huge role in the repair of Americas crumbling infrastructure a big-ticket funding item that will yield gains for both parties.

Trump and the Democrats do have areas of disagreement, most obviously Obamacare, but only in principle. Trump has already come out in opposition to eliminating the laws most popular features. Thats one reason the White House and the GOP have punted on further action on repeal for now.

Democrats need to get out of denial: The country has tilted sharply conservative and wants to give Trump a chance to govern. Working with Trump to fashion the semblance of a policy consensus on key issues might help Democrats become part of an expanded political center. Over time, it might even help drive a wedge between Trump and much of the GOP.

Displays of defiance and militancy are certainly cathartic for Democrats.They expected to win last November and theyre still grieving.But continuing to live in a political fantasy world the same besetting evil of which they accuse Trump promises only more disarray.

Read the rest here:
Democrats: Work With Trump Or Risk Further Disarray - Daily Caller