Monthly Archives: April 2020

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez questions Acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan as he testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, July 18, 2019. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the $484 billion coronavirus relief package to replenish the depleted small business loan program, with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) being the only Democrat in both the House or Senate to oppose the bill.

The House passed the bill, which includes $310 billion for the governments phase-three Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), by a 388-5 margin sending it to President Trumps desk after the Senate passed the bill on Tuesday. Four House Republicans Andy Biggs of Arizona, Ken Buck of Colorado, Jody Hice of Georgia, and Thomas Massie of Kentucky along with former Republican Justin Amash (I., Mich.) joined Ocasio-Cortez in voting against the bill.

Speaking to CNNs Manu Raju, Ocasio-Cortez explained that her problem with the bill was giving Republicans what they want.

McConnell is already talking about the deficit the moment we talk about getting people relief, she said. . . . That to me is a signal that Republicans are done.

The new funding includes $60 billion $50 billion in loans and $10 billion in grants for companies with less than $50 billion in total assets, with $30 billion of that for firms with less than $10 billion. The bill also includes $75 billion in additional funding for hospitals and health care providers, and $25 billion to help fund the nationwide effort to expand coronavirus testing.

Republicans and Democrats have sparred over the draining of SBA funding, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) saying Wednesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) delayed the bill, but admitted that Democrats did reject a simple reauthorization proposed by Republicans.

Democrats should never have made the Paycheck Protection Program lapse. The House must follow the Senates lead and vote today to re-open it, McConnell tweeted ahead of the House vote Thursday.

Ocasio-Cortez drew criticism earlier this week for tweeting, and then deleting, praise over the U.S. oil market reaching negative territory for the first time ever. Over four million Americans applied for unemployment last week, according to data released Thursday, bringing the number of coronavirus jobless claims to over 26 million since last month.

See original here:

AOC Only Democrat to Vote Against $484 Billion Coronavirus Relief Package - National Review

The Democratic Party still expects to hold an in-person convention to nominate Joe Biden for president.

The event is currently scheduled to take place in Milwaukee during the week of Aug. 17. Exact dates are unclear since party brass scrapped the original plans to host the convention from July 13-16.

We expect to hold an in-person convention in Milwaukee. We are planning for that, Democratic Party Chairman Tom Perez told reporters Thursday. At the same time, we do not put our public health heads in the sand. We dont do that right now. We wont do that in the run-up.

Perez left open the idea that part of the convention would be conducted virtually but was hopeful that it will be safe to congregate at the designated venue, the Milwaukee Bucks basketball arena, by August.

Wisconsin has confirmed more than 5,000 coronavirus cases and more than 250 related deaths, with stay-at-home order running until May 26 under Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.

Biden has been less optimistic, speculating the entire event might have to be virtual.

Party conventions can draw tens of thousands over the course of several days. Some Democrats have suggested that a limited crowd could attend, while the roughly 4,700 delegates would stick to an online gathering.

I am hopeful that we can have a very exciting convention in Milwaukee where we can highlight the vice president and his history-making running mate, whoever she turns out to be, Perez said, referring to Bidens pledge to select a woman running mate.

Republicans, meanwhile, have projected much more confidence that they will be able to host their party convention just a week later in Charlotte, North Carolina, from Aug. 24-27.

With Post wires

View original post here:

Democratic Party still hopes to hold 'in-person' convention in August - New York Post

Amazon disputed the accuracy of the Journal's account and said it did not offer "intentionally misleading" testimony, but said it would conduct an internal investigation into the report.

The committee's leaders vowed Thursday evening to press the company for answers.

"At best, Amazons witness appears to have misrepresented key aspects of Amazons business practices while omitting important details in response to pointed questioning," said Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), chairman of House Judiciary's antitrust subcommittee. "At worst, the witness Amazon sent to speak on its behalf may have lied to Congress.

Rep. David Cicilline. | Patrick Semansky/AP Photo

Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said the panel plans "to seek clarification from Amazon in short order, in light of this troubling report."

The Journal's story, based on documents and interviews with former workers, said Amazon employees have used data about independent sellers on the companys platform to develop competing products, even though that goes against both the companys stated policies and past pledges by its executives. The revelation immediately reignited long-standing concerns, previously expressed by regulators in Europe, that Amazon has used the vast reams of data it collects from third parties on its marketplace to unfairly benefit its own business.

The report comes as big tech companies increasingly face accusations of abuses of power ranging from predatory pricing to failing to protect user privacy. While Amazon has become a key supplier to homebound Americans during the coronavirus pandemic, the outbreak has also increased scrutiny of the company's worker safety conditions and the way it presents third-party products on its website.

At a hearing on antitrust concerns in July, Amazon associate general counsel Nate Sutton testified before Cicilline's subcommittee that the company does not "use individual seller data to directly compete with them. Suttons testimony at the hearing later drew scrutiny from Cicilline, who questioned the veracity of his remarks regarding third-party sellers.

Amazon said Thursday in a statement that it prohibits employees from using non-public, seller-specific data to determine which private label products to launch.

While we dont believe these claims are accurate, we take these allegations very seriously and have launched an internal investigation, the statement said.

The company also rejected Warren's characterization of its statements to Congress.

"Its simply incorrect to say that Amazon was intentionally misleading in our testimony," Amazon spokesperson Maxine Tagay said.

POLITICO NEWSLETTERS

Technology news from Washington and Silicon Valley weekday mornings, in your inbox.

But the Journal's report quickly prompted condemnation from an array of antitrust hawks.

The Committee should make a criminal referral for perjury, and the Department of Justice should investigate what Mr. Sutton knew and when he knew it," said Sarah Miller, executive director for the American Economic Liberties Project, a group that champions more stringent antitrust enforcement.

The House Judiciary Committee needs to call Jeff Bezos to testify, said Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the libertarian-leaning chairman of the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, said in a statement that he expects the DOJ and the FTC to look into the allegations as part of their ongoing tech investigations.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who sits on the subcommittee, joined Warren in accusing Amazon of misleading Congress, calling the Journal's revelation "damning" proof that Amazon has been "blatantly exploiting third-party sellers."

Warren last year called for Amazon and other tech giants to be broken up as part of her presidential campaign platform. She said she wanted to roll back Amazon's acquisition of Whole Foods and split apart business arms like Amazon Marketplace and AmazonBasics.

Leah Nylen contributed to this report.

Read this article:

Democrats demand answers on whether Amazon 'lied' about data tactics - POLITICO

WASHINGTON Republican members of Congress were noticeably reluctant to wear masks on the House floor Thursday, sparking a sharp debate with Democrats, who readily accepted the federal guidance.

As lawmakers gathered for a morning debate on creating a coronavirus stimulus oversight committee, the GOP side of the chamber largely left their mouths and noses uncovered, while some Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, dropped their coverings while speaking.

Democrats nearly all entered the chamber wearing either bandannas or masks of many colors. At least two were orange. One wore a mask embroidered with a sparkly sequin American flag.

The sole Democratic exception asof mid-afternoon was recovered coronavirus patientRep. Joe Cunningham of South Carolina. He later put on a mask after The Post contacted his staff for comment. His aides did not comment.

House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) lashed into his Republican colleagues who chose not to cover up after Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) spoke. Jordan, who coughed repeatedly while awaiting his turn to speak, did not wear a mask while seated on the floor, or at the lectern.

People can do what they want to do, McGovern scolded. But while we all want to show how fearless we are, we should be mindful of the people that are surrounding us. And so until Im advised otherwise, Im going to keep my mask on.

While face coverings are not mandatory, they are certainly recommended, McGovern said. The Office of the Attending Physician has also advised that a face cover will produce a minimal reduction in sound when using a microphone. The face covering is most useful in reducing viral spread while speaking.

Meanwhile, Republicans argued against the proposed new oversight committee, saying it would be a politicized weapon to attack President Trump. Later Thursday, lawmakers will vote on a half-trillion-dollar package of small-business loans, hospital aid and testing funds.

The House gathering was the first since March 27, when masks were rare or non-existent on the floor, as US health officials said at the time that masks were ineffective for the public to protect against the virus. The health guidance about-faced this month, with federal officials advising face coverings as an optional measure to prevent spread of the virus.

In several Asian countries, authorities credit universal mask wearing with preventing major outbreaks of COVID-19. In Taiwan, which has a larger population than New York, there are about 400 cases of the coronavirus after early widespread mask wearing.

Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) andMinority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) arrived on the House floor without masks, as did many GOP peers.

Nice mask! a colleague told Scalise.

Thanks! I wear it for Halloween, too! the second-ranking Republican said, laughing uproariously.

Those who did not wear masks included Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.), Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), James Comer (R-Ky.), Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), Jody Hice (R-Ga.), David Kustoff (R-Tenn.), Michael McCaul (R-Texas), Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas).

Some Republicans did wear masks, and the number who did increased around noon when lawmakers pivoted to debating the fourth large coronavirus bill.

GOP Reps. Kevin Brady of Texas, Steve Chabot of Ohio, Tom Cole of Oklahoma, Debbie Lasko of Arizona and Thomas Massie of Kentucky were among those who wore masks.

Aside from Cunningham, the closest to an unmasked Democrat was Rep. Richard Neal of Massachusetts, who wore a mask tied around his neck. It did not appear that Neal ever raised the mask onto his face.

During House votes last month, many New York Democrats ignored guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which urged a 14-day self-quarantine for people recently in the New York metro area.

Read the rest here:

House Republicans anger Democrats by refusing to wear protective masks - New York Post

Democrats are pushing Joe BidenJoe BidenThe Hill's Campaign Report: States divided over when to reopen amid pandemic Poll: 62 percent of 18-34-year-olds support Sanders' endorsement of Biden Ex-Sanders campaign aide Nina Turner on why ideology is more important than race for Biden VP pick MORE to select his running mate sooner rather than later, saying this would give him more time to raise funds and unite the Democratic Party ahead of the general election fight against President TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MORE.

Presumptive Democratic nominees typically announce their pick before the partys convention.But with the coronavirus pandemic sidelining the campaign and pushing back the Democratic convention from July to August, Democrats say an early pick could boost Biden.

Democratic strategist Michael Trujillo said hes all for an early announcement because it would give the Biden campaign an infusion of campaign donations and double the campaign teams power.

She can help raise more money, get activists engaged, do one-on-one interviews in key media markets and build more enthusiasm for the ticket immediately, Trujillo said of Bidens potential running mate, who the former vice president has said will be a woman.

Democratic strategist Adam Parkhomenko, who served as an aide on Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonEXCLUSIVE: Voters in swing states trust governors over Trump on reopening economy, poll finds Biden holds wide lead over Trump in New Jersey: poll The Memo: Trump shores up base amid crisis MOREs 2016 presidential campaign, said it makes a lot of sense to go earlier than later.

People keep saying theyre not hearing from the Biden campaign lately, Parkhomenko said. This is something they could do to help break through.

He stressed that the Biden campaign is going to have to be creative in how they roll out a vice presidential pick to make sureit does providea needed boost to his campaign.

In an appearance on CBSs "The Late Late Show with James Corden" early Wednesday morning, Biden predicted the selection process for his running mate will take until sometime in July to winnow the process down to the one, two, three people.

Sources close to the campaign say the process is in the early stages, noting that advisers are not in the same room and that people are working remotely to set up a secure vetting process.

Not every Democrat thinks Biden needs to worry about moving fast with a VP pick.

The Vice President is doing pretty damn well under the circumstances, so what needs to be fixed? asked Philippe Reines, a longtime adviser to Clinton.

If Biden were to pick a superstar online fundraiser such as Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWhat you need to know today on the coronavirus: House passes huge funding bill Poll: 62 percent of 18-34-year-olds support Sanders' endorsement of Biden Maxine Waters dedicates legislation to sister dying of coronavirus MORE (Mass.), that would be a reason to go early with the pick, Reines said. Trump has a big fundraising edge on Biden as things stand, and many do not believe the former vice president can catch up.

He needs money, one Democratic bundler said. And he needs a lot of it. Anything that helps move the needle is valuable. And the more time, the more money.

Democratic strategist Eddie Vale said he would lean toward a traditional approach. But he conceded that if the coronavirus pandemic stretches into the summer or pushes the convention online, it would be a reason for Biden to go early withthe VP selection.

[It] could be worth thinking about trying to do a slightly earlier and different digital VP rollout to try and get some more coverage to make up for a lack of convention, he said.

Democraticstrategist Chris Lehane, who served as a campaign aide to both Al GoreAlbert (Al) Arnold GoreThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - House set to pass 3B COVID bill; Lawmakers jockey over next package The Hill's Campaign Report: Florida in play as Biden takes lead in poll OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Trump says national parks to start reopening | Oil prices begin recovery amid pressure to finance struggling industry | Al Gore endorses Biden MORE and John KerryJohn Forbes KerryDemocrats want Biden to go early with VP pick Earth Day goes online amid coronavirus pandemic Sanders's fate sealed by the over 40 crowd MORE during their presidential bids, said he would be pushing to announce the pick sooner.

For starters, he said, it moves the dial because this is going to be a time where voters will value the presidential decision making differently by discerning whether this is a pick who makes the team materially better in terms of dealing with a historic crisis.

Lehane also said it would be a way for Biden to get media coverage.

I would produce this like it was a 10 episode Netflix series with surround sound on social media that allows Biden to really occupy media real estate and drive the message, create momentum [and] generate interest, said Lehane, who referenced ESPNs 10-part documentary on Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls.

In a world devoid of live entertainment where people are shut in their homes and desperate for information, there is a huge opportunity to take something and rethink about how it could be adapted and deployed for the current times, he said. If there was ever a time to rethink the approach so as to help define and animate the candidacy, electorally position the campaign, and own the conversation by generating ratings, it is now.

Biden could even call this The First Dance, he quipped.

Go here to see the original:

Democrats want Biden to go early with VP pick | TheHill - The Hill

If you cant win, change the rules thats what we were taught in grade school, right? The political left certainly seems to think so.

Democrats are using voting rights litigation to secure through unelected courts a partisan advantage that theyve failed to achieve through politically accountable legislatures. They create standards they pronounce to be unassailably fair and demand election administrators disregard the rules and procedures agreed to through the compromise of the legislative process. Their latest endeavor was a lawsuit that threw Wisconsins April election into chaos and now theyre bringing the act to Nevada.

In Wisconsin, the Democratic Party asked a judge to blow past the deadlines to register to vote and to request and return an absentee ballot; to disregard critical voter ID requirements for absentee ballot requests; and to ignore Wisconsin state law requiring witness verification of absentee ballot voters. Whats the saying about never allowing a crisis to go to waste?

This lawsuit was filed less than three weeks before Election Day, forcing judges to make quick decisions about things they dont really know much about such as administering elections in a fair and secure manner. Wisconsin voters were left confused by the legal whiplash.

Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske finds herself the Democrats next target. They demand more in-person early voting locations, potentially putting poll workers and voters at increased risk of coronavirus infection. They demand that ballots be sent to all registered voters, not just active voters, knowing full well this will result in undeliverable ballots washing around the postal service. In Nevada, a voter becomes inactive if a postcard the Election Department sends is undeliverable to the voter at the address on file. Why should they send a ballot to an address where they know a voter doesnt receive mail? Wisconsins recent election was full of examples of voters who requested ballots but never received them. Then tubs of ballots appeared at local post offices, after Election Day, undelivered and unreturned.

In Nevada, Cegavske is a veteran public servant who knows how to properly administer a fair and secure election even an election impacted by unprecedented circumstances. While in the legislature, Cegavske chaired the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. She was the states top election official during the 2016 election that saw over 1 million Nevadans cast ballots. Nevadans re-elected Secretary Cegavske in 2018 and for good reason.

Nevadas voters know the plan to conduct the 2020 primary election as an all-mail contest has the support of Nevadas election officials. The liberal lawsuit isnt designed to benefit the voters; its designed to help the Democrats.

Democratic lawyers are trying to overturn the will of the people across the country, as expressed by their politically accountable legislatures, for partisan gain. We all know thats what this is really about: defeating President Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MORE. And if they can wreak havoc with state election laws from now until November, thats just an added benefit.

Austin Chambers is the president of the Republican State Leadership Committee. Prior to joining the RSLC, Chambers served as the consultant for several successful gubernatorial campaigns. You can follow him on Twitter @achambersgop.

Andrew Wynne leads the Republican State Leadership Committees Judicial Fairness Initiative. He has managed successful voter education campaigns to elect rule of law justices to the State Supreme Court in several states.

Read the original here:

Democrats wreaked havoc in Wisconsin's elections now they've set their sights on Nevada | TheHill - The Hill

Three Democratic senators on Friday urged the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to strengthen its fraud protections amid reports of scammers targeting coronavirus relief checks.

"These scams often involve criminals impersonating the IRS or suggesting that they can help get individuals their stimulus payments faster," Finance Committee members Sens.Maggie HassanMargaret (Maggie) HassanDemocrats urge Treasury to ensure Social Security recipients quickly receive full coronavirus rebates Tensions flare as Democrats press Pence over coronavirus testing The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump turns to lawmakers to advise on reopening MORE (D-N.H.), Tom CarperThomas (Tom) Richard CarperEPA is abandoning those suffering from toxic PFAS pollution Infrastructure investments have never been so good Bipartisan senators announce .5B water infrastructure proposal MORE (D-Del.) and Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenFree-flowing rivers help ecosystems, wildlife, people and the economy Key Democrat presses Mnuchin about Trump's name on coronavirus checks Bipartisan Senate report reaffirms intelligence findings that Russia meddled in 2016 elections MORE (D-Ore.) wrote to agency Commissioner Charles Rettig.

"Criminals ask for personal information in order to steal personal identities and stimulus payments," the senators explained.

Under the $2 trillion coronavirus relief packagePresident TrumpDonald John TrumpNew Mexico governor extends stay-at-home order: 'We're not ready to ease up' Coronavirus culture war over reopening economy hits Capitol Hill Challenge China and the WHObut not while the pandemic rages MOREsigned late last month, known as the CARES Act, mosthouseholds will receive direct payments of up to $1,200 per adult and $500 per child.

Scammers have taken advantage of the payments, redirecting the needed stimulus to themselves, according to multiple reports.

In Friday's letter, the Democratic lawmakers urged the IRS to boost fraud protections for online tools related to the checks.

They also called on the agency to work with the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission to educate Americans on how to spot and avoid scams.

The IRS's watchdog warned earlier this month that people should be vigilant about scams relating to the checks because criminals have long devised schemes targeting government aid programs.

The agency itself has also issuedwarnings about coronavirus-related scams, saying that retirees in particular may be targeted.

View post:

Democratic senators urge IRS to strengthen fraud protections | TheHill - The Hill

Rigas is holding down two jobs at the moment: He also was named late last month as the acting deputy director of management at the Office of Management and Budget.

Since taking charge, Rigas has put his stamp on OPMs front office and is bringing George Nesterczuk on board as a senior adviser, according to two people familiar with the matter. He previously did organizational and HR consulting for government contractors and management consulting firms.

Nesterczuk had been Trumps first choice to head up OPM but withdrew in August 2017 after criticism from federal employee unions who didnt like the role he played in trying to enact a pay system based on performance at the Defense Department and raised questions about his work for the Ukranian government. He served two stints at OPM during both the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations and has also worked on Capitol Hill and at the Departments of Transportation and Defense.

Rigas has told colleagues that he questions the constitutionality of the 1883 Pendleton Act, which codifies using merit to pick government officials, and believes that all executive branch employees should be political appointees, according to a person who has discussed the matter with him.

The arrival of Rigas comes amid a push by McEntee and his allies to install other Trump loyalists across the executive branch.

McEntee is working in concert with Paul Dans, OPMs new White House liaison and senior adviser, whose rapid efforts to consolidate his control over other agency appointees has irritated some officials.

Dans has also castigated other OPM officials for relying on career employees he suspects are Democrats, according to two people familiar with the interactions. He also has been asking how many policy jobs the government can shift from career officials to political appointees, a line of inquiry the people saw as an effort to install Trump loyalists in key posts.

Dans had no comment, but an OPM spokesperson said: "All employees in the executive branch have an obligation to carry out administration policy at the direction of the president, who is elected by the American people."

Other recent conversations inside the personnel office have raised further hackles. For instance, the Trump administration has had discussions on creating a new schedule, which regulates how agencies hire people, so they could make more jobs excepted service to make it easier to hire and fire people who are involved in policy jobs.

PPO is also trying to assert more control over who gets hired into political appointee jobs at some Cabinet departments, including the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services and a number of defense agencies, according to a former Trump administration official. Depending on the position, Cabinet agencies have typically had more latitude in choosing lower-ranking political hires.

But starting a few weeks ago, before some agencies fill a job, they now have to submit the opening to PPO to see if the White House has someone to place into the position. If they dont have anyone, only then can the agency submit a name, the former official said. The result has left the personnel office much stronger than they ever have been before, this person said.

With greater authority has come a new round of clashes between various parts of the executive branches over personnel, with veteran officials in Cabinet agencies accusing McEntee of installing unqualified appointees in key posts.

Go here to see the original:

Democrats blast Trump team's handling of federal workers in coronavirus crisis - POLITICO

Democrats presumptive presidential nominee for 2020, former Vice President Joe Biden, at a September 2019 debate in Houston with then-candidates Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)

Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, has the backing of the overwhelming majority of Democrats and Democratic-leaning registered voters in the November general election contest against Donald Trump.

But after a primary campaign that saw the most diverse group of candidates in the partys history including six women, several black, Hispanic and Asian candidates and the first openly gay contender 41% of Democratic registered voters say they are bothered that the likely Democratic nominee for the 2020 election is a white man in his 70s. About six-in-ten Democratic voters (59%) say this does not bother them, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Democrats attitudes about the outcome of the 2020 presidential primary contests. We surveyed 4,917 U.S. adults April 7-12, 2020. In this analysis, we look at the 2,349 respondents who are Democratic or Democratic-leaning registered voters and who took the survey after Bernie Sanders suspended his presidential campaign (April 8-12). Everyone who took part in the survey is a member of Pew Research Centers American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATPs methodology. Here are the questions asked for this report, along with responses, and its methodology.

Democratic voters who are bothered that the likely nominee is an older white man are more liberal, more educated, younger and more likely to be white than those who are not bothered, according to the survey, which was conducted just after Bernie Sanders suspended his presidential campaign.

Democratic voters with a postgraduate degree are the only educational group in which a majority (58%) say they are bothered the likely Democratic nominee is a white man in his 70s. In contrast, 76% those with no college experience and 59% of those with some college experience are not bothered by this.

More than six-in-ten Democratic voters 50 and older (65%) say it does not bother them that the likely Democratic nominee is a white man in his 70s, while those under age 50 are more divided in their views (47% say this bothers them, 52% say it does not).

These views also differ by race and ethnicity. About seven-in-ten black (72%) and Hispanic (70%) Democrats say they are not bothered the likely nominee is a white man in his 70s. By comparison, white Democrats are divided on this question: 49% say they are bothered and 51% say they are not.

Perhaps not surprisingly, these views are associated with which candidate voters backed on the eve of the first primaries and caucuses.

Nearly eight-in-ten of those who said in a January survey that Biden was their first choice for the Democratic presidential nomination (79%) now say the likely Democratic nominee being a white man in his 70s does not bother them. A narrower majority of those who backed Sen. Bernie Sanders in January (58%) say the same.

However, about six-in-ten Democratic voters who supported other candidates in January now say they are bothered that the likely Democratic nominee is an older white man. Voters who preferred Sen. Elizabeth Warren are particularly likely to hold this view: Nearly three-quarters (73%) say this, as do 57% of those who backed Pete Buttigieg and 52% of those who supported other candidates at the beginning of the year.

Democratic registered voters who are bothered the likely nominee is an older white man are slightly more likely than those who are not bothered by it to say they would vote for Biden in the November general election contest against Trump (89% vs. 83%). And they are especially likely to have a negative evaluation of the president: Nearly all in this group (97%) say they disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job in office, including nine-in-ten who strongly disapprove. Among Democratic voters who are not bothered the presumptive nominee is an older white man, 85% disapprove, including 72% who do so strongly.

Note: Here are the questions asked for this report, along with responses, and its methodology.

See the original post here:

Some Democrats are bothered nominee is an older white man and they solidly back Biden in November - Pew Research Center

Sen. Bernie Sanders makes a point to former Vice President Joe Biden during the Feb. 19 debate in Las Vegas. (Photo by Mark Ralson/AFP via Getty Images)

(CNSNews.com) The first three Democrat presidential debates held this year on Jan. 14, Feb. 7, and Feb. 19 contained a single, passing reference to the coronavirus outbreak that had emerged in China weeks earlier and was starting to spread.

That sole reference came from former South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg, during the Feb. 7 debate in Manchester, N.H., who said, The next president is going to face challenges from global health security, like what were seeing coming out of China.

None of the other candidates raised the issue, and neither did the ABC News moderators. The word coronavirus was not mentioned. (Neither was COVID-19, although the World Health Organization only came up with that name for the disease on Feb. 11.)

Apart from Buttigiegs comment, China did come up during the Feb. 7 debate, but in the context of climate change (Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Amy Klobuchar) and its mistreatment of Muslim Uighurs (Sanders).

By Feb. 7, China was reporting more than 34,500 confirmed coronavirus cases and more than 700 deaths, while 288 cases were reported in 24 other countries including 12 in the United States along with the first death outside China, in the Philippines.

That debate came five days after U.S. travel restrictions, barring entry to any non-U.S. national who has visited China in the previous 14 days, came into effect. It also came eight days after the WHO had declared the outbreak to be a public health emergency of international concern.

A little over a fortnight before the New Hampshire debate, a Democratic presidential debate was held in Des Moines, Iowa, on Jan. 14.

There were no references during that debate to the outbreak in China, although China was mentioned, in relation to trade (Biden, Sanders), North Korea (Biden) and the economic threat (Klobuchar).

Although Jan. 14 was early in the context of the outbreak, by then the CDC had issued a travel health notice for Wuhan, established a coronavirus incident management system, and issued an advisory to state and local health departments and health care providers. Thailand had just reported the first confirmed case outside China.

Almost two weeks after the New Hampshire debate, another was held, in Las Vegas, on Feb. 19. None of the candidates raised the coronavirus issue, and neither did the NBC News/MSNBC moderators.

China did come up, but again in connection with climate change (Biden, Buttigieg, and Mike Bloomberg).

By Feb. 19, China was reporting more than 74,000 confirmed coronavirus cases and more than 2,100 deaths, while more than 1,070 cases were confirmed in 26 other countries including 15 in the United States along with eight deaths outside China (in the Philippines, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, France, and Iran.)

By Feb. 19, the China-related U.S. travel restrictions had been in effect for 17 days.

It never even was a part of their dialogue

During a White House press briefing on Sunday evening, President Trump drew attention to an observation by Fox News Bret Baier that the Feb. 19 debate in Las Vegas had not featured the words coronavirus, virus or COVID-19.

That was February 19, thats way after I closed entrance from China into our country, Trump said.

I just thought that was a very interesting because, you know, you hear these people, some of the people, the Democrats, said oh, this, that. It never even was a part of their dialogue. Now they bring it up because you see what happens now. But they didnt bring it up, he said. But I brought it up.

Coronavirus first featured in a Trump tweet on Jan. 24, when he thanked China for working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. At the time the CDC had reported two confirmed cases in the U.S.

On Jan. 29, the White House announced the formation of the coronavirus task force, and on Jan. 31 Trump declared the outbreak a public health emergency. When he delivered his State of the Union on February 4, Trump said the administration will take all necessary steps to safeguard our citizens from the coronavirus threat.

After Las Vegas, the next Democratic debate was held on Feb. 25, in Charleston, S.C., and for the first time, the coronavirus situation was brought up by a moderator, CBS News Gayle King. (By then there were 53 COVID-19 cases in the U.S., but no deaths had been attributed to the disease.)

Among the candidates responses, Biden said if he were president he would be putting pressure on China to allow American experts to visit.

Heres the deal, he said. I would be on the phone with China and making it clear, We are going to need to be in your country. You have to be open. You have to be clear. We have to know whats going on. We have to be there with you, and insist on it, and insist, insist, insist.

I could get that done, Biden added. No one up here has ever dealt internationally with any of these world leaders. Im the only one that has.

Eight days before Biden made those remarks, a 25-person WHO-led team of experts, including U.S. scientists from the CDC and NIH, had finally arrived in China on a mission delayed for weeks by the Chinese government. Back on February 7 the New York Times had reported that China had been ignoring both CDC and WHO offers of help for weeks.

The rest is here:

Coronavirus Was All But Ignored in First Three Democrat Debates of the Year | - CNSNews.com