Mediaboss Marketing

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

The McKinsey Mayor has a plan: Copy the most successful Democratic politician of the last generation. If an inexperienced but inspiring young black man from Chicago could become president, why not an even less experienced, even younger gay man from Indiana? John McCormick reports for the Wall Street Journal reports that "it is Mr. Buttigieg among the top-tier candidates who is trying the hardest to mimic the former presidents campaign style."

There are just two problems. Pete Buttigieg is running a radically different campaign in a radically different time. Where the party's center of gravity was decidedly moderate in 2008, today it is deeply fissured between moderates and a resurgent left. Thus where the Obama campaign could plausibly both promise optimistic, sweeping change and run on moderate policies, the Buttigieg campaign is going straight for moderates by cynically blasting quality leftist policy like Medicare-for-all and tuition-free college with conservative rhetoric.

Despite his smiling persona, Buttigieg, like Amy Klobuchar, is all about falsely telling the American people what they can't have. Call it the audacity of nope.

Over the past few weeks Buttigieg has started several policy fights with the left. He attacked Elizabeth Warren over her support for Medicare-for-all, demanding to know how she would raise taxes to pay for it despite the fact that he has still not fully costed out his own plans, which would certainly require at least several hundred billion per year in new taxes (though the campaign has said repealing Trump's corporate tax cut might pay for his health-care agenda). More importantly, Buttigieg failed to mention that his own plan would be more expensive on net than Medicare-for-all, because it would not have the same leverage over prices and would preserve much of the current duplicative and wasteful structure.

Most recently, Buttigieg has attacked Medicare with tendentious libertarian ideology about choice. "Youre not free if you dont have health care," he said in a recent stump speech, "but you should have the freedom to choose whether you want it." By this view, non-universal Medicare increases choice and is hence better but elides the fact that it would foreclose the choice of a complete system which covers everyone from cradle to grave, without exception. As usual, libertarian choice rhetoric obscures more than it reveals.

Now, this might sound somewhat familiar. Back in 2008, the major health care policy argument was whether the reform that would become ObamaCare should have an individual mandate. And Obama did cynically promise, Buttigieg style, that his plan would not need one, only to put it back in when it came time to pass the bill. But this was a narrow and technical point that only partly obscured that both candidates basically agreed about what needed to be done. Unlike Buttigieg, Obama was not running far to the right of a full-throated Medicare-for-all supporter.

Buttigieg's case against tuition-free college is just as bad. He would zero out tuition only for families making less than $100,000, and reduce it for families making between that and $150,000. His reason: "I have a hard time getting my head around the idea a majority who earn less because they didnt go to college subsidize a minority who earn more because they did." This is utterly disingenuous, and politically poisonous. In fact, it is the ultra-rich who would pay for tuition-free college under both the Sanders and Warren proposals, with a financial transactions tax and a wealth tax respectively.

As historian Eric Rauchway points out, tuition-free college was also the actual reality for most public American colleges for over a century just the kind of universal program that boosted citizen solidarity and fellow feeling. Indeed, back in 1974, Fred M. Hechinger predicted that then-new tuition fees "threaten to turn higher education into an instigator of class warfare," because if the "children of the [poor] are encouraged to attend college tuitionfree or even on a subsistence subsidy as they ought to be then hardpressed middleclass families are likely to react in anger and political vindictiveness."

That is pretty much exactly what happened, as middle- and upper-middle class families with young children now have to scrimp and save for decades to have a chance at affording college or their kids end up saddled with gigantic student loan debt, or both. Now Buttigieg is exploiting that class divide, using education policy that absolutely would benefit the overwhelming majority to drive a wedge between the middle and working classes. "[W]here I come from, three out of four people dont have a college degree," he said recently. "And if the message were sending to them is that you need a college degree in order to get by in life were leaving most Americans out."

The major concrete effect of this duplicity, of course, would be to protect the top 1 percent from taxation, and make post-secondary education more expensive for people not terribly far up the income ladder.

In the 2008 primary, just like health care, Hillary Clinton and Obama basically agreed with the since-abandoned education reform consensus, and it barely came up during the debates. Unlike Buttigieg, Obama was not running far to the right of a free tuition supporter.

Buttigieg's cynical moderation is reflected in his demographic support, which comes overwhelmingly from older whites. Every supporter quoted in the Wall Street Journal article is over 58. Where Obama racked up tremendous margins among the young and minorities with his energetic charisma, the ongoing Morning Consult poll finds that nearly 90 percent of Buttigieg supporters are white, 59 percent over 55, and 35 percent over 65. Just 6 percent of his supporters are black, and 8 percent between 18-29. The famed Obama coalition it is not.

In retrospect, one can see a great deal of cynicism in the Obama campaign of 2008, especially in his subsequent treatment of homeowners. But partly because his presidency was a disappointment, you can no longer promise "hope and change" without actually backing it up with genuinely aggressive policy.

Buttigieg might be rising in the polls with his elderly coalition, but he'll never recapture that Obama magic.

See original here:
Pete Buttigieg and the audacity of nope - The Week

Schools have been always a good source of primary education. Most parents admit their child to school at the age of 3. School is the second home of a child. Teaching is a separate thing and making sure that the student learns is another thing. Schools make sure students learn by giving assignments (assignmentgeek), quizzes, class test, and many other methods.

Furthermore, school plays a vital role in building a childs character. That is one of the reasons why parents should find a good school.

When it comes to school, you will find two types of school. One is public school while the other is the private school. Both schools have different perks. In other words, both schools have pros as well as cons. In this article, we will talk about both the pros and cons of public and private schools.

Private schools owned by people. In simple words, these schools arent controlled by the government. However, the course pattern is almost the same as in public schools. The books might be different but in the end, the course learning outcome is the same.

One of the biggest advantages is that the classes are smaller. This means that the environment will also be small. Since the classroom is small, the teacher can give attention to all students. This will increase the learning process so that students can understand everything.

The private school doesnt only focus on quality education but they also focus on other activities. You will find extra classes such as PE, music class, art class, etc.

However, the curriculum is the same but, in private schools, they design it in a way to make it more challenging than public school.

One of the biggest problems is the fees. A private school charges a lot of money. This is not easy for every parent to afford such expensive schools. Moreover, because of small classes, it is not easy to secure admission in private schools.

The teachers are not qualified in public schools. In other words, mostly teacher doesnt have a teaching degree (which is one of the requirements set by the accreditation board).

Since the school has less space, therefore not many sports activities can be carried out. In a few private schools, your child needs to pass their entrance exam otherwise they wont offer the admission.

Public schools are controlled by the government. This means that the government takes care of everything from classrooms to the quality of education. There are many positive points as well as defects in public schools.

Public school is free for all children. This means that even if parents cant earn that much to pay tuition fees, they can always think about public school. The school is supported by the government. In other words, the government provides all the funds.

There is no need to pick and drop your child because public school provides transportation facilities. They have big busses and they almost cover all the important places in your city.

One of the amazing parts of public school is that they hire qualified teachers. These teachers meet all the requirements such as the degree of teaching, etc. Not to forget about sports activities. Public school keeps students engage in all kinds of activities from sports to art.

In this case, if a child contains disabilities, there is nothing to worry about because public schools also provide special services. Furthermore, they wont charge you a penny for the special services because it is a part of the Exceptional Student Education program.

Since classes have large therefore it will become hard for the teacher to give attention to all students. However, few public schools dont have such a big environment which results in great teacher-student interaction.

Another problem because of a large number of students causes funding problem. The fund (provided by the government) is not much and that is why the quality of education is decreasing day by day because they cant hire teachers.

There is a serious issue of the bad attitude of students towards others. Bullying, fighting, and many other bad behaviors are found in public schools. Last but not least, in public schools, the region cant be expressed.

School is the place where a child receives an education. It is the responsibility of the school to build up childrens character. There are two types of schools, public schools, and private schools. Both schools have different advantages as well as disadvantages. Parents should look up all the pros and cons of both school then decide what which school will be best for their child.

Read more:
Pros and Cons of Public and Private School - The Libertarian Republic

Bang the gavel harder still doesnt make it right, said Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

They have talked about everything else, but they have offered not one substantive word in the presidents defense, Mr. Nadler said of the Republicans in his closing remarks. In a letter sent during the hearing, he rejected Republicans requests to call witnesses including Mr. Schiff, Mr. Bidens son Hunter and the anonymous C.I.A. whistle-blower whose complaint helped start the inquiry. Republicans could demand a vote on the matter at a later date.

Republican lawmakers fumed when Mr. Berke, who appeared at a witness table at the start of the hearing to deliver his argument against Mr. Trump, later climbed onto the dais and led the cross-examination of Mr. Castor, who was also representing the Intelligence Committee lawyer. It is highly unusual for House lawyers to testify in hearings, for Mr. Castor to be testifying on behalf of two committees and for one lawyer to question another in that way, but all were allowed under the rules.

Hes badgering the witness, Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, shot out as Mr. Berke pressed Mr. Castor.

He is not, Mr. Nadler fired back.

Republicans seized on a small subset of evidence in the report to accuse Democrats of what Mr. Collins called a gratuitous drive-by targeting a conservative journalist and a Republican lawmaker.

At issue were a half-dozen subpoenas issued by Democrats that turned up call records between the journalist, John Solomon of The Hill; Representative Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee; and subjects of the investigation, including Mr. Giuliani. Mr. Collins said he had no problem with the subpoenas, but demanded to know who decided to name Mr. Nunes and Mr. Solomon in the report.

Folks, you have made Joe McCarthy look like a piker, Mr. Sensenbrenner said.

Mr. Goldman declined to discuss investigative decisions, but said such identifications were typical when examining phone records in an inquiry like this. The calls noted in the report all took place around key events under scrutiny.

Read more here:
Democrats Signal Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress Charges Against Trump - The New York Times

TRENTON, N.J. The confrontation was brief but explosive, and it laid bare the deepening fault lines within the Democratic Party in one of Americas bluest states.

New Jersey state troopers singled out Sue Altman, the leader of the left-leaning Working Families Alliance, grabbed her by the arms and forcibly removed her from a standing-room-only State Senate hearing on corporate tax breaks.

She was led past her main political rival, George E. Norcross III, a Democratic power broker who was at the hearing to testify in support of an $11 billion economic incentive program that Ms. Altman had criticized harshly and that is the subject of state investigations and subpoenas.

The imagery and its aftermath have roiled Trenton, exposing a generational and philosophical rift between progressive and mainstream Democrats that is mirrored nationwide.

The clash thrust Ms. Altman into the limelight and offered a vivid example of how the grass-roots energy in New Jersey that helped Democrats flip four seats in Congress last year has spilled into the State House.

It was not fun, Ms. Altman, 37, said of the confrontation. But, she added, it had underscored the current volatility in Trenton a perfect storm that she believes has created an opportunity to reshape New Jerseys political system.

Saily Avelenda, a lawyer from Essex County who worked to elect one of the four new Democrats, Representative Mikie Sherrill, said that New Jerseys progressive activists had deliberately shifted their focus from Washington to the state capital.

We created a conversation that wasnt there before, and, boy, do we need to have it, she said. It culminated in that one picture of Sue.

Images of the clash were shared widely on social media including by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a Democratic presidential candidate amplifying tensions between the Democratic factions that control the state government: lawmakers aligned with the progressive first-term governor, Philip D. Murphy, and those, including the powerful State Senate president, who are linked to Mr. Norcross.

Mr. Norcross, an insurance executive whose company and business associates benefited significantly from tax breaks passed under Mr. Murphys predecessor, Gov. Chris Christie, is widely regarded as the states most powerful unelected official.

His influence extends well beyond New Jersey. He is a member of both President Trumps Mar-a-Lago club and the Democratic National Committee. His brother, Representative Donald Norcross, is a Democrat who represents a South Jersey district.

Ms. Altmans ejection from the November hearing is being reviewed by the attorney general, and it is coloring the discussion of a range of issues, including the renewal of the corporate tax-break program and the fight for control of the Democratic State Committee.

The whole atmosphere here has changed somewhat, said Senator Loretta Weinberg, a Democrat who initially called Ms. Altmans removal one of the hearings disruptions, but later acknowledged that it was improper and embarrassing.

Ms. Altman became the leader of the Working Families Alliance in May, after the previous director left to help run Senator Bernie Sanderss presidential campaign.

A former prep-school history teacher with an M.B.A. from Oxford University, she speaks in rapid-fire sentences that pivot quickly in tone from policy wonk to street-savvy organizer.

She is at home in front of a power-point presentation, holding forth on what she sees as the ultimate prize: dismantling established political structures to make it viable for outsiders to run and win without the blessing of county bosses who still rule with tight fists in many parts of the state.

I want the whole thing to be rethought, she said in an interview at the rowhouse she rents in Camden.

To some people, Ms. Altmans background makes her an unlikely champion of Camden, one of the poorest cities in the United States. She is an Ivy-League educated former basketball star who was raised in Hunterdon County, an affluent enclave known for its horse farms.

Critics have said that Ms. Altman, who earns $75,000 in her new role, has been reluctant to speak out on issues that might upset the governor.

She was a registered Republican until 2008. My parents were, so I just signed up as them, she said. She later registered without a party affiliation before becoming a Democrat.

Her outspokenness about corporate tax breaks and her decision to live in Camden, a city seen as the Norcross familys inviolable power base, made her a ready target for opponents long before the contentious Senate hearing.

Felisha Reyes-Morton, a Camden councilwoman, said that she was tired of hearing Ms. Altman blame George Norcross and the tax breaks for everything that was wrong with the city.

I think she uses it to her advantage, not that shes a caring Camden resident, Ms. Reyes-Morton said.

Ms. Altman regularly spars with the powers-that-be on Twitter and seems to revel in the role of outside agitator. Barely a week into her job as the alliances director, she participated in a demonstration where protesters stood near an inflatable pig handing out fake million-dollar bills stamped with Mr. Norcrosss face.

She credits her years on the basketball court with making her comfortable in the political scrum. After leading her college team at Columbia University in scoring, she played professionally in Ireland and Germany. She went on to teach and coach at Blair Academy before studying at Oxford, where she also played basketball.

Youre going to get booed, she said. You still have to make your foul shots.

She is flirting with the possibility of making a primary run against Donald Norcross. I havent ruled it out, she said, despite taking no concrete steps toward a campaign.

A spokesman for the congressman declined to comment, but provided a list of re-election endorsements that include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Planned Parenthood.

The alliance, a wing of a national labor-backed umbrella organization, cites New Jerseys adoption of a $15 minimum wage in February as a key victory. The groups legislative agenda syncs closely with the governors, and includes approving drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, a so-called millionaires tax and the legalization of recreational marijuana.

When the Democratic Party is not fighting for progressive values, were going to fight the Democratic Party, said Kevin Brown, a vice president of the 32BJ Service Employees International Union, an alliance member.

A senior Murphy administration official who was not authorized to speak publicly said that in the past year Ms. Altman had influenced the debate in Trenton more than any other person, calling her a game changer.

A fellow Camden activist described her as fierce.

She doesnt have to stay here, said Ronsha Dickerson, 42, an African-American mother of six who works for an organization that has called for a moratorium on new charter schools in Camden. But shes chosen this space to really be committed to making change.

In college, Ms. Altman took up boxing to stay in shape. She picked it up again this past fall, parrying punches with the ease of a lifelong athlete during a recent workout.

As she left the gym, Wayne Shareef Jr., a boxing coach and trainer, jokingly cautioned her not to get in trouble.

I cant guarantee that, she said, chuckling.

A spokesman for George Norcross, Daniel Fee, bristled at the depiction of Ms. Altman as an independent reformer. He pointed to a $100,000 donation to the Working Families Alliance from New Direction New Jersey, a group aligned with Mr. Murphy, as evidence of her financial dependence on the governor.

The alliance is not required to disclose its donors, but Ms. Altman has been criticized for not doing so voluntarily.

I wouldnt ascribe to them any success other than getting media coverage, Mr. Fee said. The way to make change is to win elections, and so far they havent.

The well-oiled political organizations in New Jerseys 21 counties are skilled at nurturing obedience, in large part by controlling which candidates share the ballot line with incumbents. The structure makes it almost impossible for an insurgent to win a primary, as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did in New York.

Its a self-fulfilling prophecy, said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. Once youve got the line, you hold the power to keep the line.

Perhaps nowhere is the schism within the Democratic Party clearer than in the fight over who will lead the state committee. The victor controls the partys purse strings, and the true prize: command over selecting a committee that will redraw the legislative map, a power that can make or break candidates and is a potent bargaining chip.

Ms. Avelenda was hired two weeks ago to be the campaign manager for Mr. Murphys choice, John Currie, the current state party chairman. Mr. Currie is locked in an uphill race against LeRoy Jones, who has the support of George Norcross and the Senate president, Stephen M. Sweeney.

If Mr. Currie loses, the governor will face re-election in 2021 with a party chairman he did not select, or want.

Ms. Altman welcomed the choice of Ms. Avelenda, who may be best known from a 2017 episode involving Rodney Frelinghuysen, to run Mr. Curries campaign.

That year, Mr. Frelinghuysen, New Jerseys most powerful member of Congress at the time, highlighted Ms. Avelendas political activism in a personal note attached to a fund-raising letter sent to a member of the board at the bank where she worked.

She resigned from the bank and devoted herself to electing a Democrat; Mr. Frelinghuysen decided not to seek re-election.

Love seeing the Dems recognize the talents of progressive women, Ms. Altman wrote on Twitter. Plus, we need a win.

Go here to read the rest:
Why a Progressive Democrat Was Dragged Out of the N.J. Senate - The New York Times

PARIS (AP) The presidents of Ukraine and Russia agreed Monday to revive the peace process on the bloody separatist conflict in eastern Ukraine and exchange all their prisoners, but they failed to resolve crucial issues such as a timeline on local elections and control of the borders in the rebel-held region.

At the first meeting between new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two leaders failed to find a compromise to bring an end to the 5-year-old war that has killed 14,000 people, emboldened the Kremlin and reshaped European geopolitics.

But they did agree to try again in four months to find new solutions, said French President Emmanuel Macron, who mediated the talks along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and called them fruitful in that it brought all four leaders together.

There are disagreements, especially on timeline and next steps. We had a very long discussion on this, Macron said at a news conference after the talks in the Elysee palace.

The talks focused on reviving a largely stalled 2015 peace agreement intended to end fighting between Ukrainian troops and Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Putin said they agreed that there was no alternative to the 2015 accord reached in the Belarusian capital of Minsk. He emphasized that Ukraine should quickly extend a law giving wide autonomy to the rebel-held regions in line with the deal and also approve a legislation granting amnesty to the rebels.

He added that in addition to the prisoner swap, agreement was reached to continue pulling back troops in other areas in the east, clear mines there and remove fortifications.

Zelenskiy acknowledged many previous cease-fire deals didnt hold but he added that this time we agreed to treat it seriously.

Im convinced that if all parties want it strongly, we will be able to implement it, he said.

Ukraine and Russia conducted several rounds of prisoner exchange, most recently in September. Mondays deal goes further, envisaging a blanket all for all exchange of all known prisoners held by Ukraine and the rebels.

Zelenskiy made a particular emphasis on that.

I would very much like our people to come home in time to spend the New Year holidays with their families, Zelenskiy said after the talks.

But there was little clarity on the key contentious issues autonomy for the east and control of the border.

Russia wanted the summit to increase pressure on Zelenskiy to fulfill the 2015 Minsk peace accord, which promises wide autonomy to Ukraines rebel-held regions.

The Minsk deal puts forth that Ukraine can regain control over the border with Russia in the separatist-held regions only after they are granted a broad self-rule and hold local elections.

In particular, it stipulates that the Ukrainian law should allow municipal authorities in the east to appoint judges and prosecutors in the region and form local police. It notes that the law should also provide for an amnesty for those who took part in the fighting. Those provisions were anathema to many in Ukraine.

The 2015 deal was a diplomatic coup for Russia, ensuring that the rebel regions get a broad authority and resources to survive on their own without cross-border support.

Zelenskiy wants to tweak the timeline laid out in the accord, which calls for Ukraine to be able to regain control of its border with Russia only after local elections are held in the separatist regions and the regions receive autonomous status. He says Ukraine must get control of its border first before local elections are held, but the Kremlin insists thats not an option.

The summit was the biggest test yet for Zelenskiy, a comic actor and political novice who won the presidency this year in a landslide partly on promises to end the war.

Macron praised Zelenskiys courage and determination, adding that he made gestures that allowed peace talks to be relaunched.

Today an important step was made. Thats the first time in three years such a summit is being held,Macron said. Thats the first time President Zelenskiy and President Putin are meeting... and we have tangible results.

A major breakthrough at the Paris talks had been seen as unlikely, and Ukrainian protesters in Kyiv had put pressure on their new leader not to surrender too much to Putin, who has been in office nearly 20 years.

But the fact that Putin and Zelenskiy met at all was a significant step after years of war. Putin and Zelenskiy faced each other across the table, flanked by Macron and Merkel. Putin and Zelenskiy also held a separate one-on-one meeting.

While opinion surveys have shown an overwhelming support for Zelenskiys peace efforts, a minority opposing them is highly-mobilized and energetic. Thousands rallied on Kyivs man square Sunday to warn him against making any concessions, and some set up a tent camp around his headquarters. Cries of shame! and whistles of derision greeted announcements from the leaders news conference in Paris.

We didnt see any real steps Putin did not promise control of the border or the withdrawal of his troops, 38-year-old demonstrator Nina Onufrik said.

Despite the 2015 peace agreement, Ukrainian soldiers and Russia-backed separatists have continued to exchange fire.

Germany and France helped to broker the Minsk accord, in hopes of ending a conflict on Europes eastern edge that has complicated relations with Russia, a powerful trading partner and diplomatic player.

But with progress stalled, the leaders havent met since 2016. Ukraine and Russia struck a prisoner exchange deal in September and agreed on a troop and heavy weapons pullback from two locations in eastern Ukraine. Russia has also released three Ukrainian navy ships that were seized a year ago.

While Zelenskiy still enjoys broad public support, he has been embarrassed by the scandal around his discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump that have unleashed an impeachment inquiry in Washington. The U.S. is an important military backer for Ukraine, which is hugely out-gunned by Russia.

While the U.S. was never part of this peace process, U.S. backing has strengthened Ukraines overall negotiating position with Russia in the past. Now that support is increasingly in doubt, after the Trump administration froze military aid earlier this year and is increasingly focused on Trumps re-election bid. With U.S. influence waning around the world, many in Kyiv see one clear winner: Russia.

Russia denies providing troops and weapons to help the separatists but has maintained political support and sent aid. It argues that people in eastern Ukraine feel stronger cultural and linguistic ties with Russia than with Western-leaning Kyiv.

The Kremlin hopes that an end to the conflict could also lead to the eventual lifting of EU sanctions against Russia linked to the fighting, which European businesses have pushed for. The EU and U.S. imposed separate sanctions on Russia over its annexation of Ukraines Crimean Peninsula in 2014.

The EU is expected to extend sanctions this week by another six months. Arriving for meetings in Brussels on Monday, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said: At the moment I see no grounds to change anything in the European Unions sanctions policy toward Russia in this matter. It would be good if we could get there at some point.

Macron and Merkel said they agreed to intensify the monitoring by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is now only active for 12 hours a day and conduct it 24 hours a day.

___

Karmanau reported from Kyiv. Sylvie Corbet and Angela Charlton in Paris, Inna Varenytsia in eastern Ukraine, Daria Litvinova in Moscow and Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed.

Read the original:
Russia, Ukraine to revive peace process amid little progress - The Associated Press