Showing posts with label GOP extremism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP extremism. Show all posts

Saturday, January 25, 2020

Why Democrats Still Have to Appeal to the Center

Electoral College map.
A lengthy piece in the New York Times looks at political polarization in America and how the Electoral College, equal numbers of senators for states regardless of population disparities, and other structural matters that the Founding Fathers believed would ensure stability are now moving the nation towards a political crisis where in time 30% of the national population may be able to impose its will on the other 70%.  The piece poses the question of how long the majority will stand for minority control.  It also looks at why the Democrats to win must win over the votes of the political center and even more moderate conservatives.  It also underscores why a far left Democrat presidential candidate such as Bernie Sanders would be a political disaster for Democrats.  National polls mean nothing since winning huge majorities in the 15 largest states is not enough to win the Electoral College - a system that is now disproportionately tilted to favor red state and rural Republican voters.  A candidate that can win in enough moderate states is crucial - something Bernie's cult like followers do not want or seem capable of grasping.  Here are column highlights (every serious Democrat needs to read this piece): 
American politics has been dominated by the Democratic and Republican Parties since the Civil War. That gives us the illusion of stability — that today’s political divisions cut roughly the same lines as yesteryear.
But in recent decades, the two parties have been changing, and fast. Those changes are ideological — the Democratic Party has moved left, and the Republican Party has moved right. But more fundamentally, those changes are compositional: Democrats have become more diverse, urban, young and secular, and the Republican Party has turned itself into a vehicle for whiter, older, more Christian and more rural voters.
This is the root cause of intensifying polarization: Our differences, both ideological and demographic, map onto our party divisions today in ways they didn’t in the past. But the changes have not affected the parties symmetrically.
Put simply, Democrats can’t win running the kinds of campaigns and deploying the kinds of tactics that succeed for Republicans. They can move to the left — and they are — but they can’t abandon the center or, given the geography of American politics, the center-right, and still hold power. Democrats are modestly, but importantly, restrained by diversity and democracy. Republicans are not.
Over the past 50 years, the Democratic and Republican coalitions have sorted by ideology, race, religion, geography and psychology. Not all sorting is the same. Sorting has made Democrats more diverse and Republicans more homogeneous. This is often played as a political weakness for Democrats.
But diversity has played a crucial role in moderating the party’s response to polarization.
Appealing to Democrats requires appealing to a lot of different kinds of people with different interests. Republicans are overwhelmingly dependent on white voters. Democrats are a coalition of liberal whites, African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians and mixed-race voters. Republicans are overwhelmingly dependent on Christian voters. Democrats are a coalition of liberal and nonwhite Christians, Jews, Muslims, New Agers, agnostics, Buddhists and so on. Three-quarters of Republicans identify as conservative, while only half of Democrats call themselves liberals — and for Democrats, that’s a historically high level.
The Democratic Party is not just more diverse in who it represents; it’s also more diverse in whom it listens to. A new Pew survey tested Democratic and Republican trust in 30 different media sources, ranging from left to right. Democrats trusted 22 of the 30 sources, including center-right outlets like The Wall Street Journal. Republicans trusted only seven of the 30 sources, with PBS, the BBC and The Wall Street Journal the only mainstream outlets with significant trust. (The other trusted sources, in case you were wondering, were Fox News, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Breitbart.)
The Democratic Party’s informational ecosystem combines mainstream sources that seek objectivity, liberal sources that push partiality and even some center-right sources with excellent reputations.
There is no similar diversity in the Republican Party’s trusted informational ecosystem, which is heavily built around self-consciously conservative news sources. There should be a check on this sort of epistemic closure. A party that narrows the sources it listens to is also narrowing the voters it can speak to. . . . . Democracy, in other words, should discipline parties that close their informational ecosystems. But America isn’t a democracy.
Republicans control the White House, the Senate, the Supreme Court and a majority of governorships. Only the House is under Democratic control. And yet Democrats haven’t just won more votes in the House elections. They won more votes over the last three Senate elections, too. They won more votes in both the 2016 and 2000 presidential elections. But America’s political system counts states and districts rather than people, and the G.O.P.’s more rural coalition has a geographic advantage that offsets its popular disadvantage.
To win power, Democrats don’t just need to appeal to the voter in the middle. They need to appeal to voters to the right of the middle. When Democrats compete for the Senate, they are forced to appeal to an electorate that is far more conservative than the country as a whole. Similarly, gerrymandering and geography means that Democrats need to win a substantial majority in the House popular vote to take the gavel. And a recent study by Michael Geruso, Dean Spears and Ishaana Talesara calculates that the Republican Party’s Electoral College advantage means “Republicans should be expected to win 65 percent of presidential contests in which they narrowly lose the popular vote.”
The Republican Party, by contrast, can run campaigns aimed at a voter well to the right of the median American. Republicans have lost the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections. If they’d also lost six of the last seven presidential elections, they most likely would have overhauled their message and agenda.
Republicans are trapped in a dangerous place: They represent a shrinking constituency that holds vast political power. That has injected an almost manic urgency into their strategy. Behind the party’s tactical extremism lurks an apocalyptic sense of political stakes. This was popularized in the infamous “Flight 93 Election” essay arguing that conservatives needed to embrace Trump, because if he failed, “death is certain.”
[O]ne of the few real hopes for depolarizing American politics is democratization. If Republicans couldn’t fall back on the distortions of the Electoral College, the geography of the United States Senate and the gerrymandering of House seats — if they had, in other words, to win over a majority of Americans — they would become a more moderate and diverse party. This is not a hypothetical: The country’s most popular governors are Charlie Baker in Massachusetts and Larry Hogan in Maryland. Both are Republicans governing, with majority support, in blue states.
A democratization agenda isn’t hard to imagine. We could do away with the Electoral College and gerrymandering; pass proportional representation and campaign finance reform; make voter registration automatic and give Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico the political representation they deserve. But precisely because the Republican Party sees deepening democracy as a threat to its future, it will use the power it holds to block any moves in that direction.
The alternative to democratizing America is scarier than mere polarization: It is, eventually, a legitimacy crisis that could threaten the very foundation of our political system. By 2040, 70 percent of Americans will live in the 15 largest states. That means 70 percent of America will be represented by only 30 senators, while the other 30 percent of America will be represented by 70 senators. . . . Down that road lies true political crisis.

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Trump’s State-by-State Approval Ratings Look Good for Democrats

click image to enlarge.

Donald Trump's campaign strategy for 2020 of fanning hate and division, especial racial hate, in the hopes of mobilizing rural voters and non-college educated whites may not be playing out as planned based on new analysis of his state-by-state approval ratings. The picture looks very positive for Democrats and, if Trump were to fair as poorly as these analyses suggest, he could pull down with him many other Republican candidates. Here in Virginia, many hope the widespread anti-Trump feelings may be the added edge Democrats need to flip control of the Virginia General Assembly and thus flip the middle finger to Der Trumpenführer.  A piece in New York Magazine looks at the survey findings.  Here are highlights:
There has been a lot of discussion in political circles about Donald Trump’s job-approval ratings, what they portend, and Trump’s Electoral College strategy for 2020, which doesn’t necessarily require a popular-vote plurality. But in the end, of course, the conjunction of the Electoral College with Trump’s state-by-state popularity is where the deal will go down.
The online polling firm Civiqs has published a new set of state-by-state job-approval ratings for Trump as of August 11, and it shows how the president’s overall standing (a 43 percent approval rating nationally, which happens to match the current RealClearPolitics polling average) might translate into electorate votes. It’s not a pretty picture for the president, to put it mildly.
Civiqs shows [Trump's] the president’s net approval ratios being underwater (i.e., negative) in 10 states he carried in 2016: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin. If that were to represent how the 2020 elections turn out, Trump would have a booming 119 electoral votes.
He’s underwater by 12 points in Pennsylvania, 11 in Michigan, and nine in Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. And there’s virtually no indication that states that narrowly went for Clinton in 2016 are trending in Trump’s direction: His approval ratios are minus 18 in Colorado, minus 15 in Minnesota, minus 12 in Nevada, and minus 27 in New Hampshire. These are, by the way, polls of registered voters, not just “adults,” so they should be a relatively sound reflection of the views of the electorate.
[T]he other publicly available survey of state-by-state presidential job approval is from Morning Consult, and its latest numbers (as of July) are pretty similar. They show Georgia and Texas as positive for Trump, and North Carolina as very close. But all the other “battleground states” are quite the reach for the incumbent.
If you credit these polls at all, Trump’s reelection will require (1) a big late improvement in his approval ratings, which is possible but unlikely based on long-standing patterns during his polarizing presidency; (2) a campaign that succeeds in making the election turn on theoretical fears about his opponent rather than actual fears about a second Trump term, which won’t be easy either; (3) a big Republican turnout advantage, which is less likely among the larger presidential electorate than it was in 2018; or (4) some diabolical ability to thread the needle despite every contra
If anything, there’s evidence that he is likely to undershoot rather than overshoot his approval ratings as the sitting president of a country whose direction lacks any kind of public confidence. Beyond that, even those who succeed by selling their souls to the devil don’t have the collateral to pull that off twice.
One can only hope that these surveys prove accurate and that things only get worse for Trump and his fellow Republicans.

Tuesday, August 06, 2019

GOP Ohio Rep. Blames Mass Shootings on Gay Marriage, Drag Queens and Obama

GOP Rep. Keller
The absolute lunacy and bigotry of the Republican Party was on open display in the wake of the weekend's mass shootings as GOP Ohio Rep. Candice Keller took to Facebook and blamed the tragedies on "drag queen advocates," "homosexual marriage," "open borders" and even former President Barack Obama.  Sadly, this type of insanity and bigotry - not to mention homophobia - is the norm with far too many Republican candidates and office holders.  Here in Virginia, despite her sanitized campaign web page, GOP candidate Colleen Holcomb running for the 91st House of Delegates seat is just as nuts as Keller as I pointed out in a post here.  Holcomb subscribes to the same mindset as Keller and has many disturbing affiliations, not the least of which are her ties to Eagle Forum, an ultra-far right organization.  

But back to Keller.  USA Today looks at Keller's batshitery Cincinnati which even alramed a few Republicans in Ohio.  Here are story highlights:
A Southwest Ohio [Republican] politician has stirred anger for a Sunday post on social media in which she blamed mass shootings on "drag queen advocates," "homosexual marriage," open borders and even former President Barack Obama. 
In the Facebook post, Ohio Rep. Candice Keller complained about liberals playing the "blame game" after every shooting and asked why not place the blame where it belongs. The Republican lives in Middletown, about 30 miles south of Dayton, where a gunman killed nine people early Sunday. 
Keller, in the post, placed the blame for mass shootings on "the breakdown of the traditional American family(thank you, transgender, homosexual marriage, and drag queen advocates); fatherlessness, a subject no one discusses or believes is relevant; the ignoring of violent video games; the relaxing of laws against criminals(open borders); the acceptance of recreational marijuana; failed school policies(hello, parents who defend misbehaving students): disrespect to law enforcement(thank you, Obama)."
The post went on to blame others, including the Democrats in Congress, and other lawmakers who don't value the Second Amendment.  Keller is running for the Ohio Senate in Butler County in 2020 against fellow Republicans: Rep. George Lang, R-West Chester Township, and West Chester Township Trustee Lee Wong. Democrats have yet to announce a candidate for the heavily Republican district.  


Again, Keller is not unique in her bizarre beliefs. In Virginia, we need to make sure Colleen Holcomb is defeated in November, 2019.

Monday, July 15, 2019

Republicans Refuse to Punish Trump for Openly Racist Rhetoric

The Republican Party of the past is dead and gone and has been replaced by a political party that relishes open racism and misogyny in general. The takeover the of the GOP base by white supremacists and religious extremists is nearly complete.  Old school Republicans who refuse to leave the party and/or pretend that the party of the past still exists are not only deluding themselves, but are complicit in the sins of the GOP and its head, Donald Trump. Seemingly, there is nothing beyond the pale that will cause Republicans to push back against Trump and the destruction of any shred of morality in the GOP.  They either enthusiastically support his overt racism or are such cowards they refuse to confront the hideous elements of the party base. Trump's racist tweet rant over the weekend has failed to bring any punishment or for that matter, even much hand wringing. A piece in CNN looks at the Republican refusal to condemn or rein in Trump.  Here are excerpts:

The most shocking thing about Donald Trump's racist tweets is that possibly the most fundamentally un-American outburst of modern presidential rhetoric did not come remotely as a surprise.
The second most shocking aspect of an episode that would have rocked any other administration is that the President knows he can trade in such base tactics because he will pay no price in a Republican Party cowed by his fervent political base. Many GOP voters and lawmakers are uncomfortable with Trump's conduct and sentiments. But most are sufficiently satisfied with the ideological direction of his presidency that they are willing to turn a blind eye to such behavior, making it a useful political weapon as he seeks to drive a rampant base turnout in 2020. In an attack clearly aimed at four minority Democratic lawmakers – [Trump] the President did not name the "progressives" in his tirade -- Trump underlined how his presidency has used bigotry as a lever of power and made it a fact of 21st century political life more than half a century after the peak of the Civil Rights era. His use of the nation's most revered office to make such unequivocally racist remarks emphasizes how a presidency stewing in rage, fear and identity politics lacks boundaries. And Trump's xenophobia made it more obvious than ever that he plans to win reelection by carving a nativist schism between white, rural America and the increasingly diverse population being courted by Democrats. He risks opening divides that will take years to heal.
By telling the four women — three of whom were born in the US — to "go back" to where they came from, Trump employed the most basic and crude racial taunt. He also implicitly rejected the motto emblazoned on America's Great Seal — E Pluribus Unum — from many one. He is implying that any American who is not white and native born has no place in the country. The silence from Republicans Sunday about Trump's tweets was near universal, emphasizing how his outlandish behavior is tolerated by lawmakers who represent half of the electorate and who won't risk their own political careers to condemn him. [T]he already poisonous tone of Trump's reelection campaign seems almost certain to become far, far worse. The question is whether Trump will alienate sufficient crops of more moderate voters to swing the White House to Democrats or whether his raging culture wars will maximize turnout in his own party and hand him a second term.His attack is a logical extension of an election strategy that is clearly designed to exploit racial and social divides. The reason why Trump's attack was not surprising is because it fits into a pattern of racially charged rhetoric that he has been willing to use in private life — dating back to his comments on the Central Park Five and the "birtherism" campaign against Obama. While it is shocking to see such open racism expressed by a President of the United States, Sunday's tweets were far from the first time that Trump has dealt in such toxicity in office. . . . The debate about whether Trump is a "racist" that pops up after such comments seems increasingly academic.
 Republicans who support Trump by margins of close to 90% in recent polls have long ago made peace with the President's outrageousness or are willing to look the other way as he implements a conservative agenda, especially in the courts. Trump's incessant catering to his base means he has little to fear politically from the modern Republican Party. [Trump] The President has only one hope of winning reelection -- thanks to the way that he has conducted his presidency. He must hope his fired up political base will show up to the polls in greater numbers than voters supporting Democrats that he is painting as extreme and bent on a communist takeover.  That's why Sunday's tweets are probably not a historical aberration but a taste of things to come.


Republican "friends" who consider themselves moral, decent people are running out of time to prove their decency.  The time has come to either leave the GOP or become complicit in its sins.  There really is no middle ground. 

Monday, April 15, 2019

Today's Republicans Are the Real Extremists


As long time readers know, I grew up in a Republican household and had both parents and grandparents who were Republicans for the majority of their lives.  I followed in their foot steps and became a party activist, served on the Virginia Beach City Committee and even incorporated that body (as Virginia SCC documents available online confirm).  Yet before the end of my parents' life times they and the rest of my family fled the GOP.  It's not that we had change.  Rather, it was the Republican Party that had changed drastically as a result, in retrospect of the Party's embrace of Christofascists and white supremacists. The end result has been a GOP that is extreme and bears no resemblance to the GOP of the 1950, 1960's or even the 1980's under Reagan.  Yet, many Republican "friends" continue to close their eyes to the reality that the GOP they remember is no more and that the party for which they continue to vote has become both extreme and something ugly, especially under Donald Trump, a/k/a Der Trumpenführer.  A column in the New York Times makes the case that the real extremists today are Republicans, not the Democrats they target for abuse and perhaps even violence.  Here are excerpts:
All of Donald Trump’s major policies have failed substantively, politically, or both. His one big legislative achievement, the 2017 tax cut, remains unpopular. His attacks on Obamacare have only enhanced public approval of the program. His fearmongering has cemented majority opposition to his proposed border wall.
But while today’s G.O.P. can’t do policy, it commands a powerful propaganda machine. And this machine is now dedicated to a strategy of portraying Democrats as extremists. It might work — but it shouldn’t, because Democrats aren’t extremists, but Republicans are.
The attack on Democrats has largely involved demonizing two new members of Congress, Representative Ilhan Omar and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Omar is Muslim, and the usual suspects have gone all-out in using an out-of-context quotation to portray her, completely falsely, as sympathetic to terrorists.
It’s surely not an accident that these two principal targets are both women of color; there’s a sense in which supposed concerns about extremism are just a cover for sexism and white nationalism. But it’s still worth pointing out that while both Omar and AOC are on the left of the Democratic Party, neither is staking out policy positions that are extreme compared with either expert views or public opinion.
Take AOC’s famous advocacy of a 70 percent tax rate on very high incomes. Economists who knew anything about public finance immediately recognized that number as coming from a widely cited paper by Peter Diamond and Emmanuel Saez, two of the field’s leading figures. You don’t have to agree with their analysis to recognize that AOC, far from showing her ignorance, was actually drawing on solid research.
Nor does the public find the idea outrageous. An overwhelming majority believe that people with high incomes pay too little in taxes, and polls show wide support for AOC’s proposal.
Republicans, on the other hand, really are extremists. As Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein put it in 2012 — long before the rise of Trump — the modern G.O.P. is “ideologically extreme” and uninterested in “facts, evidence, and science.” For example, major figures in the party routinely dismiss global warming as a hoax perpetrated by a vast global conspiracy.
Or consider the views of Stephen Moore, who Trump is trying to put on the board of the Federal Reserve.
He’s a former editorial writer for The Wall Street Journal, a former chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, a fixture at conferences like FreedomFest. Given this background, it may not be surprising that he’s a firm believer in failed economic doctrines, especially the insistence that tax cuts for the wealthy have magical effects.
What’s coming out only now, however, is the extent of Moore’s political extremism. Many of his past statements — like his assertion that “capitalism is a lot more important than democracy” — sound like a liberal caricature of conservatism. But it’s not a caricature; Moore shows us what the right actually thinks.
I mentioned that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that the rich pay too little in taxes. Moore, on the other hand, wants to eliminate income taxes and replace them with sales taxes, which would dramatically shift the tax burden away from the rich and onto the middle class.
He also wants to privatize Social Security, a program that is both hugely popular and the bedrock of retirement security for American workers. Moore would convert it into a 401(k)-type system. He is also fiercely hostile to Medicaid, which covers 65 million Americans.
Finally, Moore has proposed, in advance, a purge of the institution Trump wants him to join, calling for firing “hundreds” of Federal Reserve economists “who are worthless.” These would, presumably, be the economists who considered low interest rates and monetary expansion valuable tools in fighting the Great Recession, at the same time Moore was predicting that these policies would send inflation soaring. Guess who was right.
So even if you cherry-pick left-leaning Democrats, a look at their actual positions shows them to be not at all extreme. At the same time, pillars of the right-wing establishment hold views that are utterly at odds with both evidence and public opinion. Republicans are the real extremists.
Again, this is why I ceased to be a Republican two decades ago.

Friday, February 01, 2019

Don't Be Fooled, It’s Republicans Who Ruined the Country

The other day a local young, privileged, white gay man with no children to support wrote an op-ed in the Virginian Pilot that stated he was proud to be a Republican and then went on to bloviate about the usual supposed merits of the Republican agenda: smaller government, fiscal responsibility, etc., etc.  Things that might once have been true of the GOP more than two decades ago when I was an active Republican. Those days, however, are long gone and Republicans cut from that cloth are as extinct as the dinosaurs in today's party of Trump. The reality is that today's GOP has overseen the rise of wealth disparity not seen since the Gilded Age and the slow death of the middle class. Further, today's GOP's core base consists of religious extremists and white supremacists.  Yet, I am sure that this young Republican views himself as a centrist even though personally I do not understand how one can still claim to be a Republican and not in fact be a racist. A column in the New York Times looks at the problem of so-called political centrists who continue the error of much of the media that gives false equivalency to Republicans and Democrats.  As the column points out, the real extremism is with the GOP despite pretense to the contrary. Until average Americans  (and the media) wake up to this reality, expect damage to the nation by the GOP to continue.  Here are column excerpts:

Why is American politics so dysfunctional? Whatever the deeper roots of our distress, the proximate cause is ideological extremism: Powerful factions are committed to false views of the world, regardless of the evidence.
Notice that I said factions, plural. There’s no question that the most disruptive, dangerous extremists are on the right. But there’s another faction whose obsessions and refusal to face reality have also done a great deal of harm.
But I’m not talking about the left. Radical leftists are virtually nonexistent in American politics; can you think of any prominent figure who wants us to move to the left of, say, Denmark? No, I’m talking about fanatical centrists.
Over the past few days we’ve been treated to the ludicrous yet potentially destructive spectacle of Howard Schultz, the Starbucks billionaire, insisting that he’s the president we need despite his demonstrable policy ignorance. Schultz obviously thinks he knows a lot of things that just aren’t so. Yet his delusions of knowledge aren’t that special. For the most part, they follow conventional centrist doctrine.
Schultz, however, still declares debt our biggest problem. Yet true to centrist form, his deficit concerns are oddly selective. Bowles and Simpson, charged with proposing a solution to deficits, listed as their first principle … reducing tax rates. Sure enough, Schultz is all into cutting Social Security, but opposes any tax hike on the wealthy.  Funny how that works.
In general, centrists are furiously opposed to any proposal that would ease the lives of ordinary Americans. Universal health coverage, says Schultz, would be “free health care for all, which the country cannot afford.”
[S]ingle-payer health care (actually called Medicare!) hasn’t bankrupted Canada. In fact, every advanced country besides America has some form of universal health coverage, and manages to afford it.
The real issue with “Medicare for all” isn’t costs — the taxes needed to pay for it would almost surely be less than what Americans now pay in insurance premiums. The problem instead would be political: It would be tricky persuading people to trade private insurance for a public program. That’s a real concern for Medicare-for-all advocates, but it’s not at all what either Schultz or Bloomberg is saying.
Finally, the hallmark of fanatical centrism is the determination to see America’s left and right as equally extreme, no matter what they actually propose.
[N]ow, with Democrats taking a turn that is more progressive but hardly radical, centrist rhetoric has become downright hysterical. Medicare and Medicaid already cover more than a third of U.S. residents and pay more bills than private insurance.
But Medicare for all, says Schultz, is “not American.” Elizabeth Warren has proposed taxes on the wealthy that are squarely in the tradition of Teddy Roosevelt; Bloomberg says that they would turn us into Venezuela.
Where does the fanaticism of the centrists come from? Much of the explanation, I think, is sheer vanity.  Both pundits and plutocrats like to imagine themselves as superior beings, standing above the political fray. They want to think of themselves as standing tall against extremism right and left. Yet the reality of American politics is asymmetric polarization: extremism on the right is a powerful political force, while extremism on the left isn’t. What’s a would-be courageous centrist to do?
The answer, all too often, is to retreat into a fantasy world, almost as hermetic as the right-wing, Fox News bubble. In this fantasy world, social democrats like Harris or Warren are portrayed as the second coming of Hugo Chávez, so that taking what is actually a conservative position can be represented as a brave defense of moderation.
But that’s not what is really happening, and the rest of us have no obligation to indulge centrist delusions.
It is nothing short of delusion to pretend the extreme GOP of today is the same as the party of my youth and young adulthood.  That party is dead and gone and its successor has inflicted real harm on millions of Americans.  It's time to accept that reality.  

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Virginia GOP in Denial About Election Day Disaster


The Republican Party of Virginia ("RPV") began to reject objective reality and began to dwell in a bubble years ago.  It started with RPV's embrace of Christofascists who were slowly but steadily voted onto local city and county committees and who alienated moderate members of those same committees and the party in general.  Now, with the embrace of white supremacists as best embodied by failed senate candidate Corey Stewart and Donald Trump.  The end result is that Virginia is quickly becoming a "blue state" where no Republican can win statewide office and where the GOP strangle hold on the Virginia General Assembly is greatly weakened and may vanish completely in November, 2019.  Sane people would realize that either the party agenda needs to change oe extinction may be on the horizon.  Not so with RPV as a column in the Virginian Pilot notes.  Here are column excerpts:
ANYTIME a political party gets shellacked on Election Day, it’s useful to ask whether the party has learned anything from the experience, and whether it is willing to fix its problems.
If the post-election message from Virginia GOP Chairman Jack Wilson to the party faithful is any guide, the answer is “not likely.”
Friday evening after the Nov. 6 midterm elections — contests in which Virginia Republicans gave up three seats in the U.S. House of Representatives (two of them in usually Republican territory), and got walloped in Virginia’s U.S. Senate election — Wilson sent an email to fellow Republicans statewide.
“Simply put, this Tuesday’s results were devastating,” acknowledged Wilson. He continued, “While some will want to play the blame game, we as a Party do not have the time to engage in that useless dialogue. Our defeated candidates are not to blame, every single one worked their hearts out and left everything they had out on the field. President Trump is not to blame.”
The contention that Donald J. Trump is not responsible for Republican losses here strains credulity.  Trump and his supporters are in full command of the Republican Party. He promotes a racially inflammatory agenda in place of traditional Republican principles that support free trade, strong ethics and family values.
Trump’s message continues to appeal in rural districts.  But in states with rapidly growing urban and suburban districts, such as Virginia, Trump and Trumpism are political liabilities.
Largely as a result of Trump, Virginia Republicans over the past two years have lost statewide elections in Virginia, lost those three seats in the House of Representatives and almost lost the GOP’s 20-year grip on the Virginia General Assembly in the 2017 state elections.
Statewide surveys show that Trump is deeply unpopular in Virginia, and the Washington Post-Schar School Election Day survey confirmed that Trump was top of mind with voters as they went to the polls.
The Washington Post-Schar School survey showed that 56 percent of women voted for Democrats in hotly contested congressional districts around the country this month. A CNN exit poll in Virginia showed that 64 percent of women voted for Democratic incumbent Tim Kaine in his U.S. Senate contest with Republican Corey Stewart, an unabashed Trump acolyte.
Despite the gender gap, Wilson’s letter makes no mention of urging the Republican Party to do more to appeal to women. That seems odd; women usually outnumber men at the polls.
[A]s long as Republican election officials around the country are regularly accused of suppressing the minority vote, and as long as the president stokes a strident anti-immigrant agenda, it’s doubtful black and Latino voters will soon embrace the GOP.
Some GOP strategists have openly said that as long as Trump is president, Virginia will continue to elect Democrats.
We won’t have to wait long to test that proposition. The Virginia General Assembly is up for grabs next fall. Results from the midterm elections show that Kaine won handily in about a dozen General Assembly districts currently held by Republicans, a worrying sign for the GOP.
But to capitalize on the opportunity in 2019, Democrats will have to motivate voters who seldom vote in low-profile legislative elections.
“Virginia has changed,” says [former Lt. Governor Bill] Bolling, “and the Republican Party is going to have to change if it wants to win again in a state that is much more diverse and much more moderate than it used to be.”  But Bolling is not calling the shots at the Virginia GOP anymore. The Trumpists are.
With luck, RPV will remain in its alternate reality and Democrats will gain control of the General Assembly in November 2019.  Perhaps if that happens, RPV will finally realize that embracing Christofascists and racists is a losing proposition long term. 

Thursday, November 01, 2018

Vote Against all Republicans. Every Single One.

A column in the Washington Post takes the position I subscribe to as a former Republican: vote against every single Republican that you can next Tuesday.  It is the only way to save the Republican Party and perhaps the country as well.  A message must be sent that the current hatred of others and general toxicity of the GOP is unacceptable and must end.  The column is written by a former Republican.  Much of the lament involves the daily parade of lies and horrible behavior flowing from the White House, but ultimately it focuses on all of the Republicans (I call them Vichy Republicans) who have thrown principle and decency - what little many had - to enable, aid and abet the most malignant individual to ever occupy the White House.  What we are witnessing is NOT normal.  Indeed, the unhinged behavior coming from the White House is more reminiscent of that of Ivan the Terrible (for Fox News viewers, that a 16th century Russian tsar), Adolph Hitler or Idi Amin.  There is only one way to stop or at least lessen it.  Vote out every member of the party that is complicit in such misogyny.  Every one possible.  The future of America literally depends on it.  Here are column highlights:

I’m sick and tired of a president who pretends that a caravan of impoverished refugees is an “invasion” by “unknown Middle Easterners” and “bad thugs” — and whose followers on Fox News pretend the refugees are bringing leprosy and smallpox to the United States. (Smallpox was eliminated about 40 years ago.)
I’m sick and tired of a president who misuses his office to demagogue on immigration — by unnecessarily sending 5,200 troops to the border and by threatening to rescind by executive order the 14th Amendment guarantee of citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
I’m sick and tired of a president who is so self-absorbed that he thinks he is the real victim of mail-bomb attacks on his political opponents — and who, after visiting Pittsburgh despite being asked by local leaders to stay away, tweeted about how he was treated, not about the victims of the synagogue massacre.
I’m sick and tired of a president who cheers a congressman for his physical assault of a reporter, calls the press the “enemy of the people ” and won’t stop or apologize even after bombs were sent to CNN in the mail.
I’m sick and tired of a president who employs the language of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Jewish financier George Soros and “globalists,” and won’t apologize or retract even after what is believed to be the worst attack on Jews in U.S. history.

I’m sick and tired of a president who presides over one of the most unethical administrations in U.S. history — with three Cabinet members resigning for reported ethical infractions and the secretary of the interior the subject of at least 18 federal investigations.
I’m sick and tired of a president who flouts norms of accountability by refusing to release his tax returns or place his business holdings in a blind trust.
I’m sick and tired of a president who cares so little about right-wing terrorism that, on the very day of the synagogue shooting, he proceeded with a campaign rally, telling his supporters, “Let’s have a good time.”
I’m sick and tired of a president who lies outrageously and incessantly — an average of eight times a day — claiming recently that there are riots in California and that a bill that passed the Senate 98 to 1 had “very little Democrat support.”
And I’m sick and tired of Republicans who go along with Trump — defending, abetting and imitating his egregious excesses.
I’m sick and tired of Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) acting like a caddie for the man he once denounced as a “kook” — just this week, Graham endorsed Trump’s call for rescinding “birthright citizenship,” a kooky idea if ever there was one.
I’m sick and tired of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), who got his start in politics as a protege of the “bleeding-heart conservative” Jack Kemp, refusing to call out Trump’s race-baiting.
I’m sick and tired of Republicans who not only refuse to investigate Trump’s alleged ethical violations but who also help him to obstruct justice by maligning the FBI, the special counsel and the Justice Department.
Most of all, I’m sick and tired of Republicans who feel that Trump’s blatant bigotry gives them license to do the same — with Rep. Pete Olson (R-Tex.) denouncing his opponent as an “Indo-American carpetbagger,” Florida gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis warning voters not to “monkey this up” by electing his African American opponent, Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-Calif.) labeling his “Palestinian Mexican” opponent a “security risk” who is “working to infiltrate Congress,” and Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) accusing his opponent, who is of Indian Tibetan heritage, of “selling out Americans” because he once worked at a law firm that settled terrorism-related cases against Libya.
If you’re sick and tired, too, here is what you can do. Vote for Democrats on Tuesday. For every office. Regardless of who they are. And I say that as a former Republican. Some Republicans in suburban districts may claim they aren’t for Trump. Don’t believe them. Whatever their private qualms, no Republicans have consistently held Trump to account. They are too scared that doing so will hurt their chances of reelection. If you’re as sick and tired as I am of being sick and tired about what’s going on, vote against all Republicans. Every single one. That’s the only message they will understand.

Saturday, October 27, 2018

"MAGA Bomber" - A Portrait of a Growing Segment of the GOP


When the first pipe bombs sent to CNN and prominent Democrats who are constantly targeted by Donald Trump, a/k/a Der Trumpenführer, began to be discovered, many on the right - think Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et. al. -  claimed they were a "false flag operation" backed by liberals. Indeed, Der  Trumpenführer twisted reality into claiming that he was the victim, not the addressees on the bomb-containing packages.  They had no evidence, of course, but nowadays, evidence and facts are devoid for what passes for news and discourse on the right.  Deliciously, when Fox News tried to secure the rights to use a photo of Cesar Sayoc's van covered with pro- Trump and anti-CNN and liberal stickers, the couple who had taken the picture replied they "won't allow you guys to use it [the photo] because you aren't a reliable source of what's going on in our country today. Sorry!"  Now, as facts about Sayoc have emerged, as disturbed as he is, he is a portrait of the core base of the GOP: inspired by hatred and extremism and blindly eating up Trump's lies.  A piece in New York Magazine looks at the right's crumbling and dishonest effort to disavow Sayoc and the causation of Trump rhetoric that he subscribed to whole-heartedly.  Here are article highlights:
Rush Limbaugh, the most influential conservative talk show host in the country, and a man whom Republicans made an honorary member of the 1995 freshman class in recognition of his role in helping them win the House majority, explained recently that the still-anonymous bomber could not be on the political right. “Republicans just don’t do this kind of thing,” he explained. “From the Haymarket riot to the Unabomber, bombs are a liberal tactic,” added Ann Coulter.
The discovery that the person suspected of mailing bombs to various figures Donald Trump has described as enemy threats is in fact a Trump-supporting Republican has necessitated a change in emphasis. Whereas before conservatives insisted the bomber’s method told us everything we needed to know about his ideology, now they insist it tells us nothing at all about his ideology. “Crazy person attacks Republican Congresspeople: blame the crazy. Crazy person sends bombs to Democrats: blame the Republicans,” tweets right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro, whose analysis was recirculated by Donald Trump Jr.
It is of course true that the overwhelming majority of Republicans are not violent. . . . . Nonetheless, the relationship between the two parties and violence is not symmetrical, and the fact that alleged bomber Cesar Sayoc had a strong identification with Trump and his partisan message is not a coincidence. The Republican Party encompasses an extremist fringe that nurtures violence in a way the Democratic Party does not.
Political violence — when it is attached to political ideology at all, as opposed to simple mental illness — is associated with Manichean, paranoid, illiberal thought. That is a description of a large and steadily growing wing of conservative politics. . . . . Sensible conservatives roll their eyes at this sort of nuttery, but by this point in history, such modes of delusional thought have gained such deep inroads in the party that purging them is a hopeless task.
Even figures as deranged as Limbaugh have long since found themselves outflanked by even more deranged minds like Alex Jones, who has received respectful attention from President Trump, himself an avid conspiracy theorist. Trump has praised a member of Congress for assaulting a reporter; pardoned ranchers who inspired a right-wing militia attack, the right-wing conspiracist Dinesh D’Souza, and lawless authoritarian racist Joe Arpaio; literally today, at an event in which he was attempting to project some measure of dignity and decorum, Trump invoked a far-right conspiracy theory by attacking George Soros as a “globalist” and chuckling appreciatively at an audience member shouting “Lock him up!”
The left certainly has illiberal, paranoid modes of thought. The difference is that the left-wing version resides outside the boundaries of two-party politics, because the Democratic Party is fundamentally liberal not radical. . . . . The street-fighting cult antifa lies outside of, and is primarily hostile to, Democratic politics. Left-wing violence from the 1960s likewise came out of radical groups who viewed the Democratic Party with contempt.
The Republican Party, on the other hand, has followed a course that has made its rhetoric amenable to extremism. Republican radicalism enabled the rise of a conspiratorial authoritarian president, and that president has expanded the bounds of the party’s following farther out to the fringe. It is getting harder and harder to distinguish the “normal” elements of conservatism from the “kook” parts. That some of those kooks would resort to violence is not an accident but a statistical likelihood. Trump’s party is a petri dish for diseased minds.
Decent, moral people ought to be embarrassed to admit they are Republicans.   The fact that people don't speaks volumes about them and none of it good.

Thursday, June 28, 2018

Justice Must Be Won at the Ballot Box


With the United States Supreme Court poised to become a reactionary, anti-civil rights, anti-minority, anti-non-Christian force in America, average Americans' last resort for justice will be the ballot box.  Judicial redress of wrongs will like  be greatly curtailed as a soon to be solid majority of reactionaries will dominate the Court and inflict the Republican Party's extremist agenda on all Americans.  Two different columns, one in the New York Times and one in the Washington Post, look at the ominous future and suggest that efforts must be made to defeat Republicans at the ballot box - just as former Republican George Will recently argued. America is now poised where it either goes down the road of fascism like Germany of the 1930's, or citizens get off their asses and act before it is too late.  First, highlights from the Times piece:
If the last few days hadn’t been dispiriting enough for those who believed the Supreme Court could still stand for reproductive freedom, equal rights for all Americans, a check on presidential power, a more humane criminal justice system and so much more, Wednesday afternoon brought the coup de grâce.
Everyone knew it was coming sooner than later, but Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement, which he announced in a letter released hours after the court had issued its final rulings of the term, is still crushing. It sends a stark message to the tens of millions of Americans who have long turned to the court for the vindication of many of their most cherished rights and protections: Look somewhere else.
That place is the ballot box. So show up and vote. In the absence of a Supreme Court majority that will reliably protect human dignity, universal equality and women’s right to control their own bodies, it is up to Americans who cherish these values to elect politicians at every level of government who share them. . . . With Justice Kennedy’s departure, the court is very likely to lock in an unmoderated, hard-right majority for the rest of most of our lives.
It is a dark moment in the history of the court and the nation, and it’s about to get a lot darker. Once President Trump names his second pick and the Senate confirms that person, you can forget about new or enhanced protections for gays and lesbians, or saving the last shreds of affirmative action at public universities. Longstanding precedents are now at extreme risk.
[C]ount on more rulings that, like Monday’s decision upholding racial gerrymandering in Texas, give states the green light to cut back on voting rights, promote the rights of corporations over individuals, further erode the wall between church and state and look the other way when states cut corners and evade constitutional requirements in order to execute their citizens.
Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, who put up that blockade [to Obama’s nominee] despite the damage it inflicted on two branches of government, is celebrating now. He knows he has an open road to confirming whomever he and the Federalist Society want on the bench. . . . any remaining sense that the court can exist apart from partisan politics is gone.
For those who face the future in fear after Wednesday, there are no easy answers — but there is a clear duty. Do not for a moment underestimate the importance of getting out and voting in November. Four years ago, only 36 percent of Americans cast ballots in the midterm elections. Had more people showed up, the Senate may well have remained in Democratic control, Mitch McConnell would not be the majority leader and Judge Merrick Garland would now be Justice Garland. In the days and months ahead, remember this.
The column in the Post makes a similar case.  Here are excerpts:
Our constitutional system of “checks and balances” works only if those in a position to operate the levers of checking and balancing do their job. It is clear that a Republican Congress and Republican appointees to the Supreme Court have no taste for such work. For the moment, President Trump is mostly unchecked and unbalanced.
[N]ow things stand to get even worse because of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s retirement. He was, at least on some occasions, a moderating force. His replacement by another conservative hard-liner in the mold of Justice Neil M. Gorsuch would give right-wing interpretations of the law free rein.
This court’s direction was troubling enough with Kennedy there.  . . . When it comes to access to the ballot, they are pushing the nation back to the jurisprudence of the pre-civil rights era. The majority’s shameless ratification of a racial gerrymander by Texas’s Republican legislature, wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in dissent, demonstrated its refusal to enforce the “right of equal opportunity.”
And on Wednesday, in what might be seen as a companion to the Citizens United decision that enhanced the influence of corporations on our political life, the majority voted to undercut organized labor’s ability to fight back. 
A profound mistrust of the court will only be aggravated by the contrast between its approach to the travel ban and its method in an earlier 7-to-2 ruling in favor of a baker who did not want to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.
The cake decision uses statements by a Colorado regulator critical of religion to decry “religious hostility on the part of the State itself.” The five-justice majority then turns around in the travel-ban case, as Sotomayor noted, and “completely sets aside the President’s charged statements about Muslims as irrelevant.” In the first, involving Christians, the court went out of its way to protect religious liberty. In the second, involving Muslims, it went out of its way to insist that religious-liberty concerns did not apply.
All the recent talk about civility should not stop opponents of a right-wing court from doing everything in their power to keep the judiciary from being packed with ideologues who behave as partisans.
There is nothing civil about rushing a nominee to replace Kennedy before the midterm elections. And no rule of civility demands the confirmation of justices who would leave an abusive president unchecked and use raw judicial power to roll back a century’s worth of social progress.
Get registered to vote if you are not currently registered and get to the polls and vote against Republicans at all levels.  Act as if your rights - and lives - depend on it because they just might.  Apathy and laziness have brought the nation to this nightmare crossroads. The 2018 midterm elections just might be among the most important in America's history. 

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Why Virginia Republicans Haven't Won Statewide Since 2009

The Virginia GOP's Three Stooges. 

I was a member of the Virginia Beach City Committee for the Republican Party for eight years.  During that same period, I was precinct chair for the Alanton precinct, historically a Republican bastion.  I left the GOP years ago and in my resignation letter stated that I could no longer remain in a party that failed to support the concept of separation of church and state. In the years since, the stranglehold of the Christofascists - especially those mobilized by The Family Foundation, Virginia's leading hate group - has only increased.  Indeed, now the Christian right extremists have been joined by white supremacists as the second pillar of the Republican Party of Virginia.  The result?  The Virginia GOP has not won a statewide race since 2009 and one can see why if one looks at the candidates for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate: a neo-Confederate, an unhinged (in my view) self-anointed right wing "bishop," and a largely unknown individual whose main appeal is that he isn't either of his opponents.  The Virginia GOP has become a study in insanity and with every loss, the lunatic base blames defeat on the party's candidates being "too liberal" rather than looking in the mirror and realizing that a majority of Virginians find the GOP base and its "values" frightening if not repulsive.  A piece in CNN looks at this years class of clowns and lunatics vying for the GOP Senate nomination,  Here are excerpts:

Republicans haven't won a statewide race in Virginia since 2009, and GOP leaders have all but written off their chances of changing that trend in this year's Senate race.
The state's Republicans will select their Senate candidate in Tuesday's primary.
The best-known candidate, Corey Stewart, built his brand on defending Confederate icons. Another contender is a minister who called gay people "perverted" and "very sick people" and warned that yoga leads to Satan. And a third, who has emerged as the establishment preference, is most closely aligned with Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee.
None, national and state Republicans admit, are likely to give Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine a serious race in November's midterm elections.
Party leaders point to Ed Gillespie's losses in the 2014 Senate race and the 2017 governor's race as primary reasons that stronger candidates didn't enter the Senate race.
"It's just a blue wave, and I think that scared some people off," said John Whitbeck, the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia. "On paper, Tim Kaine has an incredible amount of money. You've got to have a lot of courage to take him on."
There's also the reality that allowed Democrat Ralph Northam to cruise to a 9 percentage point victory over Gillespie in the governor's race last fall: Northern Virginia's suburbs are rapidly growing and diversifying, and increasingly follow the trends of the national political landscape.
"I definitely think that we have to accept the fact that the state's changed dramatically demographically," Whitbeck said. "The issues have to be right. We need to be focused on the fiscal issues that we've always been known for."
The problem for the GOP is that none of the contenders in Tuesday's primary appear to meet those requirements.
Stewart, the chairman of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, narrowly lost the GOP gubernatorial nomination last year to Ed Gillespie but is seen by national party leaders and strategists as an embarrassment after Stewart tied his political identity to icons of the Confederacy.
Also in the race is E.W. Jackson . . . who was the party's failed 2013 nominee for lieutenant governor.
And outside Republican groups have rallied around Nick Freitas, a little-known 38-year-old state delegate who hasn't raised enough money for his own television ads.
In the last week of the primary, Freitas also showed a new willingness to attack Stewart, making reference to his ties to Paul Nehlen, an anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim House candidate in Wisconsin, and his links to criticism of "both sides" in the wake of the Charlottesville neo-Nazi gathering and the killing of a counter-protester.
"If we are to continue our party's legacy, we must reject Corey Stewart's dog-whistling of white supremacists, anti-Semites, and racists," Freitas said in an email to supporters, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.
Though the outcome of the primary will get attention -- and the winner could prove a headache for the party nationally and statewide for the rest of the year -- Virginia Republicans are now wrestling with the bigger problem of how they can return to competitiveness in what was until recently a swing state.
Virginia has effectively become "two one-party states," voting like New Jersey in the northern suburbs and Alabama throughout its more rural regions, and the GOP has failed to adjust to meet that new reality, said former Virginia Rep. Tom Davis, who chaired the National Republican Congressional Committee.
"They keep running Alabama candidates and Alabama campaigns, and they've just quit communicating with the northern Virginia suburbs," Davis said.
"The Republican base has migrated from the country club to the country," he said. "The problem with that is, your country club areas are the growing areas. But there's very little tolerance within the party for people who don't appeal to the country base."


Until the Christofascists and white supremacists are ejected from the Virginia GOP base, don't expect sanity to prevail - which I am sure warms the hearts of Democrats and progressives.