Mediaboss Marketing

At the time, the Obama administration was cracking down on illegal immigration in an attempt to bring Republicans to the table for a grand bargain on comprehensive immigration reformbut it was more effective politics for both Democrats and Republicans to pretend that Obama was less of a border hawk than he really was.

Again and again, Republicans have targeted groups they believe too small or too powerless to spark a costly political backlash. By attacking them, the GOP seeks to place Democrats in a political bind. If they decline to bow to demagoguery, Democrats risk looking either too culturally avant-garde for the comfort of more conservative voterswhose support they need to remain viableor too preoccupied with defending the rights of a beleaguered minority to pay attention to bread-and-butter issues that matter to the majority. This strategy has worked in the pastPresident Bill Clinton, who signed the federal statute outlawing same-sex marriage in 1996, was no Republican. Many people across the political spectrum accept the premise that defending a marginalized groups civil rights is identity politics, while choosing to strip away those rights is not.

In 2004, Republicans pursued a good-cop/bad-cop strategy: Bush sounded notes of tolerance and acceptance in public, while Republican strategists pursued an anti-gay-rights agenda behind the scenes. In 2012, the partys presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, ran to the right of Bush on both immigration and LGBTQ issues in order to prove that he was severely conservative. In 2016, the Republican base wanted a nominee who would sound their hatreds with a foghorn rather than a dog whistle. Trump obliged, promising to ban Muslims from coming to the United States and build a wall on the border with Mexico. Trump had previously mocked Romneys harsh self-deportation policy as maniacal, but the reality-show star knew what the Republican base wanted in a president when he finally ran.

That brings us to 2021. Republicans lost the fight over marriage equality so decisively that some now pretend not to have vigorously opposed it in the first placemuch to the alarm of many religious conservatives, who are their most dedicated supporters. The fight over immigration is locked in a stalemate, because Trump showed national Republicans that embracing nativism is less politically costly than they had supposed. Anti-Muslim animus has hardly disappeared, but it is no longer as useful a tool to oppose the current leader of the Democratic Party, an elderly Irish Catholic man.

Read: The GOPs Islamophobia problem

Conflicts between civil rights and religious freedom can certainly present thorny legal dilemmas, but most of what Im describing here involves Republicans consciously choosing not to leave people alone. There was no threat to life or liberty that demanded same-sex-marriage bans, Sharia bans, or draconian state-level immigration laws. They embraced these causes because they believed that picking on these particular groups of people was good politics, because of their supporters animus toward them, and because they believed that their targets lacked the votes or political allies to properly fight back.

Read more from the original source:
The GOP's War on Trans Kids - The Atlantic

Groton Two Democrats one the partynominee and the otherthe incumbent running as a write-in candidateand both former Republicans, arevying for the city's top office inthe Maygeneral election, without a Republican opponent.

In the unprecedented and contentiousrace, the City of Groton Republican Committee chairman said the committee plans to stay neutral, even if individual members support either candidate.

Meanwhile, some Democrats in the city are supportingTown Councilor and former stateRep. Aundr Bumgardner,who won theDemocratic primary after he challengedMayor Keith Hedrick,while others are backing Hedrick, who is the chairman of the city's Democratic Committee and isrunning as a write-in candidate after losing the primary by five votes.

The City of Groton Republican Committee, which did not put forward a slate of candidates after citing a hostile political climate for Republicans, recently issued a news release that the committee "is not involved, supports, favors or endorses in any way either individual candidate in this process."

"Any statement to the contrary is false and misleading," the release states.

Republican Chairman Robert Zuliani said by phone that while he, as an individual, is supporting Hedrick, the committee is not involved.Zuliani said heissued the news releaseafter Bumgardner made statements in a campaign fundraisingemail that his opponent "decided to put personal ambition and love for power ahead of what it means to be a Democrat. He has announced a write-in campaign led by the leadership of the Groton Republican City Committee." Bumgardner added that his "opponent refused to concede, turned his back on the Democratic Party, and is now working with Republicans."

Bumgardneralso posted on Twitter: ".@GrotonDems, I heard we won the Democratic primary for Groton City mayor. Why is our Dem leadership, including (Democratic Town Committee) Chair Conrad Heede, promoting the candidacy of a write-in candidate now colluding with the local GOP City Committee? Asking for 100s of Democratic voters in our city."

In a phone interview, Bumgardner cited that Hedrick's campaign treasurer is Irma Streeter, a member of the city's Republican committee. Hedrick said Streeter brings experience, and Irma and her husband, Jim, who are Republicancommittee members and longtime volunteersin Groton, said they are supporting Hedrick as individuals.

Zuliani said he is not sure whom the other members of the 11-person committee are supporting individually, and he thinks at least one is supporting Bumgardner. He said they have not discussed it as a committee and the committee has never endorsed a Democrat in the general election.Jim Streeter and Zuliani said they are supporting Hedrick as individuals because they feel he is the best candidate.

Zuliani said he was disappointed with the accusation of "colluding." He said there are Democrats and Republicans supporting both candidates and there's nothing wrong with that.

Hedricksaid he is a registered Democrat and is running a grassroots campaign with support from hundreds ofpeople across the city, including Democrats, unaffiliated voters, independents, Green Party members and Republicans.He said he is running as a write-in candidate because voters asked him to get back in the race so they could have a choice, and his campaign is not about "partisan politics."

"The race is about the residents of the City of Groton and about who is qualified to lead the City of Groton for the next two years," Hedrick said.

Bumgardnersaidthat while individuals in the community are entitled to support the individuals of their choice, he committed to supporting the Democratic candidate if he lost the primary. He saidHedrick,as chair of the city'sDemocratic committee,"is obligated to support the entire Democratic slate, just as I have committed to doing."

"I would challenge Mr. Hedrick to reassess his involvement with the Democratic committee, considering he is chair of the very committee that has an endorsed Democratic slate, and he has now launched a write-in candidacy against the top of the ticket of the Democratic slate," Bumgardner added.

Hedrick said individuals on the committee can make their own decisions about whom they support in the election and don't need to be "in lockstep." He also pointed out that the Democratic slate of councilors andcity clerk are running unopposed.

"The race is between me and my opponent," Hedrick said. "There is no need to drive the Groton City Democratic Committee into this. They can support who they want to support and once the election is over, then the Groton City Democratic Committee will need to determine where they will go in the future."

The town committees also said they are staying out of the city elections.

The Groton Republican Town Committee responded on its Facebook page to campaign text messages sent by Bumgardner "stating that the Republicans are working with his opponent. WE ARE NOT. People working with Keith Hedrick, who may or may not be Democrats, are doing so as individuals and their efforts do not represent Groton Republicans in any way shape or form."

Meanwhile, Heede, chair of the Groton Democratic Town Committee, said that committee has "never endorsed candidates for City elections. Since the only two candidates competing in the May election are both Democrats, we expect some of our members will support one or the other candidate."

k.drelich@theday.com

See the original post:
As two Democrats face off in unprecedented Groton City election, Republicans say they will remain neutral - theday.com

ATLANTA (AP) Some of Georgias most prominent corporate leaders on Wednesday began to more forcefully criticize the states sweeping new election law, acknowledging concerns of civil rights activists and Black business executives who say the measure targets nonwhite voters and threatens the democratic process.

The chief executives of Delta Air Lines DAL, +1.14% and Coca-Cola KO, -0.38% pivoted from earlier, more equivocal statements and called the law unacceptable, opening an unusual rift with Republican leaders who championed the legislation and typically enjoy a cozy relationship with the states business community.

The business lobby in Georgia, home to 18 Fortune 500 companies, wields significant clout in state politics. Civil-rights activists blamed influential executives for not helping spike the new law thats become a focal point in the nationwide, partisan fight over voting rights, and there is rising pressure nationally on corporate titans to defend voting rights more explicitly and oppose Republican efforts in states that could follow Georgias lead. Deltas and Coca-Colas latest declarations could push Georgias other marquee brands, including UPS UPS, +0.76% and Home Depot HD, +0.82%, to take a stronger stand.

Deltas statement finally tells the truth even if its late, said Ns Ufot of the New Georgia Project, which has launched an ad campaign targeting major corporations.After Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed the new law last week, Delta issued a statement promoting parts of the law such as expanded weekend voting, but said we understand concerns remain over other provisions and there continues to be work ahead in this important effort.

Chief executive Ed Bastian was more blunt in a memo sent Wednesday to employees. The entire rationale for this bill was based on a lie: that there was widespread voter fraud in Georgia in the 2020 elections. This is simply not true, Bastian wrote, alluding to former President Donald Trumps false claims that he lost because of fraud. Unfortunately, that excuse is being used in states across the nation that are attempting to pass similar legislation to restrict voting rights.

Bastian said Delta joined other major Atlanta corporations to work closely with elected officials from both parties, to try and remove some of the most egregious measures from the bill. We had some success in eliminating the most suppressive tactics that some had proposed.

But, he said, I need to make it crystal clear that the final bill is unacceptable and does not match Deltas values.

See: Delta Air Lines CEO walks back supportive statement on Georgias new voting law

Speaking on CNBC, Coca-Cola chief executive James Quincey called the legislation a step backward.

It does not promote principles we have stood for in Georgia around broad access to voting, around voter convenience, about ensuring election integrity, he said. This legislation is wrong and needs to be remedied.

Kemp insisted the law was being misrepresented. He accused businesses of ignoring their role in its development. Throughout the legislative process, we spoke directly with Delta representatives numerous times, the governor said in a statement. Todays statement stands in stark contrast to our conversations with the company, ignores the content of the new law, and unfortunately continues to spread the same false attacks being repeated by partisan activists.

Republicans in the Georgia House added their disapproval later Wednesday, voting to strip Delta of a tax break worth tens of millions of dollars annually. The vote was rendered symbolic when the state Senate failed to take up the measure before adjourning its yearly session.

From the archives (March 2018): Georgia lawmakers kill jet-fuel tax break after Delta drops NRA discount

The reaction wasnt much friendlier from voting-rights groups that fought the legislation and criticized corporate players for not trying to block it altogether.

Ufot chided Bastian for his timing and alluding to conversations with leaders and employees in the Black community late in the process. She also noted advocates pending demands that Delta and other companies no longer use their political action committees to back lawmakers who support voting restrictions.

Bastians memo did not address that matter. Quincey noted on CNBC that Coca-Cola, even before Georgias action, already had paused its PAC activity and would consider politicians position on voting rights as part of future contributions.

Also on Wednesday, dozens of Black business executives from around the country, including Merck chief executive Kenneth Frazier and former American Express AXP, +2.21% chief executive Kenneth Chenault, released a joint letter in the New York Times urging corporate America to stand up forcefully on matters of racial justice.

Black activists, meanwhile, recall that many U.S. corporations took public stands last summer amid nationwide demonstrations against systemic racism and police violence.

Bishop Reginald Jackson, who presides over more than 400 African Methodist Episcopal churches in Georgia, said too many corporate leaders have been silent on voting laws. He has called for his 90,000 parishioners to boycott Delta, Coca-Cola and other major brands.

This is not just a Georgia issue or problem. It is a national problem that we believe puts our democracy at risk, Jackson said.

Business analysts say the dynamics are challenging for corporations.

Delta clearly felt a lot of heat for its previous statement. Deltas problem now is credibility, said Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst in San Francisco. Will people believe future Delta statements or actions regarding voting rights or social justice?

Kemp signed the measure last Thursday, hours after a negotiated version cleared the state House and Senate in whirlwind votes. It is part of a tide of GOP-sponsored election bills introduced in states across the country after Trumps false assertions about the 2020 elections. Democrat Joe Biden won the presidential race in Georgia by about 12,000 votes out of almost 5 million cast, and Democrats won two Jan. 5 Senate runoffs to give the party control of the chamber on Capitol Hill.

Georgia officials, including Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, also a Republican, vouched for elections accuracy even as they backed some changes that could make it harder for Georgians to cast absentee ballots, a method that more than one-fifth of the November electorate used.

The new law adds a photo ID requirement for voting absentee by mail, cuts the amount of time people have to request an absentee ballot and limits where drop boxes can be placed and when they can be accessed. It also bans people from handing out food or water to voters waiting in line and allows the Republican-controlled State Election Board to remove and replace county election officials while curtailing the power of the secretary of state as Georgias chief elections officer.

Republicans insist the changes are needed to restore voters confidence.

Civil-rights groups have filed federal lawsuits seeking to overturn the Georgia law.

See: Biden sympathetic to call for baseballs All-Star Game to be pulled from Atlanta over Georgia voting restrictions

Theyve otherwise turned their focus to Washington, where Democrats are pushing a comprehensive federal overhaul of election law that could effectively override many changes being enacted in Georgia and considered elsewhere. Advocates want corporate leaders like Bastian and Quincey to help.

Theyve been out there trying to claim victory in Georgia, saying basically that this bill could have been worse, said Mia Arreguin of Progress Georgia. But this was never going to be a voter-friendly bill. Now they can really do something about it in Washington. We arent watching what they say. We are watching what they do.

Bastian nodded toward Capitol Hill action in his memo, declaring that federal proposals would expand voting rights nationwide. He noted one bill is named after the late Atlanta civil rights hero and Delta friend John Lewis, the longtime Georgia congressman who died last year.

But Bastian stopped short of an explicit position. Delta, he wrote, is closely monitoring legislation.

Originally posted here:
Republican lawmakers hit back after Delta CEO blasts Georgia voting law as undemocratic - MarketWatch

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Senate Republicans cleared the way Thursday for new, sweeping restrictions to voting in Texas that take particular aim at forbidding local efforts meant to widen access.

In an overnight vote after more than seven hours of debate, the Texas Senate signed off on Senate Bill 7, which would limit extended early voting hours, prohibit drive-thru voting and make it illegal for local election officials to proactively send applications to vote by mail to voters, even if they qualify.

The legislation is at the forefront of Texas Republicans crusade to further restrict voting in the state after last years election. Although Republicans remain in full control of state government, Texas saw the highest turnout in decades in 2020, with Democrats continuing to drive up their vote counts in the states urban centers and diversifying suburban communities.

Like other proposals under consideration at the Texas Capitol, many of the restrictions in SB 7 would target initiatives championed in those areas to make it easier for more voters to participate in elections.

The bill deemed a priority by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick now heads to the House for consideration after moving rapidly through the Senate. Just two weeks after it was filed, a Senate committee advanced it Friday. That approval followed more than five hours of public testimony, largely in opposition over concerns it would be detrimental to voters who already struggle to vote under the states strict rules for elections.

While presenting the bill to the Senate, Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes said the legislation standardizes and clarifies voting rules so that every Texan has a fair and equal opportunity to vote, regardless of where they live in the state.

Overall, this bill is designed to address areas throughout the process where bad actors can take advantage, so Texans can feel confident that their elections are fair, honest and open, Hughes said.

In Texas and nationally, the Republican campaign to change voting rules in the name of election integrity has been largely built on concerns over widespread voter fraud for which there is little to no evidence. More recently, Texas Republican lawmakers have attempted to reframe their legislative proposals by offering that even one instance of fraud undermines the voice of a legitimate voter.

But Hughes was met by fierce opposition from Senate Democrats who took turns arguing the legislation would make wholesale changes to address isolated and rare incidents of fraud at the expense of voting initiatives that were particularly successful in reaching voters of color.

As I see this bill, its a pure case of suppression. There are some things in here that are really offensive, said state Sen. Borris Miles, D-Houston. This hurts to the core.

The bill originally limited early voting hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., curtailing the extended hours offered last year in Harris County and other large counties where voting ran until 10 p.m. for several days to accommodate people, like shift workers, for whom regular hours dont work. The bill was rewritten before it reached the Senate floor to allow for voting only between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.

But those hours will still prohibit the day of 24-hour voting Harris County offered last November. The legislation would also outlaw the drive-thru voting set up at 10 polling places in the county for the general election.

While questioning Hughes, Democratic state Sen. Carol Alvarado of Houston referenced an analysis by Harris Countys election office that estimated that Black and Hispanic voters cast more than half of the votes counted both at drive-thru sites and during extended hours.

Knowing that, who are you really targeting? Alvarado asked.

Theres nothing in this bill that has to do with targeting specific groups. The rules apply across the board, Hughes replied.

In defending the portions of the bill that target Harris Countys initiatives, Hughes in part pointed to the limitations he claimed drive-thru and overnight voting presented for poll watchers oversight, characterizing them as the eyes and ears of the public. Poll watchers are not public watchdogs but instead inherently partisan figures, appointed by candidates and political parties to serve at polling places. And poll watchers did have access to observe drive-thru and 24-hour voting last year.

If passed into law, the legislation would broaden poll watchers access at polling places, even giving them power to video record voters receiving assistance in filling out their ballots if the poll watcher reasonably believes the help is unlawful. That provision has drawn particular concerns about possible intimidation of voters who speak languages other than English, as well as voters with intellectual or developmental disabilities who may require assistance through prompting or questioning that could be misconstrued as coercion.

The collection of civil rights organizations that have warned the bill could lead to disenfranchisement of voters of color and voters with disabilities did see one of their most prominent concerns addressed in the version of the bill passed by the Senate.

Texas allows people looking to vote by mail based on a disability to request a ballot for an individual election or apply once for ballots in every election in a calendar year. Originally, the bill would have required voters citing a disability to provide proof of their condition or illness, including written documentation from the Social Security Administration or a doctors note, to qualify for the latter. Hughes endorsed an amendment by state Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, to nix that requirement, citing the confusion it had created and feedback from advocates for people with disabilities.

But Republicans rejected more than a dozen amendments offered by Democrats to strike other portions of the bill and to clarify language on how local elections officials could make vote-by-mail applications available to voters seeking them. They also rejected an amendment that appeared to affirm the right to vote.

Just before the Senates vote to advance the bill, state Sen. Royce West of Dallas criticized Republicans for not listening to Democrats concerns about how the bill would harm communities of color represented by senators of color all of whom are Democrats who have faced a legacy of suppression when it comes to voting.

I hope that one day you hear us not only hear us but listen to us, West said. Passage of this bill tonight makes clear that on these issues you have not understood our plight in this country.

SB 7s prohibition on sending vote-by-mail applications to voters who havent requested them comes after a pandemic-era election that saw a significant increase in votes cast by mail as voters tried to keep safe from a deadly virus. Other Texas counties proactively sent applications to voters 65 and older, who automatically qualify to vote by mail, but Harris County came under Republicans scrutiny for attempting to send applications to all 2.4 million registered voters in the county with specific instructions on how to determine if they were eligible. The Texas Supreme Court ultimately blocked that effort.

Texas Republicans attempt to prevent a repeated of that echoes efforts in other states, including Georgia, where Republican lawmakers recently passed a similar prohibition. After voters of color helped flip key states into the Democrats column during the presidential election, Republicans have channeled their myth that the election was stolen into legislative pushback in state capitols across the U.S.

Hughes rejected Texas Democrats inferences throughout the debate that his bill is part of a national push from his party. He noted that aspects of SB 7 carried over from failed legislation proposed during the 2019 legislative session.

If we focus on the provisions of this bill not what the feds are doing but whats in this bill and Texas elections well have to agree these are provisions that will apply across the board, theyre consistent, theyre fair, Hughes said.

But Democrats pointed to the focus on increased voting regulations in diverse, urban areas. Beyond the restrictions targeting Harris County, the legislation would also set specific rules for the distribution of polling places in only the handful of counties with a population of at least 1 million most of which are either under Democratic control or won by Democrats in recent national and statewide elections.

Its a strange, strange coincidence that all of these laws are being filed right now, West said. Thats all Im saying.

More:
Texas Senate advances voter restrictions as part of bigger Republican push - The Texas Tribune

Yettheres little evidence these transplants are the sole, or even the driving,cause of Texass approaching swing-state status. As the Houston Press wrote last year, It is utter nonsenseto assume that every person coming here is some wide-eyed socialist hippie whodreams of high taxes and replacing Whataburgers with soy patties. Another write-up noted that it wassignificantly reductive to ascribe Texass leftward lurch to these new arrivals.

Indeed,theres a kind of cognitive dissonance at play in the Texas rights claim thatthe sole reason for the states political shift is wayward Californians. Afterall, shouldnt these uprooted Californians be fleeing the supposedly failedsocialist policies in California? Why would they be bringing these left-leaningpolicies with them? Are California politicians secretly plotting to spread theseeds of socialism wherever the roots of liberty run deep?

Thiswillingness to pin Texass political changes on an influx of liberals acts as akind of cover, or an excuse, for a state Republican Party unwilling to face newgenerations and demographics of Texans disgusted by the partys Trumpian turn.Younger Texans, nonwhite Texans, second-generation Americans whose immigrantparents selected Dallas and Houston and El Paso as the place to raise theirfamilyall of these contingents are increasingly sloughing off the outdated imagesof Texas that prep schoolers like Roy and Rodimer cling to. Its these true-nativeTexans who are refashioning those tiredtropes,all while steering the state leftward, toward a more multiethnic polity aimedsquarely against the authoritarian rot at the heart of the Texas RepublicanParty.

Buttheres one more irony at the heart of these far-right transplants attemptingto claim the mantle of Texanness. When the state first began convulsing towardindependence in the 1830s, the states residents broke into two camps. On theone end was a multiracial cohort composed of older Anglos and most of thestates Tejanos, content to remain within the anti-slavery republic of Mexico.On the other end was a contingent of young, transplanted Anglos, comprising theso-called War Party.

Read the original:
The Republican Poseurs Who Claim to Be True Texans - The New Republic