Category Archives: Democrat

There is a a whole big swath of the Republican Party, who Murphy said he believes actually wants to see the U.S. default an event that would put tens of billions of dollars in Social Security benefits, federal salaries, payments to Medicaid providers and veterans benefits at risk. It also would rock global markets.

The agreement announced Saturday is not yet a sure thing. Any bill will have to be passed by both chambers of Congress before heading back to Bidens desk, and to prevent default it all has to happen fast before June 5, when the government is expected to no longer be able to pay its debts.

On Sunday, Murphy voiced concern about the speed with which members of Congress will be able to send the final deal back to the president.

Its going to take at least three to four days for this to get to the House of Representatives and then it could take as long as a week if Republicans use all of the procedural tactics at their disposal. That of course would result in a default on American debt. something that we would never recover from, Murphy said.

See the original post:

Does the debt deal have enough GOP support? This Democratic senator says he's worried. - POLITICO

Delbert Hosemann has many liberal friends. This is becoming more and more clear as we advance in this political season.

Delbert the Democrat has been a name that seems to be sticking to the lieutenant governor and with good reason. You can look at his record and the legislation he has fought to kill. That alone would be enough to prove his loyalties do not land with true Republican voters or conservatives.

He killed legislation that would have completely phased out the state income tax. He has fought against religious liberties. He told President Donald Trump to go jump in the Gulf of Mexico when the president was asking for help on voter integrity and he has stood against necessary voter ID requirements to protect our elections.

All of that while also fighting behind the scenes to ensure he got a pay raise. He also pushed to get the legislature a pay raise. (One that, thankfully, Sen. Chris McDaniel was able to kill after the vote.) He led the redistricting charge to grow Bennie Thompsons district. He appointed 13 out of 16 Democrats to key committee chairs while leaving nine Republican senators without a chair.

He has stood against legislation designed to protect our Second Amendment rights. In addition, he has fought to expand Obamacare through Medicaid expansion.

Because of these things, Delbert has become a darling for the liberal media. They reported glowingly when he told President Trump to go jump in the Gulf of Mexico. They have projected Delbert the Democrat as their champion and with good reason: Because he is a liberal champion.

Democrat challenger for governor, Brandon Presley, was so excited to hear Delbert the Democrat speak last year he put on two different shoes as he bragged about it on Twitter. And, of course, Delbert replied with a laughing emoji. I can definitely see them working well together to move this state to the left.

Mississippi Today has spent a large part of its coverage into the lieutenant governors race trying to make Chris McDaniel look bad while ignoring Delberts record. That media outlet attempted to double down on a report that McDaniel had filed an incomplete campaign finance report, despite the fact the Secretary of States office admitted fault due to an issue with its website.

The outlet has spent countless political cartoons, editorials and other resources to defend Delbert or paint McDaniel in a negative light. At this point, it seems to be staffed with nothing more than political operatives working for the Hosemann campaign, in my opinion. For a media outlet like it to defend a Republican like this should speak volumes about the Republican in question.

Over the weekend, the former chairman and executive director of Mississippis Democrat Party Sam Hall wrote a column attacking McDaniel. His attack was the latest in a long line of liberal Democrats rushing to defend Hosemann.

Halls attack on McDaniel further proves who the Democrats in this state feel best represents their values. They want to make sure anything they print is a defense of Delbert the Democrat or an attack on McDaniel. It also makes it clear that Hall would love nothing more than a Presley/Hosemann combo running our state. This combo would be a liberal nightmare.

Have you ever seen the mainstream media in Mississippi ever rush to defend a Republican before? Can you name a time you thought they were trying to push a conservative candidate? I cannot think of one time. I am sure you cannot either.

Hall, the Mississippi Today crew and many others in the Mississippi media represent the very left of our state. They represent the Obama crowd. And they are carrying the wood for Delbert the Democrat.

The lines are clear for us in Mississippi. If we truly want a conservative Mississippi, we must not fall for the fake news lies. As Gov. Tate Reeves recently stated, there is only one conservative in this race. That is Chris McDaniel. We all need to do whatever we can between now and Aug. 8 to ensure he beats Delbert the Democrat.

Jack Fairchilds is host of The Right Side podcast. He lives in Jones County

Visit link:

Delbert the Democrat and his friends in the liberal media - leader-call.com

If the shocking 2016 presidential election of Donald J. Trump taught us anything, it should be that voters can still be unpredictable and unpollable, and that millions of them believe that the entrenched elites from both political parties no longer hear their voices or speak for them.

Voters are continually seeking a new champion. Will Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. become such a champion? I believe so — at least as far as the Democratic primary process is concerned.

When that process is final and all the votes from the primaries and caucuses have been tabulated, I believe Kennedy will emerge as the Democratic nominee for president in 2024.

Cue the laughter and pejoratives. Most from the left. Some from the right. In our increasingly polarized times, everything seems to be viewed through the prisms of ideology, tribalism, anger, hate and the outright dismissal of voices in opposition to our own. But if we choose to put down those often-distorted prisms and open our eyes, there are still facts, figures and pragmatic reasons as to why the less obvious (or the most ridiculed) might still be the correct answer.

My first reason for predicting a Kennedy nomination is that I am still not convinced President Joe Biden will actually run for reelection, primarily because of concerns regarding his advanced age and the perception of cognitive decline.

With regard to Biden’s age being a roadblock to a 2024 campaign, we have this from former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who was asked about it at the Financial Times Weekend Festival: “His age is an issue. And people have every right to consider it.”

In a Quinnipiac poll out this week, 65 percent of voters said they think Biden, 80, is too old for a second term. That’s a share that could very well continue to rise.

But for the moment, Biden has declared his intention to run for reelection. And therein lies reason number two why I believe Kennedy will be the eventual nominee. The longer Biden stays in the race, the more he hurts the chances of undeclared Democratic contenders such as Vice President Kamala Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg or even former First Lady Michelle Obama. 

As Biden lets other potential candidates twist in the wind, Kennedy continues to crisscross the nation taking almost every media opportunity given to him — even and especially those on the right, such as Fox News and the New York Post.

Of course, one of the reasons Kennedy is appearing on conservative outlets is because many in the now-activist mainstream media refuse to give him a platform.

Back in 1975 and 1976, when former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter ran his longshot campaign for the White House, some in the media also refused to give him a platform. But they did so because they ignorantly dismissed his campaign as a joke, not because they were personally or ideologically opposed to his policies.

Today, many in the media refuse to have Kennedy on because they are outraged that he dared to question the lockdowns, masking and vaccine mandates that came in the wake of the COVID-19 virus. Additionally, I believe many of them are simply running interference for the Biden White House. 

But again, there is a real danger in viewing the political process with ideological blinders permanently attached to your face. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch recently used a statement in a lawsuit over the Title 42 public health order to give a scathing overview of how civil liberties were trampled during the COVID era. 

The U.S., he wrote, may “have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country….Executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale. Governors and local leaders imposed lockdown orders forcing people to remain in their homes. They shuttered businesses and schools, public and private. They closed churches even as they allowed casinos and other favored businesses to carry on. They threatened violators not just with civil penalties but with criminal sanctions too.”

Many on the left now condemning Kennedy as an “anti-vaxxer” might have no problem with these draconian actions. But guess what? Tens of millions of Americans did and still do.

These Americans are going to be very open to hearing Kennedy’s voice as he barnstorms the nation in the face of a liberal media blackout. 

The next reason why I believe Kennedy will prevail is that he is far from the “one issue” candidate some in the media believe him to be. He is speaking to multiple issues a majority of voters want addressed — issues which have been upending their quality of life for years.

Kennedy’s “ace in the hole” may very well be his simplified campaign message: “Tell the truth.” He pledges to roll up his sleeves much like his dad did in the 1960s and engage in honest conversations with the people. 

Next, because of the Kennedy name coupled with his own stated values, RFK Jr. will make tremendous inroads with Black, Hispanic and disenfranchised voters — a large part of the Democratic base.

After Kennedy met with the editorial board of the New York Post, the editors wrote: “Kennedy has real conviction and charisma, and he’s fiercely independent of many of the party’s reigning pieties — all of which should appeal.”

His message should most especially appeal considering the latest Monmouth University poll declaring that only 16 percent of respondents said the U.S. is headed in the right direction.

Sixteen percent.

The headline for that Post editorial read: “Biden’s a fool to ignore the RFK Jr. challenge.” To that list of “fools” I would add the activist media and the Democratic Party. Despise him all you want, but Kennedy is already polling at 20 percent against Biden as his pragmatic voice continues to reach more and more Americans in search of a champion. 

Douglas MacKinnon, a political and communications consultant, was a writer in the White House for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and former special assistant for policy and communications at the Pentagon during the last three years of the Bush administration.

See the rest here:

Why I believe RFK Jr. will be the 2024 Democratic nominee - The Hill

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

Democrats in the Texas Legislature have struggled to keep a united front against a barrage of conservative Republican priorities, including proposed limits on drag performers, school library books that discuss sex, and medical treatments for young transgender Texans.

That difficulty has led to eye-catching defections by some Democrats, exposing fractures within the party on LGBTQ rights and the proper role of discussions about sex and gender in public.

Nowhere was that divide more evident than in Rep. Shawn Thierrys 12-minute speech on the House floor earlier this month defending her vote in favor of a bill that would ban hormone therapy and puberty blockers for transgender Texans under the age of 18. The Houston Democrats voice quivered as she recounted grappling with the issue before casting a vote she felt represented her constituents.

Certainly, the topic of gender and body dysphoria in children requires careful consideration, caution and compassion, Thierry said in her speech. It remains my legislative duty and moral obligation to vote the conscience and core values of my constituency. I will do this today with an open heart and clear mind.

To advocates for transgender Texans, including medical experts who say gender-affirming care is important to the youths well-being, Thierrys vote on Senate Bill 14 was a stark betrayal.

To political observers, it highlighted an ongoing challenge for the Democratic Party, whose base includes liberals and moderates as well as older voters whose beliefs on sex and gender are being recast and challenged.

The Democratic Party is giving voice to constituencies that were formerly shushed and quieted, so issues like how to treat gender dysphoria are new issues, and I do think the average person is sort of unclear about those issues and how to respond to them, said Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University. Theyre uncomfortable with them.

Thierrys speech, which repeated conservative talking points that advocates for transgender Texans challenged as false, drew the brunt of criticism from fellow Democrats, but she was not alone in breaking with the party. Longtime Democratic Reps. Harold Dutton of Houston and Tracy King of Batesville also voted for SB 14, as did Rep. Abel Herrero of Robstown.

On other hot-button issues, longtime Dallas Democratic Sen. Royce West voted in favor of a bill regulating drag shows, while nearly a dozen House Democrats voted for a bill to ban books deemed sexually explicit. The vote on books came despite the state partys chair criticizing the bill as part of a Republican attempt to ban huge catalogs of literature every two years. Some of the targeted books deal with helping kids understand their sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ten House Democrats voted with Republicans to pass Senate Bill 15, which was sold as an effort to protect womens sports from transgender competitors by requiring college athletes to compete on sports teams that align with their sex assigned at birth.

To LGBTQ advocates, the votes showed that many lawmakers, and much of the states population, remain unfamiliar with the lives of transgender Texans.

On both sides of the aisle, people dont understand transgender issues and transgender people in Texas, said Andrea Segovia, senior field and policy adviser for the Transgender Education Network of Texas. Having these few Democrats vote for the bill is a clear representation of that.

While her group has spent years talking to lawmakers about transgender Texans and their needs, she said this years session shows that education efforts need to continue.

The movement forward is more education, more working on Where are those gaps of information? Why is it that this talking point from the opposition worked better than ours? she said. Theres a lot of homework from our part that we plan to do to figure out how we can come back better and stronger for our people.

Jillson said Republicans have a built-in advantage a center-right base that is older, whiter and more conservative, allowing for an easier consensus on social issues.

Democrats, on the other hand, have a base that includes a broader range of age, race and religious affiliation.

For Democrats, its much more difficult, Jillson said, adding that positions taken by some lawmakers who represent more conservative constituencies may clash with activists who support LGBTQ rights.

Segovia said Republicans have been winning the messaging war. By the time she and fellow activists try to explain how puberty blockers and hormone therapy work and the benefits they provide to a population at higher risk of depression and suicide, opponents have already scared lawmakers and the general public into voting to ban such procedures, she said.

The opposition uses a bumper sticker to make their point, and we come back and we say a paragraph, Segovia said. Its always a disadvantage.

Former state Rep. Celia Israel, an Austin Democrat and an LGBTQ advocate, echoed Segovias concerns and said some lawmakers were not doing deeper research to look past talking points.

The Texas Legislature is reflective of the population of Texas. If theyre hearing scary stuff from different sources and theyre not balancing it out with facts and real people, thats a problem, thats not being true to yourself, she said. You want people to vote their districts and their conscience, but you dont want them to vote against science.

Matt Mackowiak, a GOP political consultant, said Republicans have identified social issues that resonate with the public and taken positions that are more in line with the general Texas population.

If these bills were as extreme and radical as the left says, you would have Republican defections, and youre not seeing that, he said.

Mackowiak said hes seen more Democratic defections than expected, and he thanked those lawmakers for crossing the aisle on difficult issues. But he said he would expect liberal Democrats to take them to task during next years primary elections.

Did these Democratic House members that came to their own decisions, did they misjudge their own electoral vulnerability, or did they swim with the tide? he said.

Older Democrats also have an influence on their party, said Jeronimo Cortina, a political scientist at the University of Houston. In heavily Hispanic South Texas, Democrats have historically enjoyed support based on social programs to improve health care, provide benefits to seniors and lift people out of poverty. But that support has been counterbalanced by a largely conservative populace with close ties to the Catholic Church and, increasingly, evangelical churches.

Many of those churches oppose abortion and the growing acceptance of LGBTQ people in society.

Black voters, historically the most reliable base for the Texas Democratic Party, also face a similar issue, Cortina said. Black churches organize the highly successful souls to the polls efforts that whisk voters from their churches to polling locations during elections. But some of those churches, he added, are not welcoming to LGBTQ Texans.

Not all Christian denominations can be defined as welcoming churches on issues of homosexuality or broadly LGBTQ+ issues. That complicates how these representatives voted in terms of that, Cortina said. Its an internal tug-of-war between progressive Democrats and more traditional conservative Democrats.

Nine of the 11 House Democrats who crossed party lines to vote for banning sexually explicit books were either Black or hailed from South Texas. All 10 who voted for the bill on transgender college athletes fell in the same categories.

Those votes have led to anger and frustration from liberal Democrats who say theyve tried to address concerns lawmakers expressed about these bills.

The argument that I wasnt aware or I didnt know? It's trash at this point, Segovia said.

Joel Montfort, a Democratic political consultant, offered to help any candidate considering a primary challenge to Thierry after her vote in favor of SB 14, saying she was not a real Democrat.

Montfort also criticized Theirrys vote to ban sexually explicit library books.

To see a Democrat backpedal and buy into the GOP propaganda just like she did with book banning, its all just nonsense, Montfort said. Youre not really a Democrat then. Youre not paying attention to your constituents rights.

But some Democrats defended their colleagues. State Rep. Eddie Morales, an Eagle Pass Democrat who voted against SB 14, said Thierry should be recognized for her courage.

She carefully laid out her analysis and reasoning, Morales said on social media. Republicans have the votes to pass this bill without her vote. Yet she voted her [conscience] knowing she was opening herself up to attacks from within her own base.

Morales, one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, voted for the book ban bill, restrictions on drag artists and requiring transgender collegiate athletes to join sports teams based on their sex assigned at birth. He said he voted against the ban on gender-affirming care after meeting the family of a transgender teen.

Democratic leaders have taken a careful approach to addressing the division within their party. The chair of the House Democratic Caucus, Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer of San Antonio, stayed out of the fracas, saying lawmakers are responsible for their own votes.

When a member takes a vote on this House floor, they are voting consistently with the values and the principles of their district, Martinez Fischer said. Every member has to go home and explain these votes, and everybody takes a vote knowing that they have to come back and get reelected.

Disclosure: Southern Methodist University and University of Houston have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Tickets are on sale now for the 2023 Texas Tribune Festival, happening in downtown Austin on Sept. 21-23. Get your TribFest tickets by May 31 and save big!

Excerpt from:

Republican blitz on LGBTQ issues exposes fractures among Texas ... - The Texas Tribune

Why It Matters: Harris County could tilt the power balance in Texas.

Harris County, the states most populous county, has become a reliable Democratic stronghold.

The passage of the bills marked the culmination of a monthslong effort by Texas Republicans to contest some of that dominance. They highlighted Election Day problems last November in Harris County as justification for challenging results that favored Democrats and call into question the way the Democratic-led county runs its elections.

It was a stated intention of some of the folks in the Legislature to take action against Harris County election administration, said Daniel Griffith, the senior policy director at Secure Democracy USA, a nonpartisan organization focused on elections and voter access.

Senate Bill 1750 eliminates the appointed position of elections administrator, which has been in place in Harris County only since late 2020. If the bill becomes law with the governors signature, the county must return to its previous system of running elections, in which the county clerk and the county tax collector-assessor split responsibilities. Both positions are currently occupied by elected Democrats.

The Legislatures support for S.B. 1750 and S.B. 1933 is because Harris County is not too big to fail, but too big to ignore, State Senator Paul Bettencourt, a Houston Republican and sponsor of several election bills, said in a statement. The publics trust in elections in Harris County must be restored.

Another bill, Senate Bill 1070, removes Texas from an interstate system for crosschecking voter registration information run by a nonprofit, the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC. The system has been the target of conservative attacks in several states in part because it requires states using it to also conduct voter outreach when new voters move in from out of state. The Texas measure bars the state from entering into any crosschecking system that requires voter outreach.

Yet another bill, House Bill 1243, increases the penalty for illegal voting from a misdemeanor to a felony.

The measures that passed were opposed by Democratic representatives and voting rights groups. But advocates of greater access to the polls were relieved that other, more restrictive measures put forward and passed in the State Senate including one that would have required voters to use their assigned polling place instead of being able to vote anywhere in the county, and another that would have created a system for the state to order new elections under certain circumstances in Harris County failed in the Texas House.

Those havent moved and thats definitely a good thing, Mr. Griffith said.

The bills invite new scrutiny of elections, especially in Harris County, where officials would be expected to revamp their system just months before important elections.

Under the new legislation, future complaints about the functioning of elections in the Democratic-run county could create the real possibility that the secretary of state, a former Republican state senator, could step in and oversee elections as early as next year, as the county votes for president.

The bills, said Mayor Sylvester Turner of Houston, create more problems than they allegedly solve.

Top officials in Harris County have vowed to go to court to challenge both measures aimed at the county once the laws go into effect (Sept. 1, if the governor signs), meaning the fight over elections in the county remains far from over.

See the original post:

Texas Passes Bills Targeting Elections in Democratic Stronghold - The New York Times

Dont be too sure a Democratic majority can be built on the grounds of abandoned houses of worship. Photo: Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

One of the big predictions in American politics lately, of infinite comfort to embattled progressives, is that the increasing number of religiously non-affiliated Americans, particularly among younger generations, will spur a steady leftward drift. Perhaps that will mean, we are told, that Democrats will be able to build their elusive permanent majority on the grounds of abandoned houses of worship. Or perhaps, some hope, the religious roots of todays Republican extremism will begin to wither away, allowing American conservatives to resemble their less intemperate distant cousins in other advanced democracies, ending the culture wars.

Both propositions may be true. But its a mistake to treat so-called nones as an undifferentiated secularist mass, as Eastern Illinois University political scientist Ryan Burge explains with some fresh data. He notes that in 2022, 6% of folks were atheists, 6% were agnostics, and another 23% were nothing in particular. This large bloc of nothing in particular voters may lean left, all other things being equal, but they tend to be as uninterested in politics as in religion, making them a less than ideal party constituency. He explains:

To put this in context, in 2020 there were nearly as many nothing in particulars who said that they voted for Trump as there were atheists who said that they voted for Biden.

While atheists are the mostpolitically active groupin the United States in terms of things like donating money and working for a campaign, the nothing in particulars are on another planet entirely.

They were half as likely to donate money to a candidate compared to atheists. They were half as likely to put up a political sign. They were less than half as likely to contact a public official.

This all points to the same conclusion: they dont vote in high numbers.So, while there may be a whole bunch of nothing in particulars, that may not translate to electoral victories.

As Burge mentioned, however, there is a none constituency that leans much more strongly left and is very engaged politically indeed, significantly more engaged than the white evangelicals were always hearing about. That would be atheists. In a separate piece, he gets into the numbers:

The group that is most likely to contact a public official? Atheists.

The group that puts up political signs at the highest rates? Atheists.

HALF of atheists report giving to a candidate or campaign in the 2020 presidential election cycle.

The average atheist is about 65% more politically engaged than the average American.

And as Thomas Edsall points out in a broader New York Times column on demographic voting patterns, atheists really are a solid Democratic constituency, supporting Biden over Trump by an incredible 87 to 9 percent margin. Its worth noting that the less adamant siblings of the emphatically godless, agnostics, also went for Biden by an 80 to 17 percent margin and are more engaged than nothing in particulars as well.

So should Democrats target and identify with atheists? Heres the problem: Despite the trends, there are still three times as many white evangelicals as atheists in the voting population. And there are a lot more religious folk of different varieties, some of whom have robust Democratic voting minorities or even majorities who probably wouldnt be too happy with their party showing disdain for religion entirely. Theres also a hunt-where-the-ducks-fly factor: If atheists and agnostics already participate in politics and lean strongly toward Democrats, how much attention do they really need? Theres a reason that politicians, whatever their actual religious beliefs or practices, overwhelmingly report some religious identity. Congress lost its one professed atheist when California representative Pete Stark lost a Democratic primary in 2012; the only professed agnostic in Congress is Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema, whose political future isnt looking great.

Its a complicated picture. Conservative columnist Ross Douthat argues that American liberalisms increasing identification with secularism is keeping a lot of conservative Christians from politically expressing their reservations about Donald Trump. And religious people beyond the ranks of conservative faith communities may feel cross-pressured if Democratic politicians begin to reflect the liberal intelligentsias general assumption that religion is little more than a reactionary habit rooted in superstition and doomed to eventual extinction.

Perhaps it makes more sense for Democratic atheists and agnostics to spend time educating and mobilizing the nothing in particular Americans who already outnumber white evangelicals and ought to be concerned about how theyll be treated if a Christian-nationalist Gilead arises. Only then can nones become the salvation for the Democratic Party.

Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice and to receive email correspondence from us.

See the article here:

The Rise of Religious 'Nones' Won't Save Democrats - New York Magazine

StateAssembly Democrats on Tuesdayheld what was supposed to be a routine committee meeting to consider final pieces of legislation before adjourning next month. Instead, it went off the rails, with fellow Democrats losing their tempers and insulting each other.

According to a video of the Codes Committee meeting viewed by NY1, things got heated when Committee Chair Jeffrey Dinowitz called for a vote on Westchester Democrat Amy Paulins bill, which requires police officers to take temporary custody of firearms when responding to reports of domestic violence.

This was not the first time the bill had come before the committee and failed to gather enough votes to pass. Dinowitz, a Bronx Democrat, was challenged on that point by Manhattan Democrat Daniel ODonnell. Part of the exchange went like this:

ODonnell: Is this not the bill we voted down last week?

Dinowitz: This is the bill that did not have enough votes, and we removed it last week. Yes, its the same exact bill.

ODonnell: So we now allow do-overs on some bills?

Dinowitz: I believe it is within my discretion to put bills on the agenda.

ODonnell: The videotape said something different, Jeffrey. I would recommend you look at it.

Dinowitz: The point being, Daniel. The bill had neither enough votes to be reported last time. Nor did it have enough votes to be defeated or held.

ODonnell went on to say that it was unfair to the 149 other members of the House who cant get their bills reconsidered. A short time later, a vote was held and once again, it didnt have enough support to pass.

After the vote, ODonnell proceeded to walk out of the hearing room. As he passed Queens Assemblymember Catalina Cruz, a Democrat who voted in favor of the bill, he audibly whispered to her: Grow a pair, honey.

Cruz became visibly upset, and immediately responded: That was so disrespectful. A few seconds later, Cruz stood up and declared: I have something. I dont care who is in here. I am a woman of color. I am an attorney. And to be spoken to like that, by a man. By a white man. In front of people. It is not ok.

Dinowitz then said: I didnt hear what he said. Im sorry. What did he say?

As Cruz gets up to leave, she turns to Dinowitz and says: He told me to grow a pair.

NY1 reached out to ODonnell and Cruz for comment, but did not immediately hear back.

View original post here:

Democrats trade insults over bill at committee meeting - Spectrum News NY1

The Executive Branch Ethics Commission of Kentucky has finally completed its investigation of Democrat Alison Grimes, a former secretary of state who ran an unsuccessful campaign for Senate against Sen. Mitch McConnell in 2014.

The commission, in a unanimous vote, hasfinedher $10,000 for abusing her position and influence to provide 18 Democratic candidates with official, confidential voter lists in violation of state law in an obvious attempt to aid their political campaigns.

The commissionopenedits investigation in 2021, after her father, Gerald Jerry Lundergan, a former state representative and former chairman of the Kentucky Democratic Party, was convicted of violating federal campaign finance laws.

Along with a political consultant, who was also convicted, Lundergan illegally funneled more than $200,000 from one of his companies to his daughters Senate campaign. He sought to appeal his conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court, whichrejectedthe appeal in May 2022.

At the time that she was running against the Republican McConnell, Grimes was Kentuckys secretary of state, and she remained in that office until 2020.

She was never charged in the federal prosecution involving her father andclaimedshe had no knowledge of the day-to-day operations of her own Senate campaign or the illegal corporate financing by her father.

But she was charged with violating Kentuckys state ethics laws for her misbehavior while she was secretary of state.The commissions Final Order, which was issued on May 19, details its findings that were based on clear and convincing evidence, including Grimes own admissions, documents such as email communications, and facts that the parties do not dispute.

Grimes ordered her staff to download information from the Voter Registration System onto flash drives, including lists of newly registered voters. The purpose of downloading the information was to distribute voter lists to selected Democratic Party candidates.That, said the commission, is undisputed.

None of the forms that the law requires be completed by anyone requesting voter information were completed, and none of the fees that state law imposes were charged to those Democratic candidates.

Moreover, the candidates were provided with personal information of voters that state law prohibits being released.

Grimes tried to claim as a defense that she was responding to an open records request under state law. But as the commission pointed out, the information she distributed electronically to the Democratic Party candidates is protected from disclosure under the Open Records Act of Kentucky.

Moreover, Grimes couldnt produce any evidence that her office ever actually received an open records request.There were no Open Records request forms in the file and no evidence documenting receipt of an Open Records request.

The commission did not directly call Grimes a liar, but it said that her defense that she was responding to an open records request was incredible and implausible. Even if she had been, it was processed contrary to law because personal information was released and none of the required forms or fees were completed or charged.

Grimes could not plead ignorance of the law according to the commission. She conferred that benefit knowinglyproviding Democratic candidates with voter lists to which they were not entitled, in violation of state law. She was not laboring under a good faith misunderstanding of the law, since the Kentucky statutes governing this are unambiguous, and the secretary of state would know the requirements of the law she administered.

In fact, it would be disingenuous and incredible to suggest that she did not.

She also knew the rules governing voter information from personal experience because she, as a candidate, when she was running for office, requested voter lists from the Secretary of States Office and paid the required fees.

She would know that Open Records requests require redaction of personal information.

Grimes, said the commission, had to know she was providing information to which the recipients were not entitled. In its dry, legal, straightforward exposition of the facts, the commission makes it very clear that Grimes knowingly violated Kentucky law as a government official in partisan actions intended to help candidates of her own political party.

Kentucky is lucky that Grimes is no longer its secretary of state, a position that, because it administers elections, requires honest, ethical officials. And the states residents are fortunate that someone willing to engage in such unprincipled behavior is not their U.S. senator.

Grimes joins her father in the annals of Kentuckys political history as another unethical politician who was willing to abuse her position of public trust, as the commission concluded, to confer a benefit and advantage to her political friends and allies.

This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal

Continued here:

Kentucky Democrat Who Lost Bid to Unseat McConnell Fined $10K ... - Heritage.org

https://apnews.com/article/mississippi-governor-election-democrat-bob-hickingbottom-6325c33a3484d787e2445c980f0fbf07

Click to copy

Click to copy

1 of 2

FILE -Bob Hickingbottom speaks at the Neshoba County Fair in Philadelphia, Miss., Thursday, Aug. 1, 2019, when he was a constitution party candidate for Mississippi governor. A judge ruled Friday, May 26, 2023, that the Mississippi Democratic Party had improperly excluded Hickingbottom from running for governor as a Democrat in 2023. If the state Supreme Court agrees with that ruling, Democrats would have an August primary with Hickingbottom and Brandon Presley seeking the party nomination for governor. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis, File)

1 of 2

FILE -Bob Hickingbottom speaks at the Neshoba County Fair in Philadelphia, Miss., Thursday, Aug. 1, 2019, when he was a constitution party candidate for Mississippi governor. A judge ruled Friday, May 26, 2023, that the Mississippi Democratic Party had improperly excluded Hickingbottom from running for governor as a Democrat in 2023. If the state Supreme Court agrees with that ruling, Democrats would have an August primary with Hickingbottom and Brandon Presley seeking the party nomination for governor. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis, File)

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) Mississippi could have a Democratic primary for governor in August because a judge ruled Friday that the party improperly excluded a candidate from the ballot.

The state Democratic Party immediately filed notice that it will ask the Mississippi Supreme Court to overturn the judges ruling on the candidacy of Bob Hickingbottom.

I appreciate the courts consideration. We hope to get a more favorable ruling on appeal, the committees attorney, Gerald Mumford, told The Associated Press.

The state Democratic Executive Committee decided in February that Hickingbottom could not be on the ballot as a Democrat. Hickingbottom, who has described himself as a political operative, ran for governor as a Constitution Party candidate in 2019.

The executive committee also excluded Gregory Wash from running for governor this year, after he ran a low-budget campaign for governor in the Democratic primary four years ago.

The partys decisions left Brandon Presley, a four-term public service commissioner, as the only Democratic candidate for governor. Wash did not challenge the partys decision, but Hickingbottom filed a lawsuit.

Republican Gov. Tate Reeves is seeking a second term, and he faces two challengers in the GOP primary military veteran David Hardigree and physician Dr. John Witcher.

Mississippi primaries are Aug. 8, and the general election is Nov. 7.

Presley campaign spokesman Michael Beyer on Friday responded to questions about a potential Democratic primary by focusing on a welfare misspending case that developed while Reeves was lieutenant governor.

We welcome any legally qualified candidate to enter the race, and our campaign will continue to focus on Tate Reeves failed record of allowing criminals to misspend $77 million of Mississippians hard-earned taxpayer dollars meant for working families on luxury cars, steak dinners, and even a volleyball stadium, Beyer said.

Judge Forrest A. Johnson Jr. wrote that the Democratic Party was not allowed to reject Hickingbottoms candidacy on grounds that Hickinbottom has failed to file an economic interest statement with the Ethics Commission.

Johnson wrote that Hickingbottom meets the qualifications to run for governor, which are in the state constitution: A candidate must be at least 30 years old, a U.S. citizen at least 20 years and a resident of Mississippi at least five years before the election.

Hickingbottom is Black, and Presley is white. Attracting support from Black voters is an important part of winning a Democratic primary. Presleys campaign did not mention race Friday, but Mississippi Republican Party chairman Frank Bordeaux did.

Brandon Presley and his Democratic Party allies corruptly pushed his African American opponent off the ballot, Bordeaux said in a statement. A judge just ruled their actions are illegal and unethical, and now Presley faces a primary challenge. Why did Brandon Presley work so hard to prevent an African American candidate from accessing the ballot?

HIckingbottom filed a campaign finance report this month showing he raised and spent no money through April. Presley reported $1.6 million in his campaign fund.

Reeves reported $9 million in campaign money, while Witcher reported about $21,000 and Hardigree reported no money.

See original here:

Mississippi Democrats improperly excluded candidate for governor ... - The Associated Press

About half of Vietnamese American registered voters are Republicans or lean to the GOP the highest share across the five largest Asian origin groups in the United States.

Overall, about six-in-ten Asian American registered voters (62%) identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and 34% are Republicans or GOP leaners, according to a Pew Research Center survey of Asian adults conducted from July 2022 to January 2023.

Around two-thirds of U.S. registered voters who are Filipino (68%), Indian (68%) or Korean (67%) identify as Democrats or lean Democratic. Chinese American voters are also majority Democratic (56%), while Vietnamese American voters tilt to the GOP (51% Republican, 42% Democratic).

Asian voters are more likely than voters overall to affiliate with the Democratic Party: U.S. registered voters are about evenly split between the Democratic Party (47%) and the Republican Party (48%).

Overall, 80% of Asian Americans who are U.S. citizens ages 18 and older (and therefore eligible to vote) report being absolutely certain that they are registered to vote at their current address. This includes about three-quarters or more in each of the five origin groups in this analysis.

Pew Research Center conducted this analysis to understand differences in political affiliation among Asian American registered voters, based on their ethnic origin and other demographic factors, as well as examine the geographic distribution of Asian Americans who were eligible to vote in the U.S. in 2021.

Eligible voters are defined as U.S. citizens ages 18 and older. Not all eligible voters are actually registered to vote. Registered voters are defined as those who self-report being certain that they are registered at their current address.

The analysis of Asian American registered voters is based on a nationally representative survey of 7,006 Asian adults. The survey sampled U.S. adults who self-identify as Asian, either alone or in combination with other races or Hispanic ethnicity. It was offered in six languages: Chinese (Simplified and Traditional), English, Hindi, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese. Responses were collected from July 5, 2022, to Jan. 27, 2023, by Westat on behalf of Pew Research Center.

The Center recruited a large sample to examine the diversity of the U.S. Asian population, with oversamples of the Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Korean and Vietnamese populations. These are the five largest origin groups among Asian Americans. In this analysis, the five largest ethnic groups include those who identify with one Asian ethnicity only, either alone or in combination with a non-Asian race or ethnicity. Survey respondents were drawn from a national sample of residential mailing addresses, which included addresses from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Specialized surnames list frames maintained by the Marketing Systems Group were used to supplement the sample. Those eligible to complete the survey were offered the opportunity to do so online or by mail with a paper questionnaire. For more details, read theMethodology. For questions used in this analysis, read theTopline Questionnaire.

The analysis of Asian American eligible voters is based on data from the U.S. Census Bureaus American Community Survey from 2021 provided through Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) from the University of Minnesota. In this analysis, Asians are defined as those who report their race as Asian alone and non-Hispanic, Asian and at least one other race and non-Hispanic, or Asian and Hispanic. The five largest ethnic groups include those who identify with one Asian ethnicity only, either alone or in combination with a non-Asian race or ethnicity.

Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, its primary funder. The Centers Asian American portfolio was funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts, with generous support from The Asian American Foundation; Chan Zuckerberg Initiative DAF, an advised fund of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation; the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; the Henry Luce Foundation; the Doris Duke Foundation; The Wallace H. Coulter Foundation; The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation; The Long Family Foundation; Lu-Hebert Fund; Gee Family Foundation; Joseph Cotchett; the Julian Abdey and Sabrina Moyle Charitable Fund; and Nanci Nishimura.

We would also like to thank the Leaders Forum for its thoughtful leadership and valuable assistance in helping make this survey possible.

The strategic communications campaign used to promote the research was made possible with generous support from the Doris Duke Foundation.

Among Asian registered voters, majorities across most demographic groups favor the Democratic Party, but there are some differences by age, gender and other factors:

Asian Americans represent a relatively small but fast-growing segment of the U.S. electorate. In 2021, 13.4 million Asian Americans were eligible to vote, making up 5.6% of all eligible voters, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the 2021 American Community Survey. Eligible voters in this analysis are defined as U.S. citizens ages 18 and older who live in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Not all eligible voters are registered to vote.

In 2021, the 2.8 million Chinese American eligible voters in the U.S. accounted for the largest population of any Asian origin group, followed by Filipino (2.6 million), Indian (2.1 million), Vietnamese (1.3 million) and Korean American (1.1 million) eligible voters.

As of 2021, the majority of Asian American eligible voters (56%) live in just five states. The state with the highest share is California, which is home to 4.3 million Asian eligible voters accounting for about a third (32%) of the total Asian eligible voter population. The state with the second-largest share of Asian American eligible voters is New York (1.1 million), followed by Texas (960,000), Hawaii (575,000) and New Jersey (545,000).

Among each of the countrys five most populous Asian origin groups, California also has the highest share of eligible voters of each group. This includes about four-in-ten eligible voters who are Filipino (41%), Chinese (38%) or Vietnamese (37%). Three-in-ten Korean eligible voters (29%) and one-fifth of Indian eligible voters (20%) live in California as well. The state with the second-largest share of eligible voters among each origin group varies. Some 14% of Vietnamese eligible voters live in Texas, and 7% of Filipino eligible voters live in Hawaii. New York is home to 15% of Chinese, 11% of Indian and 7% of Korean eligible voters.

Original post:

Asian voters in the U.S. tend to be Democratic, but Vietnamese ... - Pew Research Center