Pick One: Fewer Deaths Or More Corporate Profits

Last week one of the famous electoral prognosticators, who never gets anything right until a day or two before the election, looked at the Senate election in Montana and pontificated that "Based on what we can piece together, the race seems like it’s neck and neck at the moment. But does that actually make it a Toss-up? We are not quite there yet." I wrote that he should be there and will be there in a few weeks and went into why, which you can read at the link. But a new poll of likely voters from Montana State University shows Bullock pulling out ahead already.

The Democratic governor-- whose state has the second fewest COVID-19 cases in the country (after Alaska) and just 439 cases per million (compared to a national number of 3,681 per million)-- has pulled ahead of the incumbent Steve Daines, whose head hasn't been pulled out of Trump's ass once this year. Montanans were asked who they would vote for if the election for Senate were held now.

• Bullock- 46%
• Daines- 39%
• Someone else (Libertarian or Green)- 6%
• Unsure- 7%

53% of Montana voters approve of Trump's response to the pandemic, but 70% approve of Bullock's response. (Only 48% approve of Daines' response-- and 28% said they don't know what Daines' response is.)

Bullock isn't exactly a Berniecrat-- not by a long shot-- but he seems pretty good for an establishment guy and is certainly better than any of Schumer's other recruits. I wouldn't be surprised if the Montana Senate race turns out to be the only case in the country where Schumer and I are backing the same challenger.

There seems to be a structural difference between conservatives and progressives when it comes to a very basic perspective playing out right now in regard to how to confront the pandemic-- individualism vs societal cooperation. I bet you're not surprised to see that conservatives value business over life and progressives value lives over business. John Pavlovitz seem to have tweeted it this week:

And for the conservative side of the argument, let's turned to the former-- and hopefully last-- Republican governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, a guest on Dana Bash's show Monday. Christie told her that the country needs to reopen, despite separate key coronavirus models forecasting that thousands may die daily.

"Of course, everybody wants to save every life they can-- but the question is, towards what end, ultimately?" Christie, a Republican tapped to lead President Donald Trump's presidential transition team in 2016, told CNN's Dana Bash on the Daily DC Podcast. "Are there ways that we can... thread the middle here to allow that there are going to be deaths, and there are going to be deaths no matter what?"

Christie told Bash that "we've got to let some of these folks get back to work, because if we don't, we're going to destroy the American way of life in these families-- and it will be years and years before we can recover." His comments Monday echoed similar characterizations by other Republicans-- including President Donald Trump-- that the economic impact of coronavirus is just as devastating to the nation as the virus itself.

When Bash pressed Christie on whether people would be able to accept reopening in light of news of a Trump administration model projecting a rise up to about 3,000 daily US deaths from coronavirus by June 1, Christie responded, "They're gonna have to."

"We're in the midst of a pandemic that we haven't seen in over 100 years," he said. "And we're going to have to continue to do things."

With governors facing mounting pressure mounting to reopen their states' economies and Trump itching to scale back on social distancing nationwide as soon as possible, more than half of states had lifted aspects of their stay-at-home orders as of Monday.

Yet, a separate influential coronavirus model often cited by the White House is now forecasting that 134,000 people will die of Covid-19 in the United States, nearly double its previous prediction. The model, from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, had predicted 72,433 deaths as of Monday morning.

Christie, asked Monday what his messaging would be to the American public if he sat in the Oval Office, said, "The message is that the American people have gone through significant death before." He pointed to the first and second World Wars as examples of how "we've gone through it and we've survived it. We sacrificed those lives."

"We sent our young men during World War Two over to Europe, out to the Pacific, knowing, knowing that many of them would not come home alive," he said, adding: "And we decided to make that sacrifice because what we were standing up for was the American way of life. In the very same way now, we have to stand up for the American way of life."

The former governor lamented the "economic devastation" as "equally sad," and told Bash that while he wasn't advocating for crowded public gatherings like rock concerts or football games, "we have to let certain people get back to work because I can see my own state here."

Christie encouraged vulnerable populations to stay indoors, as "they're the ones who are gonna really swallow this burden badly, the elderly and those with respiratory diseases, depressed immune systems from cancer treatments or other things."

"Those folks are going to have to be even more careful than the rest of the population," he added. "I don't know what the choice is."

There's a way to do this and minimize loss of life and there's a way to do this and minimize loss of profit. It's not all black or all white; it's a matter of prioritization. Conservatives pick one way and progressives pick the other. As a voter, you'll have to pick between the two. Liam O'Mara is the progressive Democrat taking on corrupt Republican incumbent Ken Calvert in Riverside County, California. Riverside County has the 4th highest population in California, after L.A., San Diego and Orange counties. But Riverside is second in the number of COVID infections and deaths. CA-42, where Liam is running, gave Calvert a 56.5% to 43.5% win in 2018 (an R+13 PVI). That would be just the kind of district with large numbers of sociopaths who refuse to obey social distancing regulations out of selfishness and disregard for their neighbors. And the county band of supervisors is debating whether or not to just scrap the regulations altogether and open up for business without masks or social distancing. This is the sensible letter O'Mara sent the board:

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) noted that "We can deliver unemployment checks to those who were laid off. We can get loans to small businesses who had to shut down. We can provide stimulus payments to families affected by the pandemic. But we cannot bring the dead back to life. This is why we cannot haphazardly rush to reopen without adequate testing, tracing and isolation."

Bullseye by Nancy Ohanian

Trump Multi-Faceted Vote Buying Schemes

On Tuesday evening, Trump held one of his lunatic rallies for the pigs in the Wildwood, New Jersey area who support him and his newest puppet, former DCCC-Blue Dog Jeff Van Drew. Trump asserted, absurdly, that Van Drew was a symbol of the future. Then he pulled out of his ass a new refrain he'll be gaslighting America with, claiming "that an increasing number of Americans were 'disgusted' by congressional Democrats who, he said, are 'obsessed with demented hoaxes, this crazy witch hunt and deranged partisan crusades'... They’ve spent the last three years and probably even before I came down on that beautiful escalator with our beautiful future first lady, trying to overthrow the last election, and we will make sure that they face another crushing defeat in the next election." His moron supporters eat that crap up but normal Americans are ready to see him go. The latest YouGov poll, just released by The Economist, shows that if the congressional elections were held today the Democrats would win 48-39% and that 47% of registered voters (and that includes Republicans) want Trump removed while just 46% oppose removing him.

Trump paid Van Drew to switch parties. This is part of the payback. Trump also forced Republican David Richter, the top Republican in the race-- who had just moved into the district-- to withdraw and go run somewhere else (where there already is a Republican challenging Democrat Andy Kim). She immediately derided Richter as a "seat shopper who apparently believes he's entitled to party support-- somewhere, anywhere." Richter is a self-funder who had already given his campaign against Van Drew $500,000. And now he was forced to endorse Van Drew, who he's been denouncing in no uncertain terms for months.

But I'm sure it surprises no one that Trump uses bribery as a political tool. He used to brag about it in 2016 during the campaign-- about buying political favors from slimy politicians. You watch Pam Bondi making a jackass out of herself at the impeachment hearings the other day? Paying back a cash debt. Does this Politico headline surprise you? Trump lures GOP senators on impeachment with cold cash. Alex Isenstadt wrote that "Trump is rewarding senators who have his back on impeachment-- and sending a message to those who don't to get on board. Trump is tapping his vast fundraising network for a handful of loyal senators facing tough reelection bids in 2020. Each of them has signed onto a Republican-backed resolution condemning the inquiry as 'unprecedented and undemocratic.' Conspicuously absent from the group is Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a politically vulnerable Republican who’s refused to support the resolution and avoided taking a stance on impeachment. With his new push, Trump is exerting leverage over a group he badly needs in his corner with an impeachment trial likely coming soon to the Senate-- but that also needs him."

Most eager to sell out to Trump were Cory Gardner (CO), Joni Ernst (IA) and Thom Tillis who signed onto the resolution and just received a fundraising letter from Trump. Another shameless whore, David Perdue (GA), also signed on and is getting a Trump-hosted fundraising event next week. Isenstadt reported that "Attendees are being asked to give up to $100,000." He's also doing one of those for Moscow Mitch.

Party officials said there are likely to be additional Trump-led digital fundraising efforts for senators and that those who weren't included in this wave could be in a later one.

The president has been a fundraising boon for Republican senators. Earlier this month, Texas Sen. John Cornyn sent out an appeal to donors that prominently featured an image of Trump flashing a thumbs-up. The plea asked givers to “Show President Trump you have his back!” and invited them to split their donations between the president and Cornyn’s reelection campaigns.

The Texas senator tweeted afterward that his campaign “had its biggest online fundraising day ever."

“The donors listen to the president, and he has the most capacity to energize small-dollar contributions by making the case that he needs a Senate majority to be successful,” said Scott Jennings, a former political aide in the George W. Bush White House.

A few hours ago, former Gov. Chris Christie told ABC News that Republicans who vote for witnesses should expect retribution. That's the stick part of Trump's carrot and stick strategy for dealing with his own party. "You could very well see the president encouraging or creating primaries against senators that are up this year if they went and voted the other way I could definitely see him at least attempting to do that."

Trump is running the most transactional swampy regime in American history. Fat cats know if they open their wallets for Trump, they get whatever they want. It's all pay-to-play. Scott Reed, the senior political strategist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said that "Trump has the ability to turn on the money spigot like no one else."

Another Politico reporter, Ben Schreckinger, wrote another shocking story about the Trump Swamp: Trump allies are handing out cash to black voters. Short version: the Trumpists have begun holding events in black communities where they lavish praise on the president while handing out tens of thousands of dollars in giveaways.

The first giveaway took place last month in Cleveland, where recipients whose winning tickets were drawn from a bin landed cash gifts in increments of several hundred dollars, stuffed into envelopes. A second giveaway scheduled for this month in Virginia has been postponed, and more are said to be in the works.

The tour comes as Trump’s campaign has been investing its own money to make inroads with black voters and erode Democrats’ overwhelming advantage with them. But the cash giveaways are organized under the auspices of an outside charity, the Urban Revitalization Coalition, permitting donors to remain anonymous and make tax-deductible contributions.

The organizers say the events are run by the book and intended to promote economic development in inner cities. But the group behind the cash giveaways is registered as a 501(c)3 charitable organization. One leading legal expert on nonprofit law said the arrangement raises questions about the group’s tax-exempt status, because it does not appear to be vetting the recipients of its money for legitimate charitable need.

"Charities are required to spend their money on charitable and educational activities,” said Marcus Owens, a former director of the Exempt Organizations Division at the Internal Revenue Service who is now in private practice at the law firm Loeb & Loeb. “It's not immediately clear to me how simply giving money away to people at an event is a charitable act.”

Asked about the legality of the giveaways in a brief phone interview, the Urban Revitalization Coalition’s CEO, Darrell Scott, said that most gifts were between $300 and $500, and that the group mandates that anyone who receives over $600 fills out a W-9 form in order to ensure compliance with tax law. He did not respond to follow-up questions about how the giveaways were structured and whether they met the legal standard for a charitable act.

Scott declined to name the donors funding the effort. "I'd rather not,” he said. “They prefer to remain anonymous."

Scott, a Cleveland-based pastor, has been one of Trump’s closest and most prominent black supporters. He struck up a relationship with the real estate mogul in the years before Trump’s presidential run, and-- along with Trump’s former lieutenant Michael Cohen-- co-founded the National Diversity Coalition for Trump to promote that run.

...The group’s “Christmas Extravaganza” event in Cleveland last month featured a $25,000 giveaway and an appearance by Ja’Ron Smith, a deputy assistant to the president. A Cleveland native who worked on Trump’s criminal justice reform, Smith is among the highest-ranking black officials in the White House.

At the event, which also featured an appearance by television personality Geraldo Rivera, Lanier compared the investigative scrutiny faced by Trump to the plight of wrongfully incarcerated black men. He also defended Trump’s record on race.

"President Donald Trump-- the one that they say is racist-- is the first president in the history of this country to incentivize people who have the money to put it into ... urban areas,” he said.

...The election year initiative by the Urban Revitalization Coalition to improve Trump’s image in black communities could bolster those efforts.

The coalition planned a Martin Luther King Jr. Day event at Virginia Union University, a historically black school in Richmond. Advertisements for the event said it would feature a $30,000 cash giveaway and would honor Trump as well as his son-in-law, senior White House adviser Jared Kushner.

But school administrators canceled the Jan. 20 event, saying it had been described to them as an “economic development discussion” when it was first booked. In a letter to Lanier, university President Hakim Lucas said: “The event advertised is vastly different from the event VUU agreed to co-host.”

Scott told Politico that the school had initially “begged” him to have the event there. He said that the coalition intends to reschedule it at another venue at a later date.

Scott also said the group was planning to unveil a slate of additional future events and that he would reveal additional details. He did not respond to follow-up queries about the group’s upcoming schedule.

Why Are Republicans Like Chris Christie Pushing So Hard For A Biden Candidacy?

Funny how so many Republicans are weighing in on the Democratic primary— and how they virtually all want Democrats to nominate Status Quo Joe. I can guarantee you that they don’t have the Democratic Party’s or working families’ best interests at heart. The latest was the out-of-work slob who blocked the George Washington Bridge and got away with it, while his imitate subordinates went to prison for carrying out his orders. Christie was on The View Friday— don’t ask me why— where he told their audience that he’s “said all along that Biden is still the most electable Democrat… We all know 77,000 votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and most of those votes were white, working-class men and women. That’s what [Señor Trumpanzee] won by, and… the question is going to be who is going to be able to appeal to those folks. I’ve known Joe Biden for a long time. And I think he’s a really good person and a good human being. But listen, what he learned last night was, ‘Game on, man. Game on,’ and he wasn’t ready.” He didn’t mention on the air that he’s ready to accept a position in a Biden Cabinet.

Christie’s premise is that (white) working class men and women who voted for Trump are dull-witted enough to fall for the Biden claptrap about being their champion. I don’t see that happening. Neither does Norman Solomon, who used a column at Truthdig last April to point out what a phony Biden has always been— and all that time Christie has known him too… and long before Christie knew him. “Let’s be blunt: As a supposed friend of American workers, Joe Biden is a phony. And now that he’s running for president, Biden’s huge task is to hide his phoniness.” Solomon had no intention of allowing Biden to do that.

From the outset, with dim prospects from small donors, the Biden campaign is depending on big checks from the rich and corporate elites who greatly appreciate his services rendered. “He must rely heavily, at least at first, upon an old-fashioned network of money bundlers— political insiders, former ambassadors and business executives,” the New York Times reported on Tuesday.

Biden has a media image that exudes down-to-earth caring and advocacy for regular folks. But his actual record is a very different story.

During the 1970s, in his first Senate term, Biden spouted white backlash rhetoric, used tropes pandering to racism and teamed up with arch segregationists against measures like busing for school integration. He went on to be a fount of racially charged appeals and “predators on our streets” oratory on the Senate floor as he led the successful effort to pass the now-notorious 1994 crime bill.

A gavel in Biden’s hand repeatedly proved to be dangerous. In 1991, as chair of the Judiciary Committee, Biden prevented key witnesses from testifying to corroborate Anita Hill’s accusations of sexual harassment during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court. In 2002, as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was the Senate’s most crucial supporter of the Iraq invasion.

Meanwhile, for well over four decades— while corporate media preened his image as “Lunch Bucket Joe” fighting for the middle class— Biden continued his assist for strengthening oligarchy as a powerful champion of legalizing corporate plunder on a mind-boggling scale.

Now, Joe Biden has arrived as a presidential candidate to rescue the Democratic Party from Bernie Sanders.

Urgency is in the media air. Last week, the New York Times told readers that “Stop Sanders” Democrats were “agonizing over his momentum.” The story was front-page news. At the Washington Post, a two-sentence headline appeared just above a nice photo of Biden: “Far-Left Policies Will Drive a 2020 Defeat, Centrist Democrats Fear. So They’re Floating Alternatives.”

Biden is the most reliable alternative for corporate America. He has what Sanders completely lacks— vast experience as an elected official serving the interests of credit-card companies, big banks, insurance firms and other parts of the financial services industry. His alignment with corporate interests has been comprehensive. It was a fulcrum of his entire political career when, in 1993, Sen. Biden voted yes while most Democrats in Congress voted against NAFTA.

In recent months, from his pro-corporate vantage point, Biden has been taking potshots at the progressive populism of Bernie Sanders. At a gathering in Alabama last fall, Biden said: “Guys, the wealthy are as patriotic as the poor. I know Bernie doesn’t like me saying that, but they are.” Later, Biden elaborated on the theme when he told an audience at the Brookings Institution, “I don’t think five hundred billionaires are the reason we’re in trouble. The folks at the top aren’t bad guys.”

Overall, in sharp contrast to the longstanding and continuing negative coverage of Sanders, mainstream media treatment of Biden often borders on reverential. The affection from so many high-profile political journalists toward Biden emerged yet again a few weeks ago during the uproar about his persistent pattern of intrusively touching women and girls. During one cable news show after another, reporters and pundits were at pains to emphasize his essential decency and fine qualities.

But lately, some independent-minded journalists have been exhuming what “Lunch Bucket Joe” is eager to keep buried. For instance:

• Libby Watson, Splinter News: “Joe Biden is telling striking workers he’s their friend while taking money from, and therefore being beholden to, the class of people oppressing them. According to Axios, Biden’s first fundraiser will be with David Cohen, the executive vice president of and principal lobbyist for Comcast. Comcast is one of America’s most hated companies, and for good reason. It represents everything that sucks for the modern consumer-citizen, for whom things like internet or TV access are extremely basic necessities, but who are usually given the option of purchasing it from just one or two companies.” What’s more, Comcast supports such policies as “ending net neutrality and repealing broadband privacy protections... And Joe Biden is going to kick off his presidential campaign by begging for their money.”

• Ryan Cooper, The Week: “As a loyal toady of the large corporations (especially finance, insurance, and credit cards) that put their headquarters in Delaware because its suborned government allows them to evade regulations in other states, Biden voted for repeated rounds of deregulation in multiple areas and helped roll back anti-trust policy— often siding with Republicans in the process. He was a key architect of the infamous 2005 bankruptcy reform bill which made means tests much more strict and near-impossible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy.”

• Paul Waldman, the American Prospect: “Joe Biden, we are told over and over, is the one who can speak to the disaffected white men angry at the loss of their primacy. He’s the one who doesn’t like abortion, but is willing to let the ladies have them. He’s the one who tells white people to be nice to immigrants, even as he mirrors their xenophobia (‘You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent,’ he said in 2006). He’s the one who validates their racism and sexism while gently trying to assure them that they’re still welcome in the Democratic Party. . . . It’s not yet clear what policy agenda Biden will propose, though it’s likely to be pretty standard Democratic fare that rejects some of the more ambitious goals other candidates have embraced. But Biden represents something more fundamental: a link to the politics and political style of the past.”

• Rebecca Traister, The Cut: “Much of what Democrats blame Republicans for was enabled, quite literally, by Biden: Justices whose confirmation to the Supreme Court he rubber-stamped worked to disembowel affirmative action, collective bargaining rights, reproductive rights, voting rights. . . . In his years in power, Biden and his party (elected thanks to a nonwhite base enfranchised in the 1960s) built the carceral state that disproportionately imprisons and disenfranchises people of color, as part of what Michelle Alexander has described as the New Jim Crow. With his failure to treat seriously claims of sexual harassment made against powerful men on their way to accruing more power (claims rooted in prohibitions that emerged from the feminist and civil-rights movements of the 1970s), Biden created a precedent that surely made it easier for accused harassers, including Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh, to nonetheless ascend. Economic chasms and racial wealth gaps have yawned open, in part thanks to Joe Biden’s defenses of credit card companies, his support of that odious welfare-reform bill, his eagerness to support the repeal of Glass-Steagall.”

One of Biden’s illuminating actions came last year in Michigan when he gave a speech— for a fee of $200,000 including “travel allowance”— that praised the local Republican congressman, Fred Upton, just three weeks before the midterm election. From the podium, the former vice president lauded Upton as “one of the finest guys I’ve ever worked with.” For good measure, Biden refused to endorse Upton’s Democratic opponent, who went on to lose by less than 5 percent.

Biden likes to present himself as a protector of the elderly. Campaigning for Sen. Bill Nelson in Florida last autumn, Biden denounced Republicans for aiming to “cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.” Yet five months earlier, speaking to the Brookings Institution on May 8, Biden spoke favorably of means testing that would go a long way toward damaging political support for Social Security and Medicare and smoothing the way for such cuts.

Indications of being a “moderate” and a “centrist” play well with the Washington press corps and corporate media, but amount to a surefire way to undermine enthusiasm and voter turnout from the base of the Democratic Party. The consequences have been catastrophic, and the danger of the party’s deference to corporate power looms ahead. Much touted by the same kind of insular punditry that insisted Hillary Clinton was an ideal candidate to defeat Donald Trump, the ostensible “electability” of Joe Biden has been refuted by careful analysis of data.

As a former Sanders delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention and a current coordinator of the relaunched independent Bernie Delegates Network for 2019, I remain convinced that the media meme about choosing between strong progressive commitments and capacity to defeat Trump is a false choice. On the contrary, Biden exemplifies a disastrous approach of jettisoning progressive principles and failing to provide a progressive populist alternative to right-wing populism. That’s the history of 2016. It should not be repeated.

Did You Ever Doubt Christie Ordered Bridge-Gate? (Oh Boy, I Get To Use The Pictures Of Christie Blocking The Bridge Again!)

I don't think it took many firing neurons to come to that conclusion. At her sentencing yesterday, the designated patsy for the crime, Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie's deputy chief of staff, said Christie knew in advance. "The fact that I am on these steps in place of others from the Christie administration, and the governor himself, does not prove my guilt. It only proves that justice is not blind. It has favorites. It misses the mark. It misses the truth. And it picks winners and losers that are sometimes beyond anyone’s control... How did all these men all escape justice? Chris Christie was allowed, without rebuttal from anyone, to say out of one side of his mouth that I was a low level staffer-- a woman only good enough to plan menus and invite people to events. And then say out of the other side that I was somehow powerful enough to shut down the George Washington Bridge."

She then said the obvious-- obvious to anyone not so willfully obtuse as to ignore it-- that there was only one person powerful enough to approve that and only one person who would dare close down the bridge: Governor Chris Christie. Could anyone doubt that? For a minute?

She has no intention of remaining silent either. "Mr Christie, you are a bully, and the days of you calling me a liar and destroying my life are over. The truth will be heard, and for the former governor, that truth will be unescapable, regardless of lucrative television deals or even future campaigns. I plan to make sure of that."

David Wildstein has admitted having some up with the plan to create "traffic problems" for Fort Lee. Kelly testified under oath that she told Christie in advance about Wildstein's plan, which she claims she believed was a legitimate traffic study, and that he gave her the go-ahead. Wildstein also testified under oath that he personally briefed Christie about how the plan would work before it was carried out. Wildstein was granted probation in return for his testimony against Kelly and Baroni, but I guess he was only believable about them and not to the far more important testimony about Christie approving the scheme in advance!

She and Christie's deputy executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Bill Baroni, were found guilty of plotting to shut down of several access lanes to the George Washington Bridge over the course of four days in 2013, creating a traffic nightmare for Fort Lee to screw over Mayor Mark Sokolich for refusing to endorse Christie's reelection bid. Although never directly under oath, Christie denied he knew anything about the dastardly deed. A spokesman read a statement from him: "As I have said before, I had no knowledge of this scheme prior to or during these lane realignments, and had no role in authorizing them. No credible evidence was ever presented to contradict that fact. Anything said to the contrary is simply untrue."

She was sentenced to 13 months in prison, although she remains free while her appeal works its way up to the Supreme Court. Baroni is already serving his 18 month prison sentence, although he has joined Kelly's Supreme Court appeal.

Do You Think Chris Christie Is Mainstream, A Centrist? He Wants You To. How About AOC?

In the video above, Morning Joe regular, Mike Barnicle, asked Chris Christie how he felt about the neo-fascist CPAC convention giving the announcement of Senator John McCain's death a standing ovation. Barnicle's soft ball: "Is that your political party?" Watch Christie's pivot into an attack on the figure the right-of-center establishment fears most in the whole country. "No, that's not people I would agree with," establishes a rapport with the audience who would also not agree with Nazis cheering the death of John McCain either. "You know, Mike, there's always been elements of my party that I haven't agreed with." Oh, he's such a bipartisan centrist (just like me... my kinda guy). Now that he's got your attention and sympathy... the pivot:

I think that's normal for any political party. I'm sure there are folks who have heard some of the things that Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is saying that are mainstream Democrats who say 'no, that's not the party that I belong to, even though that may be where the energy is right now in the Democratic Party.'... Both parties...

Which "things that Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is saying" are comparable to a bunch neo-Nazi Trump supporters cheering the death of John McCain? A 70% margin tax rate on annual income over $10,000,000? The Green New Deal? Medicare for All? Replacing ICE? What does she say that is so offensive to self-labeled "centrists?" That "people who are taking money from pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be drafting health care legislation and that people who are taking money from oil and gas companies shouldn't be drafting climate legislation?" I understand exactly why that enrages congressional criminals like Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD). I can see how it drove that worthless slug Claire McCaskill (D-MO), who was kicked out of office by voters in Missouri in part because she took $1,671,164 from the healthcare sector, denounce a reformer like AOC. She doesn't make establishment career criminals comfortable. Nor does she want to. And they want her DEAD.

Yesterday Mehdi Hasan's Intercept essay, AOC, Sanders And Warren Are The Real Centrists Because They Speak For Most Americans, made a lot more sense that the garbage you normally hear fromBeltway media sellouts using the word "moderate" to describe conservatives. Hasan is as angry about this as I am. He asks his readers-- one of whom you should be-- to "Google the words 'moderate' or 'centrist' and a small group of names will instantly appear: Michael Bloomberg, Amy Klobuchar, Joe Biden, and, yes, Howard Schultz. Bloomberg is considered a 'centrist thought leader' (Vanity Fair). Klobuchar is the 'straight-shooting pragmatist' (Time). Biden is the 'quintessential centrist' (CNN) and the 'last hurrah for moderate Democrats (New York Magazine), Shultz is gifted with high-profile interview slots to make his 'centrist independent' pitch to voters." Blood boiling yet? Hasan:

Now Google the freshman House Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She’s been dubbed a member of the “loony left” (Washington Post), a “progressive firebrand” (Reuters), and a “liberal bomb thrower” (New York Times).

Got that? Biden, Schultz and Co., we are told, sit firmly in the middle of American politics; Ocasio-Cortez stands far out on its fringes.

This is a brazen distortion of reality, a shameless and demonstrable lie that is repeated day after day in newspaper op-eds and cable news headlines.

“It’s easy to call what AOC is doing as far-lefty, but nothing could be farther from the truth,” Nick Hanauer, the venture capitalist and progressive activist, told MSNBC in January. “When you advocate for economic policies that benefit the broad majority of citizens, that’s true centrism. What Howard Schultz represents, the centrism that he represents, is really just trickle-down economics.”

“He is not the centrist,” continued Hanauer. “AOC is the centrist.”



Hanauer is right. And Bernie Sanders is centrist too-- smeared as an “ideologue” (The Economist) and “dangerously far left” (Chicago Tribune). So too is Elizabeth Warren-- dismissed as a “radical extremist” (Las Vegas Review-Journal) and a “class warrior” (Fox News).

The inconvenient truth that our lazy media elites do so much to ignore is that Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders, and Warren are much closer in their views to the vast majority of ordinary Americans than the Bloombergs or the Bidens. They are the true centrists, the real moderates; they represent the actual political middle.

Don't believe me? Take Ocasio-Cortez’s signature issue: the Green New Deal. Former George W. Bush speechwriter-- and torture advocate-- Marc Thiessen claims that the Green New Deal will “make the Democrats unelectable in 2020.” The Economist agrees: “The bold plan could make the party unelectable in conservative-leaning states.” The Green New Deal “will not pass the Senate, and you can take that back to whoever sent you here and tell them,” a testy Diane Feinstein, the senior and supposedly “moderate” Democratic senator from California, told a bunch of kids in a viral video.

But here is the reality: The Green New Deal is extremely popular and has massive bipartisan support. A recent survey from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University found that a whopping 81 percent of voters said they either “strongly support” (40 percent) or “somewhat support” (41 percent) the Green New Deal, including 64 percent of Republicans (and even 57 percent of conservative Republicans).

What else do Ocasio-Cortez, Warren, and Sanders have in common with each other-- and with the voters? They want to soak the rich. Ocasio-Cortez suggested a 70 percent marginal tax rate on incomes above $10 million-- condemned by “centrist” Schultz as “un-American” but backed by a majority (51 percent) of Americans. Warren proposed a 2 percent wealth tax on assets above $50 million-- slammed by “moderate” Bloomberg as Venezuelan-style socialism, but supported by 61 percent of voters, including 51 percent of Republicans. (As my colleague Jon Schwarz has demonstrated, “Americans have never, in living memory, been averse to higher taxes on the rich.”)

How about health care? The vast majority (70 percent) of voters, including a majority (52 percent) of Republicans, support a single-payer universal health care system, or Medicare for All. Six in 10 say it is “the responsibility of the federal government” to ensure that all Americans have access to health care coverage.

Debt-free and tuition-free college? A clear majority (60 percent) of the public, including a significant minority (41 percent) of Republicans, support free college “for those who meet income levels.”

A higher minimum wage? According to Pew, almost 6 in 10 (58 percent) Americans support increasing the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to (the Sanders-recommended) $15 an hour.

Gun control? About six out of 10 (61 percent) Americans back stricter laws on gun control, according to Gallup, “the highest percentage to favor tougher firearms laws in two or more decades.” Almost all Americans (94 percent) back universal background checks on all gun sales-- including almost three-quarters of National Rifle Association members.

Abortion? Support for a legal right to abortion, according to a June 2018 poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, is at an “all-time high.” Seven out of 10 Americans said they believed Roe v. Wade “should not be overturned,” including a majority (52 percent) of Republicans.

Legalizing marijuana? Two out of three Americans think marijuana should be made legal. According to a Gallup survey from October 2018, this marks “another new high in Gallup’s trend over nearly half a century.” And here’s the kicker: A majority (53 percent) of Republicans support legal marijuana too!

Mass incarceration? About nine out of 10 (91 percent) Americans say that the criminal justice system “has problems that need fixing.” About seven out of 10 (71 percent) say it is important “to reduce the prison population in America,” including a majority (52 percent) of Trump voters.

Immigration? “A record-high 75 percent of Americans,” including 65 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, told Gallup in 2018 that immigration is a “good thing for the U.S.” Six in 10 Americans oppose the construction of a wall on the southern border, while a massive 8 in 10 (81 percent) support a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

How much of this polling, however, is reflected in the daily news coverage of the Democrats, which seeks to pit “leftist” activists against “centrist” voters, and “liberals” against “moderates”?

How is it that labels like “centrist” and “moderate,” which common sense tells us should reflect the views of a majority of Americans, have come to be applied to those who represent minority interests and opinions?

How many political reporters are willing to tell their readers or viewers what Stanford political scientist David Broockman told Vox’s Ezra Klein in 2014: “When we say moderate what we really mean is what corporations want. Within both parties there is this tension between what the politicians who get more corporate money and tend to be part of the establishment want-- that’s what we tend to call moderate-- versus what the Tea Party and more liberal members want”?

The center ground-- if it even exists-- cannot be found on a map; it is not a fixed geographical location. You cannot get in your car, type the address in your navigation, and then drive to it.

It moves, it shifts, it reacts to events. The center of 2019 is not the center of 1999 or even 2009. You want to know where it is right now? You want to find the moderate middle? Then ignore the right-wing hacks, the conventional wisdom-mongers, and the donor class. Go check out the policy platforms of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren.

You may not recall Brad DeLong, the subject of an interesting piece by Zach Beauchamp for Vox yesterday. He's a UC-Berkeley economist, who served as deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy in the Clinton administration and is widely considered "one of the market-friendly, neoliberal Democrats who have dominated the party for the last 20 years. The term he uses for himself is 'Rubin Democrat'-- referring to followers of finance industry-friendly Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin." Zach reports that "DeLong believes that the time of people like him running the Democratic Party has passed. “The baton rightly passes to our colleagues on our left,” DeLong wrote. “We are still here, but it is not our time to lead.” Good; I hope that's one less vote for Status Quo Joe.

The core reason, DeLong argues, is political. The policies he supports depend on a responsible center-right partner to succeed. They’re premised on the understanding that at least a faction of the Republican Party would be willing to support market-friendly ideas like Obamacare or a cap-and-trade system for climate change. This is no longer the case, if it ever were.

“Barack Obama rolls into office with Mitt Romney’s health care policy, with John McCain’s climate policy, with Bill Clinton’s tax policy, and George H.W. Bush’s foreign policy,” DeLong notes. “And did George H.W. Bush, did Mitt Romney, did John McCain say a single good word about anything Barack Obama ever did over the course of eight solid years? No, they fucking did not.”

The result, he argues, is the nature of the Democratic Party needs to shift. Rather than being a center-left coalition dominated by market-friendly ideas designed to attract conservative support, the energy of the coalition should come from the left and its broad, sweeping ideas. Market-friendly neoliberals, rather than pushing their own ideology, should work to improve ideas on the left. This, he believes, is the most effective and sustainable basis for Democratic politics and policy for the foreseeable future.

How Have All Those Freshman Members We Elected In November Been Voting?

The worst new senator (AZ) and worst new House member (NJ)

First the good news: Although there haven't really been enough controversial votes yet to definitively analyze the voting records of the congressional freshman class, there are mostly pretty good signs. With every day that passes, records are beginning to become somewhat clearer, at least at the extremes. According to ProgressivePunch, 38 freshman House members are tied for the #1 spot-- with 100% perfect scores. There are obvious perfect voters like AOC (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Joe Neguse (D-CO), the Levin Boys (Mike from California and Andy from Michigan), Debra Haaland (D-NM) and Chuy Garcia (D-IL) but even some of the reactionary candidates have been voting exactly the way the Democrats who entrusted them with high office would have wanted them to vote-- crap candidates who will likely soon start disappointing, like Jason Crow (New Dem-CO) and Susie Lee (New Dem-NV), for example. For now... 100%.

But some Democrats have already started slipping over to the Dark Side and finding their comfort zones on the other side of the aisle. Further down the list of freshmen, there are 10 tied for 144th most progressive: Cindy Axne (D-IA), Abby Finkenauer (D-IA), Chrissy Houlahan (New Dem-PA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA), Katie Porter (D-CA), Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA), Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ), Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI) and Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA). Republicans are already starting to look at some of these freshman as obvious targets for 2020 since they are already beginning to show signs of disappointing the Democratic base. For example, in Orange County-- CA-48, the coastal district Rouda won from Dana Rohrabacher last year, 157,837 (53.8%) to 136,899 (46.4%)-- Republican businessman James Bradley, who was the top finishing GOP candidate in last year's U.S. Senate race, declared against Rouda, whose congressional office is said to be in utter turmoil and disarray, last week.

Right-of-center freshmen like Blue Dog Mikey Sherrill, are going to need all the help they can get if they keep voting against progressive bills and refuse to back popular progressive initiatives like Medicare-For-All and the Green New Deal. History has taught us that Democrats like her will wind up without support from a crucial sector of the electorate: committed progressive activists. In NJ-11, former governor Chris Christie has already started pushing his wife to run against Sherrill. It's a very swingy red-leaning district (R+3) and the only thing Sherrill will be able to count on for reelection is suburban revulsion at Trump at the top of the ticket. The Christies have lived in the district for 25 years and are very popular there.

And those ten aren't even the worst problem-children-- not by a loingshot. Tied as the 202nd most progressive (which is not at all progressive) are 7 freshmen who keep finding themselves voting with the GOP an awful lot:

• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)
• Antonio Delgado (D-NY)
• Jared Golden (D-ME)
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)

Now we're in real stinky garbage territory. Those 7 above will all have tough reelection battles, if not primaries. Xochitl Torres Small already has two declared GOP opponents... as her support from progressives activists evaporates. And that brings us to the 3 worst freshmen Democrats-- tied for the 231st "most progressive" and already with voting records better than only 2 sewer lane Democrats, Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX) and Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN). Tied for the worst freshmen of all and just begging to be one termers:

• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)

The DCCC announced their 2020 frontline program yesterday-- 44 Democratic incumbents, mostly shitty freshmen, who are in trouble for reelection. The only non-freshmen on the list are a couple of truly crap Blue Dogs-- Tom O'Halleran (AZ) and Josh Gottheimer (NJ)-- and a progressive, Matt Cartwright (PA) in a Republican-leaning seat. O'Halleran's biggest political problem is a primary from progressive Democrat, Eva Putzova. As for the freshman members, most of them are Republican-lite types who can count on Trump-hatred to get them over the hump next year, although most of them are likely to be defeated in 2022 after Pelosi leads the Democratic Party into disappointing everyone on everything important... But at least she passed her own top priority: Pay-Go. Which of the freshmen on the list deserve some support? So far I'd say Mike Levin (CA)... but I'm holding out some hope that Katie Porter (CA), Jahana Hayes (CT), Jared Golden (ME), Andy Kim (NJ) and Kim Schrier (WA) are on their way to proving themselves worthwhile members of Congress. The rest have already proven themselves the contrary. Most of the good freshmen are not on the DCCC Frontline list of course.

Over in the Senate, there are are 4 freshmen tied as the 47th most progressive-- two Democrats and two Republicans. The Republicans are Josh Hawley (MO) and Martha McSally (AZ). The Democrats are the only freshmen in the class, both of whom had very right-wing voting records in the House-- Jacky Rosen (NV) and the worst of the worst, the Democrat who applauded the loudest and most often and with the greatest enthusiasm for Trump Tuesday night, Kyrsten Sinema. All four are rated "F," of course. The four pictured below have nothing to do with these four from the Senate-- and do I mean nothing!

Hey, but while we're all here, this is a list of all the House Democratic freshmen and the committees they were assigned to. You might find it useful moving forward... or not, but I'll be using it s a reference for the next couple of years.

Colin Allred (New Dem, TX)

• Foreign Affairs
• Transportation and Infrastructure
• Veterans' Affairs

Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)

• Agriculture
• Financial Services

Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)

• Agriculture
• Veterans' Affairs

Ed Case (Blue Dog-HI)

• Appropriations
• Natural Resources

Sean Casten (New Dem-IL)

• Foreign Affairs
• Science

Gil Cisneros (D-CA)

• Veterans' Affairs
• Armed Services

T.J. Cox (D-CA)

• Agriculture
• Natural Resources

Angie Craig (New Dem-MN)

• Agriculture
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Jason Crow (New Dem-CO)

• Armed Services
• Small Business

Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)

• Natural Resources
• Veterans' Affairs

Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)

• Small Business
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Madeleine Dean (New Dem-PA)

• Financial Services
• Judiciary

Antonio Delgado (D-NY)

• Agriculture
• Small Business
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Veronica Escobar (New Dem-TX)

• Armed Services
• Judiciary

Abby Finkenauer (D-IA)

• Small Business
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Lizzie Fletcher (New Dem-TX)

• Science
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Chuy Garcia (D-IL)

• Financial Services
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Sylvia Garcia (D-TX)

• Financial Services
• Judiciary

Jared Golden (D-ME)

• Armed Services
• Small Business

Debra Haaland (D-NM)

• Armed Services
• Natural Resources

Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)

• Agriculture
• Education and Labor

Jahana Hayes (D-CT)

• Agriculture
• Education and Labor

Katie Hill (New Dem-CT)

• Armed Services
• Oversight
• Science

Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)

• Armed Services
• Science

Stephen Horsford (New Dem-NV)

• Budget
• Ways and Means
• Natural Resources

Chrissy Houlahan (New Dem-PA)

• Armed Services
• Small Business
• Foreign Affairs

Andy Kim (D-NJ)

• Armed Services
• Small Business

Ann Kirkpatrick (New Dem-AZ)

• Agriculture
• Appropriations

Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)

• Education and Labor
• Veterans' Affairs

Andy Levin (D-MI)

• Education and Labor
• Foreign Affairs
• Veterans' Affairs

Mike Levin (D-CA)

• Natural Resources

Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA)

• Armed Services
• Veterans' Affairs

Tom Malinowski (New Dem-NJ)

• Veterans' Affairs
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)

• Financial Services
• Science

Lucy McBath (New Dem-GA)

• Education and Labor
• Judiciary

Joseph Morelle (D-NY)

• Budget
• Education and Labor
• Rules

Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (New Dem-FL)

• Judiciary
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Joe Neguse (D-CO)

• Judiciary
• Natural Resources

AOC (D-NY)

• Financial Services
• Oversight

Ilhan Omar (D-MN)

• Budget
• Education and Labor
• Foreign Affairs

Chris Pappas (New Dem-NH)

• Veterans' Affairs
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)

• Financial Services
• Foreign Affairs

Katie Porter (D-CA)

• Financial Services

Ayanna Pressley (D-MA)

• Financial Services
• Oversight

The worst Democratic members of Congress-- posing proudly

Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)

• Veterans' Affairs
• Homeland Security

Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA)

• Oversight
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA)

• Judiciary
• Rules

Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)

• Agriculture
• Education and Labor

Donna Shalala (D-FL)

• Education and Labor
• Rules

Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ)

• Armed Services
• Space

Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI)

• Armed Services
• Homeland Security

Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)

• Agriculture
• Foreign Affairs

Greg Stanton (New Dem-AZ)

• Judiciary
• Transportation and Infrastructure

Haley Stevens (New Dem-MI)

• Education and Labor
• Science

Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)

• Financial Services
• Oversight

Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)

• Armed Services
• Homeland Security

Lori Trahan (D-MA)

• Armed Services
• Education and Labor

David Trone (D-MD)

• Foreign Affairs
• Education and Labor

Lauren Underwood (D-IL)

• Veterans' Affairs
• Education and Labor
• Homeland Security

Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)

• Agriculture
• Natural Resources

Jennifer Wexton (New Dem-VA)

• Financial Services
• Science

Susan Wild (New Dem-PA)

• Foreign Affairs
• Education and Labor