Daily Archives: June 14, 2017

On Dec. 4 last year, less than a month after Donald Trump had defeated Hillary Clinton, Austria held a revote in its presidential election, which pitted Alexander Van der Bellen, a liberal who had the backing of the Green Party, against Norbert Hofer of the right-wing Freedom Party. In May 2016, Van der Bellen had defeated Hofer by just more than 30,000 votes receiving 50.3 percent of the vote to Hofers 49.7 percent but the results had been annulled and a new election had been declared. Hofer had to like his chances: Polls showed a close race, but with him ever so slightly ahead in the polling average. Hofer cited Trump as an inspiration and said that he, like Trump, could overcome headwinds from the political establishment.

So what happened? Van der Bellen won by nearly 8 percentage points. Not only did Hofer receive a smaller share of the vote than in May, but he also had fewer votes despite a higher turnout. Something had caused Austrians to change their minds and decide that Hofers brand of populism wasnt such a good idea after all.

Left: Far-right candidate Norbert Hofer. Right: Independent presidential candidate Alexander van der Bellen.

Georg Hochmuth/AFP/Getty Images; Alex Domanski/Getty Images

The result didnt get that much attention in the news outlets I follow, perhaps because it went against the emerging narrative that right-wing populism was on the upswing. But the May and December elections in Austria made for an interesting controlled experiment. The same two candidates were on the ballot, but in the intervening period Trump had won the American election and the United Kingdom had voted to leave the European Union. If the populist tide were rising, Hofer should have been able to overcome his tiny deficit with Van der Bellen and win. Instead, he backslid. It struck me as a potential sign that Trumps election could represent the crest of the populist movement, rather than the beginning of a nationalist wave:

It was also just one data point, and so it had to be interpreted with caution. But the pattern has been repeated so far in every major European election since Trumps victory. In the Netherlands, France and the U.K., right-wing parties faded down the stretch run of their campaigns and then further underperformed their polls on election day. (The latest example came on Sunday in the French legislative elections, when Marine Le Pens National Front received only 13 percent of the vote and one to five seats in the French National Assembly.) The right-wing Alternative for Germany has also faded in polls of the German federal election, which will be contested in September.

The beneficiaries of the right-wing decline have variously been politicians on the left (such as Austrias Van der Bellen), the center-left (such as Frances Emmanuel Macron) and the center-right (such as Germanys Angela Merkel, whose Christian Democratic Union has rebounded in polls). But theres been another pattern in who gains or loses support: The warmer a candidates relationship with Trump, the worse he or she has tended to do.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron have both been the beneficiaries of the right-wing decline.

Gabriel Rossi/LatinContent/Getty Images; Lionel Bonaventure/AFP/Getty Images

Merkel, for instance, has often been criticized by Trump and has often criticized him back. Her popularity has increased, and her advisers have half-jokingly credited the Trump factor for the sharp rebound in her approval ratings over the past year.

By contrast, U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May has a warmer relationship with Trump. She was the first foreign leader to visit Trump in January after his inauguration, when she congratulated him on his stunning electoral victory. But she was criticized for not pushing back on Trump as much as her European colleagues or her rivals from other parties after Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris climate accords on June 1 and then instigated a fight with the mayor of London after the terrorist attack in London two days later. Her Conservatives suffered a humiliating result, blowing a 17 percentage point polling lead and losing their majority in Parliament; its now not clear how much longer shell continue as prime minister. Trump was not Mays only problem, but he certainly didnt help.

Lets take a slightly more formal tour of the evidence from these countries:

Geert Wilders.

Carl Court/Getty Images

The Netherlands Geert Wilders, of the nationalist Party for Freedom (in Dutch, Partij voor de Vrijheid or PVV), hailed Trumps victory and predicted that it would presage a populist uprising in Europe. And PVV initially rose in the polls after the U.S. election, climbing to a peak of about 22 percent of the vote in mid-December potentially enough to make it the largest party in the Dutch parliament. But it faded over the course of the election, falling below 15 percent in late polls and then finishing with just 13 percent of the vote on election day on March 15. Those results were broadly in line with the 2010 and 2012 elections, when Wilders party had received between 10 and 15 percent of the vote. The center-right, pro-Europe VVD remains the largest party in the Netherlands.

Marine Le Pen.

Chesnot/Getty Images

Reciprocating praise that Le Pen had offered to Trump, Trump expressed support for Le Pen after a terrorist attack in Paris in April and predicted that it would probably help her to win the French presidential election. But over the course of a topsy-turvy race, Le Pens trajectory was downward. Last fall, shed projected to finish with 25 to 30 percent of the vote in the first round of the election, which would probably have been enough for her to finish in pole position for the top-two runoff. Her numbers declined in December and January, however, and then again late in the campaign. She held onto the second position to make the runoff, but just barely, with 21 percent of the vote. Then she was defeated 66-34 percent by Macron in the runoff, a considerably wider landslide than polls predicted.

Le Pens National Front endured another disappointing performance over the weekend in the French legislative elections. Initially polling in the low 20s close to Le Pens share of the vote in the first round of the presidential election the party declined in polls and turned out to receive only 13 percent of the vote, about the same as their 14 percent in 2012. As a result, National Front will have only a few seats in the French Assembly while Macrons En Marche! which ran jointly with another centrist party will have a supermajority.

Theresa May.

Jack Taylor/Getty Image

While the big news in the U.K. was Mays failed gamble in calling a snap parliamentary election, it was also a poor election for the populist, anti-Europe UK Independence Party. Having received 13 percent of the vote in 2015, UKIP initially appeared poised to replicate that tally in 2017 (despite arguably having had its raison dtre removed by the Brexit vote). But it began to decline in polls in the spring, and the slump accelerated after the election was called in April. UKIP turned out to receive less than 2 percent of the vote and lost its only seat in Parliament.

UKIPs collapse in some ways makes Mays performance even harder to excuse. Most of the UKIP vote went to the Conservatives, providing them with a boost in constituencies where UKIP had run well in 2015. But the Conservatives lost votes on net to Labour (although there was movement in both directions), Liberal Democrats and other parties. Its perhaps noteworthy that Conservatives performed especially poorly in London after Trump criticized London Mayor (and Labour Party member) Sadiq Khan, losing wealthy constituencies such as Kensington that had voted Conservative for decades.

Frauke Petry.

Markus Schreiber/AP photo

The German election to fill seats in the Bundestag isnt until September, but theres already been a fair amount of movement in the polls. Merkels CDU/CSU has rebounded to the mid- to high 30s from the low 30s last year. And the left-leaning Social Democratic Party surged after Martin Schulz, the former president of the European Parliament, announced in January that hed be their candidate for the chancellorship (although the so-called Schulz effect has since faded slightly). Thus, the election is shaping up as contest between Schulz, who has sometimes been compared to Bernie Sanders and who is loudly and proudly pro-Europe, and Merkel, perhaps the worlds most famous advocate of European integration.

The losers have been various smaller parties, but especially the right-wing Alternative for Germany (in German, Alternative fr Deutschland or AfD) and their leader, Frauke Petry, who have fallen from around 12 to 13 percent in the polls late last year to roughly 8 percent now. Meanwhile, both Schulz and Merkel have sought to wash their hands of Trump. Instead of criticizing Merkel for being too accommodating to Trump, Schulz instead recently denounced Trump for how hed treated Merkel.

So if youre keeping score at home, right-wing nationalist parties have had disappointing results in Austria, the Netherlands, France and the U.K., and they appear poised for one in Germany, although theres a long way to go there. I havent cherry-picked these outcomes; these are the the major elections in Western Europe this year. If you want to get more obscure, the nationalist Finns Party underperformed its polls and lost a significant number of seats in the Finnish municipal elections in April, while the United Patriots, a coalition of nationalist parties, lost three seats in the Bulgarian parliamentary elections in March.

Despite the differences in electoral systems from country to country and the quirky nature of some of the contests, such as in France its been a remarkably consistent pattern. The nationalist party fades as the election heats up and it begins to receive more scrutiny. Then it further underperforms its polls on election day, sometimes by several percentage points.

While theres no smoking gun to attribute this shift to Trump, theres a lot of circumstantial evidence. The timing lines up well: European right-wing parties had generally been gaining ground in elections until late last year; now we suddenly have several examples of their position receding. Trump is highly unpopular in Europe, especially in some of the countries to have held elections so far. Several of the candidates who fared poorly had praised Trump and vice versa. Hes explicitly become a subject of debate among the candidates in Germany and the U.K. To the extent the populist wave was partly an anti-establishment wave, Trump the president of the most powerful country on earth has now become a symbol of the establishment, at least to Europeans.

There are also several caveats. While there have been fairly consistent patterns in elections in the wealthy nations of Western Europe, we have little evidence for what will happen in the former nations of the Eastern Bloc, such as Hungary, which has moved substantially to the right in recent years. (The next Hungarian parliamentary election is scheduled for early next year.) Turkey is a problematic case, obviously, especially given questions about whether elections are free or fair there under Tayyip Erdogan.

And even within these Western European countries, while support for nationalist parties has generally been lower than it was a year or two ago, it may still be higher than it was 10 or 20 years ago.

Politics is often cyclical, and endless series of reactions and counterreactions. Sometimes, what seems like the surest sign of an emerging trend can turn out to be its peak instead. Its usually hard to tell when youre in the midst of it. Trump probably hasnt set the nationalist cause back by decades, and the rise of authoritarianism continues to represent an existential threat to liberal democracy. But Trump may have set his cause back by years, especially in Western Europe. At the very least, its become harder to make the case that the nationalist tide is still on the rise.

Read the original here:

Donald Trump Is Making Europe Liberal Again - FiveThirtyEight

NewsBusters (blog)

Hulu's 'Casual' Shoehorns Liberal Propaganda - NewsBusters NewsBusters (blog) The writers of Hulu's Casual are determined to stick in liberal propaganda wherever they see fit, as shown by Tuesday's episode, Troubleshooting. and more »

The rest is here:

Hulu's 'Casual' Shoehorns Liberal Propaganda - NewsBusters - NewsBusters (blog)

Alan Suderman, The Associated Press Published 8:53 p.m. ET June 13, 2017 | Updated 6 hours ago

Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam greets voters and supporters at the Larchmont Elementary School polling place on Election Day in Norfolk, Va., June 13, 2017.(Photo: Stephen M. Katz, The Virginian-Pilot via AP)

RICHMOND, Va. Virginias establishment-favored lieutenant governor won the Democratic nomination in the closely watched race for governor Tuesday, defeating a more liberal insurgent challenger in a contest to be one of the partys standard-bearers against President Donald Trump.

Ralph Northam defeated former U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello, who ran as an unapologetic liberal crusader supported by prominent national Democrats like Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren as the best candidate to take on Trump.

The three-way Republican primary remains too close to call. The general election is expected to be an early referendum on the president and a preview of what the 2018 midterm elections will look like.

Northam, a low-key pediatric neurologist, won running as a pragmatist with states Democratic establishments firm support. He has also vowed to fight Trump, but with pledges to work with state Republican lawmakers on issues like a tax overhaul.

Virginia is one of only two states electing new governors this year, and the swing-state contest is likely to draw intense national scrutiny for signs of how voters are reacting to Trumps first year in office.

Frank Von Richter said he voted for Northam because he likes that the lieutenant governor is more middle of the road than Perriello and thinks he will work better with a Republican-controlled General Assembly. The retired Richmond resident said Northam is strong on issues like education and health care and will continue Gov. Terry McAuliffes efforts to bring more jobs to Virginia.

I think he has the ability to move Virginia forward like McAuliffe has, the 80-year-old said.

McAuliffe, who, like U.S. Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine of Virginia, backed Northam, is barred from seeking a consecutive term.

Perriello made a surprise entrance into the race in January and faced an uphill climb from the beginning. He energized many new-to-politics voters who oppose Trump and promised to support a grab-bag of progressive policies, like raising taxes on the wealthy, using public funds for political campaigns or mandating union membership.

Although he received a large amount of attention and praise from prominent national Democrats, Perriello was ultimately unable to expand the universe of Democratic primary voters enough to counter Northams advantages.

Northam had been essentially campaigning for years, making key contacts with influential power brokers like prominent African-American politicians and religious leaders, and building up a large cash advantage that let him outspend Perriello on TV advertising in the closing weeks of the race.

Northams campaign ran a more traditional campaign focused heavily on his biography rural upbringing, Army veteran, pediatric neurologist as well as his endorsements from key progressive groups that make up the Democratic base like teachers and abortion-rights groups.

He will face Republican Ed Gillespie who narrowly won his partys nomination in Virginias race for governor, eking out a victory against an ardent supporter of President Trump.

Gillespie is a former Republican National Committee Chairman who had a huge fundraising advantage and enjoyed the solid backing of most state elected Republicans, but largely kept Trump at arms length during the campaign.

On Tuesday, he barely defeated Corey Stewart, a former Trump state campaign chairman who made preserving Virginias Confederate history a top campaign issue. The close results shocked many political watchers and shows Trumps enduring appeal among Republican voters in Virginia.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2slIVq3

Read more from the original source:

Northam beats Sanders-backed liberal in Va. gubernatorial primary; Gillespie wins GOP nomination - USA TODAY

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Almost six out of 10 American voters are angry and dissatisfied with how the media is covering politics, according to a new Quinnipiac poll. Someone has finally united us, and its through rejection of the 24/7 media (read liberal) hate-fest of President Trump.

Thats a good sign for the country, but not so much for the business of news or for the Democratic Party. Its indicators like this that should be considered seriously by the Democrats and their still failing water carriers. Their spoiled, elitist hatred for the president is not translating well for the American people.

As Obamacare continues its collapse and terrorist attacks around the world are an almost daily event, New Yorks elite remain rabidly enraged at Mr. Trump. Ironically, hes the only person so new to the political scene to not have had a hand in any of the governmental schemes currently ruining peoples lives.

Yet, its Mr. Trump who apparently should be murdered because, you know, after 144 days hes a tyrant or something. According to Rasmussen, consumer confidence is the second-highest its been in the indexs history. The market cap of the U.S. stock market has risen more than $3 trillion since Mr. Trump was elected. Small-business confidence has surged to a 12-year high. In May, the unemployment rate hit a 16-year low.

Yeah, for New York limousine liberals that amounts to a tyranny, especially because their political bread-and-butter relies on victimhood. Mr. Trump is threatening the only thing the Democrats have left suffering.

Whats a panicked gang to do? Much is being made of the New York Public Theaters play featuring the murder of Mr. Trump. Sure, its titled Julius Caesar, but we know thats an inside joke. For those not living in the pretend-world of liberals, the people in charge of the New York Public Theater are using Shakespeare simply as cover for their horrific fantasy, as its rather likely their creative process first involved wanting to kill the president, then they went scrounging around to find the fitting Shakespeare.

How clever they are, as they no doubt assure themselves.

Drowning in smug, the theater released a statement which, in part read: Our production of Julius Caesar in no way advocates violence toward anyone. Shakespeares play, and our production, make the opposite point: Those who attempt to defend democracy by undemocratic means pay a terrible price and destroy the very thing they are fighting to save.

How kind of them. Americans appalled at the presentation of the murder of our sitting president are reprimanded by our artistic betters for not understanding Shakespeare, and the message of Julius Caesar.

Newsflash for artistes: Context matters. Shakespeares intent was based on an historical personage for a reason. When you murder a living president, who is loathed by the very people making the presentation, you lose the right to point back at the original playwright who knew the difference between a historical lesson and contemporary provocation.

This is dangerous for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the inuring of the public to the idea of violence being committed against the president. After the London Bridge terrorist attack, we were told by various media that Londoners were getting used to terrorism.

One man was lauded for keeping his beer with him as he ran from the carnage. The Associated Press headline: UK hails man who fled attack holding beer an unlikely hero.

This is what liberals everywhere want. Why? Because it keeps them from having to face the consequences of their actions. They create chaos and then have no solutions for the collapse of civil society, so the goal becomes to make obscene violence and chaos a normal, or as former Secretary of State John Kerry wished about terrorism, for it to be considered simply a nuisance.

There are many reasons why six out of 10 Americans are angry at the media, defending what the New York Public Theater has done is part of it (You ignorant fools dont understand Shakespeare), but also in purveying fake news. Former FBI Director James B. Comey told us the foundation story in The New York Times claiming Trump campaign collusion with Russia was dead wrong. CNN had to retract a story a day before Mr. Comeys testimony claiming he would deny he told Mr. Trump he wasnt under investigation. The opposite was true.

During an appearance on Fox News Fox & Friends, this columnist was on a panel that included a perfectly nice young man who, as a liberal, explained essentially that the president was unable to work because of the headlines surrounding his presidency. I responded, noting that headlines are not reality, despite the fact that for the years prior to new media and the internet, headlines and people like Walter Cronkite did control what the American people saw and heard. They did control reality.

When liberals lose that, their mask is ripped off as they produce photographs of the president beheaded ISIS-style, or a play featuring his torturous murder night after night.

But Donald Trump is the tyrant. Got it.

Tammy Bruce, author and Fox News contributor, is a radio talk show host.

Read the original here:

Trump and the liberal hate-fest - Washington Times

The executive director of the B.C. Liberal Party announced via social media Tuesday that she is leaving her post.

Laura Miller was also the Liberal campaign director for the May 9 election in which the party lost its majority in the legislature.

Miller said on Twitter that she is moving on professionally and geographically at the end of the month after more than three years with the B.C. Liberals.

She expressed her gratitude to Premier Christy Clark and Liberal Party president Sharon White for the incredible opportunity and experience.

The party said in a statement that Miller signed on to see the party through the 2017 election campaign and now is transitioning out of her role as planned.

The search for Millers replacement is already underway, the statement said.

White thanked Miller for dedicating her talents, energy, and excellence to a strong party and B.C.

Its the second time Miller has left the B.C. Liberal Party.

She stepped aside in December 2015 after being charged in Ontario with breach of trust and mischief in connection with the alleged deletion of government documents while she was deputy chief of staff under former Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty.

Miller denied any wrongdoing and vowed to vigorously defend herself in court.

The Liberals rehired Miller three months later, saying she had organized her defence and was in a position to return.

Clark supported the decision.

Its the fair and right approach one that respects our court process, including the fundamental principle that every person is innocent unless proven otherwise, she said.

Millers case is set to go to trial this fall.

See the original post:

BC Liberal director moving on - Times Colonist

Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer scolded those who kept to an unsubstantiated belief in the Russian collusion story. He said that Attorney General Jeff Sessions held off his accusers at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing and exposed the absurdity of the Russian collusion accusations. He made the comments Tuesday on Fox News.

I think helped himself a lot, Krauthammer explained. He basically uncovered, or exposed the absurdity of this whole exercise.

I mean this is supposed to be about Russian meddling in our election, he explained. That wasnt even in an issue. Then it was supposed to be about the collusion.

Theres not an ounce of evidence, he said, Im open to empirical evidence, I used to be a doctor. You show me the facts, Im willing to change my opinion. You know this has been investigated for seven months. There have been leaks like the Titanic, and yet has there been any leak of anything implicating the president in the collusion with the Russians? No.

And trying to tag it on Sessions is even more absurd, he added. I mean the man says and I think he was right in saying, that the big charge against him came from what was clear innuendo from the Comey testimony, where he implied there was something nefarious that he could not discuss in public, that would have forced a recusal of the attorney general on the Russia case.

Of course, he continued, the story that was then leaked from the closed session where Comey was, the third meeting, which is exposed as a ridiculous charge. All of us have been at receptions where you meet two dozen people. You cant remember half of them, and he says, which is quite likely, he had no interaction at all. And if he had any interaction, it would have been brief, completely inconsequential, and forgettable.

So wheres the charge? Krauthammer concluded. Wheres the crime?

Lordy, Im not a fan of Donald Trump, Krauthammer said, referring to his former opposition to the candidacy of Donald Trump in the primaries.

But this seems to me to be a case of all smoke, no fire, he explained. Yes, it all looks like this is a coverup, but wheres the crime? Its the first coverup in history in absence of a crime.

You show me the crime, he challenged, I will admit it. But show it to me. And going after Sessions, is simply a way to go after Trump.

I think, look, he won, fair and square, Krauthammer continued. Hes elected, hes the president. You dont like it? Then you vote them out of office next time around. But the idea that theres this kinda of obligation to bring him down to actually build a case for impeachment after three four months is absurd.

And I think its sort of un-American, he added. If he commits high crimes and misdemeanors, yes, but show me. Show me the evidence and I think this is just a sideshow of a sideshow. Theyre going up tributaries to try to find anybody who can be condemned.

I thought Sessions did a very good job fending off all of these charges, he concluded. Where is the evidence of obstruction? I dont see it.

Krauthammer had been a stalwart critic of Trump in the primaries, even eliciting a few Twitter insults from the then-candidate.

The Fox News contributor has since defended the president when he believed he was being unfairly treated by the media or by the Democrats.

Sessions defended himself and his reputation in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, especially when challenged by Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oreg.), who accused him of stonewalling the committee.

Continue reading here:

Krauthammer says Sessions exposed the absurdity of this liberal narrative - TheBlaze.com