Categories
News

Dick Cheney Ignores His Own Record While Indicting Trump As Worst Threat To American Democracy Ever

Former Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed his own record launching an overseas war based on junk intelligence when he claimed Thursday that former President Donald Trump is the worst threat to the republic since the Declaration of Independence was signed.

On Thursday, endangered Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, whom the state GOP no longer recognizes as a Republican, published a video of her father’s endorsement.

“In our nation’s 246-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump,” said the former vice president under George W. Bush.

[embedded content]

“He lost his election, and he lost big,” Dick Cheney added, despite Trump only losing the 2020 contest by less than 50,000 votes across three tipping-point states. Nevertheless, Cheney said, “I know it, he knows it, and deep down I think most Republicans know it.”

The 81-year-old longtime presidential adviser, whose Washington resume stretches from the Ford White House to both Bush administrations, appeared in the one-minute ad less than two weeks before Liz Cheney faces primary voters at the ballot box. The three-term incumbent is up against Trump-endorsed attorney Harriet Hageman, who, according to a July poll sponsored by the Casper-Star Tribune, is up by 22 points.

During the second Bush administration, Dick Cheney was a “chief architect” of the Iraq war, sending American troops into a conflict that would last decades without an exit strategy. The invasion was launched under the pretense that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) based on U.S. intelligence. The classified information cited by the White House to justify the war however, turned out to be one of the worst intelligence failures in modern American history, if not the worst failure.

The oldest living former vice president’s assertion that Trump is the greatest threat to the republic in its existence, meanwhile, glosses over the dozens of historical figures who surely did more harm. Was Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy who oversaw a four-year insurrection, less of a threat than Donald Trump? Was John Wilkes Booth, who shot President Abraham Lincoln, less of a threat? What about Benedict Arnold?

It’s unlikely that Dick Cheney’s video will save Liz’s House seat. According to an Axios poll in March, less than 2 in 5 GOP Wyoming voters reported a favorable opinion of former vice president. Nearly half, 48 percent, said they view Dick Cheney unfavorably.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

The Federalist logo eagle mark

Unlock commenting by joining the Federalist Community.

Subscribe

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Harvard Study: Only 8% of Capitol Rioters Wanted ‘Insurrection’

A comprehensive study by Harvard University of the motivations of those who participated in the January 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol found that only 8% wanted to start an insurrection or civil war — contrary to claims by the January 6 Committee.

The Harvard Crimson reported last week:

In the most comprehensive study to date of what motivated the Trump supporters to attack the Capitol, Shorenstein Center researchers found that 20.6 percent of the rioters, a plurality, were motivated to take part in the riot because they supported Trump. Another 20.6 percent of the rioters cited Trump’s fraudulent claims that the 2020 presidential election was rigged as their primary reason for participating in the Jan. 6 riot.

The third most common reason for attacking the Capitol: a desire to start a civil war or an armed revolution, according to the study. Almost 8 percent of defendants indicated it was their main motivation.

In an interview, Fagan said she was surprised by how frequently support for Trump and concerns about the election were cited as primary motivations for joining the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

As constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley has pointed out, the study suggests that many of the participants in the riot believed — rightly or wrongly — that they were defending democracy, not trying to overthrow it:

The study found that a plurality of the 417 federally charged defendants were motivated by the “lies about election fraud and enthusiasm for his re-election.” It concluded that “[t]he documents show that Trump and his allies convinced an unquantifiable number of Americans that representative democracy in the United States was not only in decline, but in imminent, existential danger.”

The study also found that belief in QAnon “was one of the [defendants’] lesser motives.” The study was hardly pro-Trump and one author even expressed surprise with the results since conspiracy theories “were so prominently displayed in much of the [riot’s] visual imagery.”

Once again, none of this exonerates or excuses those who rioted on January 6th or those who fueled the riot. However, the use of “insurrection” by the politicians, pundits, and the press is not an accurate characterization of the motivation of most of the people who went to the Capitol on that day. It was clear that this was a protest that became a riot.

Several members of the January 6 Committee, including chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), have in the past objected to the certification of presidential elections when Republicans have won, claiming irregularities with voting machines or foreign interference.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Political Hackery of Georgia Dem Harassing Sen. Graham Would Have Framers Spinning

Even our Founding Fathers could not have foreseen the political hackery on display in Fulton County, a motion filed late Friday in a Georgia federal court by Sen. Lindsey Graham’s legal team makes clear.

Earlier this month, Fulton County’s Democrat District Attorney Fani Willis obtained permission to subpoena Graham with the goal of forcing the United States senator from South Carolina to testify before her fake grand jury. Graham had originally filed a motion to quash the subpoena in a federal court in South Carolina but later agreed with Willis to dismiss that motion and refile it in a Georgia federal court, which he did this afternoon. 

In his motion to quash, Graham opened by stressing that Willis had obtained permission in early 2022 from the Fulton County Superior Court to impanel a “special grand jury” to assist in her supposed investigation “into any coordinated attempts to unlawfully alter the outcome of the 2020 elections in this state,” but the term “grand jury” is a misnomer. Unlike a typical grand jury, Willis’ grand jury “cannot indict; all it does is investigate and issue non-binding recommendations.”

Yet Willis demands that Graham and a parade of other nationally known Republicans, such as Trump’s election lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Jenna Ellis, and Cleta Mitchell, march into Fulton County for questioning by county prosecutors. While Democrats may take glee in Willis’s politically motivated “investigation” and her targeting of big-name Republicans — she has reportedly already forced Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Deputy Secretary of State Gabe Sterling to testify before the “special grand jury” — her attempt to haul Graham into a county courthouse in Georgia should raise concerns on both sides of the aisle. 

Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution provides that “for any Speech or Debate in either House, [members] shall not be questioned in any other Place.” This clause, known commonly as “the Speech or Debate Clause,” applies not just to “speech” and “debate” in the literal sense, but also “protects a member’s conduct if it is an integral part of the due functioning of the legislative process.” 

Graham seeks to quash Willis’s subpoena based on the Speech or Debate clause; he also argues that sovereign immunity and the “high-ranking official” doctrine prevent the county D.A. from subpoenaing him.

From a purely textual perspective, Graham’s Speech or Debate argument should succeed, as I detailed previously. In short, the Fulton County prosecutor seeks to “question” him in a place other than Congress. Further, in claiming Graham is “a necessary and material witness,” Willis focuses on two telephone conversations the senator had with Raffensperger and his staff about absentee ballots and allegations of widespread voter fraud, but as Graham stresses, his questioning of the secretary of state on reported irregularities in Georgia’s election were “integral” to the “functioning of the legislative process.” 

Specifically, as a senator, Graham had the authority to raise objections to a state’s certificates of electors under the Electoral Count Act, as well as to debate the objections raised by others, and then vote on the objections. Graham did precisely that. And as I previously explained, the Supreme Court has made “clear that obtaining information for the purpose of legislating ‘wisely or effectively’ constitutes an appropriate ‘legislative function.’” Under these circumstances, the Speech or Debate Clause, properly understood, should keep the county D.A. out of the Senate’s business.

But beyond the textual argument, which the federal court will likely consider in the next week or so on an expedited time frame, the underlying rationale for the Speech or Debate Clause should provide a stark warning to Democrats that what Willis is doing is destructive to our democratic republic and should be denounced. 

As Graham’s attorneys stressed in his motion, the framers believed the Speech or Debate Clause was “‘indispensably necessary’ for the independence of the legislature, and ultimately for the ‘rights of the people.’” Only by protecting members of Congress from being questioned about their legislative activity could the integrity of the legislative process be assured. “By ‘enabling these representatives to execute the functions of their office without fear’ of interference from prosecutors, grand juries, or courts, the Framers understood that the ‘rights of the people’ would, in turn, be protected.” 

But here, we don’t truly have a “prosecutor” or a “grand jury”; we have an inquisitor and her trial of Republicans by publicity. And the Fulton County court seems but a rubber stamp for the subpoenas Willis seeks.

And Willis is but one county D.A. Imagine the mischief if every prosecutor with political ambitions followed her lead.

If the federal court hearing Graham’s motion to quash does not put a stop to this Fulton County prosecutor’s ploy, “there would be nothing to stop any state or local official from investigating — or ‘intimidat[ing]’ under the veneer of investigating — Senators or Representatives with which they disagree.”

Democrats may not care now, and they may never care about the Constitution, but they would be wise to worry about payback.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

The Federalist logo eagle mark

Unlock commenting by joining the Federalist Community.

Subscribe

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Candidate Joe Biden Promised to ‘Pull This Country Out of a Recession’ in 2020

Candidate Joe Biden promised to get the United States out of the recession caused by the coronavirus and the subsequent economic shutdowns when he ran for president.

“I helped pull this country out of a recession before — and, as president, I’ll do it again,” Biden wrote on social media in October 2020.

The president’s old promises were revisited Thursday on social media after the latest GDP numbers were released for the second quarter of 2022, showing two consecutive quarters of contracted growth.

That makes Biden responsible for a recession, despite White House efforts to redefine what it actually means.

In spite of spending trillions of dollars and fueling record-high inflation, Biden has struggled to explain why economic growth has slowed on his watch.

In a statement to reporters, Biden blamed the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy for the economy’s slowing.

“[I]t’s no surprise that the economy is slowing down as the Federal Reserve acts to bring down inflation,” he said.

The president spoke Thursday about his support for the latest Democrat attempt to raise taxes and spend $433 billion more as proof he is committed to fighting inflation.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

FBI Sabotaged Hunter Biden Probe To Derail Investigation


FBI Sabotaged Hunter Biden Probe To Derail Investigation

FBI Whistleblowers

ZH

Several FBI whistleblowers say that the agency’s probe into Hunter Biden was internally sabotaged during the 2020 election in order to derail the investigation, after agents wrongfully deemed verified evidence as “disinformation” to ignore.

According to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), agents investigating Hunter “opened an assessment which was used by an FBI headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” adding that his office received “a significant number of protected communications from highly credible whistleblowers” regarding the investigation.

Grassley added that “verified and verifiable derogatory information on Hunter Biden was falsely labeled as disinformation,” according to the Washington Examiner.

FBI supervisory intelligence agent Brian Auten opened in August 2020 the assessment that was later used by the agency, according to the disclosures. One of the whistleblowers claimed the FBI assistant special agent in charge of the Washington field office, Timothy Thibault, shut down a line of inquiry into Hunter Biden in October 2020 despite some of the details being known to be true at the time.

A whistleblower also said Thibault “ordered closed” an “avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting,” according to Grassley, even though “all of the reporting was either verified or verifiable via criminal search warrants.” The senator said Thibault “ordered the matter closed without providing a valid reason as required” and that FBI officials “subsequently attempted to improperly mark the matter in FBI systems so that it could not be opened in the future,” according to the disclosures.

The whistleblowers say investigators from FBI headquarters were “in communication with FBI agents responsible for the Hunter Biden information targeted by Mr. Auten’s assessment,” and that their findings on whether the claims were in fact disinformation were placed “in a restricted access sub-file” in September 2020, according to Grassley, who added that the disclosures “appear to indicate that there was a scheme in place among certain FBI officials to undermine derogatory information connected to Hunter Biden by falsely suggesting it was disinformation.

Grassley summarized the new allegations in a Monday letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

The Examiner notes that FBI agent Auten was involved in the Trump-Russia investigation, including interviewing Christopher Steele’s primary source, Igor Danchenko.

According to Grassley, the “volume and consistency” of the allegations regarding the handling of the Hunter Biden probe “substantiate their credibility.”

The assessment by Auten in August 2020 was opened the same month Grassley and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) received a briefing from the FBI “that purportedly related to our Biden investigation and a briefing for which the contents were later leaked in order to paint the investigation in a false light,” Grassley said. The senator said Senate Democrats asked for a briefing in July 2020 “from the very same FBI HQ team that discredited the derogatory Hunter Biden information.”

The FBI inquiry into Hunter Biden reportedly began as a tax investigation, then expanded into a scrutiny of potential money-laundering and foreign lobbying; the DOJ has declined to hand over investigative details. -Washington Examiner

Thibault, the FBI agent who allegedly quashed the Hunter probe, may have violated the Hatch act in 2020 after making posts on social media which were critical of then-president Donald Trump and former AG William Barr.

Joe Biden, top Democrats, and virtually the entire mainstream media dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian dis-information when bombshell allegations from the New York Post emerged weeks before the 2020 election. In March 2021, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a report claiming that figures tied to Russian intelligence promoted “misleading or unsubstantiated allegations” about Joe Biden.

View Grassley to Garland and Wray Scribd Document here

*********

(TLB) published this article from ZeroHedge as written and compiled by Tyler Durden

Header featured image (edited) credit:  Hunter Biden/greatgameindia.com  /hunter-biden

Emphasis added by (TLB) editors

••••

••••

Stay tuned to …

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Former President Donald Trump Holds ‘Save America’ Rally in Prescott Valley, Arizona… (Video courtesy of Right Side Broadcasting Network)…

Former President Donald Trump will hold a Save America rally in Prescott Valley, Arizona, to support Kari Lake, who is seeking the Republican nomination for governor of Arizona.

Trump is scheduled to speak at 9 p.m. Eastern/7 p.m. MT.

Trump endorsed Lake in September 2021, touting her strength on such issues as “crime,” “border,” “Second Amendment,” “military,” and “vets.”

“It’s an honor having his support & it is a privilege to lead his #AmericaFirst Movement in Arizona,” Lake said in a July 21 tweet.

Former Vice President Mike Pence and Governor Doug Ducey (R-AZ) will be holding a “dueling rally” in support of Karrin Taylor Robson, another candidate for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, according to CBS News.

On July 20, Breitbart News noted that the two upcoming rallies — and the Arizona gubernatorial primary more generally — served as a “proxy war” between Trump’s wing of the Republican Party and the establishment wing, with which the former president has maintained tense relations, writing, “The split-screen just two weeks ahead of Election Day — while ballots are already out and people are already voting early by mail — is the most intense direct contrast this ongoing proxy war for control of the party has seen this year.”

You can follow Michael Foster on Twitter at @realmfoster.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Democrat Poll: Trump, with Net-Positive Approval, Viewed Far More Favorably than Net-Negative Biden

Former President Donald Trump, with a net-positive approval rating, is viewed far more favorably than net-negative President Joe Biden across midterm battleground districts, according to Wednesday’s AARP/Fabrizio polling.

A majority (50-49 percent) of battleground respondents approve of Trump, while Biden’s approval rating among the same constituents is marked at only 37 percent with 61 percent disapproving. Trump’s approval rating is 23 points better than Biden’s.

The survey was conducted among 56 of the most competitive districts in 2022 that are rated either a toss-up or as lean Democrat/Republican, according to the Cook Political Report. The poll sampled 2,352 likely voters in the 56 House districts on June 29, 2022.

More specifically, the poll shows that Republicans are favored over Democrats by four points on the generic ballot. The generic ballot polling samples support parties without the influence of individual politicians.

The poll also found Republicans have greater support among those 50 years and older:

The generic Republican leads by a wider 49% – 40% margin among voters 50+, and Independents tilt toward the GOP candidate by 7 points. There are 20+ point gender gaps among both men and women overall and among those age 50+, with men voting GOP by a larger margin than women voters are supporting the Democrat.

White voters 50+ favor the generic Republican by 16-points. The race is closer among Hispanic and Asian American voters 50+ who prefer the generic Democrat by 5 & 3-points, respectively. A generic Democrat leads among Black voters 50+ by a 65% – 16% margin.

The survey indicates that candidates should pay close attention to voters 50+, with a significant majority (80%) saying they are extremely motivated to vote this fall. Voters 50+ are a crucial voting bloc, consistently showing up to the polls and making a key difference in election outcomes. In the 2018 mid-term elections, the 50+ made up about 60% of the electorate and they are poised to make up an even larger share of in 2022, given their greater to motivation to vote than those under 50.

The polling is bad news for Joe Biden, who is trying to retain his majorities in the House and Senate. If the Democrats lose control the of chambers, Republicans will have an opportunity to conduct oversight of the Biden administration. Republicans may probe Joe Biden’s involvement with his family business, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s potential involvement with indirectly funding the Wuhan lab, 40-year-high inflation, and America’s refining capacity, which is depleted due to Biden’s war on American energy.

Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter and Gettr @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality. 

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Wisconsin’s Illegal Ballot Drop Box Operation Further Proves 2020 Was Not ‘Most Secure Election In History’

As if we needed more proof that the 2020 election was not “the most secure election in history,” the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Friday that the unmanned drop boxes used to collect absentee ballots during the 2020 presidential election are illegal.

That matters because the drop boxes, which were funded by one of Mark Zuckerberg’s election meddling pet projects, collected absentee votes in five of the swing state’s biggest cities for a political race that was decided by only about 20,000 votes.

In the wake of the 2020 election, Democrats and their cronies in the corrupt corporate media repeatedly claimed that there was no way that the U.S. voting system could be compromised. Despite the growing evidence of a manipulated election, they released reports and studies that claimed that voter fraud is rare and that there were no systematic voting issues in states.

Anyone who disagreed with their conclusions was immediately smeared for touting “baseless” and “unfounded” conspiracy theories rooted in a “big lie.”

“Election Security Experts Contradict Trump’s Voting Claims,” The New York Times blared in a headline just a couple of weeks after Election Day.

Of course, these were the same class of experts who signed a letter five years ago, when Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election, claiming that U.S. elections were vulnerable and had some of the same weaknesses that they dismiss now.

The truth is, there was plenty of evidence to suggest that Joe Biden’s journey to the White House wasn’t blemish-free. Under the guise of protecting voters from Covid-19, states began recklessly mailing out ballots informed by outdated voter rolls. They eliminated election security safeguards and encouraged a flood of unverified absentee ballots.

In Pennsylvania, Democrats used the leftist courts to change the state’s Election Code to expand mail-in voting, add drop boxes, and relax the verification standards for mailed ballots. In other key states, Zuckerberg used shady election-manipulating organizations to incentivize and orchestrate increased Democrat voter turnout.

Even on Election Day, poll observers in several swing states said they were targeted, harassed, lied to, and banned from the ballot-counting rooms which they were supposed to observe. In Michigan, Republican poll challengers claimed tens of thousands of bad ballots were counted for Biden in Detroit and signed sworn affidavits saying so.

Yet, anyone who suggested anything to contradict the narrative that this was the “most secure election” ever was nuked off of the internet by Big Tech and scolded by corporate media. When they gathered in Washington D.C. to protest, they and Republicans nowhere near the nation’s Capitol building were smeared as “insurrectionists.”

That event became the basis for the hyperpartisan Jan. 6 Committee and their sham attempts to subpoena election integrity supporters for the crime of questioning what happened in 2020.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision just proves what many of us have known since before Nov. 3, 2020: Our latest presidential election was tainted by some of the most powerful institutions in our nation who meddled, censored, and rigged whatever they could to pave Joe Biden’s way to the Oval Office.


Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

McConnell’s Disastrous Culture War Surrender Is Wrong On The Year, The Issues, And The Nature Of The Fight

“McConnell,” a weekend NBC headline read, “wants to win the suburbs by defusing cultural hot buttons.”

His goal, the carefully placed story reports, is to “downplay the contentious issues on which suburban voters may be more sympathetic to Democrats.”

Those issues listed include guns, abortion, and Donald Trump, of course. That’s not where it ends, though; that’s never where it ends with D.C. Republicans.

Gender ideology and childhood transitioning? That’s an uncomfortable fight for the retired businessmen who make up much of the national GOP. Critical race theory and intersectionality in schools? Another doozy. And if our bi-annual “Gang of X” crews mean anything, even immigration is a lot harder for Republicans to talk about than, say, taxes and regulations.

These sorts of articles don’t just fall out of reporters’ brains, though: They’re placed by interested parties. In this case, it’s Sen. Mitch McConnell and his team, who are now nakedly working to run a 2012 election strategy in 2022. They’re not even hiding it anymore.

Those old enough to remember 2012, however, might recall that it didn’t work — and a divisive and then-unpopular President Barack Obama solidly defeated the GOP.

The strategy was a disaster then, and there’s even stronger reason to believe it will be more disastrous 10 years on. Why?

For one, McConnell and his team have the wrong year. For another, McConnell and his team have chosen the exactly wrong fight to move their targets (suburban parents). And finally: McConnell and his team have fundamentally misunderstood the nature of — and source of — the very fights they’re trying to disengage from.

But let’s start with the wrong year: 2022 might be a year like any other for most Americans, but in politics, 2022 is a midterm year. That makes a difference in a number of ways, including that we’re going to see fewer voters. Sure, turnout will be solid, but unlike with general elections (2020, 2024, etc.), only the most active and most motivated will turn out. Because of this, these off-year elections are decided by the party faithful more than anyone else.

November’s winners will be the candidates who rev up their bases the most — and nothing excites Republican base voters like the issues McConnell so desperately wants to avoid.

Even if it were 2024, however, there’s a second thing wrong with McConnell & Co.’s get-out-the-vote strategy: The “cultural hot buttons” are exactly what have driven suburban moderates away from the Democratic Party in the first place.

Though suburban moderates (and women, in particular) were driven toward voting for Joe Biden in the 2020 general election by what they perceived to be an atmosphere of constant cultural conflict around the Trump White House, just one year later, Republican Glenn Youngkin was able to win the governorship in blue Virginia by diving head first into the culture war.

While Youngkin is a corporate-friendly moderate by any stretch, his campaign stalled when he wore a mask and focused on grocery taxes and other economic matters. When he overruled his high-paid consultants and drilled down on contentious battles of transgender ideology, left-wing school boards, shuttered classrooms, and activist teachers, he pulled ahead, earning a surprise win.

This win would not have been possible had McConnell and his men run Youngkin’s campaign. Instead, they would have driven Youngkin’s campaign past grocery taxes and inflation and right into an obscure page of has-been political history.

Youngkin might have preferred those economic issues, sure. He is a retired businessman (like most of the rest of the national GOP) and is most at ease when speaking about economic issues. He didn’t have that choice, however; nor did the moderate suburbanites who propelled him to the governor’s manse.

This brings us to the third problem with McConnell and the boy’s election strategy: In the culture war, the GOP is not the aggressor. Far from it, the Republican Party (and the American people, more broadly) are fighting a defensive maneuver: Today’s battles aren’t about shutting down gay bars or raiding Black Panther meetings; rather, they’re being fought in our kids’ classrooms and bathrooms.

And this isn’t slowing down, either. Despite fireworks over their agenda, just this week the country’s largest teachers union proposed changing “mother” to “birthing parent” in its contracts. This, from an educators’ trade union. This, from all around us.

The hard lesson that suburban parents learned in 2021 is despite the Democrats and the media blame game — and despite the GOP’s hand-wringing — Trump was not the cause of the omnipresent American Culture War. Yes, he answered nearly every call to battle, but rarely did he instigate any major cultural conflicts.

Perhaps to moderates and McConnell’s great surprise, in schools, professional sports, playgrounds, city halls, amusement parks, and entertainment companies across the country, the culture war has continued in his absence. In many places, it’s even heated up.

That’s why suburban parents from all types of political, religious, and ethnic backgrounds are rebelling against woke policies. They understand who the aggressors are; they get it, yet the professionals in charge of the Republican Party don’t.

That’s a problem that reflects poorly on both McConnell’s team’s political acumen and on their political courage. Theirs is a strategy that will lead to anemic electoral gains at best, in what should (through no fault of their own) be a banner year for Republicans.

Theirs is a strategy that mistakes the nature of the 2022 election, misses some of the main issues motivating suburban voters, and most damningly, misunderstands the very nature of the fight the American people are engaged in: We can fight, or we surrender; there is no retreat.


Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source

Categories
News

Poll: GOP Holds Same Generic Ballot Lead as Week Before Roe Overturned

A Raaumessen Reports poll reveals that a generic Republican candidate holds the same 5-point lead over a generic Democrat candidate as the week before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

The poll, published Friday, shows that 47 percent of respondents would cast a ballot for a Republican candidate if the midterm elections were held when they were surveyed. Conversely, 42 percent of those surveyed would back a Democrat.

The five-point differential is the same as a generic Congressional ballot poll released by Rasmussen Reports, the week before Roe was overturned, where 46 percent said they would support a Republican Congressional candidate, while a generic Democrat candidate drew 41 percent of the vote.

Granted, the lead for a generic Republican did expand to 48-40 in the Rasmussen Reports generic poll released on June 24. The same day, the ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case came down, overturning Roe v. Wade and making abortion an issue for state legislatures to decide, which very well could explain the minor dip from an eight-point lead to a five-point lead week over week.

In the latest poll, Rasmussen Reports noted that Republicans are ahead primarily due to a 15-point lead among the independent demographic, as 44 percent of respondents without a party affiliation said they would vote for a Republican candidate. In comparison, 29 percent of independents said they would cast a ballot for a generic Democrat.

When referenced with last week’s findings, the poll shows no change in point differential among independent voters as 45 percent of the demographic would back a generic Republican, while 30 percent of voters would elect a generic Democrat. On June 18, Republicans held a 14-point advantage among independents, so the lead among independents has expanded and held on the heels of the Dobbs decision.

The current poll also shows that 62 percent of black Americans would vote Democrat while 23 percent would support a Republican. In terms of other minorities, 42 percent stated they would vote for a GOP candidate, which is a point higher than the 41 percent who would back a Democrat.

The survey was conducted from June 26-30 and sampled 2,500 likely voters in the United States and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus two percent.

Source

Please follow and like us:

Visit Original Source