Category Archives: Republican

The grinding battle over congressional redistricting is drawing to a close. And, contrary to expectations that the process would result in big Republican gains, the final House of Representatives map may well improve somewhat for Democrats.

The main reason is gerrymandering redrawing of district lines for partisan benefit. Republicans built on their existing gerrymanders to try to expand their House advantage, but Democrats fired back even more powerfully with gerrymanders of their own.

Basically, Democrats saved themselves by resorting to a tactic theyve previously denounced as not only unfair but downright unethical House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called gerrymandering unjust and deeply dangerous in 2019. But in the absence of national reforms banning the practice, refusing to gerrymander would have meant effective unilateral disarmament, ceding the GOP a significant advantage in the battle for control over the House.

Redistricting has proceeded like a tug of war. As state legislatures, judges, and commissions have approved new maps, creating more safe or swing districts in various states, the underlying partisanship of the median House district has been pulled in one direction, and then the other. The most powerful pulls came from either state legislatures that gerrymandered, or state courts that struck down certain gerrymandered maps, as this graphic shows:

This cycles Republican gerrymanders pulled the median district (which already leaned 2 percentage points to the right) another point further right. But state court rulings striking down North Carolina and Ohio maps effectively wiped out most of that net gain.

Meanwhile, Democratic gerrymanders in states like New York and Illinois pulled the median district nearly 3 points leftward, so it was actually close to neutral. (Joe Bidens margin in the median district would have nearly matched his national popular vote margin in the 2020 presidential election.) But an aggressive gerrymander in GOP-controlled Florida could soon shift things right again, if approved. Other state court rulings could shift things further, particularly in New York, where Democrats gerrymander is under scrutiny.

Currently, it looks like there will be close to an equal number of districts leaning left and right of the national average, with a slight edge to Republicans in the median district.

Now, its entirely possible, perhaps likely, that Democrats will still lose badly in House elections this fall the party has a small majority, President Biden is unpopular, and the historical pattern is for the incumbents party to struggle in the midterms. But unlike much of the previous decade, the underlying map may be at least somewhat less biased in Republicans favor.

The last national redistricting happened after Republicans won sweeping victories in the 2010 midterms, giving them control over many state legislatures and governorships. They used that power to draw lines that gave them a big advantage in the House.

By 2012, when that last redistricting was finished, the median House district leaned nearly 6 percentage points further toward Republicans presidentially than that years national popular vote. The results were clear: Obama won nationally by about 4 points in 2012, but he lost the median district by about 2 points. Whats more, 55 percent of the overall House districts (240 out of 435) leaned Republican, per the New York Times. That sizable advantage helped Republicans hold the House in 2012 despite Obamas national win.

But over the course of the ensuing decade, that GOP advantage significantly eroded. Changes in demographic voting patterns made many suburban districts less safe for Republicans. Meanwhile, courts struck down Republican gerrymanders in states like Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. By the time the 2020 results were in, the median House district still leaned toward Republicans, but only by 2 points, rather than 6 points. And about 52 percent of districts (228 out of 435) had a Republican lean.

That was real progress for Democrats on reducing the bias of the House, but it was accompanied by disappointment. First, though Democrats performed well in the 2018 and 2020 elections, they fell short of retaking several key governorships and legislatures, meaning Republicans would have the power to gerrymander again in these states. Second, the party had hoped the Supreme Court would declare partisan gerrymandering unconstitutional, banning it nationwide, but Trumps appointees moved to the court to the right and the conservative majority ruled otherwise. Third, efforts to pass a nationwide gerrymandering ban through the Democrat-controlled Congress under Biden were stymied by the Senate filibuster.

So as 2021 began, Republicans had the power of line-drawing in several swing states, as well as red states where they hadnt yet maxed out their advantage. The GOP still had an advantage in the House map, and now it seemed they could entrench and expand it.

There are varying ways to estimate the underlying partisanship of a district or an overall map, but for now, Ill focus mainly on a simple one: how the district voted in the most recent presidential race, compared to the national popular vote. (The New York Timess Nate Cohn used this metric in his own recent analysis.)

In 2020, Biden won the popular vote by a margin of 4.4 percentage points. If he won by more than that in a given district, Im calling that a Democratic-leaning district. If he won by less than that, or lost the district, Im calling it a Republican-leaning district. This metric lets us look at the partisan lean for the median House district (the one necessary to give a party a majority), and also measure how many districts lean toward Democrats or Republicans overall.

Focusing on the presidential numbers wont be a perfect guide to House results. House candidates run with their own strengths and weaknesses, and some manage to defy their districts underlying partisan lean. But there have been fewer such candidates lately in 2020, only 16 out of 435 House victors won a district where the opposite partys presidential candidate also won.

Other analysts may have slightly different specific calculations for the maps overall lean. For this cycle, Ive used the Cook Political Report (an invaluable resource for anyone closely following elections), which calculated the presidential results in each new district. As an alternative, Cook also uses a metric called the PVI (Partisan Voting Index), which incorporates the past two presidential elections. FiveThirtyEight has its own partisan lean score. The Economists G. Elliott Morris argues it can be most predictive to look at the presidential election prior to the most recent one. Still, these different estimates will probably be roughly similar overall.

Lets start by looking at how Republican gerrymandering attempts fared this cycle. The GOP did indeed try to expand their advantage in key states, but their overall impact was hampered by a few factors.

In the finalized maps so far, then, Republicans have ended up with just a handful of new districts leaning in their favor. But thats compared to a map that was already favorable to them, and they managed to preserve or strengthen preexisting pro-GOP maps in key states.

However, one other state may soon give them a big assist: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and GOP state legislative leaders have been at odds for months on just how much the House map should tilt in Republicans favor, with DeSantis pushing for a more extreme gerrymander. And just this week, DeSantis appeared to win: The legislature said it would approve whatever maps he wanted. Florida alone could move the median districts margin one percentage point to the right.

Democrats, meanwhile, really went to town with gerrymanders of their own in states they controlled:

That amounts to wiping out 12 Republican districts and creating 11 Democratic districts an enormous impact on the overall map.

One caveat is that some analysts think Democrats may have spread themselves a bit too thin in some of these maps by creating several districts that lean Democratic, but not strongly so, such that Republicans could very plausibly win in these areas in a strong GOP year. This is the case particularly in Illinois, Nevada, and New Mexico. Still, in a Republican wave year, the GOP is quite likely to win control of the House regardless of what happens in these states. But the lean-Democratic districts tip the balance when theres a close national contest.

There were also states in which redistricting was handled by commissions (rather than state legislatures), or where power was divided. For overall partisan balance, these proved to be close to a wash for instance, commissions eliminated a Republican-leaning district in both California and Michigan, but created a Republican-leaning district in both Arizona and Colorado. (Some Democrats are rueing the lost opportunities to gerrymander Colorado and Virginia, states where they had full control in 2021, because redistricting authority had been given to commissions there.)

Overall, then, the 2022 redistricting wars turned out to come down to a battle of the gerrymanders and Democrats ended up being more impactful.

Democrats have spent the past decade deriding gerrymandering as unethical and immoral, and trying to get it banned across the country.

Yet the plain reality is that, if they had decided not to do any of it, Republicans would not only have retained their existing advantage in the House map, they would have expanded it.

Though some states havent finalized their maps yet and these numbers can change, its currently looking like around 218 districts will have voted more for Trump than the national average in 2020, and 217 districts will have voted more for Biden (per the Cook Political Reports numbers). Furthermore, Bidens margin of victory in the median district would be about 1 percentage point lower than his margin of victory nationally. Thats not perfectly balanced, but its pretty balanced meaning the map itself will likely only swing outcomes in the very closest of elections.

Contrast this to a scenario where Democrats agreed to unilaterally disarm and do no gerrymandering or where the blue states tied their own hands by adopting serious anti-gerrymandering reforms.

Assuming something close to the 2020 maps remained in these states, around 230 of the overall new districts would have voted more for Trump than the national average, and the median district would have leaned nearly 4 points to the right of the national presidential popular vote.

A similar dynamic has arisen with other good-government reform issues, like campaign finance. Democrats spent a decade condemning conservative big money and dark money, and trying without success to rein in their influence. But the party thought it would be foolish to take the high ground by forswearing those practices. And eventually, by 2020, they arguably ended up mastering them more expertly than Republicans.

Republicans believe Democrats appeals to ethics were always situational. They point out that Democrats only began to complain about gerrymandering so loudly once Republicans got the chance to do so much of it in 2010, and that Democratic state parties have often been eager to gerrymander when theyve had the power to do so.

Still, all this does get at the difficulty of making reforms stick without a national solution. Theres a prisoners dilemma aspect to gerrymandering, in which agreeing not to get your hands dirty may well just mean agreeing to lose.

For Democrats genuinely concerned about good-government reforms, that poses a challenge. Without a national solution, is it worth it to try to keep reforming gerrymandering in blue-leaning states?

Or, if you do so, are you just a sucker?

Original post:

Democrats gerrymandered more effectively than Republicans this cycle - Vox.com

If you ask some (okay, many) conservative pundits, Democrats are grooming children. As in, grooming them to be abused by pedophiles. Some Republicans have even accused Democrats of being pedophiles themselves.

The grooming charges lump together concerns that kids are being introduced too early to sexually explicit material, to the existence of transgender people, and to non-heterosexual sexual orientations. In March, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed what critics have dubbed the Dont Say Gay bill, a measure that discourages teachers from discussing gender identity or sexual orientation in classrooms. Versions of the measure have been proposed in at least a dozen other states. Referring to the bill, DeSantiss spokesperson Christina Pushaw tweeted, If youre against the Anti-Grooming Bill, you are probably a groomer or at least you dont denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children. A pastor even organized an anti-grooming rally at Disneys headquarters in California.

This type of rhetoric is damaging in its own right. As the commentator David French writes in his newsletter, Throwing around accusations of pedophilia, sympathy for pedophilia, grooming, or sympathy for grooming is a recipe for threats and violencean assessment that some historians endorse. This latest pedophilia panic overlaps with the false beliefs of the QAnon movement, which fueled the Pizzagate incident in 2016.

But bills such as Floridas are also likely to have a chilling effect on comprehensive sexual education in schools, with deleterious effects. Comprehensive sex ed doesnt just help prevent bullying; it helps kids have healthier relationships of all kinds, improves their communication skills, and even boosts their media literacy. Compared with abstinence-only sex education or no sex education at all, comprehensive sex ed helps reduce teen pregnancy rates. One meta-analysis found that European countries, many of which offer comprehensive, mandatory sex ed, including for young children, tend to have the lowest rates of child sexual abuse in the world. Sex education is the exact opposite of grooming, says Nora Gelperin, the director of sexuality education at Advocates for Youth, a sex-ed nonprofit. Sex education, even when started in the earliest grades, has shown to be protective for kids, especially around child sexual abuse.

A 2020 study that examined three decades of research on sex education found that comprehensive sex ed that begins in elementary school can help prevent child sex abuse, among other benefits. Stranger dangertype language isnt recommended these days; about 93 percent of child sexual-abuse victims know their abusers. Instead, these programs help children identify the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touching, the difference between tattling and keeping unsafe secrets, and how to identify abusive situations. In other words, sex ed isnt groomingit helps protect kids from grooming.

Modern sex ed also seems to give kids a sense of empowerment, including by teaching them the correct names for their own genitals. Predators are less likely to select a child who can accurately talk about those body parts, Gelperin says, than a child that is ignorant of what those body parts are actually called. It also makes kids less likely to victimize one another: One program for eighth graders, called Safe Dates, was associated with lower rates of physical and sexual dating violence four years later, compared with a control group.

Experts recommend starting sex education as early as kindergarten and teaching it the way you would math. Five-year-olds dont tend to learn geometry, but they do learn about numbers and shapes. Similarly, experts say kindergartners dont need to be told about, for example, orgasms, but they are encouraged to understand what their body parts are and how to protect themselves from unwanted touching.

One of the best-regarded American sex-ed curricula is Rights, Respect, and Responsibility, or the 3Rs, developed by Advocates for Youth and available for free online. For kindergartners and first graders, the lessons focus on preventing bullying, setting boundaries about touching, and learning what types of things make babies (elephants, but not pizza). The most explicit section covers the proper names of genitalia, including an explanation that most girls have a hole called the vagina that is used when a female has a baby. The use of correct anatomical terms is meant to ensure that kids are understood if they ever report abuse. But also, this is your body and you have a right to know what the different parts are called, the curriculum explains.

The first-grade lesson plans also include a section about gender identity, in which teachers are encouraged to say something like You might feel like youre a boy even if you have body parts that some people might tell you are girl parts. You might feel like youre a girl even if you have body parts that some people might tell you are boy parts. And you might not feel like youre a boy or a girl, but youre a little bit of both. No matter how you feel, youre perfectly normal!

Though this message does not exactly comport with a socially conservative worldview, it hardly amounts to grooming children to be molested by pedophiles. The argument for providing information on sexual orientation and gender identity in elementary school is that children are likely to encounter these concepts in the wild. Between 2 million and 4 million American children are being raised by a non-straight parent. Some children might either be transgender themselves or have a parent who is. Advocates of this type of curriculum say these concepts can be explained more accurately in school, and help make kids who are not straight or cisgender feel welcomed.

But just because the 3Rs curriculum is recommended doesnt mean it gets taught. Far from it: Sex ed, like all lesson plans, varies dramatically by school district, and usually reflects the values of the surrounding community. For example, Texas, which has more children than almost any other state, does not require high schools to teach sex ed. As of 2017, most Texas schools districts took an abstinence-only approach to sex ed, and though the state has recently introduced some discussion of contraceptives in middle school, abstinence must be emphasized. Instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation is not currently offered in Florida from kindergarten to third grade, the ages targeted by the Dont Say Gay bill.

Most European countries do provide comprehensive sex ed in every school, however. Experts link Europeans superior sexual-health outcomeslower teen pregnancy rates, lower rates of sexual abuse, and lower STD rates among young peopleto better, earlier sex ed. In Western Europe, sex ed tends to be mandatory and blunt, and start before kindergarten; its like the 3Rs, but more graphic.

In the Netherlands, sex ed begins before many kids can read. From age 5, children are taught about reproduction, about pregnancy and birth of a baby, says Elsbeth Reitzema, the sexuality-education program officer at Rutgers, a Dutch nonprofit that helps run the countrys sex-ed programs. They also learn the main physical differences between boys and girls, about the genitals and their functions. By the end of primary school, children have learned about reproduction, pregnancy, and birth. They know that a woman, if she is fertile, can become pregnant through sex in the manner of penis-in-vagina sex. They also learn about being intersex, transgender, and nonbinary. When theyre 11, kids learn about masturbation.

One popular Dutch sex-ed curriculum explains to fourth graders that the clitoris is a very sensitive place. Touching it can give a nice feeling, according to Beyond Birds and Bees, a 2018 book in part about the Dutch approach to sex ed by Bonnie Rough, who has written on the same topic for The Atlantic. It is not customary for parents to take their children out of the lesson, Reitzema told me. Should parents object to the lessons, then the school will explain what the content of the lessons is. This usually removes the parents resistance to the lessons.

In Swedens mandatory sex-ed program, 7-to-9-year-olds learn about all body parts, and discuss gender, Hans Olsson, the countrys senior adviser on sexuality education, told me. School has a duty to counteract limiting gender patterns, already at [the] preschool level. Also in preschool, kids learn about bodily integrity and name their sexual organs. Rather than the proper terminology, though, Swedish kids use snopp, which is like willy, and snippa. (Dont know the equivalent word in English, Olsson said.) Starting in fourth grade, Swedish kids learn about LGBTQ issues.

Sara Zaske, the author of the German comparative-parenting book Achtung Baby, told me that her 7-year-old daughters class in Berlin read the childrens book Mummy Laid an Egg without asking parents permission first. The picture book, which was originally published in English, features cartoon drawings of Daddys tube and Mummys hole, along with the ways mummies and daddies fit together. Unlike in the United States, Zaske writes in her book, German kids learn much more about sex than conception. German schools cover STD prevention, yes, but also masturbation, orgasms, and homosexuality. Zaske quotes one doctor in an article on the city of Berlins official website as saying, Sex education cannot begin early enough.

Rough and others dont see these types of lessons as giving children ideas about sex and sexuality. After all, adults openly do thingsdrink alcohol, use the stove, drivethat kids cant. Kids understand when an activity is for adults only. She and other advocates reject the notion that telling kids about different sexual orientations or gender identities turns kids gay or gender-nonconforming. Teaching about the topics is not creating new LGBTQ students, says Elizabeth Schroeder, a sexuality educator and co-author of the 3Rs curriculum.

But most important, early sex ed opens up lines of communication between kids and responsible adults. If we start giving off the impression that sex is a topic that when you ask me a question that Im going to start acting weird and funny and dishonest about it, they quickly pick up that this is something off-limits, says Emily Rothman, a health-sciences professor at Boston University. So theyre either gonna think, Well, I can go to my friends or I can go to the internet. By which she means: to porn.

The larger point of this kind of instruction is what the Dutch call sexual assertiveness: If somebody is saying or doing something that makes your body feel uncomfortable, youve been taught how to notice that and what to do next, Rough told me. One aim of communicating freely about sex with a teacher or another trusted adult is the development of a trusting, trustworthy relationship with a grown-up who has the childs best interests at heart.

Meanwhile, only a quarter of U.S. public schools report that students practice communication, decision making, goal setting, or refusal skills as part of sex ed, Rough writes in her book. Instead, some American children learn about sex through porn, through experimentation, or, tragically, from an abuser. Because so much of American sex education treats sexual activity as dangerous or shameful, kids who are victimized by adults may feel that they have to keep it secret. European children who learn about their body, and are warned about inappropriate touching, can better protect themselves. There, Rough writes, those who prey on children can no longer benefit from their ignorance.

See the original post here:

Republicans Have Sex Ed All Wrong - The Atlantic

It took a single stroke of Ron DeSantiss pen, passing Floridas so-called dont say gay bill into law, to transform the self-proclaimed happiest place on earth into a scene of bitter conflict.

Disneys theme parks have become the latest battlefront in the pugnacious rightwing Republican governors culture war on what he calls wokeness, and on the states LBGTQ+ community. DeSantis, a close Trump ally, and perhaps rival, is threatening sanctions on the corporate behemoth after it dared to challenge the controversial law banning discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in classrooms.

DeSantis, however, is no comedic Disney villain doomed to lose and be taught the error of his ways before peace is restored to the kingdom.

The ambitious Trumpist governor, many observers say, has sights set on his own presidential run in 2024, and doesnt care if he tramples Floridas largest private employer and its notably diverse cast of almost 80,000 to get there. Or if he upends the tradition of decades of special privilege Disney has enjoyed in Florida in return for the tens of millions of dollars it has spent on political lobbying and campaign contributions.

Those perks include the right to self-government, granted to Disney by the Florida legislature in 1967 when the Magic Kingdom was under construction in Orlando, and which vocal DeSantis loyalists are now seeking to repeal in order to punish the company.

Hes running in a GOP primary for president of the United States, which is the motivating factor behind every single decision that he makes, Carlos Guillermo Smith, an openly gay Democratic member of the Florida house, said.

This doesnt make Floridians better off, unfortunately. Its all about Ron DeSantis, what he wants, and what helps his political future. They are [also] abusing their power and trying to scare Floridians and businesses away from expressing any support for the LGBTQ community.

We have major problems in Florida, and Governor DeSantis seems more interested in settling scores and seeking retribution against people who dont agree with his agenda.

DeSantiss feud with Disney has escalated in recent days following the companys statement that it would work to repeal the law, which experts say stigmatizes gay and transgender people, and could harm childrens mental health and lead to suicides.

Last week, the governor appeared to back the proposal by Spencer Roach, a Republican state congressman, to cancel the 1967 agreement, which allowed the company to build then operate Disney World autonomously. Disney, DeSantis said, had crossed the line by committing to help overturn the dont say gay law, officially known as the Parental Rights in Education Act, and that it was time for Disneys special privileges to end.

Theyre used to having their way, and theyre not used to having people that will stand in their way, DeSantis said at a press conference in St Johns county.

Actually, the state of Floridas going to be governed by the best interests of the people in Florida. Were certainly not going to bend the knee to woke executives in California, he added, referring to Disneys corporate headquarters in Burbank.

In an email to the Guardian, DeSantiss spokesperson, Christina Pushaw, denied DeSantis was seeking retaliation over Disney for its stance.

For his entire political career, his position has always been that all businesses should be able to compete on a fair playing field, and that its wrong for governments to dole out favors to politically connected companies, she said.

But records show that Disney, which announced last month it was suspending all political donations in the state as the dont say gay bill progressed, contributed almost $1m to the Republican party of Florida in 2020, and $50,000 directly to DeSantis.

Meanwhile, an analysis compiled by Anna Eskamani, a Democratic state congresswoman representing Disneys central Florida heartland, lists decades of perks and privileges she says the company has enjoyed from lawmakers.

They feature millions of dollars in sales and property tax breaks, corporate income tax refunds, and language inserted into, or left out of certain legislation that would affect the company, including a human trafficking bill that could have exposed its hotels to lawsuits, and an exemption to regulations over materials used in road construction on Disney property.

The governor hasnt held the company accountable beyond yelling about it on Fox News, said Eskamani, who stressed that she accepts no corporate campaign contributions.

Disneys business model, and tax structures, have remained unchanged, and even the governors office has helped Disney maintain special privileges. So much of this I find to be ironic.

But thats not what hes talking about. Hes talking about specific, punitive punishments of one company because they dare speak out against a homophobic and transphobic bill because they have LGBTQ+ employees who are scared for their health and wellbeing.

[Disney] needs to recruit and retain diverse staff and will not be able to do that the direction Florida is going. As economic partners they have every right to express themselves, but under the DeSantis administration, if you dare challenge him, he will bully you into submission.

Pushback on DeSantis has also come from Republicans. Larry Hogan, the governor of Maryland, told CNN: The whole thing seems like just a crazy fight. The bill was kind of absurd and not something that would have happened in our state.

For its part, Disney appears to have been caught wrong-footed by the furore. The company was accused of voicing its opposition late, and issuing its statement only after an outcry and walkout by cast members.

Chief executive Bob Chapek apologized for pain, frustration and sadness caused by its earlier silence in a letter aimed at its LBGTQ+ workers. You needed me to be a stronger ally in the fight for equal rights and I let you down, he wrote.

The misstep also allowed DeSantis to seize on perceived dishonesty by Disney, which employs dozens of lobbyists in Tallahassee but did not use them to speak with lawmakers as the law was drafted.

They didnt seem to have a problem with it when it was going through. This was such an affront, why werent they speaking up at the outset? DeSantis said.

In a further blow to Disneys attempts to make amends, the Human Rights Campaign is refusing a $5m donation until the company proves its commitment to work with LGBTQ+ advocates to overturn the dont say gay law.

Disney did not respond to emails seeking comment.

Disney is caught between a rock and a hard place, said Charles Zelden, professor of humanities and politics at Nova Southeastern University and a longtime Florida Disney watcher.

I suspect their lobbyists told them, You know, keep quiet on this and thats what they tried to do, but then they couldnt because the cast members rose up and said, You got to object to this. They cant afford to alienate not only their cast members but people who support a more liberal, diverse society.

Zelden said he was curious about DeSantiss next move.

Disney has all these lobbyists to make sure they dont lose their special taxing district. So it just means that the fight will progress into the legislature, and theyve got a heck of a tool with their money and their clout to fend off concrete attacks, he said.

The verbal attacks will continue, but as long as it stays that way, the Mouse is all right.

Continued here:

DeSantis takes on Disney in latest battle in the Republican culture war - The Guardian

Eric Lee / Bloomberg / Getty Images

Despite being a reliable Republican vote for most of two-plus terms in the U.S. House, Rep. Liz Cheney hasnt been afraid to buck her party when it comes to former President Donald Trump. The Wyoming representative was one of just 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in January 2021. She has called Trump a clear and present danger to American democracy. She supported the investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol that Trump incited. Cheney has even earned praise from Democrats, a remarkable turn of events for the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, whom Democrats loathed.

But Cheneys anti-Trump stance could doom her career in the Republican Party where Trump remains popular by sparking intense opposition to her both at home and in Washington. On Capitol Hill, House Republicans ousted Cheney from party leadership and the Republican National Committee voted to condemn her for serving on the House committee investigating the events of Jan. 6. In Wyoming, the state GOP has excommunicated her, while party committees all around the state have formally censured her. And now she faces a stern challenge in Wyomings 2022 GOP primary the state has only one congressional district from Harriett Hageman, an attorney and former RNC member who has endorsements from both Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

As a result, Cheney may face more danger in her primary than any other House Republican running in 2022. But could she be saved by Democrats? On March 8, Wyomings legislature scrapped a bill seeking to end the states crossover voting provision. That rule permits voters to switch parties on Election Day, which could allow registered Democrats and other non-Republicans to change their registration to support Cheney in the Aug. 16 GOP primary. The legislatures deliberations over the bill, which Trump had supported, sparked a raft of headlines raising the prospect of crossover voters being key to Cheneys survival.

The reality is otherwise: Only Republicans can really save Cheneys political future. If shes counting on anyone else, then shes probably done for.

The math just doesnt work for Cheney if shes looking for substantial help from non-Republicans in Wyomings GOP primary without winning a healthy share of Republicans first. The vast majority (70 percent) of voters in the state are registered Republicans. And in midterm years (like 2022), an even larger share of the states primary voters have cast ballots in GOP nomination battles, as the table below shows meaning theyre very likely reliably Republican-leaning Wyomingites. And of course, in a state as red as Wyoming Trump garnered 70 percent of the vote there in 2020 winning the GOP primary is tantamount to winning the election in November.

Total primary votes in the Republican and Democratic primaries and the share of all primary votes cast in major-party primaries, by midterm year

Excludes a small number of votes cast in nonpartisan primary races.

Source: Wyoming Secretary of State

Lets look at what happened in 2018, when almost 100,000 more votes were cast in the Republican primary than in the Democratic contest. Although a super-competitive GOP nomination race for governor partly explains that discrepancy, the 2018 cycle marked the third consecutive midterm in which more than 80 percent of the votes cast in the two major-party primaries came on the GOP side. Now, some of those voters might be Democrats or independents who vote in the GOP primary because it will determine the winner in most Wyoming elections. But in a state where the Republican presidential nominee usually wins 65 to 70 percent of the vote, its clear that most of those primary voters are dyed-in-the-wool Republicans or at least lean toward the GOP.

So lets do a little back-of-the-envelope math to consider Cheneys position based on what we know about the current state of the race and recent Wyoming primaries. There has been little recent public polling of the race, but a December survey from SoCo Strategies put her behind Hageman by 20 percentage points, and older polls found her support or favorability among Wyoming Republicans in the 20s evidence that shes in rough shape. For arguments sake, lets say that Cheney trails by 10 points among registered Republicans in the final days of the primary campaign (possibly a rosy scenario, considering her polling numbers). So Hagerman has 50 percent, Cheney 40 percent and the four or so other candidates attract the remaining 10 percent (the candidate filing deadline is May 27, so the field could expand or retract further). If there are around 110,000 voters who were registered Republicans before primary day a reasonable guess since nearly 117,000 total voters participated in the 2018 GOP primary for governor Hageman would lead by around 11,000 votes. Based on the 2018 primary, Cheney would then need nearly 60 percent of the total Democratic primary voters to not only switch to vote in the GOP contest but to also vote for her.

Now, if the race proved to be closer, and/or if another GOP contender say, state Sen. Anthony Bouchard took more of the anti-Cheney vote from Hageman, perhaps crossover voters could make the difference for Cheney. Lets say Hageman is up, with 42 percent to Cheneys 37 percent among registered Republicans, while Bouchard sits at 15 percent (and other candidates win the remaining 6 percent). In that case, Cheney would trail by about 5,500 votes, or about 30 percent of the total number of Democratic primary votes in 2018. Its not out of the question that the red-hot spotlight on Cheneys race could encourage significant crossover voting among Democrats, especially if there isnt much happening in the Democratic primary. Things could play out that way, considering so far no notable Democrats have declared in Wyomings races for the House or governor (neither of Wyomings U.S. Senate seats are up in 2022).

But this still means that Cheney must remain competitive among Republicans to even allow for a scenario where crossover voters could conceivably put her over the top. Granted, she has a huge financial edge at the end of 2021, Cheney had raised $7.2 million to Hagemans $745,000 which the incumbent can use to damage Hageman and play up her conserative bonafides. And Cheneys wealthy backers might also look to raise the profile of one of the other anti-Cheney contenders in the hopes of fragmenting her opposition. (Promoting another candidate for your benefit is a dark campaign art practiced by past vulnerable incumbents, although usually by trying to influence the other partys primary.) However, even if Cheneys allies wanted to go that route, the most obvious choice for prospective assistance looks to be toxic: Bouchard, the state senator, has seen his fundraising dry up after Hagemans entry into the race and revelations that he impregnated a 14-year-old girl when he was 18 years old.

Beyond any hypothetical campaign intrigue, the fact is that Wyomings Election Day registration rules may not even boost Cheneys chances as much as the conventional wisdom might believe. Wyoming not only permits voters to switch parties at the polls, but it also allows same-day voter registration. So while crossover voters might participate in the GOP primary, there could be even more same-day registrants, many of whom might be newly engaged Republicans.

Consider the 2018 GOP primary for governor, when some conservatives claimed that now-Gov. Mark Gordon won the party nomination thanks to crossover votes from non-Republicans. Gordon won by about 9,000 votes, but an analysis of voter registration data found that party switching probably didnt affect the outcome. The GOP added around 8,200 registered voters on primary day, but Democrats lost only about 1,800 registrants, while independents and other third-party registrations dropped by about 2,700 voters. That meant that a plurality of new Republican voters came from fresh registrants rather than party-switching, as about 3,700 new voters joined the rolls (mostly with the GOP).

Thinking about the 2022 GOP primary, theres no guarantee that same-day Republican registrants are going to be favorably inclined toward Cheney; they may be predisposed to oppose her, in fact.

And that gets back to the fundamental truth for Cheney: Her political future rests on winning over Republican voters rather than winning over Democratic or independent voters. She needs a good deal of the former for the latter to matter at all.

Read this article:

Why Liz Cheney Cant Rely On Democrats To Save Her In Wyomings Republican Primary - FiveThirtyEight

By JUAN GARCIA DE PAREDES

BALLOTPEDIA VIA THE CENTER SQUARE

Nineteen candidates are running in the Republican primary for governor of Oregon on May 17, 2022. Incumbent Kate Brown (D) is term-limited and cannot run for re-election.

Christine Drazan, Bud Pierce, and Stan Pulliam have led in fundraising and media coverage.

All three candidates have highlighted education and public safety as critical issues for their campaigns. On education, Mr. Pierce said he would set up a non-political oversight board to look after education in the state, and Ms. Drazan said she would make the superintendent of public instruction a statewide position that she argues would be accountable to voters. Mr. Pulliam said the state should empower parents and local boards. On public safety, Ms. Drazan said she would increase funding for state troopers, while Mr. Pulliam said he would triple the size of the Oregon State Police and temporarily deploy them in Portland. Mr. Pierce said he would work with federal, state, and local authorities to better public safety.

Ms. Drazan and Mr. Pierce have said there is a homelessness crisis in the state. To tackle it, Ms. Drazan said that she would address addiction, mental health, and affordability, which she said are the root causes of homelessness. Mr. Pierce said he would address those same issues by building more affordable housing and public shelters with services to tackle addiction and mental health.

On the campaign trail, Mr. Pulliam has also focused on economic growth, saying, weve got to stand up for our local small business owners and ignite the economic sector in this state.

Mr. Pierce is an oncologist who ran as the Republican nominee in the 2016 special election to finish the term of former Gov. John Kitzhaber (D). Gov. Brown, who replaced Kitzhaber after he resigned in February 2015, defeated Mr. Pierce and three other candidates in that election.

Ms. Drazan represented District 39 in the Oregon House of Representatives from 2019 until she resigned on Jan. 31, 2022. She was elected House Minority Leader in September 2019 and served in that position until Nov. 30, 2021, when she stepped down.

Mr. Pulliam is an insurance executive who has served as the mayor of Sandy, Oregon, since 2019.

Oregons last five governors have been Democrats, and as of March 2022, three independent election forecasters considered the general election as Likely or Lean Democratic. The last Republican to win the governorship in Oregon was Victor Atiyeh, who served from 1979 to 1987.

Also running in the primary are Raymond Baldwin, Bridget Barton, Court Boice, David Burch, Reed Christensen, Jessica Gomez, Nick Hess, Tim McCloud, Kerry McQuisten, Brandon Merritt, John Presco, Amber Richardson, Bill Sizemore, Stefan Strek, Marc Thielman, Bob Tiernan.

Go here to see the original:

Nineteen candidates are running in the Republican primary on May 17 for governor of Oregon - Santa Barbara News-Press

To bring you these under-the-radar political notes from the US

The extraordinarily tragic war in Ukraine has side-lined political news out of Washington and the US.

Here are a few items worth paying attention to in these very confronting times:

The text messages were included in Meadows provision of his phone records to the House Select Committee on the January 6 insurrection.

Meadows cooperated for a time with the Select Committee, and then ceased providing materials of record. Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, who co-wrote PERIL on Trumps last year in office, broke the story for the Washington Post:

Virginia Thomas, a conservative activist married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, repeatedly pressed White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to pursue unrelenting efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election in a series of urgent text exchanges in the critical weeks after the vote, according to copies of the messages obtained by The Washington Post and CBS News.

Between Virginia Thomas, who goes by Ginni, and President Donald Trumps top aide during a period when Trump and his allies were vowing to go to the Supreme Court in an effort to negate the election results.

On Nov. 10, after news organizations had projected Joe Biden the winner based on state vote totals, Thomas wrote to Meadows: Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!You are the leader, with him, who is standing for Americas constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.

Ms Thomas has every right to speak her mind on any issue. But these texts reveal she was a player in advising Meadows on Trumps strategy to stop the steal.

Those machinations would find their way to the Supreme Court, where her husband would and did rule on Trump lawsuits to throw out the election. Justice Thomas did not recuse himself from those cases.

Will the House Committee subpoena Ms Thomas to testify on what she did and whether she worked with her husband? Will Justice Thomas take unilateral steps to recuse himself from any further participation in Trump-related cases before the Supreme Court? Public hearings on all the Select Committees work will occur in the next few weeks. They will be explosive.

If Trump-backed candidates win, and if Republicans take control of the House or Senate or both, Trump will claim credit for the Republican wave and further boost his prospects for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

Rep. Mel Brooks of Alabama was a huge Trump backer. He appeared onstage at the rally January 6 that helped incite the Trump mob to attack the Capitol. Trump endorsed Brooks for his run at the open Senate seat in Alabama. But Brooks has been polling badly, and Trump pulled his endorsement last week. Brooks is angry, and went public on what Trump expected him to do in return for the endorsement:

This is shocking stuff. First, the only way Biden can be removed as president is by impeachment, and that will not happen.

Second, there is no way that Brooks or anyone else can put Trump back into the White House only the American people can do that. Third, there are no special elections in the United States for the presidency. What this episode shows is how Trump is increasingly fixated on 2020, more than he is in looking beyond the 2024 election and this obsession of Trumps is becoming a bigger issue for many rank-and-file Republicans.

Politico is reporting:

Republicans lead the generic ballot by 4 points.Biden won these battleground seats by an average of 5.5 points. In these districts, 75% of swing voters say Democrats are out of touchor condescending. About two-thirds say Democrats are spending too much money in Washington. Bidens net approval rating in these districts is -15.About 40% of voters in these seats approve of the job Biden is doing as president, while 55% disapprove.Among independent voters, his net approval is -32 a 34-point swing since February 2021 from a group that often dictates which party holds the House majority.And among Hispanic voters, his net approval is -10,a drop of 31 points in the same time frame. Economic concerns substantially advantage the GOP.Voters who identified jobs/the economy as their No. 1 concern favor Republicans by 20 points on the generic ballot. Among those who put cost of living at the top, Republicans are at a 24-point advantage.

Continuing Republican pressure on what they believe are the killer issues for them in November: inflation, gasoline prices, crime in the cities, immigration at the southern border, what woke progressives are teaching children in schools, especially on racial issues, transgender sports, new laws to restrict abortion. Republicans firmly believe these hot button issues will drive their voters to the polls and President Bidens approval remains well under 50%.

It looks like Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor who was John McCains incendiary vice-presidential running mate in 2008, and who famously said she could see Russia from her backyard, is positioning to run. Heres what she told Sean Hannity on Fox last week:

Im going to throw my hat in the ring because we need people that have cajones. We need people like Donald Trump who has nothing to lose like me. We got nothing to lose and no more of this vanilla milquetoast namby-pamby wussy pussy stuff

Whether her pre-formal-entry stunting is enough to scare off other challengers and whether she still has strong appeal in the state. The special election is likely to be held well before November.

Which is a good note on which to bring this special edition to a close.

Read more:

Palin proves how powerful Trumpism is in the Republican Party | ticker VIEWS - ticker NEWS

LANSING, MI Gov. Gretchen Whitmer vetoed Republican-approved legislation Friday that would have required Michigan voters who havent voted since 2000 or are listed with a placeholder birth date to send identifying information to their local clerks to make sure their registration isnt canceled.

Read more: Some registered voters would need to confirm identities under Senate-passed bills

Whitmer said in a statement that House Bills 4127 and 4128 would burden clerks and voters while increasing costs to Michigan residents. They would not advance the goal of improving Michigan elections, she said.

HB 4127 would require the Secretary of State to send a return card to a city or township clerk on which an elector with an unknown date of birth in the qualified voter file could verify his or her date of birth.

For each registered voter who had been assigned a placeholder birth date on the qualified voter file because his or her actual date of birth was unknown, the SOS, within 90 days after the bills effective date, would have to mail a prepaid, pre-addressed postcard to the appropriate local clerk on which the voter could verify the date of birth by signing their name.

If returning the return postcard by mail, a voter must attach a copy of his or her original birth certificate, current drivers license or current state identification card as proof of his or her date of birth.

HB 4128 would require voters who havent voted since the 2000 general election to provide their current address to maintain their registration. The Secretary of State would have to send a notice containing a statement indicating they have not voted since 2000.

Voters would need to sign and return the postcard with identification.

After receiving the postcard from a voter, local clerks would have to compare the signature on the return postcard to the signature for that elector on the qualified voter file.

The bill would have also required clerks to compare the signature of a voter on the postcard to the signature for that voter on the qualified voter file, and identify that registration record as challenged if the signature.

According the Secretary of State, Michigans qualified voter file currently contains an estimated 600 registered voters with placeholder birthdays and an additional 304,300 registered electors who have not voted since the 2000 general November election. The bill package would bring an estimated cost per mailing of $0.32 per parcel, which would add an additional $100,000 in mailing costs for the Department, according to Senate Fiscal Agency report.

The Democratic governor said Friday she would be proud to sign common-sense election reforms that do any of the following: improve access to the ballot for military families by allowing active-duty Michiganders and spouses serving overseas to vote electronically, remove barriers to voting absentee by establishing a permanent absent voter list and expedite election returns by allowing sufficient time for preprocessing of absentee ballots.

These measures would collectively enhance access to the vote and ensure the orderly administration of our election system, Whitmer said.

Read more: Whitmer vetoes election bills she says perpetuated Big Lie

Changes to the states election laws have been proposed and vetoed since last year as Republican lawmakers continue their effort to tighten elections following the 2020 election, when President Trump and others made false allegations that the 2020 November election was compromised by fraud.

Whitmer has made it clear she would use her executive power to oppose any GOP-led election bills.

The governors latest veto comes as Republican activists ramp up their efforts to collect more than 340,047 signatures for the Secure MI Vote ballot initiative.

Under the proposed law, which would bypass the governors veto should Republican lawmakers choose to adopt it, voters who show up on election day without an ID would have to use a provisional ballot that wouldnt count until that person proves their identity with their local clerks office. Voters would get six days to do so.

Read more: What to know about a petition going around that could change Michigan election law

Secure MI Votes petition would also prohibit election officials from sending out absentee ballot applications without a specific request from a voter.

Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson Benson did just that ahead of the November 2020 election, mailing absentee applications to every registered voter, drawing criticism from Republicans who claim without evidence doing so increases opportunities for fraud.

The secretary of states efforts in 2020 benefited college students and young people the most, voting rights advocates like Nancy Wang of Voters Not Politicians said at the time.

Benson said last week that her office has not made any decisions regarding the mailing of absentee ballots to voters who did not request them.

I think its important to note there were some very unique factors in 2020, the least of which was the pandemic and the recognition that a number of citizens would be encountering this new right to vote absentee for the first time. That was the first time series of statewide where that right was in place after the 2018 election, Benson said, adding that a lot of those factors arent present this year.

READ MORE FROM MLIVE:

Democrats challenge easier to vote pitch in Senate GOP election package

Whitmer vetoes election bills she says perpetuated Big Lie

View original post here:

Whitmer vetoes Republican election bills aimed at voiding registration for certain voters - MLive.com

Republican activists seek drivers attention as they work to register voters to their party at a gas station in Garden Grove. REUTERS/Mike Blake

A half-dozen mostly young Republican activists stood gamely outside of a Chevron station at a busy Orange Countyintersection, jumping up and down and holding a big sign reading, Gastoo high? Register Republican.

The demonstration in Garden Grove this week drew beeps of support, and was successful in getting a few motorists to pull over to talk aboutgasprices.

The Republican Party says the SouthernCaliforniavoter registration effort is one of many it is holding outsidegasstations across the country to woo frustrated independents and voters who supported President Joe Biden, a Democrat, in the 2020 elections.

Republicans are widely expected to gain a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives and perhaps even in the Senate in midterm congressional elections in November. Voter displeasure at highgasprices might help get them there.

In addition to turning out its deeply conservative base, the party wants to win back moderates who fled the dramatic turns and right-wing nationalism of former President Donald Trump, as well as gain new supporters.

But the response at the busy intersection in Garden Grove, which is in a highly competitive Republican-leaning congressional district, shows it is not an easy trick to pull off.

Four people stopped to fill out forms at the groups table. One said he was homeless but could use his parents address. Three were already registered as Republicans, while one was an independent.

Thegasis so high because of Biden and the Biden administration, said Ernie Nueva, 69, who pulled over when he saw the group.

Nueva says it now costs $100 to fill the tank on his Nissan Titan V8 truck up from $60 before the latest spike drove fuel prices to nearly $7 per gallon in parts ofCalifornia. A lifelong Democrat, he voted twice for Trump and last year changed his voter registration to Republican.

David Wakefield also blames Biden for high gas prices, saying that the United States needs to become more self-sufficient, producing more fuel. He is considering canceling a planned driving vacation later this month to see friends and family in NorthernCalifornia, Idaho and Utah.

But he also is already a reliable Republican voter.

Its a great issue in the short run, but its not clear how its going to hold up in November, said Raphael Sonenshein, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs at theCal State Los Angeles.

In recent years, U.S. voters have been driven to the polls more by cultural and social division, rather than other public policy issues, Sonenshein said. While the highgasprices are certainly not good for Democrats, they may not prove powerful enough to drive turnout or lead voters to switch parties.

The cost of fuel might also come back down before the election, weakening Republicans argument, he said.

Economists say prices started to rise as travel and economic activity picked up after pandemic lockdowns eased, both in the United States and worldwide leading to fears of tighter global oil supply.

Those trends worsened when Russias invasion of Ukraine shook world petroleum markets. But the party in power generally is blamed for economic woes, and Biden and the Democrats are already becoming the focus of anger by some consumers.

The Republican National Committee has conducted similar registration drives at service stations inCaliforniaand other states, including Arizona, North Carolina and Florida.

RNC spokesperson Mike Joyce said the registration drives atgasstations had been successful, drawing in voters of all political stripes who are angry aboutgasoline prices.

The RNC did not give data showing how many new voters had signed up during these events, except to say that the number was in the thousands.Majorities are won in the margins and with every new voter registered, we are one step closer to finally retiring Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer for good, said RNC Spokesperson Emma Vaughn, referring to the Democratic U.S. House speaker and Senate majority leader.

At the Chevron in Orange County, scores of motorists loudly honked their support for the tiny group during the nearly four-hour demonstration.

David Duprat, 38, a passenger in a car that wasgassing up, feels every penny of the increase ingasprices. He drives to the construction sites where he works and lives on a tight budget while also trying to help his mother.

He doesnt blame Biden for highgasprices, but overall, he feels that Democratic policies have contributed to the high cost of living inCalifornia. He has never voted before, but plans to do so in November as a Republican.

I really, really want to make sure my voice is heard, he said.

Motorist Benjamin Kohn, a liberal Democrat, is also feeling the rise ingasprices. But he thinks both parties are pushing black-and-white interpretations of events that are more nuanced.

He has no intention of switching sides over gas prices, and on his way out of the Chevron he honked his horn like many of the other passing motorists. Then he stuck his head out the window of his minivan.

Its complicated, he yelled, and drove away.

The rest is here:

At OC Gas Station Republicans Woo Voters Angry Over High Gas Price - Times of San Diego

On Thursday, in a dim conference room in the bowels of a Washington, D.C., hotel, about 150 conservatives gathered for a day of group therapy. They had all been traumatized by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which had left them questioning their assumptions about the world. But Vladimir Putins war of aggression wasnt what confounded them most; for these conservatives, a mix of D.C. professionals and college students leavened with a handful of older cranks, the hawkish response to Russian aggression by most elected Republicans was the real problem.

The conference, Up From Chaos, was a summit of all the wings of the right that would prefer a more hands-off American response to Russias invasion of Ukraine. The organizers were The American Conservative, the paleoconservative publication founded by Pat Buchanan; and American Moment, a newer organization that tries to sell the next generation of the right on its version of national conservatism. We were acutely worried that the seven years of foreign-policy gains that we made [since Donald Trump launched his campaign] were going to go away, Saurabh Sharma, one of the conferences organizers, told me.

Anne Applebaum: Ukraine must win

The event wasnt a Putin apologia like those found in some corners of the right. Instead, the phrase of the day seemed to be Putin is bad, but The attendees, who included paleocons, libertarians, and hard-core MAGA acolytes, offered variations on that tune according to their policy preferences: Putin is bad, but we dont want a nuclear war. Putin is bad, but why should we trust the American foreign-policy establishment? Putin is bad, but the media is in thrall to the U.S. intelligence apparatus. The broad consensus: Putin is bad, but why is that our problem?

This is not an ism-based movement. There is a specific policy outcome motivating the type of factions we brought here today, which is that we dont want another war, Sharma said. And people have their own isms that they bring to the table. The result was a conference of the right where Tulsi Gabbard was invited but figures such as Ted Cruz were absent.

In fact, Cruz was the target of a jab onstage from a fellow Republican senator, Rand Paul, who suggested that the Texans advocacy for sanctions on Russian energy was simply intended to boost the bottom line of the energy industry in his home state. President Joe Biden, though, received some praise for his comparatively restrained response to the crisis. Saagar Enjeti, a conservative pundit and podcaster, went so far as to say that Bidens 79-year-old ailing heart may be the only thing standing in between us and World War III.

The most common object of the attendees ire was not the Democrats, but instead the traditional enemy of the isolationist right, neoconservatives. Time and time again, speakers mocked foreign-policy hawks and criticized Republicans who had supported the Iraq War. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was the target of repeated scorn. Perhaps the biggest applause line of the entire conference was delivered by the Ohio Senate candidate J. D. Vance, who mocked the intelligence of Bill Kristol, the neoconservative pundit and Never Trumper. Donald Trumps greatest foreign-policy triumph was not so much any of his decisions, but rather that he broke the neocon Republican orthodoxy, Dan Bishop, a second-term representative from North Carolina, told the crowd.

Still, a sense that neocons and foreign-policy elites were winning seemed to permeate the room. For a D.C. conclave, the gathering featured few boldface names. Of the four elected officials who spoke, Rand Paul and Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky are best known for being libertarian gadflies, while Bishop and Representative Matt Rosendale of Montana are backbenchers who are relatively new to Washington. Vance, who hasnt even been elected to any office and may never be, gave what might have been the most high-profile speech. (Unusually for a speaker at a Washington conference, Vance hung around as an attendee after his speech, sitting quietly in the back as the fellow Peter Thiel ally David Sacks, a wealthy Silicon Valley entrepreneur, addressed the crowd).

Tom Nichols: The moral collapse of J. D. Vance

The first time that Ive ever actually had donors push back against all the crazy things that I say over the course of my Senate campaign is on this Russia-Ukraine thing, Vance said. The craziest idea Ive had in the last year and a half is that we should not be involved in a nuclear war with Russia.

Sharma framed skepticism of the U.S. response as a test of political courage for the few on the right who were still willing to stand up for a more sober foreign policy where the rubber meets the road. It is a test that few on the right are passing so far. Even Trump has expressed openness toward more aggressive action against Russia in some public statements about the conflict. (He has also praised Putin as a genius.)

The challenge for the isolationist wing of the right is finding more allies. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is one of the most popular political figures in the United States, and the Russian army is falling back from the outskirts of Kiev. It seems, at least for the time being, that the hawkish response to the invasion of Ukraine has succeeded. The war in Europe, and the fight over the future of the Republican Partys foreign policy, are likely to be long. But for now, the rights isolationists are on their own.

View original post here:

The 'Putin Is Bad, But' Republicans - The Atlantic

Ron DeSantis. Illustrated | Getty Images, iStock

Suddenly the American right is fairly exploding with accusations of sexual "grooming" against its political opponents.

Christina Pushaw, the spokesperson for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, used the term last month to defend the so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill. "If you're against the Anti-Grooming Bill," she tweeted, "you are probably a groomer or at least you don't denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children." Rod Dreher, who writes at The American Conservative, has in recent days lobbed the term at "pervy" Disney for its (belated) opposition to the new law, and labeled Democrats the "party of child mutilators & kidnappers." And MAGA outlet American Greatness on Monday printed a broadside against "Groomer Fragility."

"It's not a very nice word, to be sure," wrote the American Greatness author. "But the right must decide: Do we prefer to play nice with perverts who are very sexually interested in our children? Or do we prefer to stand up for the innocence of childhood against societal forces that seek to mutilate little kids for political gain?"

It's hard to know how much of this is sincere hysteria and how much is ugly, McCarthyist politics. Mostly the latter, probably: In its normal usage, "groomer" suggests a sexual predator, carefully prepping their prey for assault. But Dreher who has long been obsessively shrill about the rise of gay and trans identities in American culture says that's not really what he means.

"I think it is coming to have a somewhat broader meaning: an adult who wants to separate children from a normative sexual and gender identity, to inspire confusion in them, and to turn them against their parents and all the normative traditions and institutions in society," he wrote last week. "It may not specifically be to groom them for sexual activity, but it is certainly to groom them to take on a sexual/gender identity at odds with the norm."

Story continues

Maybe maybe that's what he means. Most Americans will hear the term, though, and understand it to mean something much more violent than "encouraging kids to question their sexuality and the church."

That misunderstanding is almost certainly intended. Accusations of pedophilia and child rape are old hat in today's Republican Party. In 2020, Trump shared a tweet falsely accusing Biden of being a pedophile. Karl Rove reportedly inspired a similar whispering campaign during an Alabama judicial campaign back in the 1990s. Sometimes the ugliness is overt, as during the QAnon conspiracy theorizing that led, in part, to the Jan. 6 insurrection. And sometimes it's a bit more subtle, as with Republicans accusing Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson of being lenient on child predators.

Those accusations and rumors were untrue, unfair, and ugly, and just another piece of performative politics. The point isn't to protect children. It's to weaponize concerns about their safety in the service of conservative political power.

7 brutally funny cartoons about Will Smith's Oscars slap

Russia threatens to end cooperation at International Space Station unless 'illegal sanctions' are lifted

How did Russia's oligarchs become so powerful?

Go here to see the original:

Why are Republicans so concerned about 'grooming'? - Yahoo News