Now Trump Is Actually Chasing Billionaires Away From The Republican Party

A few days ago, we saw how Ohio's top Republican donor, Leslie Wexner, has grown so fed up with the GOP-- primarily Trump but also the congressional enablers-- that all it took was hearing an Obama speech for him to quit the GOP!

Yesterday Heather Long, in a report for the Washington Post, ‘I support higher taxes’: The billionaire behind the National Debt Clock has had it with Trump Post, wrote that NYC real estate billionaire Douglas Durst is also bidding the GOP a not so fine adieu. He takes the national debt seriously and-- even though I know his brother Bobby, who's in enough trouble of his own-- I can't reach out to him to go to a Stephanie Kelton lecture on MMT. Doug is the name behind the actual National Debt clock. "U.S. government debt per household is now $127,000 (and rising)," wrote Long. "When U.S. government debt topped a trillion dollars for the first time in the early 1980s, New York real estate magnate Seymour Durst sent every member of Congress a holiday card that said: 'Happy New Year! Your share of the federal debt is $5,000.' When lawmakers refused to act, Durst went further, putting up the National Debt Clock in 1989 on a building he owned just off New York City’s bustling Times Square. Three decades later, the clock is still running, yet U.S. debt has skyrocketed and most in Congress ignore it. Republicans, including President Donald Trump, campaigned on balancing the budget, yet they have added more than $1.5 trillion to the debt in the past year."

Pelosi and Hoyer are probably on the phone with the Dursts right now-- asking them how much PAY-GO would be worth to them.

The result is that by the end of 2018, the nation will hit milestone: The federal government’s total debt owed to outsiders (known as “debt held by the public”) will exceed all debt that U.S. households have for mortgages, credit cards, cars, student loans and other personal loans for the first time in modern history, according to JPMorgan.

Seymour’s normally private son, Douglas Durst, manages the National Debt Clock and the family’s real estate empire now. He felt compelled to speak out after what he calls the “worst months” he’s ever seen for fiscal policy.

Douglas has a message for Congress: Tax the rich more.

“I support higher taxes on people like me,” said Douglas in an interview from his office in midtown Manhattan with sweeping views of the city. “I think America has more of a revenue problem than a spending problem.”

When his father put up the National Debt Clock, total gross U.S. debt was just shy of $3 trillion-- or about $12,000 a person. Today it is over $21 trillion, or about $65,000 a person.

Economists typically focus on debt held by the public, which is currently about $16 trillion, because that is the amount the government truly owes creditors (the rest of the debt is money one government agency owes another). Debt held by the public will top $127,000 per household by the end of the year, according to JPMorgan. Personal debt per household will average about $126,000.

“This is an astonishing statistic,” said David Kelly, chief global strategist at JPMorgan Funds. “Americans have a lot of debt. I always feel nervous signing a mortgage or a car loan. I think, can I afford all this debt? Then you realize the government is busy borrowing even more money on your behalf.”

The United States hasn’t had this high of a debt level as a percent of GDP since the World War II era, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It’s expected to grow quickly as Social Security, Medicare and interest payments balloon.

In good economic times, the government is usually able to shrink the deficit, but the latest data out last week shows the federal government is on track to spend about $900 billion more this year than the revenue it is bringing in. The last time the unemployment rate was this low, the government ran a surplus.

Durst's campaign contribution pattern seems to indicate he's a Republican since he gives thousands of dollars to Republican Party organizations, but when it comes to individual candidates, he gives to Republicans and to Democrats, though generally establishment Dems who favor the status quo.

“We’re mortgaging our children’s future. It’s one thing to borrow money for infrastructure investment, but this …” Douglas said. He makes an exasperated face and his eyebrows shoot up over his circular glasses. “The tax cut was an overall step in the wrong direction. Nobody who has any background in economics thought the tax bill was a good idea." Douglas says he will pay less in taxes now, although he declined to say how much he will save. Forbes estimates the Durst Organization is worth more than $5 billion.

“Fix the debt” has long been a Republican rallying cry and many GOP leaders have seized on the debt clock as a useful prop. Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan brought a mock debt clock to campaign stops on the 2012 presidential election trail, and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) has projected a debt clock on the House Financial Services Committee room since he became committee chair several years ago.

The National Debt Clock helped propel Congress to enact balanced budgets from 1998 to 2001, but the fiscal soundness was short-lived. The federal government has spent more money than it brings in every year since then. Debt shot up under George W Bush because of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, then it surged under Barack Obama during the Great Recession. Trump campaigned on shrinking-- or even eliminating-- the debt, but so far he has added substantially to it as well from the tax cuts and more military spending.

When debt gets this high, the government spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year on interest to creditors. That is money that must be paid and can mean that there are fewer funds available for education, infrastructure, the military and other priorities. Douglas is particularly concerned about the environment.

In recent years, the U.S. government has been borrowing additional money to continue funding programs. Some economists like Dean Baker of the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research, argue U.S. debt is highly desirable and the U.S. Treasury can continue borrowing without any issues.

“We have had no problem selling our debt, as shown by the low market interest rate on long-term bonds,” Baker said. “But suppose that for some reason in the next downturn no one wanted to buy our debt. In this highly unlikely scenario, the Federal Reserve could simply buy the debt.”

But most on the left and right warn there is probably a limit to how much borrowing can occur. At some point, the government will have to make hard choices about programs to scale back or cut or ways to raise revenue, especially as Social Security, Medicare and interest payments jump in the coming years. Republicans tend to favor cutting programs while Democrats tend to favor raising taxes on the rich. Many fiscal policy experts say Congress will probably have to do both.

Prominent Americans as varied as GOP senate candidate Romney, conservative Washington Post commentator George Will, Clinton’s Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Obama’s former defense secretary Leon Panetta have all warned recently the debt is leaving the country vulnerable to “economic collapse” (Will’s words), but their respective parties show little sign of restoring fiscal discipline.

Last week Republicans introduced a “tax bill 2.0” that would add another $2 trillion to the debt, and Democrats have numerous education and health care programs they would like to pass if they regain power that would probably increase costs.

The late Seymour Durst walked to work for most of his life and was famous for never wearing a winter coat because he thought it a waste of money. He couldn’t understand why top U.S. government officials didn’t have the same frugal mentality. He was part of a generation of Americans that came of age during the Great Depression and never lost a sense of valuing each penny and dime, but that generation is passing away.

Even the National Debt Clock no longer gets quite the attention it once did. The clock has been moved to an alley off West 43rd Street where few pedestrians stop to look at it. On a recent summer evening, several Chinese tourists were the only ones taking photos of it (China is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt).

It's lovely that Seymour scrimped on taxis and clothing but personal budgets have nothing to do with governmental debt. When Stephanie Kelton-- Bernie Sanders' top economic advisor-- was asked recently about deficits she explained that she doesn't just worry "about the magnitude but about the purpose. We could add $1.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, as we just did with tax cuts that go disproportionately to people in the top-income distribution, and we could have done, for instance, student debt cancellation at virtually the same price tag. We could have done massive infrastructure investment, or R&D investment."

You can have the same budgetary outcome, but very different economic outcomes, in terms of the potential to boost long-term growth and productivity, impacts on the distribution of income, and so forth. Every economy has its own internal speed limit. You can only absorb so much additional spending at any point in time, given the slack that the economy has at that moment. So can the deficit be too big? Of course! But can it be too small? Yes. And that’s something you rarely hear people say. Or complain about it."

Government debt is just the money the government spent into the economy and didn’t tax back. That’s all the national debt is. It’s a historical record of all of the times that they made a net deposit, spent more than they taxed out, and the bonds are the difference between those. One of the greatest cons ever perpetrated on the American people is this notion that the national debt belongs to us, that we are responsible in our individual capacity for a share of it."

When asked if the debt crises in Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Argentina worry her, she told the interviewer that "it’s not a lesson for America. You know, back in 2010, at the height of the European debt crisis, I can remember standing in my kitchen with the TV on, and turning on the news, cooking dinner, and seeing the opening to the nightly news. And it goes, dah, dah, dah, the debt crisis in America. And I go, what debt crisis in America? But that is really what the narrative started to become: This is a warning for America. We need to get our fiscal house in order.

What’s different? Look, Italy in 1995 had a debt-to-GDP ratio of around 120%. Spain in 1995 had a debt ratio of 62%. Greek debt-to-GDP over 100% before joining the euro. These countries were borrowing and spending in a currency that they created. Who remembers the debt crisis in Europe in ’95? There was no debt crisis in ’95, because Italy could always meet every obligation that came due, on time, in full, because it was paying in lira. Where and how else is the lira going to come from but the Italian government?

Third Way And The Republican Wing Of The Democratic Party Gears Up For War-- Against Bernie

A few days ago I went to a fundraiser for a congressional candidate here in L.A. One of the artists you see frequently here at DWT, Nancy Ohanian, donated a huge aluminum rendition of the Bernie Sanders characature you see above. It's spectacular and comes up to my chest. I offered to auction it with the proceeds going to the candidate, a super-duper progressive who, in fact, had endorsed Bernie in 2016. I got to the event early so I could set up. While the host was helping me find a suitable place to display the art, a craggy old man-- let's say 80, but I'm not certain-- ambled over and started growling and barking at either me or the art. His point was one that young people who admire Bernie never make but this nasty old codger was spitting mad and demanded that Bernie retire. To be fair, I should also mention that he also screeched that Pelosi also retire. Anyway, his whole argument seemed to be about age. Later during the event he was snarling again, this time how the Democrats would lose if they nominate a progressive in 2020.

I don't often meet people ignorant enough to spout off like that in celebration of the Blue Dogs and New Dems who make up the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. But ole shit-for-brains was all in for it. I didn't want to upset myself by arguing with him about corruption or policy so I wandered over to another part of the gigantic backyard and thankfully never saw him again. Yesterday, however, Buzzfeed ran a report about the conference the Republican wing of the Democratic Party was holding in Columbus, Ohio. They're desperate to find someone to unite behind who will defeat the Bernie/Elizabeth Warren ticket in 2020. Trump wasn't invited but he's hoping they pick Biden, who, he claimed Obama took out of the garbage heap. asked by Jeff Glor on the CBS Evening News who he thinks his Democratic opponent will be, he said:

Well, I dream, I dream about Biden. That's a dream. Look, Joe Biden ran three times. He never got more than 1 percent and President Obama took him out of the garbage heap, and everybody was shocked that he did. I'd love to have it be Biden. I think I'd like to have any one of those people that we're talking about… You know, there's probably-- the group of seven or eight right now. I'd really like to-- I'd like to run against any one of them, but Biden never by himself could never do anything. President Obama took him, made him vice president and he was fine. But you go back and look at how he succeeded in running, when he ran two or three times, I don't think he ever break-- broke one. He was at the one or less level, 1 percent or less level.

Biden is popular among centrist Democrats, not so much among progressives-- he had a long career as a corporate whore and Wall Street kiss-ass-- and not so much among Independents. Molly Hensley-Clancy wrote that at the centrist conference "the burning question was how to create an economic message that could beat two people in 2020 who have crystal clear economic messages: Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders... Centrist Democrats are eager to take on the party’s ideological left. But nearly 30 years after Bill Clinton won with an explicitly moderate brand of Democratic politics, they are smaller in number, and in a sign of just how much the Democratic Party has changed in the last five years, they're explicitly defining themselves in response to a democratic socialist from Vermont. They’re still searching for their message-- and their messengers. At the presidential election-- focused “Opportunity 2020” conference, hosted by the center-left think tank Third Way, there wasn’t much in the way of presidential candidates. The featured speakers were currently much lower key players in the increasingly serious field of prospective Democratic contenders-- Jason Kander, who just announced his run for mayor of Kansas City, Missouri; Virginia Sen. Mark Warner; Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan."

Third Way is not "center left"-- unless you're comparing the group to neo-fascists like Jim Jordan and Steven Miller. This are the people who use big corporate money and GOP billionaires to defeat progressives in primaries. They're the worst of the worst. You'll notice how how an idiot fake journalist like Hensley-Clancy refers to the furthest right segment of the Democratic Party benignly as "center left" while smearing the people who go to the grassroots Netroots Nation convention as "ultra-progressives," including in her empty-headed smear Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Idiots like Hensley-Clancy make the error of conflating crooked politicians, like Jim Himes, for example, who are whores for Wall Street, with "moderates." Himes, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, has taken $2,869,907 in bribes from Wall Street, more than any Democrat currently serving in the House. So, of course Hensley-Clancy goes right to him for some wisdom.

When it comes to moderate voices in the 2020 election, “I think there is a risk that they get drowned out,” said Rep. Jim Himes, of Connecticut, who chairs the House’s moderate Democrat caucus, the New Dems. “There’s a lot of volume and emotion and energy around the more activist wing of our party.”

Former Delaware Governor Jack Markell is basically a moderate Republican pretending to be a Democrat, like many attendees at the Third Way conference. He was delighted at the opportunity to smear mainstream Democrats like Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, not to mention Benie. "Right now the only narrative we’re getting is from the far left," growled Markell.

The Opportunity Democrats’ big ideas-- carefully constructed, polled on, and laid out by Third Way in Columbus-- are not nearly as big as the far left’s, though that’s partly by design. There’s a venture-capital-like bank that will lend on a massive scale to underserved areas, an apprentice program modeled in part after land-grant colleges, a universal private retirement fund. Also, an Americorps-like program for retirees, called “Boomer Corps.”

Sanders loomed over much of the conference in Columbus-- as an adversary, a comparison point, and, in some ways, as an inspiration.

“To his credit, Bernie has offered something that is coherent, and big, and is very well-known,” said Matt Bennett, Third Way’s vice president of public affairs. “If you walked out on the street of Columbus, 6 of 10 people could tell you what Bernie’s economic vision is.”

There is a pervasive narrative that the energy in the Democratic Party is mostly among progressives. That’s true particularly when it comes to the looming 2020 presidential election, where most of the party’s buzzed-about contenders, from Harris to Warren to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, have spent their time in the Senate outdoing each other to come out in support of what are traditionally considered very liberal policies on economics.

“It’s accurate to say most of the energy on Twitter is on the far left, and a lot of the energy in Washington is on the far left,” Bennett said. But he believes many are inaccurately conflating the energized Democratic base with Bernie Sanders supporters.

“If you go talk to the resistance, the likelihood is that they voted for Hillary, and they hate Trump to the bottom of their soul," he said. "That doesn’t mean they want a [$15] national minimum wage.”

These right-wing Democrats hate the idea of a living wage almost as much as Republicans do. That's because they are Republicans but with a less right-wing social agenda. They tend to be less racist, less sexist, less homophobic, etc. These right-of-center Democraps attracted to Third Way are furious that progressives like Kara Eastman, Dana Balter and Alexandria Ocasio beat their crap candidates in recent primaries-- and have persuaded the DCCC to undermine them-- but they are basking in the glory of having watched progressive voters march in unity-- a word the right does not realize is a two-way street-- to win seats for Conor Lamb (PA) and Doug Jones (AL). Since winning, by the way, both have scored "F" on their voting records. Jones votes more often with the GOP than any other Senate Democrat, including even Manchin, Heitkamp, Donnelly and McCaskill, who at least have the excuse that they're voting with Republicans because they're afraid of the midterms. Jones has no reelection battle to worry about. Lamb is running in a redrawn district that is way less red than the one he won, but he still votes with a Republicans as frequently as he can.

Kara Eastman isn't one of them. She's one of us. The Republican wing of the party has no use for her. She vanquished one of their worthless Blue Dog standard bearers. "In our primary race," she explained, "my team knocked on more than 60,000 doors. We know that direct contact with people at their doors is the best way to win votes, but more importantly, this personal touch shows voters in my district that I am sincere when I tell them that I want to work for them, and with them, to create tangible solutions for the concerns they have. I am the kind of Congresswoman who is accessible, compassionate and dedicated to serving people in my district-- not just donors. I believe this sincere effort to connect with voters made a difference in our race, and we will continue spending as much time as possible in the field in the general election."

One name that Democrats in Columbus did, occasionally, offer: former vice president Joe Biden, who has been publicly mulling a presidential run. Jeff Danielson, a state senator from Iowa, said at first that there was “no one” he was excited about when it came to 2020. But Biden, if he would agree to run, was an exception, Danielson said.

“Elderly white men are not necessarily what’s popular in our party right now,” Danielson conceded. “But I think that there will be a shift in the moment. Voters are going to look for stability, and I think he embodies that.”

Others said they were excited by state-level politicians: mayors like Mitch Landrieu of New Orleans, and Los Angeles’ Eric Garcetti, and governors like Deval Patrick, Steve Bullock, and John Hickenlooper. (Bullock, considered to be more moderate, is nonetheless speaking at the progressive Netroots in August.)

Rep. Cheri Bustos, an Illinois moderate who carried a district Donald Trump won handily, said she’d heard a marked shift in the most important issue people brought up to her in the supermarket aisles of her district. For years, she said, it was jobs and the economy; then, for a year, it was health care.

Now, she said, the refrain is simply: “Just get something done. I’m tired of all the fighting.”

Governors and mayors like Bullock and Garcetti are a remedy to that frustration: working in smaller confines and freed from the snarl of Washington, they have a long and detailed record of accomplishments to point to.

But even as they crafted their message in Columbus through polling, strategy sessions, and debate, attendees were aware that, especially against Trump, there’s a necessary piece they’re still searching for.

“How do we compete with ‘we’re bringing the coal mines back’?” said Himes, the Connecticut congress member. “We’re not suited to lying to the American people, and we’re not naturally arbiters of emotion and anger, and so how we tell our story in a way that makes people want to mount the barricades is, I think, one of the biggest challenges that we have. And I’m not sure, sitting here today, that I have the answer to that.”

These  self-proclaimed centrists and "moderates" think they know everything, so they didn't invite any modern economists like Stephanie Kelton or play this Stephanie Kelton interview Derrick Crowe did with her at the conference; but they don't know everything--or much of anything worthwhile-- so they should have. Watch; it'll help you understand what a bad joke the Republican wing of the Democratic Party is.

Vote For Mary Street Wilson On Tuesday

Mary Wilson is a progressive. Kopser is not, not at all

The Austin Chronicle editorial board made its endorsements for the May 22 run- off last week. In the preface they describe themselves as "left-leaning," but their non-endorsement in TX-21 is absurd and, perhaps, sexist:

No Endorsement

We could not reach a consensus of support in this race. The Chronicle issued a dual endorsement in the primary, of Elliott McFad­den and Derrick Crowe, who both lost out on the run-off. (Crowe took 23%, McFad­den 17%.) But we remain split on Mary Wilson and Joseph Kopser, whose run-off represents a litmus test of what a party's nominee in a historically Republican district should be, and what we believe the 2018 electorate will want. Though he classifies his political transition from Reagan Republican to registered Democrat (with two decades of military service sandwiched in between) as "progress" and not opportunism, Kopser remains a centrist Democrat who is pro-business, and whose measured approach to enacting progressive policies raised concerns from some of our Board that he is, in essence, Republican-lite. His political credentials are indisputable-- establishment party support, both locally and nationally-- but what remains open to interpretation is the utility of that support following the 2016 presidential election, when he and his opponent were both galvanized to wage their first campaigns for public office. Kopser believes a combination of that support and a friendly rapport with Joe Strausian Republicans, who care more about economic development than who uses which bathroom, makes him the best candidate for a general election. For those who see irrelevance in that establishment and want the party to move more left, there's Mary Wilson, a dyed-in-the-wool progressive who does not employ a generic campaign staff. She is a lesbian minister in suburban Texas (Cedar Park) with experience bringing individuals from all political stripes together under her congregation and who believes her place on the political spectrum (unapologetically on the social justice left) will be a feature and not a fault in both energizing Democrats and winning over disenfranchised Republicans should she make it to the first general midterm election since America got stuck with Donald Trump.

Blue America originally endorsed Derrick Crowe, with great enthusiasm. When he missed out on the run-off, we had no problem going over to Mary Wilson. Kopser is exactly what the Democratic Party and Texas do not need. Derrick endorsed Mary as well. He sent me this post yesterday about this current state of the race for the 21st, which goes from West Campus, the Drag, Downtown and Claksville in Austin, through Travis Heights, Sunburst, Tanglewood Forest, south though Buda, San Marcos and New Braunfels into northeastern San Antonio and west into the Hill Country beyond Fredericksburg, Boerne, Bandera and Medina.

Yesterday, one of Joseph Kopser’s most visible public supporters requested that I respond to his social media posts about Mary Street Wilson’s public disclosure that her family holds shares in Exxon. Given the issues it raised for both candidates and the fact that voting is underway in the runoff, I initially thought it best not to respond and just stay out of it. However, since subsequent social media posts make it clear that Team Kopser will continue to request that I respond, I’ve reconsidered.

Let me be absolutely, crystal clear: Exxon is a terrible company, and everyone should divest from it. No other corporation is more responsible for deceiving the public about the effects of fossil fuels on the climate, and their actions may have already cost us a livable future in the long term. Prior to running for this congressional seat, I took part in numerous protest actions and public education efforts to hold Exxon accountable. That climate-change-focused activism was eventually what drew me back into politics to challenge climate change denier Lamar Smith in TX-21. So, of course, I was concerned by the prospect that a candidate I support would hold shares in Exxon.

However, Team Kopser left out an important piece of context: the assets in question were left to Wilson’s spouse as an inheritance from a close family member. That changes things significantly. Since the asset wasn’t left to Wilson, divesting from it is not her decision alone to make-- just like it’s not Kopser’s decision alone to dispose of his wife’s holdings that include significant fossil fuel investments.

According to Kopser’s financial disclosure form, Amy Kopser has personal investments (not received from a deceased person’s estate, mind you) in funds GWX, SPDW, SPEM, SPMD, SPSM, SPYG, SPYV. According to Fossil Free Funds, all of these funds have significant oil, gas, and coal investments, including investments in:

• top owners of coal/oil/gas reserves;
• the largest coal-fired utilities;
• coal-/natural-gas-fired utilities; and
•the fossil fuel industry in general.

Again, a candidate’s spouse is a person who makes their own choices, and how they resolve that kind of thing and how it will relate to the campaign’s climate change platform is a matter for them as a couple. What should be a matter of concern to voters, however, are Kopser’s own investments in those funds. He also holds his own investments in all of them. A self-described “clean energy warrior” ought to go to war to clean up his personal investment portfolio.

This same disclosure document also reveals that Kopser has a lovely $50,000–$100,000 investment in a company, Cross CHX, whose most visible product is Olive, a medical services AI intended to replace workers doing repetitive tasks in the for-profit medical industry! Here’s how Cross CHX introduces your “new employee,” the 24-hour, 7-day-a-week, 365-day, salary-free droid! Sorry, workers!

This AI investment is flabbergasting to me. Kopser and I had repeated discussions and debates about automation, labor, and the minimum wage, and not once did he disclose his financial interest in automation and AI — which I’m sure would have been of note to the labor unions who backed him in the runoff.

Wilson and Kopser have significant, important differences between them on climate change, fracking, and whether and when we should set a deadline for our country’s transition to net-zero carbon emissions. Kopser’s evasiveness on these points and his willingness to accept additional fossil fuel use “for centuries” as part of a “holistic mix” are nonstarters for me. By contrast, Wilson’s support for a 2035 deadline for getting this country to net-zero carbon emissions fits with my own view of the urgency of the climate crisis. Furthermore, her participation in the heroic protests at Standing Rock show me that she’s willing to put herself on the line to fight for a livable future and for environmental justice.

Everyone should divest from Exxon. Everyone should leave candidate spouses out of it (a stance #TeamKopser has hitherto held to, admirably). And Kopser and his supporters have absolutely no standing to make this kind of attack.

Vote for Mary Wilson on May 22.

Meet Mary Street Wilson-- The Surprise Winner In TX-21 This Week

Before TX-21 Republican Lamar Smith announced his retirement, there were at least 9 candidates running for the Democratic nomination in the district. One, Tom Wakely, decided to run for governor. Another, Chris Perri, decided to run in an adjacent district-- TX-25, which also has a chunk of Austin, and he came in first of 5 candidates and now faces a primary runoff with Julle Oliver May 22. The winner will face ethically-challenged right-wing multimillionaire Roger Williams in a district that Trump won 55.1% to 40.2% and that still has an R+11 PVI. The others who dropped out of the TX-21 race included Ryan Allen, Rixi Melton and Scott Sturm. In the end there were just 4 candidates, 3 men and a woman. In order of how much they spent on the primary:

• Joseph Kopser- $614,514
• Derrick Crowe- $131,108
• Elliott McFadden- $82,716
• Mary Wilson- $37,088

Another way to look at the field is that 3 of the candidates-- Crowe, McFadden and Wilson are progressives and Kopser is an "ex"-Republican, a corporate Democrat GOP-lite conservative. But ultimately the way to look at it was who won and who lost Tuesday.

• Mary Wilson- 15,669 (30.9%)
• Joseph Kopser- 14,684 (29%)
• Derrick Crowe- 11,686 (23.1%)
• Elliott McFadden- 8,625 (17%)

No one expected Mary, a Baptist minister and former math teacher, to win. So why did she? And what happens next? Well, the one woman/3 guys sure worked in her favor. And she ran a bare-bones volunteer-based grassroots campaign-- as Rick Trevino did, also successfully, south of TX-21 in TX-23 (another total shocker). As for what happens next... McFadden and Crowe don't like what Kopser stands for and I expect they will both put some effort into helping Wilson. In fact, just hours after the votes were counted, Crowe issued this statement to his supporters and the media:

For almost a year now, I have watched Mary Street Wilson run a tough, tenacious campaign that defied all establishment expectations. She fought for every last vote in every corner of this district and led with her progressive values. She faced with grit both a deep fundraising disadvantage and a dismissive attitude from the establishment. Last night, the Democratic voters in Texas’ 21st Congressional District responded by giving her more votes than any other candidate in the race.

Though I am disappointed to not make the runoff, it’s impossible not to be inspired by Mary’s campaign. Last night’s result gives me deep hope that this year, our elections can’t be bought. She will make an excellent representative for the people of the 21st District of Texas. I am proud to endorse her.

And Blue America is proud to add her to our Take Back Texas ActBlue page. Please consider contributing to her runoff campaign against the corporate Democrat (and then her general election campaign against the corporate Republican)-- by clicking on the thermometer on the right.

Corrupt Conservative Democrats Insist On A Strict Impurity Test In All House Races

Let's replace Trump & Ryan-- but not by empowering garbage like Steny Hoyer

As the leader of the House Dems, Pelosi didn't really have much of a choice-- unless she wanted to cause a rift in the Democratic House caucus-- but to publicly back Lipinski... and she did. I remember a similar race in Maryland where a progressive reformer, Donna Edwards, was challenging an extremely corrupt conservative incumbent, Al Wynn. Hoyer was all in for Wynn and Pelosi knew how to play the game and backed him as well. When Donna kicked his ass an became a congresswoman, Pelosi bent over backwards to bring Donna into leadership and make it clear she was happy Donna was in Congress. (Needless to say, Wynn immediately took a big-paying job on K Street, selling access to his old colleagues on an hourly basis, as whores tend to do.)

Laura Barrón-López had an interesting perspective at the Washington Examiner yesterday: A Dan Lipinski defeat could spur future primary challenges. Yes! Perhaps nothing something Pelosi-- or most incumbents-- would appreciate, but something really and truly needed by the increasingly pathetic, increasingly geriatric party she heads. "If Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) is beaten by his progressive opponent in next month’s primary," wrote Barrón-López, "liberals are hoping it sends a signal to other potential candidates that they can take on an incumbent from the left and win." This liberal sure is!

A number of Democratic lawmakers have attracted challenges from the left but few are as endangered as Lipinski, and he’s receiving no help from the party apparatus.

With influential progressive groups in her corner, businesswoman and nonprofit executive Marie Newman is closing in on the seven-term congressman.

It's three weeks out from the March 20 primary and Lipinski is in the fight of his career. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has held back on endorsing him despite promises, reported by Politico, that it would do so. Members of the Blue Dog Coalition, which Lipinski co-chairs, have bristled at the snub by DCCC and are stunned by their Democratic colleagues fundraising for his opponent.

Progressives see Newman’s bid as a test. Does the Democratic Party believe a woman’s right to an abortion is a core principle-- Lipinski opposes legal abortion-- and can a progressive oust an incumbent Democratic congressman?

Those rallying behind Newman, argue that Lipinski doesn’t represent the district’s views on a variety of policy issues. In his time representing the solidly blue district, Lipinski has voted against LGBT rights, abortion rights, the Dream Act, and the Affordable Care Act.

“It’s not just Dan Lipinski, but there are Democrats in blue districts across the country that do not represent the policies of voters in those district, whether it’s about holding Wall Street accountable or whether it’s about Medicare for all,” said Waleed Shahid, spokesman for Justice Democrats. “This is really going to send a message to those Democrats that they should be held accountable and watch their back.”

Shahid criticized Democratic campaign arms for trying to clamp down on grassroots candidates, making it harder for them to secure resources and access. But so far, few challenges from the left against sitting Democratic lawmakers have gained steam.

If Newman wins, Shahid predicted, that could change, especially in future cycles.

“Marie Newman and the organizations that have endorsed her have shown tremendous courage to stand up to that [Democratic] machine,” Shahid said. “If Marie Newman wins it will send a big shock wave and there will be more of this stuff happening.”

For freshman Rep. Ro Khanna of California, who endorsed Newman, the race captures the split among Democrats on the issue of abortion rights in particular. As party leaders welcome Democratic candidates who oppose abortion rights, arguing that to win back majorities they have to have a big tent, progressives and powerful reproductive rights groups have grown in number.

Khanna equated Lipinski’s anti-abortion stance to someone who might support racial segregation. “I don’t think we can support someone who does not believe in the legal right to reproductive choice,” Khanna told the Washington Examiner.

Khanna said he respects members' personal faith and views on abortion but that the party shouldn’t tolerate those who vote against abortion rights.

“It’s too important an issue to consider the electoral politics,” Khanna said. “Would we put up a candidate in a swing district who believed in the Muslim ban, and say, ‘Well, that’s just the politics of the region?’ Absolutely not.”

“This is a question of what does the party stand for? Do we believe that a women’s right to choose is a fundamental human right that should be a core principle of this party?” Khanna continued. “I believe it should.”

Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois said the contrast between Newman and Lipinski compelled her to get involved.

“I’ve never endorsed against a member of Congress, an incumbent, before,” Schakowsky said. But Newman’s pro-abortion rights, pro-LGBT, and progressive platform attracted the Illinois Democrat.

Schakowsky, a member of DCCC leadership, said she never would have endorsed Newman if it threatened Democrats’ hold on the district.

But a number of Democrats are frustrated by the party’s handling of the race. The DCCC’s decision to remain out of the race and not endorse Lipinski baffled not just official Blue Dog members, but moderates in caucus.

“Not getting involved is getting involved,” said Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH). "I hope we’re not going down the road of purity tests.”

“DCCC should be protecting its incumbents,” said Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA).

Lipinski didn’t want to comment on the DCCC’s reticence to support him, instead saying his constituents are “very, very happy that I’m not a rubber stamp.”

The Chicago Democrat brushed off questions about Newman’s attacks on his voting record, saying he’s confident about his re-election. Lipinski pointed to his poll numbers, which internally put him ahead of Newman by 30 points.

For a little background... Tim Ryan and Scott Peters are both conservative Democrats. Ryan spent his whole political career opposing Choice, mostly because he didn't have the guts to say he was pro-choice. Peters, one of the richest men in the House, spent his helping the Republicans increase economic inequality. Using the phrase "purity tests" means only one thing: making the Democratic Party stand for nothing at all, just a machine to enhance the career goals of politicians regardless if, like Lipinski, they oppose everything that draws anyone to the party. These arrogant politicians think people flock to them because of their charm and that shared values mean nothing. That's their own vanity and it's bullshit. The Democratic Party, at least on a grassroots level, does mean something and politicians like Lipinski, Ryan and Peters would very much rather it didn't. Yesterday, writing for the Texas Tribune about the hard-fought primary in TX-21, Patrick Svitek, reported that the contest between the progressive, Derrick Crowe and the so-called "ex"-Republican, an establishment conservative shithead, Joseph Kopser, "has put on display a growing debate over whether the party should court disaffected Republicans this year, focus on getting their revved-up base to the polls or do some of both." Crowe put his finger right on the problem Texas Democrats have had in recent years as the party nominated one conservative asswipe after the other and then scratched their heads about why they always lose. "We have a turnout problem, and you don’t solve a turnout problem by trying to signal you’re a centrist, said Crowe, a climate activist and former congressional staffer. "You solve a turnout problem by giving people something to believe in."

And speaking of asswipes, the crook who ripped off Howard Dean and now systemically rips off every Democrat he can get his hands on, the infamous Joe Trippi, is running Kopser's sleazy campaign. "You’ve got to be able to win enough Republicans in a district like this," Trippi said," seemingly forgetting the Democrats win by turning out Democrats and persuading independents, not be converting Republicans (who have their own candidates). "Yeah, it might feel good to nominate somebody who can’t get Republicans to vote for him, but that’s all-- it’s going to feel good, but that’s about it." I don't know if Trippi gets extra pay by the word or not but he sure knows how to lather on the bullshit.

"National Democrats," wrote Svitek of the corrupt conservatives who run the DCCC and who have lost dozens and dozens of seats since they took over, "saw Kopser as fitting the mold for the kind of candidate they believe can win traditionally GOP districts in 2018." Sure they do, they look at him and it's like looking in the mirror-- and imagining they can win. Corrupt conservatives love Republicans and passionately hate progressives. They would always prefer to lose with one of their own and see a Republican win a seat than see a progressive win, more of a direct threat to their own corruption and "power." Needless to say Kosper was endorsed by one of the most personally corrupt men in Congress, K Street owned slimebag Steny Hoyer.

An e-mail from Derrick Crowe to his supporters today, further puts the lie to Kopser's and Trippi's call to "win" by abandoning progressive values. The primary is in 4 days, Tuesday, and early voting has been going on all week. "This primary election is blowing people's minds. Just a few weeks ago, political observers were dismissing the idea that the blue wave could happen here, saying Texas was 'blood red' and that 'the state is not gonna turn blue in 2018.' But after almost two weeks of early voting, Democratic turnout is 90 PERCENT higher than the last mid-term election in the counties for which data is available. In fact, more Democrats have voted early than Republicans... If we do this right, we can move into the general election with a Democratic ticket focused on building a country that works for everyone, not just corporations and the rich. But everything comes down to the next few days." See that thermometer above? Please help progressive candidates like Derrick, Jason Westin, Hector Morales, Rick Treviño, Dayna Steele and Lillian Salerno by clicking on it and contributing what you can.

Elliott McFadden, former head of the Travis County Democratic Party and also a candidate, knows just what a bucket of slops Hoyer is. He told the Tribune that "Washington Democrats are trying to pick our candidate for us. And the candidate they’re pushing turns out to be a former Republican, now a corporate friendly executive who sits on the board of the most powerful conservative business group in Texas. What a choice!"

Politicians Are Taking Longer To Adapt Than Delta And United Air-- They May Not Get Another Chance

Blue Dog John Barrow (GA) is a putz. He never belonged in Congress and never accomplished anything while he was there. After his Democratic constituents saw the ad above, they abandoned him and he lost his seat, since Republicans int appealed to had their own candidate. Pelosi and the DCCC never gave up on Barrow. When he was finally defeated, the DCCC wasted $2,382,846 trying to save him. Pelosi kicked in another $194,510 from her own SuperPAC. This year, Barrow is back at it-- this time running for Georgia Secretary of State, still pretending to be a Democrat.

The outrage over the latest brutal NRA/GOP gun massacre, the one in Parkland, Florida, is finally scaring people out of complacency-- everyone but the DCCC, who continues recruiting NRA allies like Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Anthony Brindisi (NY) and Jeff Van Drew (NJ). The DCCC should drop them and other NRA-Dems from their Red to Blue page, which is crawling with them, and pledge to stop supporting gun nuts (tantamount to murderers; let those politicians join the GOP where their perfidy will be appreciated). Even Republicans can tell which way the wind is blowing and are jumping off the SS NRA. But not idiots like Pelosi and Lujan. They'll be the last to figure it out. They should take a lesson from corporate America, which understands it is no longer tenable to be associated with the NRA. Delta Airlines, arguably America's worst carrier, is savvier than Pelosi, Lujan and Jeff Van Drew. "Two major airlines. A cybersecurity firm. Six car rental brands. A home security company. An Omaha bank. Companies," wrote Jackie Wattles for CNN Saturday, "have scrambled to cut ties with the National Rifle Association over the past couple of days, and the list continued to grow into the weekend. But not the geniuses who do the candidate recruiting for the DCCC. Anyone talking about cutting NRA postergirl Ann Kirkpatrick loose? Not at all-- only about the DCCC undermining her progressive opponents.

Delta Air Lines announced Saturday morning that it's ending discounted rates for NRA members. "We will be requesting that the NRA remove our information from their website," the company said in a tweet.

United Airlines followed a short time later, saying the company will no longer offer discounts on flights to the NRA annual meeting.

And TrueCar, a car buying service, said late Friday that it would end its deal with the NRA as of February 28.

The companies were the latest to abandon partnerships with the NRA amid a renewed public debate over tightened gun laws following a school shooting in Florida last week that left 17 dead.

First National Bank of Omaha on Thursday pledged to stop issuing an NRA-branded Visa card. A bank spokesperson said "customer feedback" prompted a review of its partnership with the NRA, and it chose not to renew its current contract.

There was also a wave of car rental outfits. Enterprise Holdings, which runs the Enterprise, Alamo and National car rental groups, announced that it will end the discount deal it has with the NRA on March 26.

On Friday, car rental company Hertz said in a tweet that it's also ending its NRA rental car discount program.

The NRA was advertising a Hertz partnership on its "member benefits" page as recently as Friday morning, but that listing disappeared by the afternoon.

The National Rifle Association did not immediately comment on Saturday about the decisions by the various companies to sever ties.

Avis and Budget, which are owned by the same company, were also listed as discount providers on NRA's website Friday. But when reached for comment, Avis Budget Group told CNNMoney that it too was ending its partnership with the organization.

"Effective March 26, our brands will no longer provide the NRA member discount," an Avis Budget Group spokesperson said via email.

More big names followed suit.

A spokesperson for moving van lines Allied and North American, which are both owned by Sirva, said Friday that the brands "no longer have an affiliate relationship with the NRA effective immediately."

"We have asked them to remove our listing from their benefits site," the spokesperson added. The company did not describe what kind of benefits had been offered to NRA members.

Insurance giant MetLife said Friday that it's ending its discounts on home and auto insurance for NRA members.

Symantec, which makes the Norton anti-virus software and owns the identity theft protection company LifeLock, said Friday that it is severing ties with the NRA. And SimpliSafe, which sells home security systems, said the same.

None of the companies gave details about why or when they decided to cut ties with the NRA, but the news comes as the hashtag #BoycottNRA has circulated widely on social media.

After the shooting in Parkland, Florida on February 14, survivors of the massacre have protested for stronger gun laws. Students across the country have walked out of class to demand new restrictions on the sale of firearms and an end to mass shootings in the U.S.

Some survivors of mass shootings confronted NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch at a CNN town hall on Wednesday. Loesch blamed a flawed system for letting people who shouldn't be able to buy guns slip through the cracks.

Two other companies-- the insurer Chubb and Wyndham Hotel Group-- confirmed to CNNMoney Friday that they've recently ended partnerships with the NRA. However, those decisions were made prior to the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida last week.

Chubb said in a statement that it "provided notice of our intent to discontinue participation in the NRA Carry Guard insurance program" three months ago.

The NRA Carry Guard program offers coverage for certain costs associated with gun-related accidents or incidents in which the gun owner claims they lawfully acted in self defense.

Lockton, another insurance firm, continues to underwrite policies for the NRA Carry Guard program, according to the NRA's website. Lockton did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Wyndham Hotel Group said in a statement that it "ended our relationship with the NRA late last year."

Saturday we listed 12 House candidates from every part of the country vowing to vote for a ban on selling assault weapons. "It worked in 1994, and should be reinstated," said Hawaii state Rep Kaniela Ing. I grew up in Alabama, and i understand hunters," said Michigan candidate Ellen Lipton. "Assault weapons are not for hunting." Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, the leading candidate in Albuquerque: "I unequivocally support an assault weapons ban. Military weapons have no place on our streets." American companies and smart political leaders are denouncing the NRA. Lujan and Pelosi should get onboard by throwing Ann Kirkpatrick, Jeff Van Drew, Anthony Brindisi, Andrew Janz and other gun nuts overboard, very publicly, very loudly.

Smart Democrats are communicating with voters the way Katie Porter was doing in Orange County yesterday: "Since the Parkland shooting, Mimi Walters hasn't had a lot to say. And there's the reason. The NRA has bought her silence. The reason the NRA and other special interests are so powerful in this country has nothing to do with the issues or what voters want. The reason special interests own Congress is because the Citizens United decision stacked the deck against working Americans by allowing corporations and billionaires to spend unlimited sums to advance extreme agendas. We've got to pass real gun reform in this country. But we'll only be able to get Congress back to a place where its serving us instead of special interests if we change our campaign finance laws."

Austin progressive Dem Derrick Crowe took just as hard a stand yesterday, not one you're going to hear from any DCCC-Democrats, like Collin Peterson (MN), Henry Cuellar (TX), Tim Walz (MN) and Darren Soto (FL):

The NRA exists for one purpose: to serve the interests of gun manufacturers. They profit from the sale of assault weapons, and they’ll profit if the GOP starts arming teachers in response. They’ve bought our Congress and this president.

I am not for sale. I refuse all corporate PAC money, signed the No Fossil Fuel pledge, and the No NRA Money pledge.

According to Quinnipiac, 67% of Americans want a ban on assault weapons and 97% of gun owners want universal background checks. When the majority of Americans want something and we don't get it, you need to ask, "why?" The "why" is that powerful business interests have bought our political system.

The NRA. Big Pharma. Private health insurance. The Military Industrial Complex. The Prison Industrial Complex. Oil and Gas Companies.

And Omaha progressive Kara Eastman sent out a similar e-mail to her supporters in Nebraska late yesterday:

The gun lobby has far too much control over some of our elected officials. Congressman Don Bacon has taken over $18,000 from the NRA to advance their agenda. 

It’s time to listen to students, parents, and teachers, not the gun lobby. Our children’s lives depend on it.

Weapons of war such as the AR-15 should not be available to everyday citizens and sensible gun safety laws are long overdue.

Arming teachers is not the answer and not what teachers want. They want to feel safe in their schools and to know their students are safe too. "More guns" is not the answer.

Hot Rumor: The Federal Trade Commission May Be Coming Back To Life

This week, the Open Markets Institute reported some good news, namely that the Federal Trade Commission may be about to "waken from it's anti-trust slumber." Hard to imagine.

For the last few years, the Federal Trade Commission all but vanished as a major player in anti-monopoly enforcement. In part, this was due to a lack of staff. For much of the last year, the FTC had only two sitting commissioners. Mainly, however, it was due to ideology.

Two of the most influential recent commissioners-- Maureen Ohlhausen and Josh Wright-- were strong proponents of libertarian competition philosophy, with its strong pro-monopoly bent. Further, even many recent Democratic appointments tended to take a highly permissive approach to economic power.

But a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on February 14 provided strong signals that the FTC may soon be back in the business of promoting competition in the United States. All five FTC commissioners are being replaced more or less at the same time, which means the character of the agency has the potential to change dramatically. And among both senators and nominees, the libertarian thinking that has long held sway in the Commission appeared to be decidedly out of fashion.

• Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a former director of policy planning at the FTC, has in the past largely opposed government regulations, including net neutrality. But at the hearing last week, Sen. Cruz expressed deep concern about the immense power wielded by Google and Facebook, citing a cover story in Esquire that calls for the break-up of big tech. Sen. Cruz appeared especially concerned about the anti-competitive implications of Facebook and Google's dominance, saying that their "market power, size, and control of public discourse is unprecedented."

• Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) urged the nominees to use the "new populism…sweeping the country" as a mandate to invigorate enforcement and advocacy. "Going beyond the FTC being a resource, I'd also like you to be a champion," he said. "You have the bully pulpit. You can bring zeal and passion to consumer issues that no one else will do at the federal level." Sen. Blumenthal also submitted a statement from the Congressional Antitrust Committee into the hearing record.

• Joe Simons, nominated by President Trump to chair the agency, said he wants to scrutinize dominant firms that wield market power and review the Commission's enforcement record. “At a high level, I don’t believe that big is necessarily bad,” he said. But he added, “Companies that are already big and influential can sometimes use inappropriate means, anti-competitive means, to get big or to stay big.” In particular, Simons said he was "very concerned" about drug pricing and would explore convening a drug pricing monitoring task force to track anti-competitive price spikes and enable prompt investigations and enforcement actions.

• In discussing extreme consolidation in agriculture with Sen. John Tester (D-MT), Simons further explained that even when bad mergers cannot be easily unscrambled, the agency can investigate dominant industry players for anti-competitive conduct and target their power through injunctions. Coupled with his written comments, Simons’ remarks suggest he intends to target abusive actions by dominant companies.

• The only Democratic nominee at the hearing, Rohit Chopra, expressed interest in reviewing barriers to entry in monopolized markets. In particular, he noted that consolidated control over data creates hazards both for consumers and independent businesses. He said, "Data breaches impose great deals of costs on small enterprises. The Equifax data breach led to significant losses for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions."

• A fifth slot on the Commission, reserved for a Democrat, still lacks an official nominee. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has recommended to the White House that it nominate his chief counsel, Rebecca Slaughter, for the position.

The founding members of the House AntiTrust Caucus are some of the House's most progressive members: Ro Khanna (CA), Mark Pocan (WI), Rick Nolan (MN), David Cicciline (RI), Keith Ellison (MN) and Pramila Jayapal (WA).

Austin Frerick has made fighting monopolies a key part of his platform, so it was no surprise when he told us that the Antitrust Caucus will be the "first caucus I will join. Also as an Iowa congressman, I plan to make antitrust a central requirement for my endorsement in the 2020 caucuses."

Derrick Crowe, the progressive running for the open seat in the Austin/San Antonio corridor told us he "would absolutely join the Congressional Anti-Trust Caucus. The rise of monopoly power threatens our bank accounts, worsens inequality, and undermines our political liberties. Busting trusts is defending democracy."

Lisa Brown, the economist who served as Chancellor of Washington State University, Spokane and is currently busy campaigning to replace Paul Ryan lieutenant Cathy McMorris Rodgers that us "it’s a basic tenet of Econ-101 that concentrated economic power in a market, in which only a few producers  dominate, has adverse outcomes for consumers. Higher prices and less consumer satisfaction generally result from oligopoly and monopoly power. Effective federal regulation can counter these results. It’s encouraging that some members of Congress are getting  more active in this arena and I would welcome the opportunity to join them."

And we'll leave the last word for Lillian Salerno, former Obama deputy secretary of Agriculture, who is running a vigorous campaign in north Dallas that takes on monopolization head on: "Concentrated corporate power is out of control," she often says, "and it's time for Congress to step up with a renewed focus on anti-monopoly rules and investigations. That's what I'll do when I get there."

Has Gun Control's Moment Come Again-- Despite Cowardly Politicians?

Cameron Kasky, one of the students who survived the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School brought down the house at the CNN forum Wednesday night when he asked his senator, Marco Rubio, if he would stop taking NRA money. Rubio-- like every single blood-soaked member of Congress from either party who takes NRA bribes and votes for their sick, murderous agenda, said that the NRA buys into his agenda, not that he buys into theirs. Maybe Rubio even believes that. But the kids didn't. They boo-ed him loudly and repeatedly. Rubio's not up for reelection again until 2022. It was gracious and somewhat courageous of him to jump into the lion's den.

Trump immediately went for the most simple-minded and idiotic right-wing suggestion-- arm the teachers. Even Rubio said he wouldn't support that idea. I asked my friend who works at a public school in Compton. He said that it's a crazy idea that not only wouldn't work but that would result in more than half the teachers he knows retiring. "You think there's a teacher shortage now," he said, if Trump manages to push this through, the whole school system will collapse. Maybe that's just what DeVos wants to see happen." He also told me he's buying bulletproof clothing for school.

Rubio told the audience he's going to try-- an impossible task?-- to get unanimous consent to bring the background check bill-- FIX NICS-- to the floor. I can't see that happening... and even if it does, Ryan will stop it in the House by keeping it attached to the concealed carry reciprocity bill, an NRA strategy which will prevent Democrats from voting for it. Rubio said he favors raising the age for legal assault rifle purchases from 18 to 21-- a total non-started for the gun manufacturers lobbyists-- and says he will back mental health background checks gun violence restraining orders and limiting the size of magazine clips. When confronted by a student on his refusal to back limits on large capacity magazines in the past, he said he's "reconsidering that position... While it may not prevent an attack, it may save lives in an attack." That would be enough for the NRA to go to try to make an example of him for other Republicans.

This morning, Marc Caputo termed that "a striking turnabout for Rubio, who never met a gun-rights bill he didn’t vote for in the Florida legislature and in Congress."

Rubio said he would leave it to law enforcement to suggest what the right magazine size would be.

That wasn’t enough for the audience, even as Rubio chided them that politicians should be allowed to change their minds. And it wasn’t enough for the other people on stage.

“The time for talking in Washington about to do about guns is over. It’s over. We know what to do,” said Rep. Ted Deutch, who represents the district where the school is located, in the city of Parkland.

But Rubio steadfastly refused to consider banning semiautomatic rifles outright. And he said he would not refuse money from the National Rifle Association, which has steered $3.3 million in contributions to him over the course of his career and given him an A+ rating-- support he might not be able to count on after Wednesday night.

In June 2016, Rubio cited the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando as a major reason he leapt back into his Senate race, which he’d been weighing doing for months after failing in the presidential primaries. Rubio said that massacre had “impacted” him and made him feel he had to return to the Senate. He won, with NRA support. But in the nearly two years since, he has not championed any new gun legislation in Congress.

...The evening didn’t start particularly well for Rubio, either, when he was questioned by Fred Guttenberg, whose 14 year-old daughter, Jaime, was killed last week in school.

“Were guns the factor in the hunting of our kids?” Guttenberg asked.

“Of course they were,” Rubio replied. “Number one, Fred, I absolutely believe that in this country if you are 18 years of age you should not be able to buy a rifle and I will support a law that takes that right away.”

Rubio was met with applause and went on to say he supports banning “bump stocks,” which can make a semiautomatic fire like a machine gun. He also voiced his support for better background checks and mental health funding.

But when Rubio said an “assault weapons ban” would not have prevented last week’s murders, the boos rained down.

“It is too easy to get,” Guttenburg said. “It is a weapon of war. The fact that you can’t stand with everybody in this building and say that, I’m sorry.”

Yesterday we looked at Ron Brownstein's ideas about what kinds of districts the Democrats could win to build a House majority. This morning, writing for The Atlantic, he reiterated his analysis in the light of the reinvigorated national gun debate. Trump-hatred in the suburbs is going to help the Democrats and the gun issue is going to amplify that.

Despite the widespread Democratic defection from outside the major urban centers, the Brady and assault-ban bills passed because Clinton drew support from dozens of suburban Republicans inside those metropolitan areas. Fifty-four House Republicans backed the Brady bill in 1993, and 38 supported the assault ban the next year; the latter number grew to 46 when the ban was included in the final version of Clinton’s crime bill. Of those 46 Republicans backing the overall bill, most were from heavily suburban, Democratic-leaning states, including eight from New York; five from New Jersey; and three each from California, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.

In the years since, the GOP’s geographic base has shifted away from major metropolitan areas and its demographic base has tilted further toward older, blue-collar, evangelical, and rural voters. Reflecting those changes, GOP congressional leaders have tightened their alliance with the NRA and hardened their opposition to gun control. The remaining Republicans from suburban districts, even in the bluest states, have bent compliantly to that current. Compared with their counterparts in the 1990s, suburban House Republicans now vote much more in lockstep with the NRA.

In December, all but 10 suburban House Republicans voted for legislation to override individual state gun laws and require every state to honor a concealed-carry handgun permit issued in any state. In February 2017, all but two House Republicans (New York’s Peter King and Dan Donovan) voted to overturn a regulation from former President Barack Obama that required the Social Security Administration to share information with the national background-check system about anyone deemed incapable of managing their benefits because of mental illness.

Many of the Republicans who voted with the NRA on both measures represent white-collar suburban seats atop the Democrats’ 2018 target list. That includes GOP legislators near Denver (Mike Coffman); Los Angeles (Dana Rohrabacher, Mimi Walters, and Steve Knight); Minneapolis (Erik Paulsen and Jason Lewis); New York (Lee Zeldin); Northern Virginia (Barbara Comstock); Omaha (Don Bacon); Des Moines (David Young); Houston (John Culberson); and Dallas (Pete Sessions). Except for King and Donovan, every other top-target metro Republican-- from Carlos Curbelo in Miami to Leonard Lance in New Jersey-- who voted against the concealed-carry reciprocity bill voted for the repeal of Obama’s Social Security regulation.

Among those Republican politicians Brownstein wrote are now vulnerable because of their unswerving support for the NRA is David Young, the pius hypocrite who Austin Frerick is taking on in Des Moines and southwest Iowa. Austin ripped into him this morning: "I’ve personally become even more driven to defeat Congressman Young knowing that’s he’s taken the 3rd most money from the NRA and continues to do their bidding tragedy after tragedy. He's just a do-nothing hollow man who does the bidding of his largest donors. After the Law Vegas massacres, Congressman Young said that he couldn't think of a good reason why bump stocks exist. His solution was to write a letter to the ATF, but the ATF doesn't think it can act. Did he do something after that ATF decision? No, but he did have time to visit a gun store whose owner was very concerned about his comments on bump stocks, and wanted to show him why they were fine."

Katie Porter is running for the Orange County seat NRA ally Mimi Walters claims to be representing-- although she doesn't live there. Katie told us she's "tired of seeing our elected officials like my opponent Mimi Walters offer her thoughts and prayers after every mass shooting, and then voting however the NRA wants-- regardless of our families’ safety.The gun lobby has spent decades perpetuating this idea that there’s nothing we can do to stop gun violence in this country. That is just ridiculous. To reduce deaths from lethal weapons, our leaders in Congress just need to find the courage to stand up to the NRA and its special interest money. Not only has my opponent received thousands of dollars of contributions from the NRA, but she is voting against the will of her constituents. 60% of CA-45 voters voted for Proposition 63, a common sense gun initiative, in 2016-- more proof that Mimi Walters votes with special interests, not her constituents."

Lillian Salerno, the progressive in the race to replace Pete Sessions in Dallas, has a similar perspective. "Pete Sessions," she told us today, "has been in the pocket of the NRA since his initial run for Congress twenty years ago, and there is no sign he will change course now. Even after hundreds of children have lost their lives to gun violence, the NRA knows they have an unwavering ally in Sessions. And what did it take to secure his allegiance? $150,000 in contributions and outside spending from the NRA. $150,000 is the price Sessions puts on the lives of children and families. And as a member of Congress, I will never, under any circumstance, take money from the NRA."

Another GOP incumbent Brownstein singled out: extremist Steve Knight (CA-25). And his progressive opponent, Katie Hill, has been reminding voters in Santa Clarita, the Antelope Valley and Simi Valley what a danger he is. "Steve Knight has prioritized special interests like the NRA over constituents since he joined Congress," she told us. "We need an elected official willing to stand up and do the right thing. I support the immediate ban of bump stocks, silencers, and assault weapons. There is no compelling reason for a civilian to own weapons of war and it is time that the law reflected it."

Now watch Derrick Crowe: