Category Archives: Democrat

We are so sorry! We bumped into a system failure and couldnt take your email this time.

Thank you for signing up!

They've called it a "racist dog whistle" and a "lie."

But those messages haven't helped Democrats tamp down the uproar Republicans are fueling over "critical race theory," now a misused catch-all term for teaching on race and diversity in K-12 schools that's firing up protests at school board meetings around the country.

In Virginia, Republican Gov.-elect Glenn Youngkin exploited the term and pledged to "ban" it in classrooms on his first day as governor, even though critical race theory an academic approach to examining racial bias is most often taught in law schools. Republicans plan to lean into the issue in the 2022 election cycle.

Democratic strategists say the party should hit back harder against "divisive" GOP claims while not losing sight of the priority for voters; the economy.

"On a political level it's a real threat that is allowing Republicans to claw back the inroads that Democrats have made in the suburbs over the last couple of election cycles," said Jim Manley, a longtime aide to former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

Democrats haven't yet pushed back on this issue enough, but the "good news" is the party's response is effective and there's time to make the case before the 2022 elections, said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist. They just need to make the case "relentlessly," he said.

"Voters run from the Republicans when Democrats peel back the onion on what these claims really mean," he said. "It's not just that Republicans want a bigger role for parents in education, it's that Republicans are willing to let white supremacists write curricula."

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the House campaign arm for Democrats, downplayed the threat to the party in congressional races. This fall, they tested responses to false claims about critical race theory in K-12 schools. The messages they say resonate most with battleground voters: Democrats want to teach the truth about US history and honor those who fought to make the country better, Republicans are trying to divide Americans and Democrats want to deliver for American families.

Democrats' message to voters in 2022 will be more compelling than "Republicans' divisive lies," said Chris Taylor, a DCCC spokesman.

"House Democrats safely reopened schools, delivered tax relief in the Child Tax Credit, and we're fighting for universal pre-K and paid family leave," he said in a statement to Insider. "Republicans stand in opposition to American families. Our bet heading into 2022 is that voters will choose progress over division."

The message tracks with a new Washington Post-ABC News poll that found most Americans overall said public schools should teach "a good amount" or more about how the history of racism affects the US today. While most Democrats and independents said schools should teach about the effects of racism, just about 4 in 10 Republicans agreed.

But Manley said the results in Virginia's recent gubernatorial race show that Republicans used critical race theory as a wedge issue to raise broader concerns among suburban voters. To suggest it's just an issue for the GOP base is "kind of like putting your head in the sand," he said.

"We need to figure out how to address this phenomenon without overplaying our hand and or allowing Republicans to, you know, break the education system in this country," Manley said.

A Fox News Voter Analysis survey found 25 percent of Virginia voters polled cited the critical race theory debate as the most important factor in their support for a gubernatorial candidate, and most of those voters went for Youngkin over Democrat Terry McAuliffe.

DCCC chair, Rep. Sean Maloney of New York, told The Washington Post that Democrats have "learned from the lies and distortions of the last election." Democrats will argue that "children need to learn their history all of it without censorship or politics limiting what they can learn," Maloney told columnist Greg Sargent.

Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said Democrats are on "strong terrain" when they talk about "teaching the truth" about racism in history and they should be more aggressive in their responses.

"Voters are wildly, wildly in favor of it and even half of Republicans think some of this stuff should be taught," she said. "Their strategy is, mobilize their base and distract us, and shame on us if we get distracted."

That's not to say there aren't lessons to be learned from Virginia. Lake said the bigger problem for McAuliffe wasn't about critical race theory, but his "problematic" statement during a debate that parents shouldn't be "telling schools what they should teach." Now, House Republicans are calling for a "parents bill of rights" in education.

Democrats need a better answer about parental involvement, Lake added, and the "irony" is that more Democrats are parents than Republicans. "We ought to be very comfortable with this," she said.

The real issue for voters is whether a candidate is on the side of parents and students or not, Ferguson said. And Democrats have a strong case to make about providing money for schools and blocking "censorship," but they need to lean into it.

"When Democrats talk about how Republican plans would put politicians in charge of classrooms and censor teachers, the swing voters who Republican voters thought they were winning quickly flee," he said.

It's not enough to say that Republicans are lying about critical race theory being taught in classrooms when right-wing media is driving the issue and parents are also hearing about it from other parents at their schools, Ferguson said.

"It can't be dismissed as just a lie," he said. "It needs to be defeated as a way to put politicians in charge of the classroom and white supremacists in charge of the curriculum."

"Culture wars" will be a problem in 2022 races, and "Democrats are always on defense," said former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner, a progressive leader. Democrats shouldn't run from the conversation about critical race theory, but they need to quickly pivot to real economic challenges people are facing in their everyday lives.

"If the Democrats would focus most of their time delivering on the promises that they made in 2020, then people couldn't get distracted with all this other nonsense that the Republicans are throwing out there," she said.

Lake said the critical issue for Democrats is the economy and not education.

"I don't minimize the amount that the Republicans are doing to try to energize their base with this issue," Lake said. "But this is not a threat to us. The economy is the much bigger threat than critical race theory."

Insider would like to know how your school district is handling the critical race theory controversy. Please contact Nicole Gaudiano at ngaudiano@insider.com.

Read more here:

Democrats plan an aggressive strategy on critical race theory claims - Business Insider

Eddie Lucios last year in the Texas Senate was emblematic.

During 2021s legislative sessions, the long-serving Democratic senator from the border town of Brownsville successfully passed bills to crack down on negligent dog owners and to encourage athletic opportunities for kids with disabilities. Lucio, a deeply Catholic septuagenarian, has long championed such laws that paint him as a defender of the vulnerable. In the same period, his decades-long war on reproductive health care reached its zenith. Alone among Senate Dems, Lucio coauthored Senate Bill 8, the states near-total abortion ban that empowers private citizens to sue anyone who performs or helps someone obtain an abortion, creating a de facto bounty-hunting system as reckless as it is cruel.

This was typical Lucio. Over his 35 years in the Texas Legislature, he passed bills promoting autism treatment for children, limiting the death penalty, and funding roads in South Texas poorest neighborhoods. In 2017, he was also the only Democrat to support Lieutenant Governor Dan Patricks transphobic bathroom bill, a misleading measure that would have restricted restroom access for transgender Texans. In the early days of Lucios political career, he made his bones backing the right-wing movement known as tort reforma euphemism for kneecapping the ability of injured workers and consumers to sue companies. Some years back, he dabbled too in the shady business of consulting for the private prison industry.

Earlier this month, Lucio made the surprise announcement that he was hanging up his Senate spurs. At a news conference in Harlingen, Lucio said hes retiring to focus on his family and his own personal ministry to help the less fortunate in our community. The arch-conservative Dan Patrick lamented the loss of a great friend and ally in the Texas Senate.

In 2019, Lucio told the Observer he intended to stay in office at least through 2021 to make sure his home regionthe Rio Grande Valley and Brownsville in particularwouldnt lose influence during redistricting. This effort bore little fruit, at least for his political party. His own district was redrawn to be more competitive for a potential Republican candidate and to include more voters from outside the Valley. One of three U.S. House seats covering the Valley, District 15, was redrawn such that former President Trump would have carried it in 2020. It is now a top GOP target. In an interview with the Rio Grande Guardian, Lucio also lamented how the Brownsville areas two state House seats had been rearranged.

So, who will replace this retiring titan of Valley politics?

Some political observers long expected Lucio would be succeeded by his son, state Representative Eddie Lucio III, but the latter announced his own retirement from the House in October without public plans to run for another office.

Shortly after the senator announced his retirement, Sara Stapleton Barrera, a trial lawyer who challenged Lucio in the 2020 Democratic primary, announced she would run for the now-open seat. Stapleton Barrera was backed by pro-choice, LGBTQ rights, and environmental groups in 2020 and managed to force Lucio into a runoff, which she lost by seven points. Her current campaign website focuses on a more milquetoast set of issues, including term limits and campaign finance reform.

Other rumored candidates for Lucios seat include state Representative Alex Dominguez, D-Brownsville, whose home was drawn out of his current district during redistricting, and Morgan Lamantia, a member of the prominent South Texas family that runs the L&F beer distribution company, who has donated to both Democrats and Republicans.

Lucio has never apologized for his reactionary record on abortion and LGBTQ rights. My faith leads me to my decision making; I wont change that because of modern trends, he told the Observer in 2019.

Reached by phone on Friday, he described the person he hopes will succeed him in his Senate seat. I want somebody that has compassion for peopleespecially the unborn, he said. Asked whether he cared which party the person belonged to, he said he did not.

Read more here:

Senator Eddie Lucio, Texas' Most Conservative Democrat, Is Retiring - The Texas Observer

Democrats and other critics of former President TrumpDonald TrumpBiden sends 2016 climate treaty to Senate for ratification US, China ease restrictions on journalists Americans keep spending MORE celebrated when criminal charges were leveled againstStephen Bannon late last week.

But the political downside of the pursuit of Bannon is becoming clearer by the day.

Theres no guarantee that the underlying purpose of the prosecution to compel Bannon to cooperate with the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection will work.

Bannon may ultimately prefer the risk of a fairly short jail sentence, and the martyrdom it would confer on him from Trump supporters, over testifying.

Even if he were to cooperate, the question then becomes whether the public will learn anything more damning than it already knows about Bannon and his former boss.

After all, Bannon said on his podcast the day before the riot that all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. And Trumps central role in inciting the insurrection was so blatant that he became the first president in American history to be impeached twice.

Above all, the criminal case has given Bannon the biggest platform he has enjoyed in years.

The news that he had been indicted on two counts of contempt of Congresson Friday was the lead story on the websites of The New York Times and other leading news organizations.

Bannons initial court appearance on Monday was another media circus, with network newscasts running footage of Trumps former chief White House strategist lambasting the prosecution and President BidenJoe BidenIdaho state House passes worker vaccine compensation bill Biden sends 2016 climate treaty to Senate for ratification Rubio vows to slow-walk Biden's China, Spain ambassador nominees MORE. Bannon live streamed his comments outside the court on the social network Gettr, a favorite among pro-Trump conservatives.

On Thursday, Bannon will get another bite of the publicity cherry if, as expected, he is formally arraigned.

Bannon revels in it. He loves it, said Allan Lichtman, a professor of history at American University, who compared the former Trump aides zeal for media attention to that of another associate of the former president, Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon DeSantis floats formation of police force to crack down on election crimes Stone says he'll run for Florida governor if DeSantis doesn't do audit MORE.

Bannons ardor for the spotlight is well known throughout Washington including among reporters who find him more personally engaging than his sinister public persona suggests.

He had seemed to be a marginalized figure after Trump disowned him back in early 2018 following the publication of a damaging book by the journalist Michael Wolff. But Bannon ultimately made his way back into Trumps good graces, conferring with him following the then-presidents election loss last year.

Now, in seeking to get details of what exactly was said between Trump and Bannon, the former aides adversaries have restored him to the center of the political stage. From there, he is sure to amplify Trump's fictions about election fraud, among other things.

But does all of that mean that Democrats and Merrick GarlandMerrick GarlandThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Unions sue in bid to represent Connecticut National Guard members Top Senate Democrat calls on attorney general to fire prisons chief MOREs Department of Justice (DOJ) are wrong tohave pressed the case against him?

Not necessarily.

The DOJ would presumably not pursue the case if it was not confident of conviction.Announcing the indictment, Garland said he was honoring a promise to "show the American people by word and deed that the department adheres to the rule of law."

Allowing Trump and Bannon together to thumb their noses at a congressional inquiry into the grave attack on the Capitol was simply unacceptable for most Democrats and many other Trump critics.

Reps. Bennie ThompsonBennie Gordon ThompsonThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Trump allies target Katko over infrastructure vote Meadows 'between a rock and a hard space' with Trump, Jan. 6 panel MORE (D-Miss.) and Liz CheneyElizabeth (Liz) Lynn CheneyThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon House to vote Wednesday to censure Gosar, remove him from committees Gosar defends anime Ocasio-Cortez video to GOP MORE (R-Wyo.), the chairman and vice chairwoman of the Jan. 6 committee said in a statement that the indictment should send a clear signal to anyone who thinks they can ignore the Select Committee or try to stonewall our investigation: No one is above the law.

Some prominent Democrats were even more emphatic.

The indictment showed that even the insurrectionist allies of Donald Trump are not above the law and the American justice system is back in business, Rep. Jamie RaskinJamin (Jamie) Ben RaskinThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Subpoenas show Jan. 6 panel's focus on Trump's plans Overnight Energy & Environment Presented by American Clean Power Democrats prepare to grill oil execs MORE (D-Md.) tweeted.

Welcome back to the rule of law, Rep. Eric SwalwellEric Michael SwalwellThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Mo Brooks says he would 'be proud' if staff helped organize Jan. 6 rally GOP ekes out win in return of Congressional Baseball Game MORE (D-Calif.) tweeted as the news of Bannons indictment broke.

But, for Democrats, the problem is that the enemy Bannon and the GOP gets a votetoo.

In Bannons case, that means characteristically pugnacious rhetoric outside the courthouse about how he is taking down the Biden regime and how his criminal prosecution is going to be the misdemeanor from hell for Biden, Garland and others.

More substantively, the door is now open to future use of the same process by Republicans at whatever point they win back control of Congress an outcome that looks odds-on to happen a year from now.

Some Trump loyalists are already salivating at the prospect.

Joe Biden has eviscerated Executive Privilege, Rep. Jim JordanJames (Jim) Daniel JordanThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Meadows comes under growing Jan. 6 panel spotlight Sunday shows preview: Biden administration confronts inflation spike MORE (R-Ohio) tweeted on Friday.

Referring to key Biden aides, he added, There are a lot of Republicans eager to hear testimony from Ron KlainRon KlainThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Manchin uncertain Biden plan will address inflation Biden aides offer praise for Harris after critical CNN report MORE and Jake SullivanJake SullivanRubio vows to slow-walk Biden's China, Spain ambassador nominees The Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon US, China get chance for cool-down with virtual summit MORE when we take back the House.

HouseRepublican Conference Chairwoman Elise StefanikElise Marie StefanikThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Virginia emerging as ground zero in battle for House majority Republicans look to education as winning issue after Virginia successes MORE (R-N.Y.) complained, also on Twitter, that during former President ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaBriahna Joy Gray: White House is setting Harris up to move past her The Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Biden's decision on Fed chair said to be 'imminent' MOREs time in office, both former Attorney General Eric HolderEric Himpton HolderThe Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon Ben Affleck, Tracee Ellis Ross join anti-gerrymandering fundraiser with Clinton, Holder North Carolina legislature approves new US House map MORE and former IRS official Lois Lerner were held in contempt of Congress and no indictments or arrests were made.

Even some Republicans critical of Trump question whether the precedents currently being set will have bad consequences further down the line.

This is dangerous ground, said Rick Tyler, a GOP strategist who has been strongly critical of Trump for years. Its tit-for-tat. When you have power, you dont use it to govern, you use it to exact revenge from your political enemies.

Others,including Lichtman, counter by saying that Democrats need to show some determination in their pursuit of figuressuch as Bannon.

One of the failings of the Democrats is that they dont have much of a backbone, he said. Republicans are ruthless, they will do whatever it takes.

Democrats are trying to take a page from that playbook now.

But the risks are higher than they might have imagined.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

More:

The Memo: Democrats may rue pursuit of Bannon | TheHill - The Hill

Democrats are trying to lock down their strategyfor a looming government shutdown fight, as they debate punting into early 2022 or setting up another deadline closer to Christmas.

Congress has until the end of Dec. 3 to pass another government funding bill after using a short-term patch, known as a continuing resolution (CR), to get them past the Oct. 1 start of the fiscal 2022 funding year.

No decisions have been made on how long to extend government funding after the early December deadline, and there are competing schools of thought within House and Senate Democrats about what their next step should be.

One option under discussion is to pass a two-week CR, which would extend current spending levels, to fund the government through roughly Dec. 17. But a source told The Hill that top Democrats are supporting a funding bill that would last until February or March.

Sen. Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenOvernight Defense & National Security Presented by Boeing Senators to take up defense bill Wednesday Democrats mull cutting into Thanksgiving break amid pile up Hillicon Valley Immigrants being put insurveillance programs MORE (D-Md.) acknowledged that Democrats were debating passing a stopgap bill that would last until mid-December or going longer.

Id like to keep the pressure on. On the other hand, theres a lot going on, said Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Democrats who favor the shorter stopgap that would set up another funding cliff closer to Christmas say they want to keep pressure on Republicans to cut a deal on fiscal 2022 funding.

I think we would be much better off doing a short-term CR. We need to keep the pressure on Republicans to do their job, said Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyInfrastructure bill could upset debt limit timeline Biden sets off high-stakes scramble over spending framework Progressives scramble to save top priorities from chopping block MORE (D-Conn.), another member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Though top members of the Senate and House appropriations committees met earlier this month to talk about funding the government, theyve made little progress toward the type of sweeping deal that would set top-line numbers and let them pass all 12 fiscal 2022 funding bills.

House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Rosa DeLauroRosa DeLauroDemocrats take on Manchin, make renewed push for family leave House Democrats put paid family leave back into bill Lobbying world MORE (D-Conn.), in a letter to House Democrats, said that she wants an end-of-year government funding deal, an apparent indirect push for a weeks-long CR instead of passing a stopgap bill that goes into 2022.

I will continue to fight for a negotiated omnibus appropriations bill. ... But beginning those robust discussions requires Republicans to come to the table with their own proposal for fiscal year 2022 appropriations, so that we can reconcile our differences and enact an omnibus in December, DeLauro wrote.

And other Democrats are warning that a longer a CR goes, the more money is wasted.

The longer a continuing resolution goes, the more it costs the taxpayers, because you waste billions of dollars because people can't make decisions, Sen. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahyThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by ExxonMobil - Biden hails infrastructure law, talks with China's Xi Midterm gloom grows for Democrats Leahy retirement shakes up Vermont politics MORE (D-Vt.) said.

House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerOn The Money Democrats try to run through the tape Democrats bullish they'll reach finish line this week Protecting nature a bright spot from Glasgow MORE (D-Md.), while cautioning that he needs to talk with DeLauro, told reporters, I think it ought to be sooner rather than later. The CR is a very negative piece of legislation, and the longer it goes the more harmful it is to the operations of our government.

But setting upa December government funding deadline would add another item on Congresss end-of-year to-do list. The Senate is currently debating a massive defense policy bill and still needs to finish negotiating and take up President BidenJoe BidenIdaho state House passes worker vaccine compensation bill Biden sends 2016 climate treaty to Senate for ratification Rubio vows to slow-walk Biden's China, Spain ambassador nominees MOREs social and climate spending bill that the House is aiming to pass this week. They are also facing a moving targetfor when they need to raise the debt ceiling after approving a short-term debt hike earlier this year.

And its not clear that negotiators could come to an agreement and draft the massive spending package in a matter of weeks.

Sen. Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by ExxonMobil - Biden hails infrastructure law, talks with China's Xi Senate Republicans call on colleagues to reject government spending bills without border wall funding Congress barrels toward end-of-year pileup MORE (Ala.), the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, appeared skeptical that they would be able to get a spending deal as an omnibus by mid-December, suggesting that lawmakers will have to end up passing another CR into February or March regardless either heading into the Dec. 3 deadline or two weeks later, if they do a short-term patch.

I think its not impossible. It would be very difficult. It would be hard to get, Shelby said about the chances for a year-end spending deal.

The split over how long to fund the government after Dec. 3 comes as senators say they are confident there wont be a shutdown in a matter of weeks, but appear frustrated about the lack of progress toward a larger spending deal.

Oh god. Do you want to be hung by a rope or a knife? said Sen. Jon TesterJonathan (Jon) TesterDemocrats face squeeze on Biden's spending bill Manchin says he has 'no idea' if he'll run for reelection in 2024 Spending bill faces Senate scramble MORE (D-Mont.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, asked about a mid-December stopgap or going into 2022. Id just as soon get our appropriations bills passed so we dont have to have a CR.

Asked about the length of a CR, Sen. Dick DurbinDick DurbinDemocrats mull cutting into Thanksgiving break amid pile up Top Senate Democrat calls on attorney general to fire prisons chief Congress barrels toward end-of-year pileup MORE (D-Ill.), another member of the committee, initially said he thought the longer the better, before walking himself back and saying that he wants to see full-year appropriations bills.

I just want to get the regular appropriations bills passed, he said.

Asked if he thought a Dec. 17 deadline would help keep pressure on, he added: I dont know. Your guess is as good as mine.

View post:

Democrats scramble to figure out shutdown strategy | TheHill - The Hill

Democratic North Carolina congressman David Price first won election in 1986, the year the last of Durhams cotton mills closed. With the exception of a single narrow defeat in 1994the notorious red wave that ousted 34 House Democrats and birthed the modern GOPhes held on to the left-leaning 4th Congressional District ever since.

The districts heart is the Bull City, but it also encompasses all of Orange, Granville, and Franklin Counties as well as parts of Wake, Chatham, and Vance. Price is the epitome of a statesman and public servant, North Carolinas other longtime Democratic congressman G.K. Butterfield said recently, which certainly rings true. Price, 81, has a well-earned reputation as an effective, no-nonsense lawmaker; hes cerebral rather than attention-seeking and would rather get things done than stand on ceremony. Hes helped push through education and consumer protection and has secured funding for a slew of state projects from the construction of Raleighs Union Station to an EPA lab and headquarters for the North Carolina National Guard.

Last month, Price announced he intends to retire at the end of his term, leaving his seat wide open for a Democratic successor in 2022. The districtwhich has been recalibrated as the 6this one of three precious safe havens for Democrats in the new, heavily gerrymandered congressional map. Republicans would be poised to secure up to 11 seats, giving them nearly 80 percent representation in a state where there are more Democrats registered to vote than Republicans (North Carolina has about 2.5 million registered Democrats, 2.4 million registered Independents, and 2.2 million Republicans). Lawsuits are already challenging the legality of the Republican-drawn maps, and courts will ultimately decide if they stand for the March primary.

The candidate filing period for the primary doesnt open for two weeks, but campaigns for the seat are already in full swing. State senator Wiley Nickel, who currently represents Wake County, threw his name into the ring the same day Price announced his retirement and has already amassed a quarter-million-dollar war chest. Last week, Durham County Board of Commissioners member Nida Allam, the first Muslim woman ever elected to public office in North Carolina, launched her campaign and instantly raised $50,000, a figure shes already doubled. And outside Durhams North Carolina Central University Monday, air force veteran and small business owner Nathan Click announced he, too, would be vying for the coveted congressional seat.

Several other big-name candidates are rumored to be entering the race, including state senators Valerie Foushee and Mike Woodard and former state senator Floyd McKissick Jr. But the full candidate roster wont come into focus until the states filing deadline December 17. (Editor's note: Woodard saidTuesday he wasn't planning to run for the seat, after the INDY went to press; Foushee announced today she plans to run for the seat.)

Prices district has long been a Democratic strongholdPrice won with 67 percent of the vote in 2020but the new 6th District condenses it into an even more tightly packed blue district by eliminating the rural areas north of Wake County. Its now expected to swing 74 percent Democrat, according to a recent analysis by the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, making it tied with the 9th District, which covers Charlotte, for having the highest concentration of Democratic voters.

They made it a safer Democratic seat so they could make other seats more Republican, says political consultant Gary Pearce, a former advisor to Governor Jim Hunt. Democrats are looking at a bad year next year and what they need to be looking at is how they are going to dig out of that hole down the road.

The question isnt if a Democrat will win the 6th seat but which, and in turn what brand of progressive politics resonates most strongly with 2022voters. If Price represents the best of North Carolina Democrats of yore, what type of candidate will represent the partys future? Will it be a young firebrand progressive, like Allam, or a tried and true establishment candidate with deep political ties and a lengthy history of service, like Foushee? With Butterfields district now competitive, could the 6th be North Carolinas best chance to send a progressive candidate to Washington?

You wont have to wait a year for the answer. The district is so packed that a Republican wouldnt stand a chance against a primate. Novembers election will be decided in the primary.

Just because the 6th is safely blue, that doesnt mean a lot isnt riding on it. Midterm elections typically spell mayhem for the party in powersee: the 1994 Republican Revolution following the election of President Bill Clinton and the Tea Partys sweep of the 2010 midterms after President Barack Obamas election. If Virginias recent gubernatorial electionwhere Republican Glenn Youngkin defeated former Democratic governor Terry McAuliffeis any precursor, 2022 is poised to be disastrous for Democrats in Congress.

A red wave next year could see Republicans easily take control of the House, which Democrats hold by a mere eight seats, and the currently deadlocked U.S. Senate. With Republicans controlling the legislature and Supreme Court, President Joe Biden would be effectively muzzled and at the mercy of a runaway GOP train. The most pessimistic prognosticators believe the subsequent descent into fascism will be swift and unrelenting.

This makes the 6th Congressional District all the more critical.

How are Democrats going to guard against fascism? Thats the essential challenge Democrats are going to be grappling with for years to come, says Blair Reeves, cofounder of Carolina Forward, a progressive nonprofit. Someone who casts a vote and stays out of the fray, thats not really going to cut it anymore.

The great debate among Democrats is: Do we want to appeal to the center or do we simply want to fire up the base? And its always hard for me to understand why people even have that debate because to win at politics youve got to do both, Pearce says. It may be easier to win running as a fire-breathing progressive, but what we need in this country and what this district ought to be in the lead in sending to Washington is someone who has progressive views but is able to get some things done in Congress.

The challenge in this election will be standing out in a crowded field, with viable races for Democrats and so many great progressive candidates packed into one district, says Maggie Barlow, one of the most sought-after Democratic campaign strategists in the state. Barlow thinks candidates of color and women will have a competitive edge, but theyll need to appeal to urban progressives and highly educated voters.

Female candidates represent our best opportunity in a lot of these electoral environments, Barlow says. Its going to be someone who can really put together a strong operation very quickly and raise a lot of money by having a lot of institutional support.

Pearce is quick to point out that Black women are the most reliable Democratic voters. In terms of demographics, he agrees a woman of color would have the best chance at winning the seat. Of the major candidates running or rumored to run, all but Nickel and Woodard are Black or people of color. And, Pearce says, if 2020 proved anything, its that North Carolinas old model for electability is broken. Cal Cunningham, your typical white, middle-aged lawyer, was the perceived safe bet in 2020 Senate primary. His campaign tanked amid a sex scandal weeks before the election, all but handing Republican Thom Tillis back his seat.

The lesson of all that is theres a hunger for younger new blood, Pearce says.

Allam, 27, certainly fits that bill. If elected, Allam would be the second-youngest person in Congress, behind Madison Cawthorn. In some ways, shes Cawthorns inverse: Cawthorn fabricated his origin storylying about the car accident that paralyzed him, falsely claiming he was accepted into the Naval Academywhile rallying supporters of President Donald Trump with fearmongering over socialism and liberal indoctrination.

Allam also has a unique origin story, but hers is real. She was driven toward local politics after three of her best friends were gunned down in a racist attack in Chapel Hill in 2015. She sees herself as the progressive Democrat poised to not only inspire young voters but take swift and meaningful action on the issue that matters most: climate change.

This is our chance for North Carolina to elect a progressive fighter and not just a status quo Democrat, Allam says. Im the candidate in this race that understands the urgency of this moment, our moment, because our generation and the next is going to have to live with the repercussions.

Nickel, 45, has a lengthy rsum that includes working under Vice President Al Gore in the nineties and in the Obama administration. He says his experience is what separates him from the pack.

Ive worked for two White Houses, held two terms in the state senate, and having that national experienceIve flown on the planes, helicopters, Ive been on the motorcadesI know what we need to do to make change, Nickel says.

While Nickel may have the financial backing needed to run an effective campaign, Reeves thinks he will face an uphill battle because most of his base is in Wake County. Nickel disagrees, noting about 40 percent of the voters in the 6th District are in Wake. Allam, on the other hand, has a lot of name recognition in both Durham and Orange Counties.

A slew of political newcomers will surely join the race in the coming weeks, but most of the major candidates interested in the seat have deep party connections, including Allam who served as vice president of the North Carolina Democratic Party. Nickel has ties to Washington, and the names Foushee and McKissick are legacies in their own right.

Party politicians consolidate behind one of their own, Reeves says. Especially given the contours of this district, we dont think a lot of them really have their finger on the pulse of the district.

This is a much more liberal area now and it needs a representative who is going to reflect that, he continued. I think people are going to raise a lot of money, but its really going to come down to who excites the liberal base more. Right now, Im seeing two candidates who can kind of do that, and one who can do it better.

The 6th might not be Prices districtits smaller, more urban, and youngerbut Durham will continue to be its crux. Mayor Steve Schewel believes Bull City voters are looking for candidates that embody the citys core values, with racial and economic justice being at the top of the civic agenda.

I think that voters everywhere want somebody with a good strong record of achievement who has bravely represented the values of this community and has achieved victories for this community over time, Schewel said. Durham, in particular, wants a good, strong progressive who is going to go and fight for our values.

After three decadesplus in Washington, Price said in a statement that despite his many accomplishments, retirement wont bring a complete sense of closure. Democracy, more fragile than ever, remains a work in progress.

Looming over it all is the frightful legacy of the last four years and urgent questions about the future of our constitutional democracy, Price said. So while it is time for me to retire, it is no time to flag in our efforts to secure a more perfect union and to protect and expand our democracy.

Support independent local journalism. Join the INDY Press Club to help us keep fearless watchdog reporting and essential arts and culture coverage viable in the Triangle.

Follow Senior Staff Writer Leigh Tauss on Twitter or send an email to ltauss@indyweek.com.

Follow this link:

N.C.'s Redrawn 6th Congressional District Packs Democrats Into One of Three Blue Seats. Will the March Primary Be a Race to the Left? - INDY Week

Congress is headed into another nasty fight to raise the debt limit that has no resolution in sight.

Treasury Secretary Janet YellenJanet Louise YellenOn The Money Democrats try to run through the tape Yellen warns US could default soon after Dec. 15 Biden's decision on Fed chair said to be 'imminent' MORE told congressional leaders Tuesday that the federal government could default on its debt soon after Dec. 15 without action to raise the federal borrowing limit.

Senate Democrats are ruling out the possibility of using the special budget reconciliation process to raise the debt ceiling with only Democratic votes. But that means theyll need some help from Senate Republicans, setting up another standoff over government spending next month.

We must pass the debt limit. We cannot let the full faith and credit of this country lapse, and we hope to do it in a bipartisan way, Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerBottom line Christie: Trump rhetoric about stolen election led to Jan. 6 attack Senate Republicans call on colleagues to reject government spending bills without border wall funding MORE (D-N.Y.) told reporters Tuesday.

Asked if he was still ruling out using budget reconciliation, Schumer repeated: We are focusing on getting this done in a bipartisan way.

Republicans say they only voted with Democrats on an emergency basis in October to advance a two-month debt-limit increase.

The GOP senators who backed the measure came under stark criticism from former President TrumpDonald TrumpBiden sends 2016 climate treaty to Senate for ratification US, China ease restrictions on journalists Americans keep spending MORE, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellYellen warns US could default soon after Dec. 15 Democrats face squeeze on Biden's spending bill Advocates worry online misogyny will keep women out of office MORE (R-Ky.) said he would not provide the help again on a procedural vote.

With the new Dec. 15 deadline fast approaching, Schumer hasnt made any move to set up a separate budget reconciliation process to address the debt limit.

Some Democrats say they think the GOP, which in October backed away from a vow of not providing help, will blink again.

Eleven Republicans voted with all 50 Democrats on Oct. 7 to end debate on the short-term debt limit extension and move the bill to a vote on final passage.

I think Republicans have now set the precedent that they understand they have an obligation to at least allow us to increase the debt limit with Democratic votes. I expect that well reach the same place, said Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyInfrastructure bill could upset debt limit timeline Biden sets off high-stakes scramble over spending framework Progressives scramble to save top priorities from chopping block MORE (D-Conn.).

But McConnell in a letter to President BidenJoe BidenIdaho state House passes worker vaccine compensation bill Biden sends 2016 climate treaty to Senate for ratification Rubio vows to slow-walk Biden's China, Spain ambassador nominees MORE after the last vote insisted it would not happen again.

I write to inform you that I will not provide such assistance again if your all-Democrat government drifts into another avoidable crisis, he wrote.

Your lieutenants on Capitol Hill now have the time they claimed they lacked to address the debt ceiling through standalone reconciliation, he wrote.

Democrats are nevertheless counting on Republicans helping them once again.

Its not going to be in this reconciliation bill, said Sen. Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenOvernight Defense & National Security Presented by Boeing Senators to take up defense bill Wednesday Democrats mull cutting into Thanksgiving break amid pile up Hillicon Valley Immigrants being put insurveillance programs MORE (D-Md.), noting that the budget reconciliation vehicle that Democrats plan to use to pass the Biden administrations climate and social spending agenda hasnt been set up to also raise the debt limit.

Van Hollen dismissed the possibility that Democrats would vote to amend the 2022 budget resolution or pass a new budget resolution to allow for the debt limit measure to pass through a separate reconciliation vehicle. Doing that would consume two weeks of floor time when Democrats are racing to wrap up their legislative agenda by New Years Day.

We want to get all of these things done. Its a huge agenda, Schumer told reporters Tuesday, explaining that Senate Democrats plan to pass the annual defense authorization bill, legislation to fund government departments and agencies and Bidens $1.75 trillion Build Back Better Act in addition to raising the debt limit.

If Schumer were to use the budget reconciliation process to pass a debt limit extension lasting beyond the 2022 midterm elections, it could consume weeks of floor time, Senate Democrats warn.

They say they dont have the days to spare when theres already so much left on their to-do list.

The stalemate over the debt limit in late September and early October took the focus off negotiations on Bidens human infrastructure agenda, stalling it for a few weeks. Democrats agreed to a two-month extension so they could devote their attention to finishing work on the Build Back Better Act.

Senate Minority Whip John ThuneJohn Randolph ThuneSchumer: Time is 'now' to repeal Iraq War resolution Republicans see Trump weakening as Democratic talking point Gingrich backs Herschel Walker in Georgia Senate race MORE (R-S.D.) said another standoff over the debt ceiling will play out much differently. He said Democrats have no argument for not using budget reconciliation to extend federal borrowing authority without needing any Republican votes on setting up final passage.

The Dems will have to deliver the votes to raise the debt limit, and they know that, he said.

He said the best way to do that is to amend the budget resolution to create a new debt limit measure that could pass with 51 Democratic votes under the reconciliation process.

The sooner they get started on that, the better, he said, though he acknowledged that Democrats dont seem to be going that route.

At some point the Democrats are going to have to focus on this, and right now they dont seem to see that as a real high priority, he added.

With the deadline approaching, McConnell is keeping his cards close to the vest.

Asked about Democratic colleagues demands that Republicans help advance debt limit legislation, the GOP leader simply said: Well figure out how to avoid default, we always do.

Follow this link:

Democrats think GOP will blink in newest debt brawl | TheHill - The Hill

Last Monday, a Democratic firm hosted focus groups with women in Virginia who voted in 2017 for Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, in 2020 for Democratic President Joe Biden, and then this month for Republican Gov.-elect Glenn Youngkin. It was centered on suburban women: a group that pivotedsignificantlyto the right in the governors election.

ConsultantDanny Barefoot said that Anvil Strategies called roughly 30,000 people in Virginia. Most didnt answer, but several hundred of them fit the criteria he was looking for: people whovoted Democrat, Democrat, Republican in the last three elections. Those people were called back and offered a $100 gift card if theyd do a lunch-hour Zoom and talk about why they voted the way they did. Ninety-six women, a fifth of whom were not white, were broken into three different sessions. Barefoot sat in on one of them and got permission from the funders to share quotes and results.

Focus groups are put together differently than surveys, which weigh the responses to reflect the population at large. While 96 respondents isnt enough for a robust polling sample, its a chance to dig deeper into the views of a slice of the electorate. Virginia is about two-thirds white, and this sample was 79 percent white so slightly whiter than the state at large but not by a ton. Eleven percent of them were Black women, 6 percent Latina, and 4 percent Asian American. They came from around the state. Barefoot said he didnt ask about college education, because what he was interested in was people who lived in the suburbs regardless of race or educational background.

What Barefoot found is that while the women agreed with Democrats on policy, they just didnt connect with them. When asked which party had better policy proposals, the group members overwhelmingly said Democrats. But when asked which party had cultural values closer to theirs, they cited Republicans.

The biggest disconnect came on education. Barefoot found that school closures were likely a big part of their votes for Youngkin and that frustration at school leadership over those closures bled into the controversy, pushed by Republicans, around the injection of critical race theory into the public school setting, along with the question of what say parents should have in schools. One Latina woman talked about how remote school foisted so much work on parents, yet later Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic nominee and former governor, would insist that parents should have no input in their childrens education. (Thats not exactly what he said, but thats how it played.) As she put it: They asked us to do all this work for months and then he says its none of our business now.

When asked which party had better policy proposals, the group members overwhelmingly said Democrats.When asked which party had cultural values closer to theirs, they cited Republicans.

The anger they felt at Democrats for the commonwealths Covid-19 school closure policy became further evidence of a cultural gap between these working people and Democratic elites, who broadly supported prolonged school closures while enjoying the opportunity to work remotely. Those with means decamped: Enrollment in Fairfax County schools dropped 5 percent, and fell by 3.9 percent and 3.4 percent in Arlington and Loudoun counties, respectively. Those who were left behind organized parent groups to pressure the schools to reopen. Though the groups tended to be nonpartisan or bipartisan at the start, Republican donors and conservative groups poured money and manpower into them, converting them into potent political weapons that blended anger at the closures with complaints about Democratic board members prioritizing trendy social justice issues all of it aimed at the November elections.

They keep saying a strong return to school, but theres no details, said Saundra Davis on Fox News over the summer, co-founder of one large group, called the Open Fairfax Public Schools Coalition. Their attention is on other things, like their pet projects and social justice issues, and the kids have been left to flounder and theres still no plan for fall.

Youll be surprised to know Im a Democrat, she said. Ive tried to warn them that theres a bipartisan tidal wave coming their way. They dont look us in the eye, they dont write us back. If we cant recall them one by one, theres an election in November. That fall, Davis cut an ad for Youngkin, citing his commitment to keep schools open as decisive.

And while the group made a Democrat angry at Democrats the face of its opposition, behind herwas a coterie of Republican operatives. The bulk of the groups financing came from N2 America, a conservative nonprofit, and Republican gubernatorial candidate Pete Snyder. Its co-founder was a Republican who lost a 2019 race for school board, and the rest of its officers were Republican operatives too. A slick nonprofit named Parents Defending Education was launched in 2020 to help guide the local groups. Little effort was made to conceal who was behind it: A longtime Koch network operative, Nicole Neily, was placed at the helm of the grassroots organization. Aside from Davis, nearly every mom and dad brought onto Fox News to complain about critical race theory held a day job as a senior Republican operative.

It was the purest expression of the way Republicans have driven the fight over schools and then capitalized on it. The fear of public schools indoctrinating our children has been a GOP theme for its base voters for decades, but in the wake of Trumps rise, the party watched in horror as suburban voters recoiled from Republicans into the arms of Democrats. Casting about for an issue that could win some of them back recall that this is a game of margins, not absolutes the party landed on schools. Around the country, the conservative media apparatus, unrivaled by Democrats, gave air cover to the schooling issue handing local activists language to use, a story to tell, and the resources and platform to tell it.

The tactic was even more potent in northern Virginia, where many professional Republican operatives and lobbyists live.In Loudoun County this November, McAuliffe outpaced Youngkin 55 percent to 44. But Biden had beaten Trump there by 62 percent to 37. Youngkins showing was only 11,000 votes fewer than Trump won a year earlier, while McAuliffe notched 50,000 fewer votes than Biden had. While Biden carried Fairfax by 42 points, McAuliffe only took it by 31.

That the GOP didnt make even bigger inroads, given their heavy investment in the issue, may be the one silver lining for Democrats who, witnessing a dishonest astroturf campaign take shape and get twisted beyond all recognition on Fox News, decided, perhaps understandably but to their later regret, to ignore the question.After McAuliffes debate gaffe, in which he delivered up the perfect sound bite to Youngkin I dont think parents should be telling schools what they should teach he took weeks to respond, initially not recognizing the danger. Everybody clapped when I said it, McAuliffe insisted later.

Even where Republicans spent heavily against outmatched Democrats, they made only marginal gains in school board races. But if the issue continues to go uncontested, their luck may run out. National Democrats have no coordinated response yet, leaving school board members unstaffed, underfunded, borderline volunteers hung out to dry, with nothing to rely on but mainstream media assertions that theres actually nothing to see here.

A voter walks past election signs as she walks to the Fairfax County Government Center polling location on Election Day in Fairfax, Va., on Nov. 2, 2021.

Photo: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

In the Virginia election, two arguments that have been running parallel in Democratic circles for the past several years finally collided. One is the question of how Democrats should position themselves in the ongoing culture war, with jockeying over fraught and contested concepts like wokeness and cancel culture. Critical race theory is one example of this;Democrats cant seem to agree on whetherits a good thing that should be taught and defended or a Republican fabrication thats not being taught in elementary schools at all. The other is the round-and-round debate over race and class: Are voters who flee Democrats motivated more by economic anxiety or by racial resentment and eroding white privilege?

While these debates have unfolded, Democrats have seen a steady erosion in support among working-class voters of all races, while gaining support among the most highly educated voters. That movement would point toward class divisions driving voter behavior, but the rearing up of critical race theory as a central plank of the Republican Party appeared to throw the question open again. Maybe its racism, after all?

Properly understanding how different voting blocs understand the terms of the debate, however, unlocks the contradiction: The culture war is not a proxy for race, its a proxy for class. The Democratic problem with working-class voters goes far beyond white people.

Now, for the portion of the Republican base heavily predisposed to racial prejudice, the culture war and issues like critical race theory easily work as dog whistles calling them to the polls. But for many voters, and not just white ones, critical race theory is in a basket with other cultural microaggressions directed at working people by the elites they see as running the Democratic Party. Take, for instance, one of the women in Barefoots focus groups. When asked if Democrats share their cultural values, she said, They fight for the right things and I usually vote for them but they believe some crazy things. Sometimes I feel like if I dont know the right words for things they think I am a bigot.

For many voters, and not just white ones, critical race theory is in a basket with other cultural microaggressions directed at working people by the elites they see as running the Democratic Party.

Barefoots results rhymed with the conclusions of a memo put out by strategist Andrew Levison, who has long made the argument that Democratic efforts at connecting with working-class voters are fundamentally flawed. The memo, published after the Virginia election but not directly responding to it, looks at how Democrats can win support among a growing number of anti-Trump Republicans. Rather than convince the entire white working class which is typically approximated in polls by looking for white voters without a college degree Levison argues that Democrats should identify a distinct, persuadable sector of the white working class and then figure out how to get members of that specific group to vote Democratic.

Levison, citing data from multiple election cycles, notes that Democrats roughly win about a third of white working-class votes. The party loses about a third right out of the gate: hardcore right-wing people who would never consider voting for Democrats and think even a Democrat like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer known for much of his career as Wall Street Chuck is a flaming socialist and a traitor. Levison calls that third extremists, and argues they are not gettable under any circumstances; he distinguishes them from the final third, which is made up of what he calls cultural traditionalists.

Strategist Andrew Levisonscharacterizations of extremist and cultural traditionalist voters.

Screenshot: The Intercept

His category of cultural traditionalists, he acknowledges, is not meant to capture every voter who is gettable by Democrats; likewise, many cultural traditionalists have competing and conflicting views on various issues. But just as corporations work to create consumer profiles before going to market with an ad campaign, Democrats need to define who that persuadable person among the white working class is. To do so, Levison relies on years of survey data, much of it collected by Working America, a community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, that does tens of thousands of in-person interviews with working-class people around the country each year looking to identify those who are persuadable.

As Levison defines them, cultural traditionalists are people who dont follow the news closely but have an easy-going personality and an open mind contrasted with cranky, short-tempered people who are more likely to fall into the extremist category. They believe in patriotism and the American way of life but also believe that diversity, pluralism, and tolerance are essential characteristics of that American way of life. When it comes to race, these traditionalists have something of a Michael Scott view, rooted in the cliche that they dont see race or dont see color. They also have religious and moral values theyd happily describe as old fashioned but say they have no problem with people who have different views. When these voters shifted their views on marriage equality, accepting it as something that ought to be legal even if they were skeptical of it, the dam had broken.

Cultural traditionalists, according to Levison, also think of government as often wasteful and inefficient and of politicians as corrupt and bought off but they dont think government is inherently evil and can be convinced that it can do good things. Meanwhile, they think Democrats are a party that primarily represents social groups like educated liberals and racial or ethnic minorities while having little interest, understanding, or concern for ordinary white working people like themselves.

Levisons distinction between these cultural traditionalists and what he calls the extremists, except for that last part, can plausibly apply to many, many Black andLatino working-class people as well. And even that last part that Democrats dont have much interest or concern for ordinary white working people, specifically is not really a value judgment, its a widespread interpretation of Democratic messaging that is not uniquely held by white voters.

Theyre the sort of voter that would be gettable for Democrats without compromising on a racial justice agenda if it is sold as the United States continuously striving to close the gap between reality and its values. But, Levison adds, there are a number of cultural issues on which cultural traditionalists and extremists align, and Republicans have become adept at exploiting them. He defines them as: pride in their culture, background, and community; respect for tradition; love of freedom; belief in personal responsibility, character, and hard work; and respect for law, strict law enforcement, and the right of individual self-defense.

There are a number of cultural issues on which cultural traditionalists and extremists align, and Republicans have become adept at exploiting them.

In other words, they express the same sensibility as the women in Barefoots group who wanted to teach their children a positive history of the United States. One suburban Black woman in his group put it this way: Our kids should be taught about slavery and all of that awfulness but America is also a good country and thats what I want my kids to learn.

Few people read the full 1619 Projectput out by the New York Times in 2019, which is a rich tapestry of thoughtful essays and reporting about the role of slavery in the development of the United States. Instead, to the extent it has seeped into the public consciousness, it has done so around the notion of rejecting 1776 as the date of our birth and supplanting it with 1619 as our true founding, in a phrase that became so controversial it was deleted.

Times editor Jake Silverstein wrote in the introductory essay:

1619. It is not a year that most Americans know as a notable date in our countrys history. Those who do are at most a tiny fraction of those who can tell you that 1776 is the year of our nations birth. What if, however, we were to tell you that this fact, which is taught in our schools and unanimously celebrated every Fourth of July, is wrong, and that the countrys true birth date, the moment that its defining contradictions first came into the world, was in late August of 1619?

That section too has since been edited, blunting some of its edge, and creating another situation where supporters of the project at once say that there was nothing off-base about it, while changing it in response to the criticism. As schools around the country began teaching the project, Republicans made a national issue out of it, one that cant be disentangled from the fight over critical race theory.

Liberals often suggest that parents who are skeptical of the New York Timess 1619 Project reject the idea of teaching the truth about American history. More often, as with the woman in the focus group, its a question of framing rather than truth. Believing or conceding that we as a people are defined by the worst of the past might actually be true, but the concession is seen as cutting off any hope of a better future. As an adult, if thats the view youve come to and I flirt with it often myself its a more than understandable conclusion. But we want our children to remain hopeful about the possibility of a better world, since its the world theyll inherit and build after were all gone. The argument that slavery was essential to the development of capitalism in the United States is well-established scholarship by this point. But absent a call to overthrow capitalism, that notion, particularly when compressed into something an elementary school student could absorb, loses any meaning beyond nihilism. And so of course parents of all races reject the framing and look askance at a party of elites who seem to be blithely suggesting though not really meaning it the overthrow of a capitalist system that benefits them before all others. And if theyre not suggesting that, then what?

Levison, meanwhile, argues that Democrats need to lean into the kind of patriotic rhetoric that makes many progressives recoil. Democrats have the potential to split extremists off from traditionalists by couching Democratic values as truly American, and extremists as un-American. As an example of such possible rhetoric, he offers, is, I love the American flag as much as any American but I would never use a flagpole flying our flag as a club to assault other Americans that I call my enemies. That is not the American way. Or: The values I grew up with are good values and I want them to endure. But the values of the people who want to turn Americans against each other and divide our country are not my values.

An attendee signs the campaign bus of Glenn Youngkin, Republican gubernatorial candidate for Virginia, during a campaign stop at the Alexandria Farmers Market in Alexandria, Va., on Oct. 30, 2021.

Photo: Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images

At the end of Barefoots focus group, the women were asked if theyd have considered changing their vote if Democrats had passed the bipartisan infrastructure bill. The bill, which was passed by the House the following week, is something that Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat, has claimed would have helped win the election for McAuliffe.

Ninety-one percent of the suburban women said no, 9 percent said yes, and one woman laughed and said, What does that have to do with anything?

Shes right to laugh. But that 9 percent actually points to something hopeful. In a close race, a 9-point swing like that can matter. If Democrats had passed the reconciliation bill as well and could talk about universal pre-K, the child tax credit, clean energy investments, and subsidies for child care, they might have won even more back. And if Democrats were out of touch culturally, though, that swing could be even higher

A major new survey from Jacobin, YouGov, and the Center for Working-Class Politics points to another way that cultural chasm can be bridged: with candidates who focus on these economic issues but dont talk like juniors at Oberlin.

The survey design was unusual:Instead of asking about issue preferences or messaging alone, it concocted prototypes of candidates and asked which of them was more appealing. When it came to a candidates background, the survey found somewhat awkwardly for a socialist magazine that voters of all races and classes had the most positive reaction to small-business owners. The most disliked candidates were CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. Working-class candidates teachers, construction workers, and veterans also fared well, though not as well as mom and pop.

Broadly, Jacobin did not find evidence to support the Great Left Hope that if the masses would turn out in full at the ballot box, theyd eagerly support democratic socialists candidates and policies. Many working-class voters in advanced economies have actually moved to the left on questions of economic policy (favoring more redistribution, more government spending on public goods, and more taxation of the very wealthy), while remaining culturally or socially moderate, they write. They contrast this from where mainstream Democrats have gone: left on culture while tempering their economic progressivism.

But the survey also pointed to how they could be won over, and the results mapped with Levisons and Barefoots findings. Language Jacobin described as woke created a cultural barrier between voters and candidates that diminished support for both woke progressive and woke moderate candidates, while universal, populist language did best for Democrats. Notably, woke messaging decreased the appeal of other candidate characteristics, they write. For example, candidates employing woke messaging who championed either centrist or progressive economic, health care, or civil rights policy priorities were viewed less favorably than their counterparts who championed the same priorities but opted for universalist messaging.Startlingly, the survey found a 30-plus point gap between support for a teacher running on a populist, universalist message versusa CEO running with a moderate economic platform, couched in woke rhetoric reminiscent of Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign.

A South Carolina National Guardsman meets a school bus as it arrives withBlack students at the Lamar School on March 23, 1970, in Lamar, S.C.

Photo: Bettmann Archive/Getty Images

In todays debate over critical race theory, its impossible not to hear echoes of the busing wars in the 1970s and 80s. Like with busing, Democratic elites are creating conflict within the working class while protecting their own class and cultural interests. By the early 1970s, white school districts had spent nearly two decades resisting Brown v. Board of Education, which outlawed segregation in schools, and national attention had turned to redlining and the dug-in segregation of housing.

The 1968 Housing and Urban Development Act had banned residential discrimination and empowered the federal government to forcibly integrate neighborhoods. In 1973, Donald Trump and his father were suedby the Department of Justice for racial segregation in their housing and settled two years later. That same year, a Gallup survey asked Black residents to choose from a list of preferred solutions to school desegregation, and the top choice was the most intuitive: neighborhood integration and an end to redlining. Only 9 percent of Black residents named busing as their preferred approach to school desegregation which, again, is intuitive: Attending the neighborhood school is always preferable, all things being equal, than being bused somewhere else. The same was true for white voters: Just 4 percent supported busing.

But neighborhood integration would require white residents to give something up. Even today, according to law professor Dorothy Brown, the author of The Whiteness of Wealth: How the Tax System Impoverishes Black Americans and How We Can Fix It, when neighborhoods integrate, with the Black population reaching at least 10 percent, property values either decline or grow more slowly. Facing that systematic decline in wealth, many white residents fought neighborhood housing integration. Busing, meanwhile, could be avoided by the well-off by sending their kids to private school. And so Democrats went with busing over housing. Republicans began to use busing in campaigns as a dog whistle to bigoted parents resistant to desegregating education, banking on the fact that there was additional political gain to be had among a majority of voters who opposed it for a variety of reasons. In 1981, Gallup found 60 percent of Black voters supported busing as a means to integration, though opposition was strong as well.

Antibusing is a code word for racism and rejection, wrote Jesse Jackson in 1982. True, some blacks oppose busing, but not for racial reasons. Blacks sometimes are against busing because all decisions about desegregation are being made for them, not with and by them.

Battles over language are by definition divorced from the material reality that structures inequality.

White parents who couldnt afford private school fled to the suburbs, creating new school districts along racial lines; since busing only happened within a school district, that meant it was largely going on inside big cities, with the suburbs immune. White working-class voters who remained in the cities noted rightly that the professional class in the suburbs, which proudly supported busing in the city, was merely signaling its own virtue, while engaging in the same bigoted resistance to or avoidance of integration.

Todays white Democratic elites are also confronted with school systems that have substantially resegregated, persistent racial income and wealth gaps, and test scores that reflect those patent inequalities. Their answer has been to thoughtfully interrogate the concepts of white privilege and systemic racism by examining interpersonal relationships and developing a new vocabulary that gives its speaker license to feel as righteous about things today as white folks did in the Boston suburbs in 1975. But, as Jamelle Bouie writes, battles over language are by definition divorced from the material reality that structures inequality.

We must remember that the problem of racism of the denial of personhood and of the differential exposure to exploitation and death will not be resolved by saying the right words or thinking the right thoughts.

Thats because racism does not survive, in the main, because of personal belief and prejudice. It survives because it is inscribed and reinscribed by the relationships and dynamics that structure our society, from segregation and exclusion to inequality and the degradation of labor.

Bouie answers with Martin Luther King Jr.s admonition to look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.

Telling the truth about King and his politics has always been too much for American liberals. The vulgar version of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives popular in boardrooms and school workshops is meant to fill the void created by a refusal to assault the roots of racism; they provide a way to talk about racism that strips it of its material reality and slots it instead into the world of individual self-improvement. Without the systemic context, it merely trains people in how to enact roles, identify people failing to play their proper role, and properly call them out.

One woman in the focus group, asked how she understood critical race theory, said, It teaches our kids America is defined by the worst parts of its past. Instead of hiring corporate consultants to pretend to tear down white supremacy in the classroom, Democrats could dedicate themselves to the pursuit of living up to the values on which the nation claims it was founded. Frederick Douglasss famous speech delivered in 1852 What, to the American slave, is your Fourth of July? pounds at the conscience of the nation by describing the gap between its founding principles and its everyday reality.

I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nations destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost,Douglass said.

Teaching the truth about American history, including all of its awfulness, doesnt require teaching kids that they or their country are defined by the worst of its past. Quite the opposite: Americas greatest heroes have always defined their project within the outlines of the promise and spirit of the nations founding, daring and challenging it to live up to its promises.

Notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented of the state of the nation, I do not despair of this country, Douglass concluded on that Fourth of July. There are forces in operation, which must inevitably work the downfall of slavery. The arm of the Lord is not shortened, and the doom of slavery is certain. I, therefore, leave off where I began, with hope while drawing encouragement from the Declaration of Independence, the great principles it contains, and the genius of American Institutions.

Thats something cultural traditionalists can all get behind. It would still, of course, trigger the far right. But the resulting fight would isolate the extremists, exposing their hostility to Douglasss message as the raw racism it is. Democrats win the argument when its about Charlottesville, but lose if its Loudoun County. But Loudoun County isnt Charlottesville, just as Glenn Youngkin isnt Donald Trump. Let the right lose its mind attacking Frederick Douglass. Make him and his allies like Robert Smalls those who fought oppression against the worst odds the true heroes of American history. And not one more word, for the love of God, from Robin DiAngelo.

Read more from the original source:

It's Not Just White People: Democrats Are Losing Normal Voters of All Races - The Intercept

Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

When Republicans lost big in the 2012 election, the party commissioned a post-mortem analysis that arrived at a blunt conclusion about the way it communicated: The Republican Party needs to stop talking to itself, said the report, informally known as the autopsy.

After the elections last week, in which Democrats across the country lost races they expected to win or narrowly escaped defeat, some are asking whether the Democratic Party is suffering from a similar problem of insularity in its messaging.

Critics and some prominent liberals like Ruy Teixeira, a left-of-center political scientist, have argued that Democrats are trying to explain major issues such as inflation, crime and school curriculum with answers that satisfy the partys progressive base but are unpersuasive and off-putting to most other voters.

The clearest example is in Virginia, where the Democratic candidate for governor, Terry McAuliffe, lost his election after spending weeks trying to minimize and discredit his opponents criticisms of public school education, particularly the way that racism is talked about. Mr. McAuliffe accused the Republican, Glenn Youngkin, of campaigning on a made-up issue and of blowing a racist dog whistle.

But about a quarter of Virginia voters said that the debate over teaching critical race theory, a graduate-level academic framework that has become a stand-in for a debate over what to teach about race and racism in schools, was the most important factor in their decision, and 72 percent of those voters cast ballots for Mr. Youngkin, according to a survey of more than 2,500 voters conducted for The Associated Press by NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research organization.

The nuances of critical race theory, which focuses on the ways that institutions perpetuate racism, and the hyperbolic tone of the coverage of the issue in conservative news media point to why Democrats have struggled to come up with an effective response.

Mr. Teixeira calls the Democrats problem with critical race theory and other galvanizing issues the Fox News Fallacy.

These issues are ripe for distortions and exaggeration by Republican politicians and their allies in the news media. But Mr. Teixeira says Democrats should not dismiss voters concerns as simply right-wing misinformation.

An issue is not necessarily completely invalid just because Fox News mentions it, he said.

In an interview, Mr. Teixeira said his logic applied to questions far beyond critical race theory. I cant tell you how many times I analyze a particular issue, saying this is a real concern, he said. And the first thing I hear is, Hey, this is a right-wing talking point. Youre playing into the hands of the enemy.

Fox News is not the only institution capable of producing this kind of reaction from some on the left it was just the one Mr. Teixeira chose to make his point as vividly as possible.

What to Know About the 2021 Virginia Election

The conservative news media is full of stories that can make it sound as if the country is living through a nightmare. Rising prices and supply chain difficulties are cast as economic threats on par with the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, a comparison that is oversimplified because neither inflation nor unemployment is as high now. Stories of violent crime in large cities are given prominent placement and frequent airing; the same is true of coverage about the record number of migrants being apprehended at the southern border.

The Biden administration has struggled to address concerns about all of these issues. Critics pounced when the White House chief of staff, Ron Klain, posted a tweet that cast inflation and supply chain disruptions as high class problems, seeming to dismiss the anxiety that Americans say they have about their own finances.

And despite border crossings hitting the highest number on record since at least 1960, when the government began tracking them, the Biden administration has resisted referring to the issue as a crisis. President Biden has faced persistent questions about why he has not visited the border.

C.R.T. is not new. Derrick Bell, a pioneering legal scholar who died in 2011, spent decades exploring what it would mean to understand racism as a permanent feature of American life. He is often called the godfather of critical race theory, but the term was coined by Kimberl Crenshaw in the 1980s.

The theory has gained new prominence. After theprotestsborn from the police killing of George Floyd, critical race theory resurfaced as part of a backlash among conservatives includingformer President Trump who began to use the term as apolitical weapon.

The current debate. Critics of C.R.T. argue that it accuses all white Americans of being racist and is being used to divide the country. But critical race theorists say they are mainly concerned with understandingthe racial disparities that have persisted ininstitutionsandsystems.

A hot-button issue in schools. The debate has turned school boards into battlegroundsas some Republicans say the theory is invading classrooms. Education leaders, including the National School Boards Association, say that C.R.T. is not being taught in K-12 schools.

Then theres crime. After a year and a half of calls from the progressive left for drastic policing reform, voters across the country last week rejected candidates and policies aligned with the defund the police movement. In two of the most striking examples, Minneapolis voters said no to a referendum to dismantle their citys troubled police department. And New Yorkers elected as mayor a former police captain, Eric Adams, who strongly opposes defund efforts.

One liberal who apparently recognized the broader problems that Democrats have had explaining their platforms to voters was Maya Wiley, who ran against Mr. Adams in the mayoral primary as a proponent of sweeping police reforms. In an opinion essay for The New Republic this week, Ms. Wiley, a civil rights lawyer, wrote that while Republicans distorted the debate over critical race theory in Virginia, they also offered a more compelling message on education.

If you only heard evening news sound bites, you would think all he talked about on the campaign trail was critical race theory, Ms. Wiley said of Mr. Youngkin. Not so. In fact, he sounded like a moderate Democrat, with the notable exception of C.R.T.

Despite the dog whistling, Wiley said, the message was effective because it was empathetic. He was saying he understood their pain, she said.

Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.

Is there anything you think were missing? Anything you want to see more of? Wed love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.

The rest is here:

Do Democrats Have a Messaging Problem? - The New York Times

McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) A veteran South Texas state representative, who recently sponsored a controversial redistricting amendment that dramatically changed the congressional border districts, has switched to the Republican party.

State Rep. Ryan Guillen, of Rio Grande City, appeared at a news conference with Gov. Greg Abbott on Monday in Floresville, Texas, and announced he will not be running as a Democrat during his next election campaign for Texas House District 31, which includes a large section of the border in Starr County.

His switch comes as South Texas is increasingly being targeted as an area that Republicans feel they can take back in 2022.

Guillen tweeted Monday that his fiscally conservative, pro-business, and pro-life values are no longer in-step with the Democratic Party.

After much consideration and prayer with my family, I feel that my fiscally conservative, pro-business, and pro-life values are no longer in-step with the Democrat Party of today, and I am proudly running as a Republican to represent House District 31. pic.twitter.com/CRKOhVnSG4

During the last Special Session called by Abbott, Guillen sponsored a controversial redistricting amendment that carved out a section of South Texas 15th Congressional District and placed it in the 34th Congressional District. That particular area is where three-term U.S. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, a Democrat, lives. And the move enabled Gonzalez to switch congressional districts and to now run for the 34th.

Gonzalez barely won his last reelection against Republican candidate Monica de la Cruz, who is running again and has high-profile backing from the Republican party by members like U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, of Texas, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, of California.

With Gonzalez in another district, de la Cruz is largely considered the favorite and she is gaining momentum in a region that used to be a Democratic stronghold.

Friends, something is happening in South Texas, and many of us are waking up to the fact that the values of those in Washington, D.C., are not our values, not the values of most Texans, Guillen said Monday. The ideology of defunding the police, of destroying the oil and gas industry and the chaos at our border is disastrous for those of us who live here in South Texas.

Welcome to the party of freedom, opportunity & prosperity @RyanGuillen.

As Dems move further left, they're abandoning the people of South Texas & their values.

Rep. Guillen's decision to switch parties is indicative of a shifting landscape in South Texas. pic.twitter.com/6gwEV0DNqB

Abbott said Guillens party switch is reflective of a larger trend throughout the Lone Star state, and the nation.

I am proud to welcome Representative Guillen to the Republican Party the party of economic opportunity and individual liberty. Rep. Guillens decision to switch parties underscores a changing landscape in South Texas, Abbott said in a statement.

The differences between Republicans and Democrats could not be more clear, becauseas the DemocratParty moves further to the left, they are abandoning the people of South Texas and their values.Republicans, however,will not abandon the people of South Texas like Democrats have. Instead, we will continue to fight for freedom, opportunity, and prosperity in District 31 and throughout South Texas. And our efforts are made stronger today with Representative Guillen joining the Republican Party, Abbott said.

The Texas Tribune reported that Guillen was the least liberal Democrat in the House during the 2021 Legislature.

Sandra Sanchezcan be reached at Ssanchez@borderreport.com.

Continue reading here:

Longtime South Texas Democrat switches to the Republican Party - ConchoValleyHomepage.com

On the surface, Democratic candidates fared quite well in the 2020 elections, winning control of the White House and the U.S. Senate, while holding onto their majority in the U.S. House. But just below the surface, these gains did not translate into down-ballot successes leaving Republicans in powerful positions in state offices nationwide.

The policy impact is obvious, but less obvious are the electoral effects: Voters left GOP officials in a position to exploit gerrymandering tactics when drawing district lines. The New York Times reports today that Republicans "are already poised" to erase their deficit in the House "thanks to redrawn district maps that are more distorted, more disjointed and more gerrymandered than any since the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965."

In other words, a year out from the 2022 election cycle, the GOP is positioned to retake the House majority, even if the American electorate votes exactly the same way as it did it 2020, when it elected a Democratic majority. The Times' report characterized this as a dynamic in which the GOP could have "a nearly insurmountable advantage in the 2022 midterm elections."

But that's only part of the Democratic Party's challenge.

To be sure, it's a problem that Democrats are positioned to lose power even if voters cast ballots the same way they did a year ago. To overcome this structural hurdle, Democrats would likely need a substantial national advantage, since winning slightly more votes might still lead to less power.

The bigger problem is that the party's national advantage, at least for now, has disappeared. ABC News reported over the weekend on an important new poll:

Republican congressional candidates currently hold their largest lead in midterm election vote preferences in ABC News/Washington Post polls dating back 40 years, underscoring profound challenges for Democrats hoping to retain their slim majorities in Congress next year.

At this point four years ago, when Republicans had control of Congress and the White House, the Democratic advantage on the Post/ABC generic ballot was 11 points: 51 percent to 40 percent. Now, those numbers have flipped, and it's the GOP with a similar advantage: 51 percent to 41 percent among registered voters.

This is roughly in line with the latest national USA Today/Suffolk poll, which found Republicans with an 8-point lead.

In case this isn't obvious, if Democrats were ahead on the generic ballot by two or three percentage points, that would also be a problem for the party, because the lead would be too small to overcome the GOP's structural advantage, given the unlevel playing field.

But Democrats aren't up by a few points; they're down by double digits.

So, does this mean Republican leaders can start measuring the drapes in the Speaker's office and Democratic incumbents should start retiring in droves to save themselves the embarrassment of inevitable defeats? Not just yet.

First, let's not forget what the generic ballot is: These surveys ask voters for their general partisan preferences in congressional elections, without referencing any specific names of candidates. It's why it's called a "generic" ballot respondents are saying whether they're inclined to support a Democratic or Republican candidate without knowing anything about those candidates themselves.

But when voters actually cast their ballots, they'll be choosing from actual candidates, not generic party labels, and the more extremists and scandal-plagued candidates win GOP primaries, the more likely it will affect the results.

Second, Republicans aren't ahead because they're popular there's nothing in the ABC/Post poll to suggest Americans are buying what the GOP is selling they're ahead because much of the country is unsatisfied with the status quo at a time when Democrats control the reins of power.

The good news for Democrats is that there's nothing normal about the status quo, which is likely to look quite different a year from now. As we recently discussed, the Covid-19 crisis will likely look a lot different 12 months from now. So will the effects of the pandemic on the economy. So will the supply chain. So will inflation rates. With any luck, Democrats might even have an improved legislative record to run on ahead of the next Election Day and the Post/ABC poll showed fairly strong support for Biden's agenda.

MSNBC's Chris Hayes made a point on Twitter a couple of weeks ago that continues to resonate: "My unified theory of American social and political life is that we've lived through and are living through a once-in-a-century trauma/disruption and the results of that are going to reverberate throughout almost every facet of politics for a while."

I think that's right. I also think this once-in-a-century trauma/disruption is temporary, and as the United States enters a different phase a year from now, the political landscape will change.

That's not to say Democrats should be complacent or optimistic. But their polling deficit doesn't necessarily mean the party is facing inevitable doom.

Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MSNBC political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "The Impostors: How Republicans Quit Governing and Seized American Politics."

Read more from the original source:

The one poll that Democrats need to care about most - MSNBC